| Course | MGT 464 Organizational Behavior |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 6 |
| Paper type | Conflict analysis |
| Length | About 1,042 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | Business Administration |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MGT 464 Module 6
Changes on Tuesday, Blame by Friday: Task and Relationship Conflict Between Engineering and Production at a Boat Builder
Student Name
Business Administration Program, Aspen University
MGT 464: Organizational Behavior
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Changes on Tuesday, Blame by Friday: Task and Relationship Conflict Between Engineering and Production at a Boat Builder
Tellico Boat Works, a composite manufacturer near Knoxville, Tennessee, builds about 1,400 fiberglass bass boats and pontoons a year for dealers across the Southeast. Each model year begins in July, when production starts on new designs. This year, engineering issued 37 design changes after production had begun, from a new console shape to a change in hull layup to save weight. Production rebuilt molds, rewrote work instructions and retrained crews for each. Rework hours rose 40%, and 60 boats shipped late. The two department managers no longer speak except in meetings, and supervisors from each side have begun blaming each other in front of crews. The operations director wants to understand the conflict and how to manage it.
Types of Conflict
Jehn (1995) studied work groups and found that conflict comes in distinct forms. Relationship conflict involves personal friction, tension and dislike among members. Task conflict involves disagreements about the content of the work, such as viewpoints and ideas about how to do it. In her study, relationship conflict was harmful to satisfaction and performance. Task conflict was harmful in routine work but could benefit groups doing nonroutine tasks, especially when group norms supported open discussion. The Tellico conflict began as task conflict, about whether changes were needed and when, and has become relationship conflict, about whether the other side can be trusted.
What the Evidence Says
De Dreu and Weingart (2003) combined studies of conflict in teams and reported that disagreement over the work and friction between people each went along with weaker team results and less satisfied members, and by roughly the same amount. The relationship between task conflict and performance was less negative in some circumstances, but on average task conflict did not help. For Tellico, the lesson is that design disagreements will not improve boats by themselves; they need a process that resolves them before they disrupt production.
Handling Styles
Thomas (1992) mapped conflict behavior on two axes, pressing for one's own aims and helping others reach theirs, and placed five modes on that map. Competing is assertive and uncooperative. Accommodating is the reverse. Avoiding is neither. Collaborating is both, seeking a solution that satisfies everyone. Compromising sits in the middle. Each mode fits some situations; the problem comes when people rely on one or two regardless of the situation.
| Episode | Type of conflict | Mode used | Better mode |
|---|---|---|---|
| Console redesign announced by email on a Friday | Task, became relationship | Engineering competing; production avoiding until Monday | Collaborating: review with production before release |
| Hull layup change to save weight | Task | Engineering competing | Collaborating: test on one mold first |
| Production skipped a change to meet shipments | Task | Production competing | Compromising: agreed date for the change |
| Supervisor blamed engineer in front of crew | Relationship | Competing | Avoiding in public; direct conversation in private |
| Dispute over who pays for scrapped parts | Task | Avoiding by both | Collaborating: shared budget decision |
How Relationship Conflict Spread
The shift from task to relationship conflict followed a recognizable path. Early disagreements were about specific changes. As changes kept arriving without warning, production supervisors began to describe engineers as people who "never set foot on the floor," and engineers began to describe production as resistant to anything new. Each new change was then read as further proof of the other side's attitude rather than judged on its merits. Jehn's research suggests that once relationship conflict sets in, it colors how task disagreements are heard, which is why the plan addresses both the process for changes and the way the two managers speak about each other.
What Crews Experience
Assemblers and laminators feel the conflict most directly. They learn new procedures, then unlearn them when a change is reversed, and they hear supervisors blame the other department. Several crew leads said the frequent changes made them less careful, since they expected the work to be redone anyway.
Underlying Causes
The conflict has structural roots. Engineering is measured on improvements in boat weight and features, production on units shipped and cost. No forum exists to weigh a change's benefit against its disruption. Changes are released by email whenever ready. The departments have opposing goals and no shared place to resolve them.
Recommendations
The operations director will create a weekly change board, chaired by her, where engineering proposes changes and production estimates their cost in hours and shipments. Changes that are not safety-related will be frozen after the model year begins and batched for a midyear release. Both departments will share a metric for rework hours. Supervisors will be coached to handle disagreements privately and to bring task disputes to the board.
What Each Side Needs
Interviews with both managers showed that each had reasonable goals. The engineering manager is under pressure from dealers to match competitors' features and believes delaying improvements for a full year will cost sales. The production manager is judged on shipments and cost and sees every unplanned change as a threat to both. Neither is wrong. The change board gives both concerns a hearing at the same table, with the director weighing them openly, so that a decision against one side's preference is made fairly rather than imposed by email.
