**4. Discussion of findings**

### **4.1 Response rate**

The researcher had a total population of 95 and from which a sample of 76 respondents was selected for the study. Of those sampled respondents, a total of 74 returned their questionnaire, it is most likely that the two questionnaires were misplaced. This represented a response rate of 97.4% which was considered appropriate for the study. This correlates with [35] recommendation that a response rate of 50% is adequate for analysis and reporting; Therefore, 97.4% was an excellent response rate for the study.

### **4.2 Demographics**

Most respondents (60.7%) were Nurses, medical doctors (18.0%), administrative staff (16.4%) and support staff (4.9%). The majority (56.8%) were females while 43.2% of respondents were males. The majority of the respondents (74.3%) worked for the Hospital between 5 and 8 years, between 2 and 5 years (14.9%), and above 9 years (10.8%). The majority (49.2%) of the workers were Bachelor's Degree holder and Diploma holders (55.4% and 33.8%) Few respondents had Master's Degree and certificates (5.4% and 5.4%) respectively. The majority of the respondents were aged between 26–35 years (55.4%), between 36–45 years (23%) 46 years and above (12.2%), and between 18–25 years (9.5%).

## **4.3 Descriptive statistics of intergroup and organizational performance**

In order to assess the level of agreement and disagreement on the different items used to measure intergroup conflict in the questionnaire, the mean and standard deviation were used to determine the central tendency. A low standard deviation implies that responses were closely related to the mean value while a high standard deviation implies that responses were highly deviating from the mean value. The results are shown in the table below:

According to **Table 1**, there is a high agreement on all the measures of intergroup conflicts and their effect on performance. The average mean of 4.154 and the standard deviation of 1.092 implies that the majority were in agreement although the responses were varying a lot.

From **Table 2** below the level of mean responses together with the average mean of 4.4831 regarding organizational performance indicate that functional intergroup conflicts positively affect organizational performance whereas dysfunctional

conflicts if not managed well can have a negative impact on Organizational performance. Based on the average Standard deviation of 0.8858, the variance of responses was minimal.


#### **Table 1.**

*Descriptive statistics on intergroup conflict and Organizational Performance.*


**Table 2.**

*Descriptive statistics on Organizational Performance.*

### **4.4 Correlation analysis**

The main aim of the study was to establish a relationship between intergroup conflicts and organizational performance. Pearson's correlation coefficient has been computed so as to establish this relationship. A high correlation coefficient would suggest a strong relationship between the intergroup conflicts and organizational performance and vice versa for a low correlation coefficient. The results are presented in the table below.

Research findings in **Table 3** below that there is a significant positive relationship between Intergroup conflicts and Organizational performance, generating a correlation coefficient of r = 0.903\*\*, and significant at 0.01. This, therefore, implies that the null hypothesis that states: *There is no significant relationship between Intergroup Conflict and Organization performance,* is rejected and the alternative is accepted. The positive correlation indicated that as employees engage in intergroup conflicts it is likely to affect their performance positively or negatively. Intergroup conflicts can affect performance by causing changes to occur, both within the group and individuals, members will usually overlook individual differences in an effort to unite against the other side. According to [36], intergroup conflicts brings positive effects for the better, by removing barriers caused by different assumptions or misunderstandings about a team's tasks, or goals. Conflict can be constructive when it creates broader awareness about how team members are experiencing their work and thus leads to changes that improve members' productivity and they ought to work together toward achieving common goals. Conflict can also lead to process improvements, such as when it reveals a deficiency in how the team communicates, which can then be corrected. Clashes of ideas can lead to more creative solutions or otherwise provide perspectives that persuade the team to take a different approach that is more likely to lead to success [1]. The Pearson correlation findings by [21], indicated that whereas relationship conflict is negatively linked to performance, there is a positive correlation between task and process conflict and employee's performance. Therefore, it was concluded that the effect of conflicts on the organization can either be positive or negative, but when managed properly, the positive effects can be used to encourage organizational innovativeness and build cooperation among the employees which enhances performance. This is because organizational conflicts improves team dynamics by increasing cohesiveness among members.

A recent study carried out by [32] emphasized the importance of task conflicts on performance when members within a team engage in highly complex tasks. With highly complex tasks, task conflict fosters intensive information exchange as well


#### **Table 3.**

*Correlation analysis between intergroup conflicts and organizational performance.*

#### *Intergroup Conflict and Organizational Performance: A Case of Kiboga Hospital, Uganda DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96150*

as detailed information processing since problems can be considered from different perspectives, different opinions or alternatives can be discussed, which may produce high quality solutions that enhance performance. Another recent research by [22], emphasized that conflicts are inevitable and if properly managed often lead to the efficiency of the organization's activity, which leads to its development.

On the negative side, a study by [3] found out that conflicts between nurses and doctors consumes much of the time and attention that should be committed to patients. Therefore, the consequences here range from poor coordination of patient care, less patient satisfaction, poor perception and utilization of health care services, medication error, failure to rescue patients, and even deaths. The results further revealed that patients suffered neglect and abandonment as they are caught in-between the conflicts of these two groups. Therefore, it is important for hospital management to identify and properly manage intergroup conflicts to avoid performance distractions.

### **5. Conclusions and recommendations**

The study findings revealed that there is a strong positive significant relationship between intergroup conflict and organizational performance. This implies that intergroup conflicts that occur in an organization either result in a negative or a positive effect on performance in the organization depending on the level it occurs. It is important to note that organization performance increase when conflicts are at moderate levels. However, conflicts can negatively affect performance especially at a low level where mutuality of ideas exists between members and if not managed well to escalate to high levels where members lack cooperation regarding activities and behavior. Therefore, in order to offer quality patient care, it is crucial for management to identify functional and dysfunctional conflicts and effectively manage them so as to enhance hospital performance.

Management of health organizations should always address and manage the issues related to intergroup conflicts, by building trust, promote leadership, address cultural differences, establish ground rules, and finally promote good communication and listening skills among the group members and members of other groups so as to improve on patient care.

Where groups have differing goals, it is prudent for management to establish a superordinate goal that can only be reached when the conflicting groups work together. A superordinate goal not only helps alleviate conflict, it focuses more on performance, which is what the organization needs to survive. If this is done in the right way it will eliminate or reduce intergroup conflicts.

Misperception of the abilities, goals, and motivations of others often leads to conflict, so efforts to increase the dialogue among groups and to share information should help eliminate conflict. As groups come to know more about one another, suspicions often diminish, and greater intergroup teamwork becomes possible, which improves performance.

Management should identify and make significant changes in the structural variables involving the conflicting groups such as changing jobs or rearranging reporting responsibilities among health care teams. For effectiveness, groups involved should participate in structural change decisions. If done well, this can lead to permanent resolution of intergroup conflicts within health care institutions.

Given the relevance of task conflicts in decision-making teams, there is a need for better selection and training of team members, as well as a culture that enables team members to leverage task conflicts appropriately, as opposed to minimizing and avoiding them completely. By doing so, it enhances performance among health services teams.
