# Introduction rganizations seek to improve their outcomes by eliminating some the negative phenomena that occur in the organization such as the conflict between team members (Somech et al., 2009). Teams were regarded and should be as a major block for organizations (Stewart and Barrick, 2000). The reason for the team's importance is to integrate resources and skills of team members (Guimera et al., 2005). Therefore, team performance must be the best. Conflict situations are one of the cases where the performance of a team must be evaluated. Hence, the aim of this study is to explore the effect of conflict management styles on team performance. Aritzeta et al. (2005) stressed that the conflict is very frequent in organizations that rely on teams. For this reason, how the conflict is conducted has an impact on the team's performance. Conflict management (CM) has received considerable attention from Researchers over the years. Examples of CM-related subjects involve studies on conflict management and group decision making (Kuhn et al., 2000), conflict management effect on group effectiveness (DeChurch and Marks, 2001), CM styles and leadership effectiveness (Barbuto Jr and Xu, 2006), differences in conflict management styles from different countries (Kim et al., 2007), exploring conflict management (Stanley and Algert, 2007), CM styles and employee attitudinal outcomes (Chan et al., 2008), conflict management and forgiveness (Rizkalla et al., 2008), team satisfaction and performance (Liu et al., 2008), conflict management between and within teams (Hempel et al., 2009), CM styles and team performance (Somech et al., 2009), the relationship between emotional intelligence and CM styles and job performance (Shih and Susanto, 2010), the influence of collectivism and CM styles (Ma et al., 2010), leadership styles and CM styles (Saeed et al., 2014), CM styles and workplace bullying (Baillien al., 2014), organizational power and CM styles (Riasi and Asadzadeh, 2015) as well as cultural orientation and CM styles (Caputo et al., 2018). Generally, the majority of studies that conducted on CM used five common styles which were avoiding, compromising, dominating, integrating, and obliging (Rahim, 2000;Rizkalla Et al., 2008;Riasi and Asadzadeh, 2015;Zaman and Saif, 2016). On the other hand, team performance has been investigated as a dependent variable in relationships with numerous variables such as conflict management (Alper et al., 2000), organizational structure and information processing (Carley and Prietula, 2014), team empowerment , transformational leadership , authentic leadership (Lyubovnikova et al., 2017), collective leadership (McAuliffe et al., 2017), team mental models (Gardner et al., 2017), team tenure diversity (Yi et al., 2018). It is noted from previous research that studies on the relationship between conflict management styles and performance of teams are few. Therefore, the importance of the current study stems from the fact that it fills a gap in the theoretical literature, and it is hoped that organizations will benefit from its results, which show the role of good management of the conflict in the performance of the team work. # II. # Literature Review a) Conflict management styles CM style was defined as a common pattern or behavior that presented in a response to interaction with others in the context of conflict (Kuhn et al., 2000). It is a combination of personality trait, cultural background, and situations (Ting-Toomey eta l., 2001). Researches in general identified five styles of conflict handling, which were avoiding, dominating, integrating, obliging and compromising. Table 1 shows these dimensions and other dimensions. # b) Dimensions of conflict management in the current study Based on the review of conflict management styles, the following styles were selected for the current paper; avoidance, distributive, integrative, dominative conflict management styles. A closer look at conflict management patterns in Table 2 indicates that the pattern is the most effective type because it is based on finding the right solution that satisfies both parties (Rahim, 2002). Followed by a style of obliging that puts the interests of others first (Barbuto Jr and Xu, 2006), even at the expense of personal interest. We can call it generosity and kindness style. In the third place comes the style of not harming the other party to the conflict through compromise (Chan et al., 2008). It can be called a settlement style. On the other hand, dominating and avoiding are ineffective styles (Chan et al., 2008;Liu et al., 2008), where the former favors personal interests over others while The second avoids conflict