scientific research report project title women leadership conflict management and team performance a study in vietnam

Gender role orientation and Conflict management styles 2.2.2 Conflict management styles and Psychological safety climate 2.2.3.. Finally, this research adds to the literature on gender-r

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY — HO CHI MINH CITY UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS AND LAW

SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH REPORT

Project Title:

WOMEN LEADERSHIP, CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AND TEAM

PERFORMANCE: A STUDY IN VIETNAM

Field of Study: Organizational Behavior

Major: Business - Business and Administration

Ho Chi Minh City, March 2023 VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY - HO CHI MINH CITY

UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS AND LAW

SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH REPORT

Project Title:

WOMEN LEADERSHIP, CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AND TEAM

PERFORMANCE: A STUDY IN VIETNAM

Group members:

No : Name : Student ID Major : Responsibility :

; Intemational © Leader ' quwev204021e@stueledu |

1: Cao Văn Duy : K204021000 : Economics : vn :

ae: ; International ; Member = jinhnht204021c@st.uel.edu |

2 3 Nguyên Hoài Thùy Lĩnh : K204020088 ' Eeonomies : : vn :

— jenssssessssssessssssnsccsesensceneseessees josssvessnsccnesencceseee Gescsscesssosscsesessccoes Geccsscvessessenesenscessce josscvescussssesenesssscenesesccssccesccsscseecs i

Đosseessesseed jssscsssssssssssssessssssssssnsconsconseses jessssesssscssessnscensees Gecssscsesssesssscssssones rỠỪ'ủũũẳ Ÿ 0s9909380038003880388038903800800038008000800A i

4} Nguyén Ngoc Bao Han K204020079 : Economics ` : vn :

5 | Nguyên Minh Khang K204020082 : Economics ; duvn :

Ho Chi Minh City, March 2023

ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA TP.HCM TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC KINH TẾ - LUẬT

BAO CAO TONG KET

DE TAI NGHIEN CUU KHOA HOC SINH VIEN

NAM 2022-2023

Project Title:

WOMEN LEADERSHIP, CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AND TEAM

PERFORMANCE: A STUDY IN VIETNAM

Đại điện nhóm nghiên cứu Giảng viên hướng dẫn Chủ tịch Hội đồng

(Ký họ tên) (Ký họ tên) (Ký họ tên)

Lãnh đạo Khoa/Bộ môn/Trung tâm

(Ký họ tên)

2.1.1 Gender role orientation and Leadership

2.1.2 Conflict and Conflict Management Style

2.1.3 Psychological safety climate

2.2 Hypothesis development

2.2.1 Gender role orientation and Conflict management styles

2.2.2 Conflict management styles and Psychological safety climate

2.2.3 Psychological safety climate and Team performance

2.2.4, Mediating roles

2.2.5 Hypothesized model

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

3.1 Research design overview

3.2 Sampling design

3.2.1 Sample characteristics

3.2.2 Sample size

3.3 Instrument design

3.3.1 The measurement scales’ format

3.3.2 The measurement scales’ details

3.4 Data collection design

3.5 Data cleaning and preparing

3.6 Instrument testing - Measurement scale validation

3.7 Highlights on research design's problems

3.7.1 Encoding participants - The project's ID

3.7.2 Communicating through emails - utilizing the benefits of customization 3.7.3 Lessening self-response biases

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS

4.1 Descriptive analysis

4.2 Data aggregation

4.3 Cronbach’s Alpha

4.4, Exploratory Factor Analysis

4.5 Confirmatory Factor Analysis

4.6 Structural Equation Model

5.2.2 For Team leaders

5.3 Limitations and Future Directions

LIST OF FIGURES

1 Figure 2.1.Hypothesized Model 29

2 Figue 3.1 Overview of research design and execution steps 31

3 Figure 3.2, Data collection procedure 39

LIST OF TABLES

1 Table 3.1 Gender Role Orientation items 33

2 Table 3.2 Conflict Management Styles items 34

3 Table 3.3 Psychological Safety Climate items 35

4 Table 3.4 Team Performance items 35, 36

5 Table 3.5 Cronbach's alpha values of GRO and CMS 40, 41

6 Table 3.6 Cronbach's alpha values of PSC and TP 42,43

7 Table 3.7 KMO and Bartlett's Test of GRO and CMS 44

8 Table 3.8 KMO and Bartlett's Test of PSC and TP 44

9 Table 3.9 The Rotated Component Matrix of GRO and CMS 45, 46

10 Table 3.10 The Rotated Component Matrix of PSC and TPM 46

II Table 3.11 Total Variance Explained of GRO and CMS 47, 48

12 Table 3.12 Total Variance Explained of PSC and TPM 48,49

13 Table 4.1 Descriptive statistics 53

14 Table 4.2 Cronbach’ Alpha for Model 55, 56, 57

15 Table 4.3 KMO and Bartlett's Test 58

16 Table 4.4 Rotated Component Matrix 58,59

17 Table 4.5 The Total Variance Explained 60, 61, 62

18 Table 4.6 Results of Discriminant Validity testing 62

20 Table 4.8 Total Effect 67

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Rationale

Despite the progress made in recent decades, there is still a significant gap between the number of men and women in higher leadership roles Almost half of the U.S labor force are women (47%; Catalyst, 2017) Women occupy more than half of all management and professional positions in American organizations (51.5%; Catalyst, 2017) However, they are underrepresented in the upper leadership ranks of America's corporations and political system Women make up only 5.4% of Fortune 500 CEOs (an all-time high; Brown, 2017), and hold only 20.2% of the Fortune 500 board seats (Catalyst, 2017) In the political arena, women currently occupy 105 of the 535 seats in the U.S Congress (19.6%; 21% in the Senate and 19.3% in the House of Representatives) The global average of female representation in national legislatures or parliaments is 23.3% (Inter-Parliamentary Union,

2017)

The same trend can be observed in Vietnam In fact, this underrepresentation and

underutilization of women leaders is more significant in Asia than in Western countries (Kazmi, 2014) Gender equality in Vietnam has shown improvement, but women continue to

be underrepresented in higher-level leadership The Women, Business and the Law 2021 report by the World Bank shows that Vietnam scores 80 out of 100 in the Women, Business and the Law Index, indicating progress However, the report also shows that women in Vietnam are still underrepresented in senior and leadership positions, with only 25% of firms having a female top manager Additionally, a report by the National Assembly's Committee for Social Affairs in 2020 found that women held only 27.3% of National Assembly seats, which is below the target set by the government of 30% Furthermore, a survey conducted by the Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry in 2019 found that women accounted for only 30% of managerial positions in Vietnamese businesses The survey also showed that women tended to hold lower-paying jobs and were less likely to receive promotions than their male counterparts

These numbers depict a grim scenario of women's leadership globally and in Vietnam There is an invisible barrier preventing women from ascending into elite leadership positions, which was initially dubbed the glass ceiling The task of finding the causes of this phenomenon has drawn much attention from researchers The general question can be stated as: "Why are women less represented in higher management levels in organizations?" or

"What is preventing them from climbing up to elite leadership positions?"

