527
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

Task Conflict Resolution in Designing Legacy Replacement Systems

, , &

References

  • Andres, H.P.; and Zmud, R.W. A contingency approach to software project coordination. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18, 3 (2002), 41–70.
  • Atuahene-Gima, K.; and Evangelista, F. Cross-functional influence in new product development: An exploratory study of marketing and R&D perspectives. Management Science, 46, 10 (2000), 1269–1284.
  • Aubert, V. Competition and dissensus: Two types of conflict and of conflict resolution. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 7, 1 (1963), 26–42.
  • Baard, S.K.; Rench, T.A.; and Kozlowski, S.W. Performance adaptation: A theoretical integration and review. Journal of Management, 40, 1 (2014), 48–99.
  • Barki, H.; and Hartwick, J. User participation, conflict, and conflict resolution: The mediating roles of influence. Information Systems Research, 5, 4 (1994), 422–438.
  • Basirati, M.R.; Otasevic, M.; Rajavi, K.; Böhm, M.; and Krcmar, H. Understanding the relationship of conflict and success in software development projects. Information and Software Technology, 126 (2020), 106331.
  • Benaroch, M.; Lichtenstein, Y.; and Fink, L. Contract design choices and the balance of ex-ante and ex-post transaction costs in software development outsourcing. MIS Quarterly, 40, 1 (2016), 57–82.
  • Berente, N.; Salge, C.A.d.L.; Mallampalli, V.K.; and Park, K. Rethinking project escalation: An institutional perspective on the persistence of failing large-scale information system projects. Journal of Management Information Systems, 39, 3 (2022), 640–672.
  • Burke, C.S.; Stagl, K.C.; Salas, E.; Pierce, L.; and Kendall, D. Understanding team adaptation: a conceptual analysis and model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 6 (2006), 1189–1207.
  • Cao, F.; Wang, W.; Lim, E.; Liu, X.; and Tan, C.-W. Do social dominance-based faultlines help or hurt team performance in crowdsourcing tournaments? Journal of Management Information Systems, 39, 1 (2022), 247–275.
  • Cha, K.J.; Hwang, T.; and Gregor, S. An integrative model of IT-enabled organizational transformation: A multiple case study. Management Decision, 53, 8 (2015), 1755–1770.
  • Cheng, F.-F.; Wu, C.-S.; and Chang, J.Y. Interproject conflict management through cooperation in an enterprise system implementation program. Project Management Journal, 51, 6 (2020), 582–598.
  • Chiravuri, A.; Nazareth, D.; and Ramamurthy, K. Cognitive conflict and consensus generation in virtual teams during knowledge capture: Comparative effectiveness of techniques. Journal of Management Information Systems, 28, 1 (2011), 311–350.
  • Christian, J.S.; Christian, M.S.; Pearsall, M.J.; and Long, E.C. Team adaptation in context: An integrated conceptual model and meta-analytic review. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 140 (2017), 62–89.
  • Creswell, J.W., and Poth, C.N. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Thousand Oakes, CA: Sage, 2016.
  • De Dreu, C.K.; and Gelfand, M.J. The Psychology of Conflict and Conflict Management in Organizations. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2008.
  • De Dreu, C.K.; and Weingart, L.R. Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 4 (2003), 741–749.
  • De Wit, F.R.; Greer, L.L.; and Jehn, K.A. The paradox of intragroup conflict: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 2 (2012), 360–390.
  • DeChurch, L.A.; and Marks, M.A. Maximizing the benefits of task conflict: The role of conflict management. International Journal of Conflict Management, 12, 1 (2001), 4–22.
  • DeChurch, L.A.; Mesmer-Magnus, J.R.; and Doty, D. Moving beyond relationship and task conflict: Toward a process-state perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 4 (2013), 559–578.
  • Druckman, D. Determinants of compromising behavior in negotiation: A meta-analysis. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 38, 3 (1994), 507–556.
  • Druckman, D.; and Zechmeister, K. Conflict of interest and value dissensus: Propositions in the sociology of conflict. Human Relations, 26, 4 (1973), 449–466.
  • Furneaux, B.; and Wade, M. Impediments to information systems replacement: A calculus of discontinuance. Journal of Management Information Systems, 34, 3 (2017), 902–932.
  • Ghobadi, S.; and D’Ambra, J. Coopetitive relationships in cross-functional software development teams: How to model and measure? Journal of Systems and Software, 85, 5 (2012), 1096–1104.
  • Goodhue, D.L.; Lewis, W.; and Thompson, R. Comparing PLS to regression and LISREL: A response to Marcoulides, Chin, and Saunders. MIS Quarterly, 36, 3 (2012), 703–716.
  • Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; and Anderson, R.E. Multivariate Data Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2010.
  • Harinck, F.; and Druckman, D. Do negotiation interventions matter? Resolving conflicting interests and values. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 61, 1 (2017), 29–55.
  • Hess, T.; Matt, C.; Benlian, A.; and Wiesböck, F. Options for formulating a digital transformation strategy. MIS Quarterly Executive, 15, 2 (2016), 123–139.
  • Hirschheim, R.; and Klein, H.K. Realizing emancipatory principles in information systems development: The case for ETHICS. MIS Quarterly, 18, 1 (1994), 83–109.
  • Hirschheim, R.; and Newman, M. Symbolism and information systems development: Myth, metaphor and magic. Information Systems Research, 2, 1 (1991), 29–62.
  • Jain, B.A.; and Solomon, J.S. The effect of task complexity and conflict handling styles on computer-supported negotiations. Information & Management, 37, 4 (2000), 161–168.
  • Jehn, K.A.; and Bendersky, C. Intragroup conflict in organizations: A contingency perspective on the conflict-outcome relationship. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25 (2003), 187–242.
  • Jehn, K.A., and Rispens, S. Conflict in workgroups. In J. Barling and C. Cooper (eds.), Handbook of Organizational Behavior: Micro Approaches. Thousand Oakes, CA: Sage, 2008, pp. 262–276.
  • Jenkin, T.A.; Chan, Y.E.; and Sabherwal, R. Mutual understanding in information systems development: Changes within and across projects. MIS Quarterly, 43, 2 (2019), 649–671.
  • Jiang, J.J.; Chang, J.Y.; Chen, H.-G.; Wang, E.T.; and Klein, G. Achieving IT program goals with integrative conflict management. Journal of Management Information Systems, 31, 1 (2014), 79–106.
  • Kalabina, E.; Belyak, O.; Meister, V.G.; and Revina, A. What Kind of Employees’ Team is Necessary for Industrial Digital Transformation? Theoretical and Practical Analysis. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021, pp. 183–193.
  • Kankanhalli, A.; Tan, B.C.; and Wei, K.-K. Conflict and performance in global virtual teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23, 3 (2006), 237–274.
  • Korper, S.H.; Druckman, D.; and Broome, B.J. Value differences and conflict resolution. The Journal of Social Psychology, 126, 3 (1986), 415–417.
  • Kudaravalli, S.; Faraj, S.; and Johnson, S.L. A Configural approach to coordinating expertise in software development teams. MIS Quarterly, 41, 1 (2017), 43–64.
  • Lacity, M.; and Willcocks, L. Conflict resolution in business services outsourcing relationships. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 26, 2 (2017), 80–100.
  • Liang, T.-P.; Jiang, J.; Klein, G.S.; and Liu, J.Y.-C. Software quality as influenced by informational diversity, task conflict, and learning in project teams. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 57, 3 (2009), 477–487.
  • Lu, W.; and Wang, J. The influence of conflict management styles on relationship quality: The moderating effect of the level of task conflict. International Journal of Project Management, 35, 8 (2017), 1483–1494.
  • Marks, M.A.; Mathieu, J.E.; and Zaccaro, S.J. A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26, 3 (2001), 356–376.
  • Marsh, H.W.; Wen, Z.; and Hau, K.-T. Structural equation models of latent interactions: Evaluation of alternative estimation strategies and indicator construction. Psychological Methods, 9, 3 (2004), 275.
  • Maynard, M.T.; Kennedy, D.M.; and Sommer, S.A. Team adaptation: A fifteen-year synthesis (1998–2013) and framework for how this literature needs to “adapt” going forward. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24, 5 (2015), 652–677.
  • Mehrizi, M.H.R.; Modol, J.R.; and Nezhad, M.Z. Intensifying to cease: Unpacking the process of information systems discontinuance. MIS Quarterly, 43, 1 (2019), 141–165.
  • Mu, T.; Yang, J.; Zhang, F.; Lyu, C.; and Deng, C. The role of task conflict in cooperative innovation projects: An organizational learning theory perspective. International Journal of Project Management, 39, 3 (2021), 236–248.
  • Müller, S.D.; Mathiassen, L.; Saunders, C.; and Kræmmergaard, P. Political maneuvering during business process transformation: A pluralist approach. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 18, 3 (2017), 173–205.
  • O’Neill, T.A.; Allen, N.J.; and Hastings, S.E. Examining the “pros” and “cons” of team conflict: A team-level meta-analysis of task, relationship, and process conflict. Human Performance, 26, 3 (2013), 236–260.
  • Pang, M.-S.; and Lee, G. The impact of IT decision-making authority on IT project performance in the U.S. federal government. MIS Quarterly, 46, 3 (2022), 1759–1776.
