inevitable and must be managed for optimal group co-existence. Next, procedural conflictexists when group members disagree about the procedures to be followed in accomplishingthe group goal. New procedures may be formulated and new agenda suggested. Even thegroup goal may be modified. Procedural conflict, like task conflict, may be productive attimes according to Barker et al., 1987.Affective conflicts are generally caused by the negative reactions of organisationalmembers such as personal attacks on group members, sexual harassment and racialdisharmony. This type of conflicts would impede group performance. It affects groupperformance by limiting information- processing ability and cognitive functioning of group
members and antagonistic attributions of group members’ behaviour. Affective conflict
diminishes groups loyalty, work group commitment and satisfaction. These result from higherlevel of stress, anxiety and conflict escalationSubstantive conflicts are related to disagreements about tasks, policies and otherbusiness issues. A study by Jehn (1995) suggests that a moderate level of substantive conflictis beneficial, as it stimulates debate and discussion, which help groups to attain higher levelsof performance. Groups that experience this conflict are able to make better decisions. Thisconflict can improve group performance through better understanding of various viewpointsand alternative solutions. Beneficial effects of substantive conflicts on performance werefound only in groups performing non routine tasks but not on groups performing standardisedtasks.Conflict improves decision making outcomes, especially on task-related conflict andgroup productivity by increasing the quality through constructive criticism and individualsad
opting a devil’s advocate role.
Research has also found out that task related conflict isbeneficial to the organization since it allows the exchange of ideas and assist better