Since the 1980s, numerous articles dedicated to women's leadership have been published to solve the mentioned puzzle Discussions of women’s underrepresentation in high-level leadership positions generally revolve around three types of explanations The first set of explanations highlights differences in women’s and men’s investments in human capital The next category of explanations considers gender differences between women and men The final type of explanation focuses on prejudice and discrimination against female leaders (Eagly & Carli, 2004, 2007; Williams, 2010)

This research concentrates on examining the second category, which is the gender differences between women and men One argument from this perspective is that women’s underrepresentation in elite leadership positions is due to differences in behaviors and effectiveness Our initial research questions were: "Do male and female leaders differ in their behaviors?" and, if so, "Do female leaders lead more effectively than male leaders?" By answering these questions, we hope to expand the knowledge on the potential inherent differences between men and women in leadership roles

1.2 Research gap

The research literature on the differences between men and women leadership found inconsistent results The behavior and effectiveness of male and female leaders has been discussed by many social and organizational psychologists (Eagly, 2007; Antonakis, 2003;

Buasuwan, 2019; Viral, 2018; Rosener, 2011; Qureshia, 2011; Jallow, 2020; etc.) In terms of

effectiveness, in general, previous studies have not reached a unified conclusion on whether male and female leaders are equally effective in all or certain contexts (Eichenauer, 2021; Northouse, 2021; Eagly, 1995) In most situations, the sex of the leader or manager does

make a difference (Jallow, 2020; Wang, 2013; Dildar, 2017; Eagly, 1995; etc.) Research on

whether female and male differ in leadership style and behavior also has a great diversity in views Traditionally, studies on women and men leadership denied any differences between

them (Caroll, 2006; Dobbins & Platz, 1986; Kaiser & Wallace, 2016; Powell, 1990; van

Engen, Leeden, & Willemsen, 2001) In contrast, meta-analyses of research examining style differences between women and men found that gender does determine the way one acts as a leader Across all settings, they found one robust gender difference which is women led ina more democratic, or participative, manner than men (Eagly & Johnson, 1990; van Engen & Willemsen, 2004) In summary, the research conducted on the topic of leadership differences between men and women has demonstrated varied findings

The inconsistencies in the research regarding gender and leadership can be attributed

to various factors, with two of the most significant listed following Firstly, these studies have failed to differentiate between gender role orientation and biological sex (Brewer, 2002; Korabik, 1990) According to the gender role perspective (Bern, 1974; Spence & Helmreich, 1978), gender roles, rather than biological sex, determine how leaders behave in certain

situations (Cook, 1985) Secondly, research on the link between gender and leadership is

usually conducted on female managers, who are socialized within the organization to become more like men (Korabik and Ayman, 1988; Brewer et al., 2002; Eagly, 2007) To attain leadership positions, both men and women must demonstrate the same required attributes and capabilities After assuming such roles, their behaviors are influenced by the associated expectations The pressures for male and female leaders to be similar make it highly likely that any differences in their leadership styles are minimal

Acknowledging the limitations of past research on women's leadership, the present study made two important contributions Firstly, we chose to conduct our research at the team level The majority of previous studies on women's leadership have focused on female managers in organizations While this approach has yielded valuable insights, it also has limitations, and there is relatively little research on leadership in group settings By examining female leaders’ behavior and effectiveness during team processes, we hope to contribute novel insights to the literature Furthermore, given the prevalence of teams in moder organizations, our focus on team-based leadership is particularly relevant Flatter organizational structures, with more and more teams being developed, are becoming increasingly common, as they allow organizations to respond more rapidly to changes (Zaccaro, 2001) Moreover, effective leadership is widely recognized as the most critical factor in team success (Zaccaro, 2001) Effective team leadership not only facilitates team

success but also helps teams avoid failure (Stagl, 2007; Stewart & Manz, 1995) In sum, since

teams are very important in the modern world and team leaders play a pivotal role in determining the team outcome, by studying females in team leader positions, the present research expects to expand women leadership literature regarding their effectiveness and influence on organization compared to men

Secondly, we use gender-role orientation instead of biological sex when examining leaders in order to ensure the precision of our research Gender-role orientation refers to the extent to which individuals describe themselves in terms of personality traits that make up the stereotypes for their own and the opposite sex (Archer & Lloyd, 2002) Traits that are

traditionally seen as more suitable for men than women in society are called masculine traits, while those seen as more suitable for women than men are called feminine traits This approach was chosen due to the limitations of past research on gender and leadership, specifically the failure to separate biological sex from sex-role socialization (Korabik, 1990) Bern (1974) has presented evidence that sex-role orientation does not always conform to the principle of biopsychological equivalence, meaning that not all males are necessarily masculine and not all females are necessarily feminine (Korabik, 1990) For instance, a

female leader can exhibit masculine behaviors, such as self-focus and narcissism, which can

lead to similar effectiveness as a male leader Therefore, by measuring a leader’s gender-role orientation rather than just examining their biological sex, we aim to investigate the differences between male and female leaders in a more precise manner

1.3 Literature review

Conflicts within a team are inevitable Conflict 1s not inherently good or bad, but the way it is handled can significantly influence the outcome (Afzalur, 2001) When managed

effectively, conflict can lead to better team performance and cohesion; otherwise, it can

negatively affect team productivity (Dong, 2013; Song, 2006; Bass, 1990) Team leaders play

a fundamental role in dealing with conflicts The way a team leader approaches conflicts strongly affects the teamwork atmosphere and ultimately determines the team's performance For instance, if team leaders foster open and honest communication, delegate responsibilities, and create an environment of mutual trust and respect, it can make members aware that they

are safe within teams and will not be embarrassed, rejected, or punished for expressing their

true opinions Men and women tend to endorse conflict management strategies that complement gender role expectations (Wachter, 1999), Regarding conflict handling, women tend to prefer accommodating strategies more than men (Greeff and de Bruyne, 2000; Rubin and Brown, 1975), while men usually adopt a confrontational, aggressive, and competitive

approach to conflict (Rosenthal and Hautaluoma, 1988; Kilman and Thomas, 1977; Rubin

and Brown, 1975) A theoretical explanation for the relationship between gender roles and the behavior of leaders can be drawn from the socialization theory The theory asserts that individuals manifest congruent gender role stereotypical personality traits and behaviors that are not readily amenable to change (Bonita, 1994)

Psychological safety climate is another vital factor for a team's success It is defined

as the "shared belief that the team is safe for interpersonal risk-taking" (Edmondson, 1999) Perceptions of a psychological safety climate originate from the trust and respect among

employees, which allows them to speak up without fear of punishment or embarrassment Empirical research has consistently found a positive correlation between psychological safety

climate and team performance, team learning behavior, and other valuable outcomes

(Newman, 2017) Social learning theory provides a significant explanation for the relationship between the team leader's conflict management style and the psychological safety climate According to this theory, by listening to and supporting subordinates and providing clear and consistent directions, leaders can model a safe environment for

risk-taking (e.g., Hirak et al., 2012; Liu et al., 2014; Nemanich & Vera, 2009; Walumbwa &

Schaubroeck, 2009)

1.4 Research purpose

Although our contribution may be modest, our purpose is to support the advancement

of women leaders by exploring the differences in behavior and effectiveness between female and male leaders, while acknowledging the limitations of past research

Our study attempt to answer two general research questions, including:

(1) Is there a relationship between a team leader's gender-role orientation and their conflict management style?