The Cost of the Conflict
The 40% rise in rework hours cost about $310,000 in labor and materials this year, and the 60 late boats strained relationships with three dealers. Less visible costs include the time supervisors spend arguing and the risk of losing experienced crew leads who are tired of the tension.
Repairing Relationships
The two managers will meet with the director to agree on how they will speak to each other in front of crews, and to share what each needs from the other.
Measures
The plant will track design changes after model-year start, rework hours, late shipments and a short survey on cooperation between departments.
Conclusion
Tellico's conflict began over legitimate disagreements about design changes and turned personal because nothing in the structure resolved them. Jehn's distinction and De Dreu and Weingart's evidence show why the conflict hurts, and Thomas's modes show how both sides contributed. A change board, a change freeze and shared measures address the cause while giving task disagreements a place to be resolved.
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
Thomas, K. W. (1992). Conflict and conflict management: Reflections and update. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(3), 265-274. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130307
MGT 464 Module 6 instructions, in plain terms
In the conflict module of Aspen's MGT 464, students generally pick a live dispute between people or units, explain its roots and set out how it ought to be handled. Treat your classroom's Module 6 prompt as the authority; the example applies it to two departments. Describe the conflict, the parties and how it developed, with figures such as rework hours where available. Distinguish types of conflict using research. Summarize evidence on how conflict affects performance. Analyze how the parties have handled specific episodes, using a model of conflict-handling styles. Recommend structures and behaviors that address the causes, not only the symptoms. Name the signs, in results and in relationships, that would show the conflict is now handled better.
How the MGT 464 Module 6 example is put together
The paper opens with Tellico Boat Works, which builds about 1,400 bass and pontoon boats a year. Engineering issued 37 design changes after the model year began, and production rebuilt molds and retrained crews for each. Jehn's Administrative Science Quarterly study found relationship conflict harmful and task conflict sometimes helpful for nonroutine work. De Dreu and Weingart's Journal of Applied Psychology meta-analysis found both task and relationship conflict negatively related to team performance and satisfaction. Thomas's Journal of Organizational Behavior article describes competing, collaborating, compromising, avoiding and accommodating. A table classifies five episodes, such as a console redesign announced by email on a Friday. The plan creates a weekly change board with both managers, a freeze on noncritical changes after the model year begins and a joint metric for rework hours.
Where the marks sit in the MGT 464 Module 6 rubric
Conflict papers are judged on distinguishing types of conflict accurately, using evidence about their effects and analyzing specific episodes rather than the conflict in general. This example shows how task conflict over design changes became relationship conflict. Jehn's work and De Dreu and Weingart's meta-analysis together give a balanced view of whether task conflict helps. Thomas's modes are applied to each episode in the table, showing what each side did and what would have worked better. The recommended structure addresses the source of conflict, unplanned changes, while giving disagreements a legitimate place, and the paper estimates what the conflict costs.
MGT 464 Module 6 help: mistakes that cost marks
Conflict papers often recommend communication training without asking what the conflict is about. Identify whether disagreements concern tasks, relationships or processes, and how one type has spread into another. Use research carefully; task conflict is not automatically beneficial. Analyze specific episodes and how each side handled them. Recommend structures, such as decision forums or shared measures, that change the conditions producing conflict. Consider both departments' legitimate goals. Avoid blaming individuals for what the structure creates. Finally, measure both work outcomes and relationships, such as rework hours and survey results. Estimate what the conflict is costing.
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 MGT 464 and Business Administration sample papers
- MGT 464 Module 1: Individual Differences and Perception
- MGT 464 Module 2: Motivation at Work
- MGT 464 Module 3: Teams and Team Effectiveness
- MGT 464 Module 4: Group Processes and Decision Making
- MGT 464 Module 5: Decision Making and Biases
- MGT 464 Module 7: Organizational Communication
- MGT 464 Module 8: Organizational Culture
- MGT 215 Module 1: CRM as a Business Strategy
- BUS 495 Module 6: Global Strategy
- MGT 494 Module 3: Internal Resources and Capabilities
- BUS 499 Module 6: Analysis and Findings
MGT 464 Module 6 questions, answered
What does MGT 464 Module 6 usually ask for?
Aspen's MGT 464 covers conflict in this module, so analyzing a workplace conflict and recommending how it should be managed is typical. Look at your classroom prompt.
What is the difference between task and relationship conflict?
Jehn distinguished disagreements about the work itself from interpersonal friction, tension and dislike between people.
Is task conflict good for teams?
Evidence is mixed. Jehn found it could help with nonroutine tasks, but De Dreu and Weingart's meta-analysis found task conflict was generally related to lower team performance.
Where can I find a free MGT 464 Module 6 sample paper?
The example above analyzes conflict between engineering and production at a boat builder, with a table of episodes and a change process.
What are Thomas's conflict-handling modes?
Competing, collaborating, compromising, avoiding and accommodating, defined by how assertive and how cooperative a person is.