Educators’ relationships and its impacts on students’ educational outcomes in higher educational institutions of Pakistan

Abstract To plan upcoming hundred years of success, society must establish an effective teaching structure and cultivate a collaborative environment among teaching faculty. This study attempts to identify the challenges faced by teaching faculty and the conflicts that arise in their professional pathways, and detrimental impact of adverse faculty relationship on students’ educational outcomes. Cross-sectional survey data were collected from 324 educators and 546 university students across 36 higher educational institutions in Pakistan. Pairwise correlation and multivariate regression analyses were employed to drive and analyze results. The findings reveal that teacher’s misbehavior (TM), illicit teachers’ relationship (TR) and university climate (UC) all exert negative impacts on students’ educational outcomes (SEO) at higher educational institutions . Additionally, we discovered that misbehavior between educators and higher discontent in university resources cause interpersonal conflict (IPC) between educators, subsequently adversely affecting students learning. These findings imply that students’ educational outcomes can be improved by minimizing adverse faculty relationships. It is pertinent to mention here that the study focuses specifically on the context of higher educational institutions in Pakistan. The findings may not be directly generalize-able to other countries or educational systems, as cultural and contextual factors can significantly influence teacher–teacher interactions and student outcomes. Nonetheless, the study provides valuable insights into the importance of fostering positive relationships among teaching faculty and the potential impact on students’ educational outcomes.


Introduction
We can never say that we "know it all" therefore, we should always consider ourselves as learners.Education stands the main medium to human success, spanning the entire spectrum of one's life.Worldwide, education particularly within universities and higher learning institutions, plays a pivotal role in imparting advanced and current knowledge to students.However, various factors that can negatively impact the teaching-learning process within these institutions, including teachers relationship, behavior, in-service training, gender bias, and limited resources (Ertmer & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2010).Positive relationships among educators can have a beneficial impact on the learning environment and educational outcomes.Conversely, negative or strained relationshipscan disrupt the organization, education, and overall learning environment.Unfortunately, it is suggested by scholars that faculty members are sometimes perceived as lacking a solid foundation in the teaching profession and being outdated in their approaches (Kearney et al., 1991).Addressing these challenges within the education system is crucial to creating a supportive and conducive learning environment.Continued professional development, promoting positive relationships among faculty members, addressing biases, and ensuring adequate resources are essential for enhancing the teaching-learningprocess in higher education institutions.By doing so, these institutions can better prepare students for success and adapt to the evolving needs of society.Constructive behavior of educators has been extensively investigated, and there has been a lack of research on the negative aspects of relationships within educational institutions.Haraway and Haraway (2005) argue that conflict and negative relationship are inherent to human interactions and exist in various domains of life.Educational institutions often focus primarily on curriculum and curricular activities, overlooking the significance of interaction among teachers.However, it has been argued that these interactions can have a profound impact on both teachers and students.Despite the recognition of this phenomenon, existing studies have primarily focused on other factors, neglecting the exploration of how faculty members' relationships and behavior influence students' learning and educational outcomes.Understanding the dynamics of faculty members' relationships and behavior is crucial for creating a positive and conducive learning environment.It is essential to address this gap and investigate the impact of these factors on student outcomes.Indeed, studying the negative interactions among faculty members and their potential impact on teaching and students' learning is crucial.Adverse relationships among educators can create a disruptive and unhealthy environment within educational institutions, which can hinder effective teaching practices and ultimately impact students' educational outcomes.
To address this research gap, developing a conceptual framework based on Haq's (2011) model, can provide a theoretical foundation for understanding the dynamics of negative interactions among faculty members and their consequences on teaching and learning.Haq's model can identify key factorscontributing to negative interactions, such as communication breakdowns, lack of collaboration, conflicting professional goals, personality clashes, or power dynamics within educators.The conceptual framework can also outline the potential consequences of these negative interactions, such as reduced teacher morale, decreased instructional effectiveness, and lower student engagement and achievement.In our current study, we have explained the reasons and consequences that students endure.Everyone has different levels of cognition; the majority of people will perceive professional relationship as destructive, and it halts the improvement in personality and working (Stanley & Algert, 2007).
In order to fill this research gap, we present a comprehensive set of variables that provide a more holistic view of the variables that influence university students' educational outcome.We believe that faculty members' relationships, various sorts of discrimination, faculty members' misbehavior, and university climate can impact on students' educational outcomes.We also consider an indirect route of interpersonal conflict through which the preceding four elements can affect SDO.In this context, researches have demonstrated that TR, TM, TD, and UC can cause to interpersonal conflict (Agyapong et al., 2022;Mitkus & Mitkus, 2014); additionally, Justino et al. (2013) revealed that interpersonal conflict among educators affects students' educational outcomes in universities.Combining these factors reveals that an unhealthy environment between university members creat conflict.Conflict is not only the parcel but it is also a part of our humanness,influences the efficacy of students' education.The support of the suggested model gives insight to managers about the results of adverse interactions and elucidates the character of numerous teacher-related aspects that create these detrimental outcomes.Data Collected from educators and students in our study help to inquire about faculty-related elements impacting students' educational outcomes more accurately.This research aims to contribute towards a deeper understanding of the dynamics within educational institutions and guide efforts toward creating a positive and conducive learning environment.

