Abstract:Power disparity refers to the differences in the concentration of power among team members. Although the pervasiveness and importance of power disparity have been well recognized, whether power disparity is functional or dysfunctional remains uncertain. Some researchers have suggested that power disparity can improve team performance by facilitating coordination, while others have found that power disparity, which may be perceived as unequal and unfair, can trigger team conflict. In this context, our study aims to reconcile these contrasting perspectives by proposing that procedural justice and team legitimacy are moderators in the relationship between power disparity and team conflict (task conflict and relationship conflict). We propose that when there is a high level of procedural justice, which helps legitimize a team's power disparity, members are likely to accept their team's distribution of power and coordinate with each another. However, when there is a low level of procedural justice, which can create the perception that a team's power disparity is illegitimate, members are likely to view their team's distribution of power as unequal and unfair. In this case, low-ranking members may show their opposition by competing over power, producing team conflict.Data were collected from two manufacturing companies in Zhejiang Province. To reduce the potential influence of common method bias, we used a two-wave design with a one-month interval. At Time 1, 450 employees in 90 teams responded to questions about power disparity, procedural justice, team legitimacy, and control variables. At Time 2, 376 employees in the 81 teams that had completed the Time 1 survey responded to questions about task conflict and relationship conflict. The final sample contained 322 employees in 70 teams. We measured individuals' responses regarding their teams' power disparity with a round-robin approach (i.e., asking individuals to rate the power of each team member) and calculated the coefficient of variation in those responses. For the purpose of analysis, we aggregated the measures of task conflict, relationship conflict, procedural justice, and team legitimacy to the group level.The results showed that both procedural justice and team legitimacy moderated the relationship between power disparity and team conflict (task conflict and relationship conflict). When procedural justice was high, power disparity was negatively related to task conflict and relationship conflict, while these relationships became positive when procedural justice was low. In a similar vein, when team legitimacy was high, power disparity was negatively related to task conflict and relationship conflict, but when team legitimacy was low, it was positively related to both kinds of conflict. Moreover, procedural justice was shown to be positively related to team legitimacy. Finally, following the procedures suggested by Grant and Berry (2011), we conducted a mediated moderation analysis to test the integrative model. The results showed that team legitimacy mediated the moderation effect of procedural justice on the relationship between power disparity and team conflict (task conflict and relationship conflict).Our findings contribute to the literature in two ways. First, the study extends our understanding of the relationship between power disparity and team conflict by testing procedural justice and team legitimacy as moderators. Second, our findings reveal that power disparity can either decrease or increase team conflict when procedural justice (team legitimacy) is high and low, respectively. Our study thereby provides a new approach to the effects of power disparity that integrates the functional and dysfunctional perspectives.

Interactional Justice, Procedural Justice in Committee Decision Making, and Employees’ Commitments to Decision: An Empirical Approach on Fairness Heuristic Theory and Uncertainty Management Theory

Leadership Justice and Negative Organizational Behaviors: Mediated by Affective Commitment

When the Automated Fire Backfires: the Adoption of Algorithm-based HR Decision-making Could Induce Consumer's Unfavorable Ethicality Inferences of the Company

Algorithmic Decision-making, Employees' Justice Perception and Deviant Behaviors: the Moderating Role of Decision Favorableness

Can AI Algorithmic Decision-making Improve Employees’ Perception of Procedural Fairness?

Power Disparity And Team Conflict: The Roles Of Procedural Justice And Legitimacy

Fairness Heuristics and Substitutability Effects: Inferring the Fairness of Outcomes, Procedures, and Interpersonal Treatment when Employees Lack Clear Information.

How Employee's Unethical Behavior Leads to Coworker-Initiated Aggression: the Perspective of Deontic Justice

Who Are More Sensitive to Procedural Fairness? the Impact of an Innovation Implementation Approach, Employees' Status Concerns and Need for Control

The Effect of Interactional Justice on Employee Well-Being: the Mediating Role of Psychological Empowerment and the Moderating Role of Power Distance

Understanding Relations Between Perception of Fairness and Trust in Algorithmic Decision Making

Unethical Leader Behavior and Employee Performance: a Deontic Justice Perspective

Interactional Justice, Leader-Member Exchange, and Employee Performance: Examining the Moderating Role of Justice Differentiation

A cross‐level study of procedural justice perceptions

Study on the Impact of Procedural and Distributive Justice on Alliance Commitment: an Empirical Analysis Based on Chinese Hospital Alliances

BEST NOT TO KNOW: PAY SECRECY, EMPLOYEE VOLUNTARY TURNOVER, AND THE CONDITIONING EFFECT OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE

The Effect of Relationship Fairness on Relationship Commitment in Strategic Alliance——the Mediating Role of Inter-Firm Trust

"A Multilevel Model of Interactional Justice, Leader-Member Exchange, and Employee Performance"

The effects of Distributive, Procedural, and interactional Justice on Digitally Enabled Supply Chain Integration: an upper Echelons Perspective.

Trust, procedural justice and decision‐making style: a study of collective and private enterprises in the context of China’s reform

Study on Fairness Perception and Cooperative Behavior of Venture Investors in the Post-Investment Process:An Analysis Framework Based on Fairness Heuristic Theory and Uncertainty Management Theory