Comparing Consensus- and Aggregation-Based Methods of Measuring Team-Level Variables: The Role of Relationship Conflict and Conflict Management Processes

¹ Villanova University
² Wayne State University
³ University of Maryland, College Park

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: narda.quigley{at}villanova.edu.

	Abstract

Using data collected from 53 student teams, the authors examine the relationships between team cohesion as measured through aggregation of individual team member responses and consensus methods and two outcome variables. They examine whether the different methods of assessment affect the strength of the relationships between cohesion and the outcome variables in cases of high and low relationship conflict and conflict management. Moderated regression results reveal three-way interactions among cohesion, method of assessment, and conflict management on team satisfaction and perceived team performance; in addition, the authors find support for a three-way interaction between cohesion, method of assessment, and relationship conflict on perceived team performance. The pattern of findings suggests that the team consensus approach to assessing cohesion may result in stronger relationships with outcome variables than the individual aggregation method only when teams are able to manage relationship conflict effectively. The findings and their implications for measuring team-level variables are discussed.

First published on July 6, 2007, doi:10.1177/1094428106286853

Organizational Research Methods 2007;10:589.

A more recent version of this article appeared on October 1, 2007
This version was published on August 30, 2007


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. J. Pasisz and G. M. Hurtz Testing for Between-Group Differences in Within-Group Interrater Agreement Organizational Research Methods, July 1, 2009; 12(3): 590 - 613. [Abstract] [PDF]