(2) Does the way in which leaders handle conflicts shape the team's psychological safety climate and ultimately affect team performance?

1.5 Research methods

The authors utilized the quantitative research methodology, which involved the implementation of a structured questionnaire consisting of predetermined response options to gather data from the target sample population Online questionnaires were designed and distributed to participants to collect data and provide persuasive evidence to either support or reject the hypothesis under investigation

- Sample size: 188 teams (628 individuals)

- Research scope and subjects: undergraduate students in Ho Chi Minh city

- Research instruments: Google Form for collecting data, SPSS 20 and AMOS 20 for data analysis

In this study, the researchers employed Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to establish the suitability of the latent constructs under

investigation Furthermore, Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) techniques were utilized to test hypotheses

1.6 Contribution, implication of research

This research contributes to the study of women's leadership in several ways Firstly,

it proposes a model to explain the mechanism by which feminine leaders lead to more positive outcomes Secondly, it fills gaps in the current literature on women's leadership by examining women's leadership behavior and effectiveness at the team level and using gender-role orientation instead of biological sex to investigate the differences between male and female leaders Finally, this research adds to the literature on gender-role orientation, conflict management styles, psychological safety climate, team performance, and their intricate relationships, showing that a leader's gender-role orientation affects their conflict management style, which in turn influences the team's psychological safety climate, ultimately affecting team performance Overall, this study contributes to the understanding of how feminine leaders may be more effective and highlights the importance of creating a positive and safe work environment for teams to achieve optimal performance

The findings of the research carry certain implications From an organizational perspective, the study helps predict team dynamics, conflict resolution behavior, and PSC The study’s implication for team leaders is to raise their awareness of team dynamics, their gender-role orientation, and the importance of psychological safety The study finds that male leaders should reduce their masculine terms and strengthen their femininity, while female leaders should remain true to their gender orientation and practice feminine behaviors to positively affect team success by increasing PSC Finally, leaders need to regularly assess the team’s psychological safety climate to increase their ability to accomplish goals efficiently

1.7 Report layout

Chapter 1: Introduction This chapter provides an overview of the research

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Hypothesis Development This chapter presents a comprehensive summary of previous research on relevant constructs in the study The

theoretical foundations of GRO, CMS, PSC, and TPM will be briefly reviewed, followed by a

theory-based argument for the relationships hypothesized in the model

Chapter 3: Research Design and Methods This chapter discusses the data collection process, sampling methodology, participant recruitment, and data analysis procedures Chapter 4: Results This chapter presents and discusses the results obtained from the data analysis process Conclusions about whether the hypotheses are supported or rejected are

drawn in this section

Chapter 5: Conclusion Chapter 5 begins with a detailed discussion on the findings This chapter highlights the contribution that the present study has made to the current literature It also points out implications for various aspects based on the findings of the study Finally, the chapter provides the limitations of the research and suggests future directions for further

studies

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT

In this chapter, we'll provide an in-depth overview of previous research on relevant topics that are studied We'll briefly discuss the theoretical bases of Gender-role orientation (GRO), Conflict management styles (CMS), Psychological safety climate (PSC), Team performance (TPM), followed by a logical explanation for the connections that are proposed

in the model

2.1 Theoretical foundations

2.1.1 Gender role orientation and Leadership

As efforts to eliminate gender inequality as well as properly recognize the practical contributions of women have paid off, the presence of female leaders in all fields and professions has significantly increased But the problem they face has never been completely solved when they are always subject to doubts with big questions when taking on the job of the head of the organization, such as: Why are there so few women leadership? Are women's leadership styles different from men's? If different, does it lead to better performance? Research on women leadership is a valuable topic that has been receiving much attention from scientific researchers Even so, studies aimed at explaining the differences between women and men when it comes to leadership are often placed within organizational settings, the scope within a team is still underexploited Teamwork appeared in life much

earlier than it was in the past Now, while in an academic environment, students have access

to teamwork and problem solving on a team basis We would like to contribute to the limited science research of women leadership at team level

Gender-roles, which represent the proper social functions for both sexes, are a result of gender stereotypes (Eagly & Steffen, 1984) Gender-Role Orientation (GRO) is the extent to which an individual identifies with specific personal beliefs, values, self-concepts, social behaviors, and professional decisions that are congruent with socially generated gender stereotypes (Beutel & Marini, 1995; Abele, 2003) According to Garcia-Leiva (2005), gender-role orientation is a dynamic and multi-cause phenomenon in which the subject actively participates in the ongoing interplay between biology and environment Biology and the environment are inseparable from one another

Past research said that research on women leaders should use gender-role orientation rather than biological sex “The premise underlying the sex differences literature is that socialization practices have encouraged the development of personality traits and behavior

patterns in women which are antithetic to the managerial role (Riger and Galligan, 1980) However, researchers have failed to separate biological sex from sex-role socialization in their research designs” In 1974, Bern presented evidence that sex-role orientation does not conform to the principle of biopsychological equivalence; not all males are masculine nor are

all females feminine

Sandra Bem developed the Bem Sex-Role Inventory (BSRI) as a tool to divide people into several gender categories and assess their gender-role orientation (1974) Her suggestion provides a different critique of the one bipolar dimension that has so far been embraced by both femininity and masculinity Bem claims that it's possible for these qualities to coexist in

an individual She disproved the notion that there is a close relationship between sex (men/women) and gender (masculine/feminine) (Watson & Newby, 2005) She established

four gender categories: masculine, feminine, androgynous, and undifferentiated, based on

various combinations of an individual's levels of male and feminine qualities

Although the concept of women leadership has been discussed frequently in the management literature and appears to have received universal acceptance, we would like to help draw attention to the research on the subject The studies conducted offer compelling evidence that leadership style is a function of sex-role orientation rather than biological sex

2.1.2 Conflict and Conflict Management Style

Most people agree that teams may benefit from some task-related conflict (Jehn & Mannix, 2001), but no one loves to be criticized or disputed (Ensley, Pearson, & Amason, 2002) One tends to feel that people don't respect their judgment or conclusion when they see that their thoughts are being challenged (Pelled, Eisenhardt & Xin, 1999) People typically experience anger and resentment when criticized, according to both common observation and scientific evidence (Baron, 1998) People who detest and find their team members

bothersome tend to attribute negative traits to them, which can lead to a self-fulfilling

prophecy of mutual animosity and escalated conflict over time (Janssen, van de Vliert, &

Veenstra, 1999) Therefore, conflict is “interpersonal disharmony reflected in tension,

animosity, and annoyance among group members” (Randel, 2002)

The research on conflict management (Montoya-Weiss, Massey, & Song, 2001) highlights that individuals can deal with conflict proactively and reactively, including

reducing conflict (LePine, Piccolo, Jackson, Mathieu, & Saul, 2008) On the other hand, the

macro literature in management encourages firms to decrease conflict in their relationships with other organizations (Zhou, Zuang, & Yip, 2007) Hence, the article emphasizes the importance of understanding the critical role of team psychological safety climate in reaping

the benefits of task conflict in teams

Conflict Management Styles

Conflict is a significant part of teams, but its effects very much depend upon how it is managed Depending on a variety of factors, such as the leaders’ conflict management style, the nature of the conflict, the perceptions of team members when dealing with conflict, and

so on, conflicts among team members may be either constructive or destructive on the performance of the team (Wu et al., 2017)