without finding a solution to the conflict. This pattern represents a form of withdrawal or disregard of conflict, which means failure to deal with conflict. Differences between these styles can be observed through the definitions showed in Table 2. # c) Team performance Teams have been defined in terms of two major elements: the number of members and goals, that is, a team consists of two or more members Seeking to achieve a common goal. Consequently, team performance was Defined as a team's ability to meet its goals (Bell, 2007). According to , team performance has been evaluated in the literature as a system of inputs, processes, and outputs, where the team processes Resources to reach the desired results. The authors conceptualized team performance in terms of three dimensions; team cohesion, team Communication and conflict management. Melita et al. (2003) added another Dimension of team performance which was team innovation. Researchers have identified many features that make the team effective such as team cohesiveness, effective team communication, team innovations, conflict management and the team overall performance (Melita et al., 2003;Zhou et al., 2015). In a study on the teams of research and development projects, Keller (2006) # d) Hypotheses development CM styles were used in previous studies as an independent variable about other dependent variables such as group decision making (Kuhn Et al., 2000), group effectiveness (DeChurch and Marks, 2001), employee attitudinal outcomes (Chan et al., 2008). In other studies, CM styles were used as the dependent variable (Yu et al., 2006). Table 4 shows examples of these studies. For this study, CM styles were used as independent variables to study their relationships with team performance. Inconsistently, the results of Somech et al. (2009) who investigated the impact of conflict management styles on team effectiveness indicated that competing style was negatively associated with team effectiveness. Based on these studies, the following hypotheses were restated: H1: Integrating conflict style has a positive significant effect on team performance. # H2: Obliging conflict style has a positive significant effect on team performance. # H3: Compromising conflict style has a positive significant effect on team performance. # H4: Avoiding conflict style has a negative significant effect on team performance. H5: Dominating conflict style has a negative significant effect on team performance. # III. # Methodology a) Research sample and data collection Using a multi-stage technique as introduced by Hair Jr. et al. (2015), a random sample of 4 regions were identified from which a random sample consisted 20 universities were selected, then a random sample comprised of 40 teams were chosen. The average number of members in these teams ranged from 3-10 members, specifically, there were 250 employees. Hence, data were collected from 250 employees using a questionnaire developed for this study. A total of 231 questionnaires were returned complete and valid for statistical analyses with a response rate of 92.4%. Responses of team members were used to conduct analyses, therefore, our data were not aggregated at the team level. # b) Measures Conflict management styles were measured based on previous studies using three indicators for each style; avoiding (1-3), integrating (4-6), dominating (7)(8)(9), obliging (10)(11)(12) and compromising (13)(14)(15) (Kim et al., 2007;Hempel et al., 2009;Somech et al., 2009;Gull et al., 2012;DeChurch et al., 2013). Team performance was measured based on employees' ratings. Six dimensions were used to assess team performance, which was members commitment to the team, work quality, interpersonal skills, initiatives, knowledge of tasks and overall performance (Stewart and Barrick, 2000). Therefore, six items were used to measure team performance. # c) Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) In order to ascertain the appropriateness of the data for exploratory factor analysis, two tests were performed: Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett's test for Sphericity. The value of a KMO test ranges from 0 to 1, and the closer the test value of a KMO to 1, the more suitable the data for factor analysis. The test value is acceptable if it is greater than 0.05. The value of the Bartlett's test for Sphericity should be statistically significant. If these conditions are met, a factor analysis is possible. The results showed that the two previous conditions were met. The value of the KMO was greater than 0.05 (KMO = 0.874) and the value of the Bartlett's test was significant (P = 0.021). The results of EFA can be seen in Table 5. It was revealed that all items of CM styles were loaded on 5 factors with loadings greater than 0.71. A measurement model with factor loadings ? 