Conceptual framework
The study's conceptual model, depicts in (Figure 1) explains the relationships among variables.To enhance clarity regarding these relationships, we divided the model into two sub-models, as illustrated in Figure 2 and Figure 3. Figure 2 presents the factorsinfluencing interpersonal conflict (IPC) among educators,providing insight into the dynamics contributing towards conflict within educational settings.On the other hand, Figure 3 depicts the determinants of SEO, encompassing TR, TM, TD, UC and the impact of interpersonal conflict (IPC).These sub-models serve to untangle the complex interactions within the educational environment, offering a delicate understanding of the factors influencing both interpersonal dynamics among educators and the ultimate educational outcomes for students.

Conceptual framework of interpersonal conflict
Figure 2 provides an in-depth explanation of the factors contributing to interpersonal conflict.Moghaddam and Harré (2010) posit that conflict emerges when two or more individuals exhibit aggressive attitudes due to conflicting interests.Multiple elements, including strained relationship, discrimination, misbehavior and scare resources can contribute to the occurrence of a conflict.Strained relationship among individuals stem from diverse factors such as varyingpersonality traits, illicit relations, mistrust, sexual harassment or other personal interests.Rahim (1990) highlights that strained relationships have a negative impact on social interactions creating a favorable environment for conflict, particularly more likely in the early stages of an employment (Ho-Won, 1999).Workplace discrimination, based on factors like ethnicity, political affiliation, or religious beliefs, is identified as a significant precursor to conflicts among employees (Pelled et al., 1999).Furthermore, misbehavior among coworkers encompassing inappropriate gestures and eye contact can be considered as a catalyst for conflict by the affected party (Mitkus & Mitkus, 2014).Finally, the overall climate of an organization might be a cause of frequent conflicts among employees.For instance, educators excessive workload and structural problems in routine tasks are more likely to get involved in frequent conflicts.

Students
Based on the above discussion, we propose an examination of these factors as potential causes of conflicts between educators.Universities as centers of up-to-date research and innovation provide some autonomy to faculty members.Despite the autonomy, granted to faculty members in universities, competition with each other for resources and engagement in daily departmental activities contribute to a competitive environment.These characteristics of universities provide a unique opportunity to investigate the causes of conflict in these institutions of modern learning.

Conceptual framework of students' educational outcomes
Figure 3 illustrates the causes of students' educational outcomes.This framework is built upon the notion that students' educational outcomes rely on relational, behavioral and discriminatory factors affecting by the faculty.Due to these factors, the tasks associated with teaching, such as lecture preparation, assignment and exams grading, crafting examination questions and feedback for students, might be affected.The repercussions on these activities may negatively impact students' learning and achievements.
For instance, Nafees et al. (2012) found that teachers to teachers and teachers to principal relationships have direct influence on educational performance.Strained relationship among teachers have an adverse effect on the learning process.Some studies argue that workplace discrimination among coworkers can diminish the overall organizational performance.In this regard, Abbas et al. (2011) found that gender discrimination in recruitment, promotions and facilities provision negatively affects organizational productivity.
Similarly, Cortina et al. (2001) examined the respondents from public sector institutions including colleges and found that frequent experiences of disrespectful and insensitive behavior by the respondents affect their job performance and opportunities for promotions.In worse situation, such misbehavior may cause to quit from job.University climate is another factor which can affect faculty motivation and performance.Resource scarcity can negatively affect performance.For example, Shoulders and Krei (2016) discovered that the number of hours spent on professional development for teachers had a positive impact on teachers' ability to engage students.
While our primary objective is to investigate the direct impact of the aforementioned four factors on educational outcomes of university students, however as illustrated in Section 2.1 that all these four factors can also cause interpersonal conflict.according to Justino, interpersonal conflict among teachers can impact learning outcomes of students in education sector (Justino et al., 2013).Therefore, we include interpersonal conflict as the fifth variable to control for the indirect effect of the four variables on educational outcomes through the channel of interpersonal conflict.

Theoretical framework
The ABC framework, encompassing Attitude, Behavior and Contradiction is a three-way relationship (three jointly inter-depending sides) for examining the causes and effects of conflicts (Lumby et al., 2003).The structure of the ABC paradigm analyzed that conflict is a self-contradictory condition where at least two entities express a hostile attitude for their dissenting interest, towards each other (Lumby et al., 2003).A contradiction occurs between the colleagues at the place of work, if two or more than two faculty members of different or same ranked violated some agreement or showing impolite behavior.Conflict is inevitable when people work together.Shemyakina (2011) argues that conflict arises in all fields of social life or territory, including the supreme valued establishments such as higher educational institutions.A thoughtful consequence of conflicts at higher educational institution is stress; strained employees are lesser satisfied from their work and job, get angry, varying in performance, and experience nervousness.Conflict in an educational institution can have negative consequences, with stress being one significant side effect.Stressed workers tend to experience job dissatisfaction, changes in behavior, reduced patience, and increased anxiety.The ramifications of conflict extend to negatively impacting employee morale and fostering less constructive attitudes.In general, recognizing the impact of conflict on employee well-being and job satisfaction is crucial for maintaining a positive organizational climate and facilitating effective teaching and learning processes within educational institutions.

