| Course | COM 140 Managing Performance and Developing Teams |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 7 |
| Paper type | Team conflict and decision analysis |
| Length | About 1,012 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | Business Administration |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for COM 140 Module 7
The Conveyor Decision: Conflict, Hidden Information and Better Choices in a Maintenance Team
Student Name
Business Administration Program, Aspen University
COM 140: Managing Performance and Developing Teams
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
The Conveyor Decision: Conflict, Hidden Information and Better Choices in a Maintenance Team
In March, the conveyor that carries packed orders to the shipping dock at Ridgeline Outdoor Supply's Aurora distribution center began to slow. The four-person maintenance team had to choose a replacement motor: a $4,200 model from the conveyor's original maker or a $2,700 model from another supplier. After a short discussion, the team voted three to one for the cheaper motor. It overheated and failed in May, stopping shipping for six hours during a sale. Since then, two technicians, Luis and Greg, have stopped speaking except when necessary. This paper analyzes what happened and how the team can decide better and work together again.
What Happened
Luis had read a service bulletin noting overheating problems with the cheaper motor under continuous loads. In the meeting, he said only that he had "heard some things" about it. Greg, the most senior technician, argued that the cheaper motor had worked well in his previous job and that the savings mattered. The others agreed with Greg. After the failure, Greg said Luis should have spoken up; Luis said Greg never listens. The disagreement about a motor has become a conflict between two people.
Two Kinds of Conflict
Jehn (1995) studied work teams and management groups in a large freight transportation firm and distinguished two kinds of intragroup conflict. Task conflict covers clashes over the work itself, the competing ideas and judgments about what should be done. Relationship conflict is interpersonal incompatibility, including tension, annoyance and animosity. She found that relationship conflict was harmful, lowering satisfaction and performance. Task conflict could improve performance on nonroutine tasks, where debate brought out better options, but harmed routine work. Norms that treated conflict as acceptable increased these effects.
| Disagreement | Kind | When |
|---|---|---|
| Which motor to buy | Task | March meeting |
| Whether Luis's warning was clear enough | Task, becoming personal | After the failure |
| "Greg never listens" / "Luis never speaks up" | Relationship | May onward |
Is Task Conflict Useful?
De Dreu and Weingart (2003) conducted a meta-analysis of thirty studies of conflict in teams. The popular belief that arguing over the work sharpens a team did not hold up: on average, teams with more of either type of conflict performed worse and their members liked the team less. The negative relationship between task conflict and performance was weaker when task and relationship conflict were less correlated. They suggested that task conflict may help only under narrow conditions and that it often spills into relationship conflict.
This fits the maintenance team. The original disagreement was healthy in principle, but it was handled in a way that let it become personal. The goal is not to avoid disagreement but to handle it so that it stays about the work.
How Information Was Lost
Stasser and Titus (1985) studied how groups make decisions when information is distributed among members. In their experiments, some information was shared by all members and some was held by only one. Groups spent most of their discussion on shared information and rarely brought up unshared facts, even when those facts pointed to the best choice. As a result, groups often failed to identify the best option when the critical information was distributed.
The motor decision followed this pattern. Everyone knew the price difference, and the discussion centered on it. Only Luis knew about the bulletin, and his brief comment did not shift the conversation.
What the Decision Cost
The cheaper motor saved $1,500. Its failure cost a $4,200 replacement motor bought at a rush price of $4,900, six hours of stopped shipping during a sale, overtime to clear the backlog and about 300 orders that missed same-day shipping. The center manager estimates the total at more than $15,000. Counting the cost matters because it shows the team that the problem was not one person's silence but a way of deciding that ignored relevant information.
The Supervisor's Part
The maintenance supervisor, who attended the March meeting, also played a part. Seeing Greg's experience and the vote, the supervisor accepted the majority view without asking whether anyone had concerns. A leader who invites dissent, especially from quieter members, makes it more likely that unshared information comes out. The supervisor will take that role in future meetings until the team lead is comfortable doing it.
A Better Decision Process
For decisions over $1,000, the team will follow four steps. Each member writes down what they know about the options before the meeting. The team lead reads the lists aloud and asks, "What does only one of us know?" Members discuss the options against agreed criteria, such as reliability, cost and downtime. Finally, the team decides, and anyone who disagrees can ask that their concern be recorded.
Repairing the Relationship
The supervisor will meet Luis and Greg together, with ground rules: describe what happened, not each other's character, and agree on one change each will make. Greg agreed to ask for others' views before giving his own; Luis agreed to share specifics rather than hints. The supervisor will thank each of them, in front of the team, the first time they do it.