However, there are other conflict-handling approaches that people can use in

professional or personal interactions with others (Chiocchio, Forgues, Paradis, & Iordanova,

2011; Wu et al., 2017) Efficient styles facilitate conflict resolution, improve job consistency, encourage team members’ emotions of self-efficacy, reduce the likelihood of unfavorable conflicts in the future, and also contribute to a company's long-term financial growth (Wu et al., 2017; Cheung & Chuah, 1999)

These theories expand on Blake and Mouton's 1964 ground-breaking classification of conflict-managing strategies into five categories: forcing, withdrawing, smoothing, compromising, and confronting The authors further classified these five tactics into two categories, namely (1) concern for people and (2) concern for tasks, both of which are related

to the behavior of the team leader In 1976, Thomas analyzed and improved Blake and Mouton's approaches for resolving disputes in team settings (Rahim & Magner, 1995) Thomas divided the ways people deal with conflict into five categories and established two key dimensions: (1) cooperativeness, in which people's concerns for their peers are higher, and (2) assertiveness, in which people's concerns for themselves are more important Therefore, we identify two key methods to managing conflict, building on Deutsch's (1973, 1980) theory of cooperation and competition These techniques have been considered

as conflict-management styles Conflict, according to Deutsch, is the result of opposing

behaviors where one person's actions interfere with, obstruct, or in some other ways make the

conduct of another less effective He claimed that the dynamics and results of conflict are significantly altered depending on whether protagonists emphasize cooperative or competitive aims is supported by social psychological research (Deutsch, 1990) Organizational contexts have been included in studies of the cooperative-competitive conflict approach (Alper et al., 2000; Barker et al., 1988) Besides, we focus on studying the competitive and cooperative conflict management styles for several reasons:

Firstly, these two styles are the most commonly studied and well-established since

“competitive and cooperative styles have been studied extensively” (Larsson & Vinberg, 2010) Secondly, the competitive and cooperative styles represent two opposite ends of the conflict management spectrum The competitive style involves a win-lose approach, where one party attempts to gain an advantage over the other, while the cooperative style involves a win-win approach, where both parties work together to find a mutually beneficial solution (De Dreu & Van de Vliert, 1997) Lastly, understanding the differences between these two styles can provide important insights for conflict management in various contexts, including innovation As the review notes, “The choice of conflict management style can be critical for the outcome of innovation activities, as innovation typically involves disagreements and differing views among stakeholders” (Larsson & Vinberg, 2010)

Overall, studying the competitive and cooperative conflict management styles can contribute to a better understanding of conflict management strategies and their impact on

various outcomes, including innovation success

Cooperative Approach to Conflict Management

Deutsch (1990) proposed a scenario in which people value the competencies and alternatives of their peers, which typically leads to the achievement of cooperative goals and

transparent communication when handling conflict The term “interdependence in conflict management” refers to this situation (Tjosvold et al., 2001)

A cooperative style shows concern for others in addition to oneself As a result, it is a problem-solving approach that confronts differences in a positive way It makes an effort to come up with a decision that will satisfy both parties It is a win-win style, making it the preferable method of addressing conflict

People are more likely to be encouraged to deal with conflict collaboratively if they feel as though they require the skills, perspectives, and resources of others Consequently, they might also get to the point where it would be important to settle disputes amicably for the benefit of both parties in order to maintain a long-term partnership and be able to continue working together effectively Cooperative conflict managers are more adept at handling conflict and are even regarded as more successful leadership Furthermore, it could also be said that reciprocal dependency promotes cooperative conflict management, which may lead

to enhanced project collaboration According to empirical research, cooperative conflict management has also been found to increase views of fair treatment among individuals in collectivist societies like China, which in turn improves team performance, according to empirical research (Chen & Tjosvold, 2002)

A cooperative style promotes open-minded engagements to comprehend competing notions, assimilate opposing views, generate acceptable alternatives, and enhance interpersonal ties in order to create win-win scenarios This leads to solutions that are beneficial to both parties (Walton & McKersie, 1965) By focusing on their shared objectives, team members might adopt a cooperative conflict resolution method They will show that they want to benefit from an activity for all parties, that they want to hear everyone's opinions, and that they are willing to include various proposals in order to come up with a solution that benefits both parties (Deutsch, 1990; Tjosvold, 1985) Ayoko (2016) and Sanders & Schyns (2006) stated that open communication, consideration of others, mutual understanding, and formation of compromises are characteristics of the cooperative style

(Ayoko, 2016; Sanders & Schyns, 2006)

High team performance and desirable individual behavior are seen to be promoted by

a cooperative approach to conflict management (Tjosvold, Poon, & Yu, 2005) Additionally, teams that can resolve disputes amicably are also able to raise their own performance (Tjosvold, Hui, & Yu, 2003) Cooperative approaches to conflict management are specifically said to lead to expressions of individual pleasure with being a member of the team, team

efficacy, boosts to invention and creativity, and greater goal achievement (Tjosvold, 2008) Cooperative conflict management then results in productive conflict

The team members are certain that they will use their disagreements to create superior solutions and reinforce their bonds The team’s effectiveness is confirmed by the fact that team members have successfully managed their disagreements

The fundamental steps in cooperative conflict resolution are for team members to directly express their thoughts and feelings, consider the viewpoints of others, convey a desire to resolve the problem for both parties, and integrate their ideas to generate innovative solutions (Tjosvold, 1998) The development of productive conflict, when team members are confident they use their disagreements to solve problems and enhance their relationships, is aided by repeated instances of efficient conflict resolution High levels of constructive conflict in top management teams may be able to offer innovative strategy leadership Competitive Approach to Conflict Management

By contrast to cooperative approach, competitive conflict increases independence among team members A win-lose situation has been associated with a competitive style (high care for self and low regard for others) (Deutsch, 1990) As one succeeds, the other slips away from achieving the goal Protagonists might also emphasize their competitive interests They frequently view the conflict as a win-lose contest; if the other wins, they lose This is a confrontational strategy that ends with one side caving in to the other Yang, Cheng, and Chuang (2013) listed some of the tactics that are frequently employed in this style, including attempts to seize control of communication channels, direct communication with regard to the issues, persistent disagreement with other parties’ opinions, and remaining rooted to one’s own position

The focus on competing interests makes it more likely for people to avoid having a

direct conversation or, alternately, causes them to have a hard, narrow conversation and try to

force the other person to do what they want These dynamics are detrimental to relationships and decision-making Communication is restricted by competitive conflict, which leads to impasses or forced solutions

Low levels of constructive conflict then result from competitive conflict Members of the team come to the conclusion that they have not improved their relationships and solved difficulties via their disagreements The team is unproductive because they lack belief in their capacity to manage disagreements

This strategy is generally used by managers or team leaders to push their ideas or viewpoints on their subordinates, and the dispute frequently has unfavorable outcomes Such leaders place a strong emphasis on their competitive objectives, which may cause others to drift from achieving the project goal They have a tendency to view confrontation as a

lose-win situation: if the other wins, they lose As a result, the most dominant party in the

conflict will impose their opinion, which discourages productive communication According

to De Dreu and Gelfand (2008), Prieto-Remo et al (2015), and Tjosvold (2008), people who place a greater emphasis on independence and a lesser emphasis on interdependence may favor a competitive style of conflict resolution because it increases the likelihood of perceived maximum personal gain rather than the benefit of win-win situations

