Revisiting Task and Relationship Conflict: An Attributional Perspective on Their Associations and Attitudinal Outcomes

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between task conflict and relationship conflict in organizational settings. Drawing on attribution theory, it considers how the same disagreement may be construed in task-related or relational terms. The study aims to examine whether and how these forms of conflict are associated in ways consistent with a transformation pattern, and how these patterns relate to work outcomes. Data were collected from 268 employees across nine industries and analyzed using structural equation modeling. The findings indicate a positive association between task and relationship conflict in both directions, suggesting that these conflict types are interconnected rather than independent categories. Task type conditions this association, such that the link between relationship conflict and task conflict is stronger in non-routine contexts. The results suggest that the relationship between conflict and job satisfaction depends on the interconnections among conflict types rather than on the presence of a single conflict type in isolation. Task conflict is indirectly associated with job satisfaction through its association with relationship conflict, whereas the reverse pathway appears more conditional. Although attributional processes are not tested directly, the findings are consistent with an attribution-based interpretation of conflict dynamics. By adopting a process-oriented perspective, the study contributes to the conflict and negotiation literature by reframing task and relationship conflict as related and by clarifying how their interrelationship relates to job satisfaction.