0.70 is acceptable (Shook et al., 2004). In terms of reliability, the results indicated that composite reliability (CR) and Cronbach's coefficient alpha values were greater than 0.70 (Ogedegbe et al., 2003). Convergent validity values as measured by AVEs were greater than 0.50 (Hair et al., 2011). CMS1: avoiding, CMS2: integrating, CMS3: dominating, CMS4: obliging, CMS5: compromising, TMP: team performance. # d) Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Hempel et al. (2009) suggested two steps to examine the structural model: First, testing the postulated structural model in terms of goodness-of-fit indices in order to investigate the model ability to explain relationships between variables. If the fit of the model is confirmed, the second step starts, which is hypotheses testing in which the relationship between variables is investigated. Structural model fit was evaluated by chisquare to degree of freedom ratio (? 2 /df), the goodness of fit index (GFI), the comparative fit index (CFI), the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and the non-normed fit index (NNFI) as suggested by Barbuto Jr and Xu (2006) and Kim et al. (2015). The results of structural model goodness-of-fit indices as shown in Table 6 indicated a satisfactory overall fit of the model. # Discussion and Conclusion The aim of this study was to determine the effects of five styles of conflict management on team performance using a sample chosen from members of teams working at twenty universities. The results showed that integrating, compromising and obliging styles had positive significant effects on team performance. While avoiding and dominating styles had negative significant effects on team performance. It is logical that the style of integration is the most style that had a positive impact on team performance. This style represents a cooperative behavior aimed at finding a suitable solution to the conflict so that the parties to the conflict are finally satisfied. This pattern was dubbed by researchers and practitioners as win-win style (Kuhn et In contrast, the dominating style conflict management refers to indifference to others and a focus on personal interests, so this style has a significant negative impact on the performance of the team (Rahim, 2002, Barbuto Jr and Xu , 2006, Chan et al., 2008and Baillien al., 2014). Finally, avoidance means ignoring the conflict and not providing any solutions. In many cases, the reason for ignoring the conflict is the inability to find an appropriate solution to the conflict Year 2019 ( ) A (Kuhn et al., 2000, Rahim, 2002, Barbuto Jr and Xu, 2006, Liu et al., 2008and Chan et al., 2008). In the light of the foregoing, it was concluded that conflict is a normal situation in organizations, but what is important is how to deal with it in the right way. There are, of course, a number of styles by which conflict can be addressed on the basis of the end result of using a specific style. For example, some styles offer suitable solutions for parties, some of which mean sacrificing one side to the other. The most negative styles are those that provide a solution and force others to comply with it. Moreover, ignoring the conflict also has a negative impact on team performance. # V. Recommendations, Limitations and Future Research The study recommends that conflict parties and conflict resolution in organizations not to ignore conflict or provide a solution and force others to accept it because these two methods of dealing with conflict are the worst. Alternatively, the co-operative style, i.e., integrating style can be used as much as possible. If this is not possible, other methods can be used to satisfy conflict parties. The current study was conducted using data collected from team members to assess their performance. It is preferable to measure the performance of a team relying on a party other than the team members (D'Innocenzo et al., 2016). Tröster et al. (2014) rated the performance of self-managed teams via experts. Future research are recommended to evaluate team performance based on supervisors' ratings. In a study by Hempel et al. (2009), five control variables were suggested; team-size, organization-size and age, organization age and industry. In the current study, no control variables were used. Therefore, it is advisable to conduct a future study that takes into account of control variables such as organization size and age. Furthermore, demographic characteristics of participants played a significant role in adopting conflict