Following Up
The supervisor will attend the next two equipment decisions and check in with Luis and Greg monthly for three months. Two signs will show whether the process works: whether facts held by one member appear on the written lists and change discussions, and whether disagreements in meetings stay focused on options rather than on people. If the relationship between Luis and Greg does not improve, the supervisor will consider changing their shift pairings for a time while continuing the work on how they disagree, since forcing two people in open conflict to repair equipment together under pressure risks both safety and morale.
Conclusion
Jehn explains how a task disagreement became a relationship conflict, De Dreu and Weingart show why task conflict is not reliably helpful and Stasser and Titus explain how Luis's warning was lost. A process that surfaces unshared information and a deliberate repair of the working relationship give the team a better chance next time.
References
De Dreu, C. K. W., & Weingart, L. R. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 741-749. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.741
Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(2), 256-282. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393638
Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(6), 1467-1478. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.48.6.1467
Reading the COM 140 Module 7 assignment instructions
COM 140 Module 7 covers conflict and decision making in teams, and students are typically asked to analyze a team's conflict or a group decision and plan improvements. The classroom's Module 7 instructions control the details; this example uses a composite team. Describe the situation with specifics. Distinguish kinds of conflict. Explain what research says about conflict and team performance. Explain how the group's decision process may have failed. Recommend a process for future decisions and for handling conflict. Say what the decision cost and how the manager will follow up. Cite research in APA 7 form.
Inside the COM 140 Module 7 example
The maintenance team chose between a $4,200 motor from the original maker and a $2,700 alternative. One technician, Luis, had read a service bulletin about the cheaper model's overheating problems but mentioned it only briefly. Jehn's Administrative Science Quarterly study of teams in a freight company found that task conflict could help on nonroutine tasks while relationship conflict harmed performance and satisfaction. In thirty pooled studies, De Dreu and Weingart saw results and satisfaction drop as either kind of conflict rose. Stasser and Titus's Journal of Personality and Social Psychology experiment showed that groups discussed shared information more and failed to find the best option when key facts were held by individuals. The conflict table separates the original task disagreement from the relationship conflict that followed. The new decision process has each member write down relevant facts before discussion and assigns the team lead to ask what only one person knows.
Where the marks sit in the COM 140 Module 7 rubric
Conflict and decision papers earn credit when they separate kinds of conflict and explain how the decision process, not only personalities, produced the result. This example uses Jehn to classify the conflict, De Dreu and Weingart to temper the belief that task conflict is always useful and Stasser and Titus to explain how Luis's information was lost. The table makes the analysis concrete, and the decision process targets the specific failure. A plan to repair the working relationship addresses the conflict that remains. Counting the cost of the decision and examining the supervisor's own part show the analysis looks at the whole system, not only at the two people in conflict.
COM 140 Module 7 help: mistakes that cost marks
Conflict papers often blame individuals without examining the process that produced the decision. Look at how information was shared and how the choice was made. Another weakness is treating all conflict alike; separate disagreements about the work from personal friction. Do not assume task conflict is always healthy; research is mixed. Recommend a specific decision process, not general advice to communicate. Plan how damaged relationships will be repaired. Finally, say how the manager will check whether the new process works. Look at the leader's role too, because leaders who do not invite dissent make hidden information more likely.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Aspen University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More COM 140 and Business Administration sample papers
- COM 140 Module 1: Performance and Strategy
- COM 140 Module 2: Goals and Measures
- COM 140 Module 3: Feedback and Coaching
- COM 140 Module 4: Addressing Poor Performance
- COM 140 Module 5: Teams as the Unit of Performance
- COM 140 Module 6: Forming and Developing Teams
- COM 140 Module 8: Leading a High-Performance Team
- MGT 494 Module 6: Acquisitions and Strategic Alliances
- BUS 225 Module 2: Litigation and ADR
- BUS 495 Module 1: Globalization and Distance
- BUS 305 Module 3: Bad-News Messages
COM 140 Module 7 questions, answered
What does COM 140 Module 7 usually ask for?
Aspen's COM 140 covers team conflict and decision making in this module, so an analysis of a team conflict or decision with recommendations is typical. Read your classroom prompt.
What is the difference between task and relationship conflict?
Jehn defined task conflict as disagreement about the work and relationship conflict as personal incompatibility, and found they affect teams differently.
Is task conflict good for teams?
Not reliably. Across thirty studies, De Dreu and Weingart found that arguments over the work, like personal friction, usually went with weaker team results.
Where can I find a free COM 140 Module 7 sample paper?
The example above analyzes conflict and a disputed equipment decision in a maintenance team and sets a better decision process.
What is the hidden profile problem?
Stasser and Titus found that groups focus on information all members share and overlook facts held by only one member, which can lead to poor decisions.