2.1.3 Psychological safety climate

The concept of psychological safety has its roots in the organizational transformation research conducted by Schein and Bennis in 1965 It is defined as the degree to which individuals feel comfortable and confident in their capacity to manage change or “shared belief that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking” (Edmondson, 1999) Over the years, scholars have explored what psychological safety means in the workplace

Psychological safety climate plays a crucial role in creating a positive team dynamic and enhancing team performance (Newman, 2017; Nembhard, 2006) When employees feel safe and comfortable expressing their thoughts and ideas, they are more likely to be engaged, creative, and productive (Hmieleski, 2012; Detert, 2007) Conversely, when employees feel unsupported, ignored, or afraid to speak up, they tend to withdraw, become disengaged, and may even leave the team (Carmeli, 2019; Nembhard, 2006) Psychological safety climate is closely linked to trust and respect among team members Team members who feel respected

are more likely to take risks, offer ideas, and share feedback that can lead to better

decision-making and performance outcomes (Edmondson, 1999) Leaders play a critical role

in establishing a psychological safety climate in their teams (Newman, 2017) Leaders who model a safe environment for risk-taking by listening to and supporting their subordinates, providing clear and consistent direction, and managing conflict in a constructive way, can positively impact their team's psychological safety climate (Edmondson, 2018) This can lead

to better team performance, higher levels of engagement, and greater overall success (Kozlowski, 2013; Edmondson, 2007).In conclusion, a psychological safety climate is an essential component of a successful team It creates an environment where employees feel respected, supported, and free to take risks and express their ideas without fear of punishment

or embarrassment Leaders can play a critical role in establishing a psychological safety climate by modeling the desired behaviors, managing conflicts constructively, and providing

clear and consistent direction to their teams

2.2 Hypothesis development

2.2.1 The link between leader's Gender role orientation and Conflict management styles

This section discusses why the current research hypothesizes a link between leaders' gender-role orientation and their conflict management style We will begin by explaining how socialization theory can help to explain this relationship, and then discuss previous studies that have explored this phenomenon to provide empirical evidence

First, socialization theory can help to explain how an individual's gender-role orientation can influence their behavior According to this theory, people exhibit personality traits and behaviors that align with traditional gender roles and are not easy to be changed For example, women are typically expected to be accommodating, emotional, and relationship-oriented, while men are expected to be competitive, confident, and independent (Northouse, 2021; Tuvana Rua, 2019; Eagly, 2012; Mueller, 2008) As a result, people who possess more feminine traits may behave in a more feminine manner, while those who possess more masculine traits may behave in a more masculine manner

Conflict management style is a type of behavior that can also be influenced by an

individual's gender-role orientation In this research, we will use Deutsch's (1973) conflict

management model, which measures conflict resolution style based on the cooperativeness dimension According to this model, people either approach conflicts cooperatively (with high concern for others) or competitively (with high concern for self) Based on the gender-role perspective, a competitive approach to conflict (with high concern for self) is consistent with a masculine gender role, while a cooperative conflict management style is consistent with a feminine gender role (Brewer, 2002) Thus, we can hypothesize that feminine leaders will manage conflicts more cooperatively than masculine leaders, and masculine leaders will manage conflicts more competitively than feminine leaders

Empirical evidence supports the direct link between gender-role orientation and behavior Research has consistently found that feminine individuals are more likely to lead in

a democratic or participative manner than masculine individuals (Northouse, 2021; Eagly, 1990; Engen, 2004) Recent studies have also replicated this finding (Jallow, 2020; Wang,

2013; Qureshia, 2011) Additionally, a meta-analysis examining differences in leadership behavior between men and women found that female leaders are more likely to adopt a transformational leadership style than male leaders (Northouse, 2021; Eagly, 2003; Jallow,

2020; Buasuwan, 2019; Vial, 2018; Rosener, 2011) Although research on conflict

management styles has received less attention, studies have shown that feminine individuals are more likely to use a collaborative conflict resolution style, while masculine individuals tend to be more competitive and dominant in dealing with conflicts (Brahnam, 2005; Portello, 1994; Brewer, 2002) Specifically, Brahnam (2005) investigated how male and female students, ranging from 18-22 years old, manage conflicts and discovered that women are more likely to deal with conflicts cooperatively In addition, studies by Brewer (2002) and Portello (1994) indicated that high-instrumental (masculine) people are more aggressive and competitive in managing conflicts They examined managers and governmental supervisors and discovered that people who scored higher in the masculinity dimension reported more use of competitive conflict management styles

Based on this analysis, we hypothesize that team leaders’ gender-role orientation influences their conflict management styles Specifically, feminine leaders are more likely to adopt cooperative conflict management styles than competitive style, while masculine leaders tend to approach conflicts competitively rather than cooperatively

These hypotheses are stated formally as:

Hypothesis 1 Team leader’s gender-role orientation directly affects team leader’s conflict management style

Hypothesis la Higher feminine gender-role orientation leads to more use of cooperative conflict management styles

Hypothesis 1b Higher feminine gender-role orientation leads to less use of competitive conflict management styles

Hypothesis lc Higher masculine gender-role orientation leads to more use of competitive conflict management styles

Hypothesis 1d Higher masculine gender-role orientation leads to less use of cooperative conflict management styles

2.2.2 The link between Conflict management styles and Psychological safety climate Social exchange theory (SET) and Social learning theory

Currently, researchers have mostly embraced theoretical perspectives such as Social Exchange Theory (SET) and Social Learning Theory to describe the mechanisms by which psychological safety develops, particularly through the benefits of supportive leadership behaviors Researchers have looked at how team members' collective perceptions of the team leader's support and coaching (Edmondson, 1999; Roberto, 2002), inclusiveness (Hirak et al.,

2012; Nembhard & Edmondson, 2006), trust in the leader (Li & Tan, 2012; Schaubroeck,

Lam, & Peng, 2011), and behavioral integrity (Leroy et al., 2012) have been found to foster team-level outcomes such as team performance, participation in quality improvement projects, and a decrease in team member errors due to the increase of psychological safety It was established that leaders who value participation, people, and have an improvement orientation management style (Halbesleben & Rathert, 2008), are able to foster high levels of psychological safety

According to Schneider et al (2013), the team climate refers to the behaviors,

operations, and practices within a specific workgroup that employees belong to, regularly interact with to accomplish goals, and feel a sense of affiliation with A leader's conflict management approach creates a climate that focuses on shared perceptions of the leader's conflict management practices and behaviors within the workgroup Anderson and West (1998) suggest that a workgroup's observation of the supervisor's response to conflict will result in shared perceptions of their supervisor's conflict management style or a workgroup-level climate following the leader's conflict management Since supervisors are typically the organizationally sanctioned individuals responsible for establishing and enforcing behavioral rules and expectations within their workgroup, they play a crucial role

in shaping the team climate (Way, Jimmieson & Bordia, 2016)