handling style, Zhang et al. (2005) found differences between older and young participants in terms of conflict style; their results indicated that older participants prefer accommodating conflict style. In the same vein, Çetin and Hacifazlio?lu (2011) pointed out significant differences between means of estimates of CM styles used by a university academics in favor of title, experience, gender as well as university type. It is therefore useful to identify the role of personal characteristics of study participants in adopting a particular style of conflict management. # Global Journal of Management and Business Research Volume XIX Issue III Version I Year 2019 ( ) A ![used three dimensions to evaluate performance, schedule performance, technical quality, and cost performance. Less cohesive Teams have poor performance (Thompson et al., 2015). Adopting Pearce and Sims (2002) scale of team effectiveness, Zhou et al. (2015) evaluated team performance based on six dimensions comprised of output, quality, change, organizing and planning, interpersonal, and overall Effectiveness. Howard et al. (2002) used quantity and quality of output as well as the resource and administrative efficiency as four dimensions of team Performance dimensions. Table3displayed the most common dimensions of team performance.](image-2.png "") 2CM StylesConceptualizationReferences? AvoidanceA behavior of ignoring organizational conflict in which lose-loseKuhn et al. (2000), Rahimstyleoutcome Emerged. It is a style with low concern For self and(2002), Barbuto Jr and Xuothers. Therefore, it represents a failure to approach or(2006), Liu et al. (2008) andwithdrawal from conflict issues.Chan et al. (2008),? Integrative style A cooperative behavior to find a persuasive solution to bothKuhn et al. (2000), Rahimsides of the conflict in a win-win approach in which parties are(2002), Yu et al. (2006),collaborated through information and finding an acceptable theBarbuto Jr and Xu (2006),solution for the conflict issue. It is a style With high concern forChan et al. (2008) andself and others. It is called a problem solving style of conflictZaman and Saif (2016)management.? Dominative style A behavior of using influences to get Ideas accepted in a winlose scheme. It is a style with (high concern for self and Low concern for others. This style is called forcing conflict management style. Rahim (2002), Barbuto Jr and Xu (2006), Chan et al. (2008), Baillien al. (2014) ? 4YearIVDVResultsReferences2000 CM stylesGroupdecisionIntegrative CM style results in positive outcomes of groupKuhn et al.makingdecision making.2001 CM stylesGroupCM style positively related to group effectiveness.DeChurch andeffectivenessMarks2006 EmotionalCM stylesEmotional intelligence has significant effects on integratingYu et al.intelligenceand compromising2007 CM styles-The dominant CM among Chinese and Korean employees areKim et al.obliging , while the dominant CM among Japanese employeesare compromising2008 CM stylesEmployeeIntegrating CM style significantly related to employees jobChan et al.attitudinalsatisfaction and turnover intention.outcomes2008 CM stylesTeam satisfactionCollaboration conflict management style has a significantLiu et al.effect on the team satisfaction2009 CM stylesTeamcooperative conflict style has a significant effect on a teamSomech Et al.performanceperformance2010 CM stylesJob performanceIntegrating CM style has a significant effect on jobShihandperformanceSusanto2014 LeadershipCM stylesManagers with transformational leadership style adoptSaeed Et al.stylesintegrating and obliging CM styles, managers withtransactional leadership style adopt compromising CM style.2015 OrganizationalCM stylesReward power is positively related to accommodating CMRiasiandpowerstyleAsadzadeh2018 CulturalCM stylesCultural orientations are positively influenced CM stylesCaputo et al.orientations 5CMS1 CMS2CMS3CMS4CMS5TMPAVECR?0.8790.9010.780.914 0.8970.8690.9920.8740.750.899 0.8780.7100.8280.8640.690.870 0.8500.8000.8440.8310.680.864 0.8590.7960.8410.8210.660.853 0.8490.7730.9010.8810.856 0.7630.670.925 0.8890.7427690. 6IndicesValueResultChi-square to degree of freedom ratio (? 