  • Parry, M.E.; Song, M.; and Spekman, R.E. Task conflict, integrative potential, and conflict management strategies in joint ventures. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 55, 2 (2008), 201–218.
  • Paul, S.; Samarah, I.M.; Seetharaman, P., and Mykytyn, P.P. An empirical investigation of collaborative conflict management style in group support system-based global virtual teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 21, 3 (2004), 185–222.
  • Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.-Y.; and Podsakoff, N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 5 (2003), 879–903.
  • Preacher, K.J.; and Hayes, A.F. SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, 36, 4 (2004), 717–731.
  • Queiroz, M.; Tallon, P.P.; and Coltman, T. How do shared IT applications influence agility? Theory and evidence of a convex relationship. Journal of Management Information Systems, 39, 4 (2022), 1089–1115.
  • Ramos-Villagrasa, P.J.; Passos, A.M.; and García-Izquierdo, A.L. From planning to performance: The adaptation process as a determinant of outcomes. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 55, 1 (2019), 96–114.
  • Rinta-Kahila, T.; Penttinen, E.; and Lyytinen, K. Getting trapped in technical debt: Socio-technical analysis of a legacy system’s replacement. MIS Quarterly, forthcoming (2022).
  • Robbins, S.P. “Conflict management” and “conflict resolution” are not synonymous terms. California Management Review, 21, 2 (1978), 67–75.
  • Sabherwal, R.; and Grover, V. A taxonomy of political processes in systems development. Information Systems Journal, 20, 5 (2010), 419–447.
  • Schmidt, S.M.; and Kochan, T.A. Conflict: Toward conceptual clarity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 3 (1972), 359–370.
  • Sherif, K.; Zmud, R.W.; and Browne, G.J. Managing peer-to-peer conflicts in disruptive information technology innovations: The case of software reuse. MIS Quarterly, 30, 2 (2006), 339–356.
  • Soliman, W.; and Tuunainen, V.K. A tale of two frames: Exploring the role of framing in the use discontinuance of volitionally adopted technology. Information Systems Journal, 32, 3 (2022), 473–519.
  • Tashakkori, A.; and Teddlie, C. Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998.
  • Thomas, K.W.; and Kilmann, R.H. Comparison of four instruments measuring conflict behavior. Psychological Reports, 42, 3 (1978), 1139–1145.
  • Thorgren, S.; and Wincent, J. Interorganizational trust: Origins, dysfunctions, and regulation of rigidities. British Journal of Management, 22, 1 (2011), 21–41.
  • Tiwana, A.; and McLean, E.R. Expertise integration and creativity in information systems development. Journal of Management Information Systems, 22, 1 (2005), 13–43.
  • Todorova, G.; Bear, J.B.; and Weingart, L.R. Can conflict be energizing? A study of task conflict, positive emotions, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99, 3 (2014), 451.
  • Tsai, J.C.-a.; Wu, X.; Klein, G.; and Jiang, J.J. Goal equivocality and joint account of meaning creation in an enterprise system program. Information Systems Management, 39, 1 (2022), 1–16.
  • Venkatesh, V.; Brown, S.A.; and Bala, H. Bridging the qualitative-quantitative divide: Guidelines for conducting mixed methods research in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 37, 1 (2013), 21–54.
  • Vial, G. Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28, 2 (2019), 118–144.
  • Wang, W.-T.; Luo, M.-C.; and Chang, Y.-M. Exploring the relationship between conflict management and transformational leadership behaviors for the success of ERP customization. Information Systems Management, 39, 2 (2022), 177–200.
  • Wimelius, H.; Mathiassen, L.; Holmström, J.; and Keil, M. A paradoxical perspective on technology renewal in digital transformation. Information Systems Journal, 31, 1 (2021), 198–225.
  • Windeler, J.; Maruping, L.M.; Robert, L.P.; and Riemenschneider, C.K. E-profiles, conflict, and shared understanding in distributed teams. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 16, 7 (2015), 608–645.
  • Xiao, X.; Sarker, S.; Wright, R.T.; Sarker, S.; and Mariadoss, B.J. Commitment and replacement of existing SaaS-delivered applications: A mixed-methods investigation. MIS Quarterly, 44, 4 (2020), 1811–1857.
  • Zhang, L.; and Guo, H. Enabling knowledge diversity to benefit cross-functional project teams: Joint roles of knowledge leadership and transactive memory system. Information & Management, 56, 8 (2019), 103156.
  • Zhang, X.; Stafford, T.F.; Hu, T.; and Dai, H. Measuring task conflict and person conflict in software testing. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM), 29, 4 (2020), 1–19.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.