Prior research has mainly relied on basic assumptions from Social Learning Theory to explain why a clear correlation may exist between supportive leadership behaviors and psychological safety (Bandura, 1977) Following this theory, experts state that a leader can educate followers that it is acceptable to take risks and communicate honestly by listening to them, offering them encouragement, and giving them detailed guidelines (Hirak et al., 2012; Liu et al., 2014; Walumbwa & Schaubroeck, 2009) Other researchers, however, argue that social exchange processes (also known as social exchange theory) may be what underlies the connection between supportive leadership and psychological safety They asserted that when

followers feel supported by a leader, they will reciprocate by acting in a supportive manner as well, creating a psychologically safe environment for the rest of their team (Schaubroeck et

al., 2011)

While we recognize that the social exchange process may increase psychological safety, we believe that the effects are more likely to be stronger and longer-lasting when psychological safety is built through learning and imitating these behaviors from the leader, rather than by displaying them temporarily in exchange for certain leadership behaviors (Newman, Donohue & Eva, 2017) Therefore, leaders may create work settings that maximize good outcomes for their teams by understanding the advantages that psychological safety offers to teams, the circumstances in which psychological safety is most impactful, and the elements that may lead to psychological safety development

The link between CMS and PSC

In practice, conflict management styles (CMS) have been the subject of in-depth study for many years According to studies, integrating, obliging, and compromising styles of conflict resolution, which demonstrate greater concern for others, typically produce positive results in the workplace, whereas uncooperative or competitive styles, such as avoiding and dominating, typically result in unfavorable results (Meyer, 2004; Ohbuchi and Kitanaka, 1991; Rahim and Buntzman, 1989) Various outcomes of subordinates, including work happiness, supervision satisfaction, relationships between supervisors and subordinates, long-term collaboration, and attitudinal and behavioral compliance, are linked to managers’

CMS (Alexander, 1995; Follett, 1940; Rahim, 1986; Thomas and Kilmann, 1974;

Weider-Hatfield and Hatfield, 1996)

Prior studies on the function of CMSs focused mostly on employee behaviors and

individual (team) performance (Costa, Passos, Bakker, 2015; Alper, Tjosvold, Law, 2000)

Many academics have recently started to concentrate on the office climate's team dynamics (Edmondson, 2018) According to team environment perception, team psychological safety (Johnson & Avolio, 2019), can influence team members' willingness to propose novel ideas and approaches Some researchers investigate the relationship between conflict management and psychological safety In order to determine the greater contribution of conflict management to team growth, it is vital to consider the relationship between conflict management and psychological safety inside teams

According to social cognition theory, people can influence the environment by their own arbitrary traits, such behavior A team leader's conflict management approach can

influence the normal team climate of psychological safety as a type of leadership behavior Mutual trust and respect foster an environment wherein members feel comfortable speaking openly without fear of retaliation or embarrassment (Johnson & Avolio, 2019) Nembhard and Edmondson (2006) suggested that the feelings of psychological safety are contributed by leader behaviors Edmondson (2004) proposes that leaders who demonstrate openness, availability, and accessibility are more likely to encourage the growth of psychological safety among workers By emphasizing the importance of such actions and reassuring followers that there won't be any negative effects, leaders can motivate followers to propose novel ideas and take calculated risks Leadership is able to communicate such expectations when it is open, accessible, and available Employees are more likely to feel comfortable sharing new ideas without worrying about the repercussions when the leader is approachable, attentive to their feedback, open to discussing alternative methods for attaining the organization's goals, and alert to emerging opportunities In a similar vein, leaders that are approachable and accessible

to their workforce convey to workers that approaching them is safe and that they will be open

to working with them to find innovative solutions to problems Other research that referred to actions that reflect leader benevolence (e.g., genuine caring and concern for the follower) and leader support to increase trust, are also compatible with Edmondson's (2004) theory concerning such qualities of leadership as openness, availability, and accessibility (Burke et al., 2007) Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that high-quality interpersonal connections promote the growth of psychological safety (Carmeli et al., 2009; Carmeli and Gittell, 2009; Puccinelli and Tickle-Degnen, 2005) Nembhard and Edmondson (2006) discovered that members generated a sense of psychological safety when they believed their leaders valued and invited their contribution This safety stems from the fact that people feel confident speaking up and expressing themselves

According to Edmondson (2004), the development of trustworthy relationships among organizational members can be crucial to creating a sense of psychological safety She specifically contends that staff members are more likely to speak honestly about their ideas and opinions when they trust their managers By contrast, 1f staff members lack confidence in their managers, they are more likely to feel “judged” or “monitored” and to hold back on speaking up out of concern for their reputation (Edmondson, 2004) Similar opinions have been stated by other researchers According to May et al (2004), high levels of trust, which represent a particular relationship in which people demonstrate care and concern for their partners (McAllister, 1995), can be crucial in fostering a feeling of psychological security Kahn (1990) also discovered that “interpersonal interactions enhanced psychological safety

when they were encouraging and trusting” The findings of this study demonstrated that when employees trusted their leaders, they were more likely to offer concepts and suggestions for designs

In conclusion, research suggests that a team leader's conflict management style has a direct impact on the psychological safety climate within their team As stated by Newman, Donohue, and Eva (2017), high levels of psychological safety can be fostered by leaders who utilize an improvement-oriented management style and value participation, people, and production

Hypothesis 2 Team leaders’s conflict management style directly affects team psychological safety climate

Cooperative Conflict Management Style and Psychological Safety Climate

A climate of trust, which results through cooperative CMS, may show to be a significant predictor of psychological safety, according to research by Madjar and Ortiz-Walters (2009) Members’ feelings of psychological safety are likely to be enhanced by the leader's cooperative CMS In order to find the best resolution for all parties involved, it employs cooperative behaviors designed to pursue win - win solutions, focuses on shared points and goals rather than individual interests, and involves working through the conflict with flexibility, open communication, and information exchange (West and Hirst, 2005) For instance, members are more willing to take risks that reflect their genuine selves when they feel psychologically safe Team members should actively show interest in their work and experiment with creative ways to complete tasks related to their roles (Amabile, 1983; May et al., 2004)

Team leaders that use a cooperative conflict management approach send out the message that their members have interests in common and shared aims Leaders of the team encourage team members to provide solutions that will benefit both parties through effective communication and discussion It can promote psychological safety inside teams by letting team members know that they are safe there and won't face consequences for expressing their genuine ideas We propose the following hypothesis in light of the analyses above:

Hypothesis 2a Team leader’s cooperative conflict management style positively affects the psychological safety climate

Competitive Conflict Management Style and Psychological Safety Climate

By contrast to cooperative conflict management style, team leaders who adopt competitive conflict management styles are more likely to force their own preferences on team members.They also find it difficult to tolerate when team members’ preferences differ from their own According to Aritzeta et al (2005), under this conflict-handling approach,

“others' feelings and interests are neglected”, and in actuality, this perspective of conflict sees only winners and losers The issue with this type of conflict management is that it fosters animosity and resentment

In the long-term, it leads to a reaction as people become less willing to bear the emotional cost and attempt to weaken the authoritarian leader's support system (Whetten &