2 /df)1.59ConfirmedThe goodness of fit index (GFI)0.921 ConfirmedThe comparative fit index (CFI)0.911 ConfirmedThe root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) 0.051 ConfirmedThe non-normed fit index (NNFI)0.961 Confirmed © 2019 Global Journals ## Global Journal of Management and Business Research Volume XIX Issue III Version I Year 2019 ( ) A * Workplace conflict management styles: Comparative study of Indian and Nigerian employees SAbbas AKarage European Journal of Business and Management 7 23 2015 * Conflict management, efficacy, and performance in organizational teams SAlper DTjosvold KLaw Personnel psychology 53 3 2000 * Team role preference and conflict management styles AAritzeta SAyestaran SSwailes International Journal of conflict management 16 2 2005 * Conflicts and conflict management styles as precursors of workplace bullying: A two-wave longitudinal study EBaillien KBollen MEuwema HDe Witte European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 23 4 2014 * Sources of motivation, interpersonal conflict management styles, and leadership effectiveness: A structural model JBarbutoJr YXu Psychological reports 98 1 2006 * Deep-level composition variables as predictors of team performance: a metaanalysis SBell Journal of applied psychology 92 3 595 2007 * The moderating role of cultural intelligence in the relationship between cultural orientations and conflict management styles ACaputo OAyoko NAmoo Journal of Business Research 89 2018 * The virtual design team: Simulating how organization structure and information processing tools affect team performance KCarley MPrietula Journal of Organization design 1 2 2014 * Academics' conflict management styles MÇetin ÖHacifazlio?lu Do?u? Üniversitesi Dergisi 5 2 2011 * Managers' conflict management styles and employee attitudinal outcomes: The mediating role of trust KChan XHuang PNg Asia Pacific Journal of Management 25 2 2008 * A meta-analysis of different forms of shared leadership-team performance relations LD'innocenzo JMathieu MKukenberger Journal of Management 42 7 2016 * Maximizing the benefits of task conflict: The role of conflict management LDechurch MMarks International Journal of Conflict Management 12 1 2001 * Transformational leadership and team performance SDDionne FJYammarino LEAtwater WDSpangler Journal of organizational change management 17 2 2004 * Transformational leadership and team performance SDionne FYammarino LAtwater WSpangler Journal of organizational change management 17 2 2004 * Do great teams think alike? An examination of team mental models and their impact on team performance AGardner DScott KAbdelfattah Surgery 161 5 2017 * Team assembly mechanisms determine collaboration network structure and team performance RGuimera BUzzi JSpiro LAmaral Science 308 5722 2005 * Impact of conflict management styles on team effectiveness in textile sector of Pakistan SGull Habib-Ur-Rehman SZaidi International Journal of Business and Management 7 3 2012 * JHairJr MCelsi AMoney PSamouel MPage The Essentials of Business Research Methods New York; Taylor & Francis Routledge 2015 * PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet JHair CRingle MSarstedt Journal of Marketing theory and Practice 19 2 2011 * Conflict management between and within teams for trusting relationships and performance in China PHempel ZZhang DTjosvold Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior 30 1 2009 * Cooperating teams and competing reward strategies: for team performance and firm productivity LWHoward DTurban SHurley Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management 3 3 1054 2016 * Transformational leadership, initiating structure, and substitutes for leadership: A longitudinal study of research and development project team performance RKeller Journal of applied psychology 91 1 202 2006 * Effects of taking conflict personally on conflict management styles across cultures EKim AYamaguchi MKim AMiyahara Personality and Individual Differences 72 2015 * Conflict management styles: the differences among the Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans TKim CWang MKondo TKim International journal of conflict management 18 1 2007 * The impact of team empowerment on virtual team performance: The moderating role of face-toface interaction BLKirkman BRosen PTesluk CGibson Academy of Management Journal 47 2 2004 * The impact of team empowerment on virtual team performance: The moderating role of face-toface interaction BKirkman BRosen PTesluk CGibson Academy of Management Journal 47 2 2004 * Team exploratory and exploitative learning: Psychological safety, task conflict, and team performance KKostopoulos NBozionelos Group & Organization Management 36 3 2011 * Do conflict management styles affect group decision making? Evidence from a longitudinal field study TKuhn MPoole Human communication research 26 4 2000 * An examination of the relationship among structure, trust, and conflict management styles in virtual teams XLiu RMagjuka SLee Performance improvement quarterly 21 1 2008 * How authentic leadership influences team performance: The mediating role of team reflexivity JLyubovnikova ALegood NTurner AMamakouka Journal