How competitive climates trigger conflict with colleagues and supervisors and how team knowledge sharing helps

Purpose This research paper aims to examine how a competitive psychological climate (CPC), in which employees perceive rewards and recognition to depend on outperforming others, relates to workplace conflict, and how team knowledge sharing shapes this relationship. Drawing on Job Demands–Resources theory, the authors examined how CPC relates to process, relationship and task conflict with colleagues (horizontal conflict; Studies 1 and 3) and with supervisors (vertical conflict; Studies 2 and 3). Design/methodology/approach Data were collected from employed adults across diverse sectors (e.g. education, information technology, public administration, health care, manufacturing). All respondents were employees; in Studies 2 and 3, only employees reporting having a direct supervisor were included. Study 1 (cross-sectional survey n = 213 employees) examined CPC’s associations with process, relationship and task conflict directed toward colleagues (horizontal relationships). The moderating role of team knowledge transfer was also investigated. Study 2 (n= 254 employees) aimed to replicate Study 1 using a time-lagged design and focusing on conflict directed toward supervisors (vertical relationships). Study 3 (n= 206 employees) was an experimental, preregistered study to replicate prior results and test a mediating mechanism (perceived colleague support). Findings Study 1 found that CPC was positively associated with process, relationship and task conflict directed toward colleagues, with team knowledge sharing buffering the effects across relationship and process conflict. Study 2 largely replicated these findings for conflict directed toward supervisors, although moderation by team knowledge sharing emerged only for process conflict. Study 3 replicated and extended these findings by identifying perceived colleague support as a key mediator: in low knowledge-transfer teams, high CPC undermined colleague support, which in turn was negatively related to process, relationship and task conflict toward both colleagues and supervisors. In contrast, in high knowledge-transfer teams, support was generally higher, partly offsetting the detrimental effect of CPC. Originality/value This work extends the literature by investigating the role of CPC in both horizontal and vertical conflict taking into consideration moderating (team knowledge sharing) and mediating (colleague support) processes, and using multiple methods (cross-sectional, time-lagged and experimental designs) to strengthen causal inference.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Conflict Management
Published
2026-03-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1108/ijcma-09-2025-0341
Primary Topic
Knowledge Management and Sharing
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How competitive climates trigger conflict with colleagues and supervisors and how team knowledge sharing helps

Stanislava Stoyanova, Siyi Xu, Kyriaki Fousiani
International Journal of Conflict Management
Knowledge Management and Sharing
article

How competitive climates trigger conflict with colleagues and supervisors and how team knowledge sharing helps

Stanislava Stoyanova, Siyi Xu, Kyriaki Fousiani
article en

Abstract

Purpose This research paper aims to examine how a competitive psychological climate (CPC), in which employees perceive rewards and recognition to depend on outperforming others, relates to workplace conflict, and how team knowledge sharing shapes this relationship. Drawing on Job Demands–Resources theory, the authors examined how CPC relates to process, relationship and task conflict with colleagues (horizontal conflict; Studies 1 and 3) and with supervisors (vertical conflict; Studies 2 and 3). Design/methodology/approach Data were collected from employed adults across diverse sectors (e.g. education, information technology, public administration, health care, manufacturing). All respondents were employees; in Studies 2 and 3, only employees reporting having a direct supervisor were included. Study 1 (cross-sectional survey n = 213 employees) examined CPC’s associations with process, relationship and task conflict directed toward colleagues (horizontal relationships). The moderating role of team knowledge transfer was also investigated. Study 2 (n= 254 employees) aimed to replicate Study 1 using a time-lagged design and focusing on conflict directed toward supervisors (vertical relationships). Study 3 (n= 206 employees) was an experimental, preregistered study to replicate prior results and test a mediating mechanism (perceived colleague support). Findings Study 1 found that CPC was positively associated with process, relationship and task conflict directed toward colleagues, with team knowledge sharing buffering the effects across relationship and process conflict. Study 2 largely replicated these findings for conflict directed toward supervisors, although moderation by team knowledge sharing emerged only for process conflict. Study 3 replicated and extended these findings by identifying perceived colleague support as a key mediator: in low knowledge-transfer teams, high CPC undermined colleague support, which in turn was negatively related to process, relationship and task conflict toward both colleagues and supervisors. In contrast, in high knowledge-transfer teams, support was generally higher, partly offsetting the detrimental effect of CPC. Originality/value This work extends the literature by investigating the role of CPC in both horizontal and vertical conflict taking into consideration moderating (team knowledge sharing) and mediating (colleague support) processes, and using multiple methods (cross-sectional, time-lagged and experimental designs) to strengthen causal inference.

International Journal of Conflict Management
South-West University "Neofit Rilski" (BG), University of Groningen (NL), Maastricht University (NL)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 64%
Knowledge Management and Sharing
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.