Cameron, 2005) As a result, team members are reluctant to disagree with team leaders for

fear of being humiliated, rejected, or penalized After the situation of suppressed team members' inner beliefs being voiced decreasingly, the team loses vibrancy and vitality, making it harder to come up with innovative ideas and plans The competitive conflict management style of the team leader has also been shown repeatedly in academic studies to have a negative influence on the psychological safety of the team, which eventually has a

negative impact on the team's performance (Yin, Qu, Li and Liao, 2022) Therefore, the

following is the hypothesis:

Hypothesis 2b Team leader’s competitive conflict management style negatively affects the psychological safety climate

2.2.3 The link between Psychological safety climate and Team performance

Numerous studies have consistently shown that psychological safety is a critical factor in enabling team performance (Edmondson, 2014) Edmondson's (1999) team learning model, which introduces the concept of team psychological safety, has been extensively researched and tested It refers to a shared belief held by team members that the team is safe for taking interpersonal risks This model suggests that team psychological safety has significant impacts on team learning and performance in organizational work teams

Moreover, Schaubroeck et al (2011) found that team psychological states and factors related to leader trust fully moderated the effects of leader conduct on team performance This finding is crucial for studies on the link between team performance and leader behavior,

as well as for initiatives to improve leader development by fusing insights from several leadership theories The association between PSC and team performance may also be explained further through team-level learning behavior (Edmondson, 1999) Ortega et al

(2014) identified an indirect influence of psychological safety on team performance through team learning in their meta-analysis A psychologically safe climate enables divergent thinking, creativity, and risk-taking and motivates engagement in exploratory and exploitative learning, thereby promoting team performance

Larson and LaFasto's (1989) research on effective teams identified eight traits that successful teams exhibit Among the eight features studied, the collaborative atmosphere was found to have a positive impact on team performance A collaborative climate is one in which members can remain focused on the problem at hand, listen to and comprehend each other, take risks without fear of repercussions, and be willing to make amends for mistakes The definition of team PSC overlaps with the description of the collaborative environment in the book by Larson & LaFasto PSC is the degree to which individuals feel comfortable and confident in their ability to manage change or “share the belief that the group is safe to take interpersonal risks.” Therefore, we believe that teams with higher PSC will have better performance

Several recent studies have further supported the importance of psychological safety

in team performance For example, Paul et al (2019) examined the effects of psychological safety climate on team performance in the context of healthcare and found that a positive psychological safety climate was significantly related to higher levels of team performance Similarly, Siemsen et al (2020) found that psychological safety climate was a critical driver

of team learning, innovation, and overall performance in a manufacturing organization

Furthermore, Wang et al (2022) highlighted the mediating role of team cohesion in the relationship between psychological safety climate and team performance The results suggested that a positive psychological safety climate leads to higher levels of team cohesion, which in turn, positively affects team performance

Overall, the evidence from numerous studies supports the view that psychological safety is a key factor in enabling team performance Teams with higher levels of psychological safety are more likely to engage in divergent thinking, creativity, and

risk-taking, which, in turn, leads to higher levels of team learning and better overall team

performance

From above arguments, we claim that:

Hypothesis 3 Psychological safety climate positively affect team performance

2.2.4 Mediating role of Conflict management styles and Psychological safety climate: This study proposes that the conflict management style of a team leader serves as a useful mediator to understand how feminine and masculine leaders influence the psychological safety climate (PSC) of their team, and as a result, affect team performance Previous research has highlighted the significance of team leaders’ supportive and cooperative behaviors in promoting PSC (Newman, 2017) According to socialization theory, leaders with expressive traits (high in femininity) are more likely to adopt collaborative, participative, and supportive behaviors, particularly when dealing with conflicts, than instrumental leaders (high in masculinity) Consequently, teams with feminine leaders are expected to score higher in PSC compared to teams with masculine leaders

Several studies have shown that team leaders’ conflict management style has a significant impact on team performance (Dong, 2013; Song, 2006; Desivilya, 2010) Effective conflict management styles, such as cooperative, compromising, and integrating, have been found to enhance team performance We hypothesize that the effect of conflict management styles on team performance can be explained by examining PSC as an intervening variable As discussed earlier, PSC plays a vital role in determining team effectiveness by allowing members to freely express their opinions and take risks Thus, the approach that a team leader takes when dealing with a conflict can shape the team's PSC Specifically, based on our earlier arguments, we theorize the following mediation effects - team leaders with high femininity scores are expected to adopt more cooperative conflict management styles, whereas team leaders with high masculinity scores are expected

to adopt more competitive conflict management styles Cooperative conflict management styles are proposed to lead to high levels of PSC, resulting in high levels of team performance On the other hand, competitive conflict management styles are expected to harm the team's PSC, ultimately lowering team performance

Stated formally as:

Hypothesis 4a: Both cooperative and competitive CMS mediate the relationship between leader’s feminine GRO and PSC (With higher feminine GRO leads to more use of cooperative CMS and less use of competitive CMS, which leads to higher PSC)

Hypothesis 4b: Both cooperative and competitive CMS mediate the relationship between leader’s masculine GRO and PSC (With higher masculine GRO leads to more use of competitive CMS and less use of cooperative CMS, which leads to lower PSC)

Hypothesis 5a: PSC mediates the relationships between cooperative CMS and team performance (With more use of cooperative CMS leads to higher PSC and higher team performance)

Hypothesis Sb: PSC mediates the relationships between competitive CMS and team performance (With more use of competitive CMS leads to lower PSC and lower team performance)

2.2.5 Hypothesized model

All the suggested hypotheses form the research model below

Figure 2.1 Hypothesized Model Hypotheses

Hypothesis I Team leader's gender-role orientation directly affects team leader's conflict management style

Hypothesis la Higher feminine gender-role orientation leads to more use of cooperative conflict management styles

Hypothesis 1b Higher feminine gender-role orientation leads to less use of competitive conflict management styles

Hypothesis Ic Higher masculine gender-role orientation leads to more use of competitive conflict management styles

Hypothesis Id Higher masculine gender-role orientation leads to less use of cooperative conflict management styles

Hypothesis 2 Team leaders' conflict management style directly affects team psychological safety climate

Hypothesis 2a Team leaders cooperative conflict management style positively affects the psychological safety climate

Hypothesis 2b Team leader 8 competitive conflict management style negatively affects the psychological safety climate

Hypothesis 3 Higher Psychological safety climate leads to higher team performance Hypothesis 4a: Both cooperative and competitive CMS mediate the relationship between leader's feminine GRO and PSC (With higher feminine GRO leads to more use of cooperative CMS and less use of competitive CMS, which leads to higher PSC) Hypothesis 4b: Both cooperative and competitive CMS mediate the relationship between leader's masculine GRO and PSC (With higher masculine GRO leads to more use of competitive CMS and less use of cooperative CMS, which leads to lower PSC) Hypothesis 5a: PSC mediates the relationships between cooperative CMS and team performance (With more use of cooperative CMS leads to higher PSC and higher team performance)

Hypothesis 5b: PSC mediates the relationships between competitive CMS and team performance (With more use of competitive CMS leads to lower PSC and lower team performance)

Note:

Feminine gender-role orientation (FGO)

Masculine gender-role orientation (MGO)

Cooperative conflict management style (COS)

Competitive conflict management style (CPS)

Psychological safety climate (PSC)

Team performance (1PM)

