2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Conflict is an inherent part of collaboration in engineering design teams. Engineering education researchers and practitioners have developed resources to help students understand the types of conflict and various conflict management strategies. Despite this, students continue to struggle to mobilize this knowledge to resolve conflicts within their project teams. One reason for this barrier may be that most previous research and interventions have assumed conflict to be symmetrical across all students involved (i.e. all students perceive the conflict in the same way), which recent work indicates may not be the case [1]. This work aims to better understand the complex processes involved in the perception and management of conflict in student project teams by investigating the (a)symmetrical nature of conflict within student teams and what the implications of this (a)symmetry are on conflict management outcomes. This work will answer the research questions: (1) How do students’ perceptions of conflict experiences converge and diverge from their team members? And (2) What are the consequences of this (mis)alignment for conflict management outcomes? This work employs multiple perspectives research (MPR) to gain a more nuanced and fulsome understanding of the occurrence of conflict within a project team. Data from semi-structured interviews with three students within a first-year project team was collected following the conclusion of the term. Interview data was analyzed using thematic coding and compared and contrasted to determine congruence and divergence of conflict experiences. Results show that both symmetrical and asymmetrical conflicts were present in the project team over the term. Symmetrical conflicts were more likely to be managed effectively than asymmetrical conflicts. This research showcases the complexity of conflict experiences in a student project team and highlights the need for a more nuanced understanding of conflict experiences. Implications for engineering education researchers and practitioners are included.