of business Ethics 141 1 2017 * Explore the impact of collectivism on conflict management styles: a Turkish study ZMa AErkus ATabak International Journal of Conflict Management 21 2 2010 * Collective leadership and safety cultures (Co-Lead): protocol for a mixed-methods pilot evaluation of the impact of a co-designed collective leadership intervention on team performance and safety culture in a hospital group in Ireland EMcauliffe ADe Brún MWard MO'shea UCunningham RO'donovan SMcginley JFitzsimons SCorrigan NMcdonald BMJ open 7 11 2017 * Emotional intelligence, leadership effectiveness, and team outcomes PMelita CDouglas GFerris AAmmeter MBuckley The International Journal of Organizational Analysis 11 1 2003 * Development and evaluation of a medication adherence self-efficacy scale in hypertensive African-American patients GOgedegbe CMancuso JAllegrante MCharlson Journal of clinical epidemiology 56 6 2003 * Impact of heterogeneity and collaborative conflict management style on the performance of synchronous global virtual teams SPaul PSeetharaman ISamarah PMykytyn Information & Management 41 3 2004 * Empirical studies on managing conflict ARahim International Journal of conflict management 11 1 2000 * A model of emotional intelligence and conflict management strategies: A study in seven countries MRahim CPsenicka PPolychroniou JZhao CYu KChan KSusana MAives CLee MRahman SFerdausy RWyk The International journal of organizational analysis 10 4 2002 * The relationship between principals' reward power and their conflict management styles based on Thomas-Kilmann conflict mode instrument ARiasi NAsadzadeh Management Science Letters 5 6 2015 * The roles of emotion management and perspective taking in individuals' conflict management styles and disposition to forgive LRizkalla EWertheim LHodgson Journal of Research in Personality 42 6 2008 * Leadership styles: relationship with conflict management styles TSaeed SAlmas MAnis-Ul-Haq GNiazi International Journal of Conflict Management 25 3 2014 * Conflict management styles, emotional intelligence, and job performance in public organizations HShih ESusanto International Journal of Conflict Management 21 2 2010 * An assessment of the use of structural equation modeling in strategic management research CLShook DJKetchenJr GHult KKacmar Strategic management journal 25 4 2004 * Conflict management styles in traditional organizations ASlabbert The Social Science Journal 41 1 2004 * Team conflict management and team effectiveness: The effects of task interdependence and team identification ASomech HDesivilya HLidogoster Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior 30 3 2009 * An exploratory study of the conflict management styles of department heads in a research university setting. Innovative Higher Education CStanley NAlgert 2007 32 * Team structure and performance: Assessing the mediating role of intrateam process and the moderating role of task type GStewart MBarrick Journal 43 2 2000 Academy of management * Team cohesiveness, team size and team performance in team-based learning teams BThompson PHaidet NBorges LCarchedi BRoman MTownsend AButler DSwanson MAnderson RELevine Medical education 49 4 2015 * Self-construal types and conflict management styles STing-Toomey JOetzel KYee-Jung Communication Reports 14 2 2001 * Structuring for team success: The interactive effects of network structure and cultural diversity on team potency and performance CTröster AMehra DVan Knippenberg Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 124 2 2014 * Top management team tenure diversity and performance: The moderating role of behavioral integration YYi HNdofor XHe ZWei IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 65 1 2018 * Relationship of emotional intelligence with conflict management styles: an empirical study in China CYu RSardessai JLu JZhao International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development 19 2006 3(1/2 * Perceived accountability and conflict management styles as predictors of job performance of public officials in Pakistan UZaman MSaif 2016 32 Gomal University Journal of Research * Exploring the effects of the privacy-handling Management styles of social networking sites on user satisfaction: A conflict management perspective JZhang HLi XRobert) Luo MWarkentin Decision Sciences 48 5 2017 * Perceptions of conflict management styles in Chinese intergenerational dyads YZhang JHarwood MHummert Communication Monographs 72 1 2005 * Informational diversity and entrepreneurial team performance: moderating effect of shared leadership WZhou DVredenburgh ERogoff International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal 11 1 2015