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

3.1 Research design overview

In order to measure the relationships between latent variables hypothesized in this study, a research design covering a wide range of problems was carefully developed The sampling design section discusses the target sample profile and the number of observations planned to be obtained The instrument design part lists the scales adopted to measure the latent variables The data collection design section details the procedure authors followed to collect such a large and complex dataset The method adopted to clean collected data and results from the instrument validating phase are elaborately described in the following parts, which are data cleaning and instrument testing Lastly, the chapter Highlights on research designs problems concludes with a section that highlights the most important issues and solutions in our research design

Figure 3.1 Overview of research design and execution steps

3.2 Sampling design

3.2.1 Sample characteristics

This research’s targeted sample is characterized as follows:

1 They are Project teams

2 They are college students at the age of 18 to 22 in Ho Chi Minh city, Vietnam

3 In these teams, there have been conflicts between team leader and team member

4 The project in which they took part finished before this research was initiated

3.2.2 Sample size

In order to evaluate our sample size, we adopted Hair (2014) belief that the minimum rate should be 5:1 and the ideal sample size should be 10:1 or 15:1 We required at least 195 samples for our research because there were 39 total items in our research Unfortunately, given limitations on resources and time, only 188 teams' total of responses, which were equivalent to 188 samples, were successfully collected by our team

3.3 Instrument design

3.3.1 The measurement scales’ format

Our research scales used a 5-point Likert structure, with 1 being strongly disagree/never and 5 being strongly agree/always

The questionnaire was created for two distinct groups of participants: team members and team leaders It is split into two main sections:

Part I: Participants’ General Information with seven items

Part 2: This is the primary section, which includes four independent scales: Gender Role Orientation (Zhang et al., 2001), Conflict Management Styles (Chen, 2005), Psychological Safety Climate (Edmondson, 1999), and Team Performance (Jones and

Harrison, 1996)

3.3.2 The measurement scales' details

Gender role orientation: The measurement scale was adapted from a shortened scale developed by Zhang et al., 2001, which included a total of 16 items This scale would be answered by the leader Higher average scores in any characteristic represent the higher level

toward which a leader orients

Table 3.1 Gender Role Orientation items

MALE GENDER ROLE ORIENTATION

MGOS Has leader abilities

MGO6 Willing to take risks

MGO7 Willing to take a stand

FEMALE GENDER ROLE ORIENTATION

Conflict management styles: we measured this factor through 2 aspects, which reflected 2 different approaches a surveyed leader would choose to solve team conflicts This

measurement scale included 9 items in total as referenced from Chen, 2005 It is similar to

leadership gender orientation, this scale would be answered by the leader, and the higher scores showed the approach that a leader would choose to deal with conflicts

Table 3.2 Conflict Management Styles items

variables

COS1 I encourage a ‘we are in it together’ attitude

COS2 I seek a solution that will be good for both positions

COS3 I treat conflict as a mutual problem to solve

CPS1 I demand that others agree to my position

¬ CPS2 I want others to make concessions, but I do not want to Competitive

make concessions myself

styles

CPS3 I treat conflict as a win-lose contest

CPS4 I overstate my position to get my own way

Psychological safety climate: the authors adapted a 7-item scale developed by Edmondson (1999), It was answered by both the team leaders and team members

Table 3.3 Psychological Safety Climate items

If I make a mistake on this team, it is often held against me

Members of my team are able to bring up problems and tough

issues

People in my team reject others for being different

It is safe to take risks on my team

It is difficult to ask other members of my team for help

No one in my team would deliberately act in the way that

undermines my effort

Working with members of my team, my unique skills and

talents are valued and utilized

Table 3.4 Team Performance items

variables

TPMI My team met the project goal

TPM2 My team completed the expected amount of work

TPM3 My team completed work with high quality

TPM4 My team finished the project as scheduled

TPMS My team finished the project with a planned budget

TPM6 My team operated the task efficiently

TPM7 My team maintained high work morale

Control variables

Team size: Barry and Steward (1997) suggested that team size impacts team performance Additionally, previous research argued that larger teams may have better information-processing capabilities, so they work more effectively in turbulent environments (Haleblian & Finkelstein, 1993) As a result, in this study, authors determine team size by asking participants how many members their project had

Leader gender: We considered gender as a control variable (1 = male, 0 = female) Kirschner et al.,(2009) controlled for the possible effects of leader gender without combining the effects of gender biases and stereotypes in order to investigate the effect of learning mode

on the retention and transfer efficiency of complex tasks

Leader age: We referenced that leader age can have an impact on the team performance, particularly in complicated situations and adaptive situations (Nguyen et al., 2014)

Gender diversity: O'Reilly, Caldwell and Barnett (1989) suggested that members’ gender diversity can affect the quality of decisions in a team We, therefore, considered it as a control variable in our study

3.4 Data collection design

Conducting research at the group level is challenging and requires a carefully planned data collection design In this section, we will describe the process that this study adopted to

obtain the valuable dataset Additionally, the authors will elaborate on the problems related to

the data collection design and the solutions we developed in the “Highlights of Research Design Problems” section

In general, the data collection procedure was divided into three sub-phases:

Step 1: Participants identification

In step 1, the authors identified the target team for our research It included two phases: interviewing our acquaintance and extracting teams from group lists

Phase I Participants identification through interviewing

Initially, to identify our target teams, we started interviewing the people who are acquainted with us The selection criteria were:

1 There was a conflict

2 The conflict happened between member and leader

3 The project duration was not over 12 months

Hence, during our interviews, we paid a profound attention on exploiting our interviewees following these criteria Some of our questions we used were: “Is there any project you participated in that contained conflict between leader and members?”; "If yes, what was that project about?”’; “When did the project end?”

The collected projects were then stored in a spreadsheet with basic information following:

1 Name of the project

2 Leader’s name

3 The contacts of the leaders and members

We also marked an equivalent project’s ID for each team Later, the collected data would be aggregated based on these project’s IDs These project’s IDs were also used for matching leaders and members in a team and helping us to send out our survey exactly

Phase 2: Participants identification through group lists and questionnaires

Unfortunately, there were not enough teams after our selection interview Our limited number of relationships could be the primary factor So, to gather more samples, we gathered university group list spreadsheets

These groupings came from academic class assignments or from student research teams that the educational institutions in Ho Chi Minh City had published To guarantee that leader-member conflict arose in those teams, we inserted a new question to our survey:

“Whether or not there was a conflict between you and your members when your team was working?” If the answer was "No," we would not approve the team's responses Finally, if there were not sufficient responses from one leader and at least two members in a team, that team would be eliminated

Step 2: Instrument testing

As we delivered our survey to verify the suitability of the research scales Our survey was sent to 432 individuals After three days, we had 173 distinct responses in total (the response rate was approximately 40%) with the inclusion of 82 responses from the leaders and 91 responses from the members Then we began cleaning up our data, removing 31 invalid responses (14 leaders responses, and 17 members responses) The reasons for the

4 There were not sufficient at least one leader and two members in the team's responses

There were 68 leaders and 75 members kept for the scale validation step as the data-cleaning step closed

In order to limit bias in our participants' responses, we utilized some techniques Firsi,

we shuffled the items in our questionnaire Second, we used reverse questions for Psychological Safety Climate scales We considered that reverse wording can reduce biases when participants provide their responses for the surveys on sensitive and controversial topics (Krumpal, 2013)