Interpersonal conflict
Conflict can be defined as, a situation where two or more individuals express aggression towards each other due to differing interests (Wall & Callister, 1995).At workplace, conflict arises when organizational members of the same or different hierarchical levels experience disagreement or incompatibility (Afzalur Rahim, 2002;Hussain et al., 2022).Conflict is an inevitable occurrence when people work together and can have an impact on employees' job outcomes.One significant consequence of conflict is the experience of stress.Employees who are stressed tend to be less satisfied with their job activities, exhibit anger, and experience anxiety.This, in turn, leads to low employee morale, delays in routine activities, and missed deadlines of routine work.According to Lumby et al. (2003) conflict is inherent in the nature of education and schooling.Shemyakina (2011) argues that conflicts arise in various aspects of human life, even within highly respected organizations such as educational institutes.Conflicts among faculty members in universities can generate stress, which can have adverse effects on their teaching activities and consequently impact their job performance.

H1:
Interpersonal conflict between educators adversely affects SEO.

Teacher's relationship
Relationships in the workplace are defined as the connections between two or more individuals.When individuals with opposite attribute come together in a workplace setting, there is a possibility of differences and conflicts arising.Educators' relations with their colleagues, peers and university administrators have been researched for decades.These studies exposed that teachers are frequently isolated from their peers and other university professionals (Gningue et al., 2022;Kun & Gadanecz, 2019).Preceding studies have identified various constructs of the relationship.Fletcher (2000) identified six constructs that are categorized as gratification, pledge, affection, faith, urge, and love and reported that only respect and cooperation are essential, and Hargreaves (2001) stated that the main features of interactions were gratitude, acknowledgment, own sustenance, and societal reception.Many researchers had a healthy debate on the positive interactions among the individuals.In the present research, the relationship was examined between teaching faculty due to factors, such as illicit relationship, friendship with boss and sexual harassment.We focused on the negative interaction of the educators.Colleague relationships can become strained due to various factors such as sexual harassment, friendships with superiors, or illicit relationships.Strained relationships have an adverse effect on societal relations, resulting in a conflict situation.For instance, the dissolution of a hierarchical workplace romance may result in sexual harassment due to ongoing career and task dependencies that require continuous social contact even after the romantic relationship has ended.In such situations, the higher-level employee may retain the ability to influence the lower-level employee, potentially leading to unwanted sexual coercion and a strained relationship (Pierce et al., 2000).As a result, conflicts can occur within the organizational member and they disturb the faculty members psychologically.Educator's relations impact SEO.
According to the study conducted by Joseph and Alhassan (2023) when faculty members develop friendships with their superiors, it can lead to imbalances in workloads.Some faculty members may avoid their tasks, relying on their friendship with the boss, while others may feel overburdened with excessive responsibilities.These asymmetric workloads can have a negative impact on the quality of tasks performed by faculty members.Furthermore, Kawo and Torun (2020) found that unwanted relations among faculty members are perceived as demotivating factors that can adversely affect the performance of faculty members.These unwanted relationships can create interpersonal conflicts between teaching faculty, further impacting on students.Therefore, the conflict resolution is handle-less due to larger number of educators.Thus, the occurring division makes the environment a concern for teaching and learning, whether unintentional or intentional, negative behavior harms students-teachers within the organization.

H2: Strained relations between educators cause interpersonal conflict.
H3: Strained relations between educators impact negatively on SEO.

Teacher's discrimination
Discrimination occurs when someone is treated unfairly because of his gender, religious conviction, culture, or ethnicity (Smart Richman & Leary, 2009).Workplace discrimination such as gender, religion, ethnicity, or political affiliation creates an unfavorable and potentially precarious environment for educators.This can lead to conflicts among educators and have detrimental effects on their emotional well-being and overall job performance (Heffernan, 2022;Smart Richman & Leary, 2009).In such an environment, conflict is more likely to arise among employees, for instance, Pelled et al. (1999) conducted a study that revealed how racial and tenure-based discrimination within organizations can contribute to conflicts by negatively affecting employees' emotions.When employees experience discrimination based on their race or length of tenure, it can generate feelings of anger, frustration, and resentment.These negative emotions can fuel interpersonal conflicts among colleagues and create a hostile work environment that leads to detrimental impacts on SEO.Similarly, Salawu (2010) conducted research on ethnic and religious discrimination and its impact on workplace conflicts.The study found that such discrimination can lead to conflicts by promoting practices like nepotism, where individuals favor their own ethnic or religious group over others.This can create a sense of domination and power imbalances within the organization, fostering tensions and conflicts between different groups of educators that halt them for constructive teaching-learning activities.Likewise, according to Abbas et al. (2011), research specifically in telecommunication organizations found that gender-based discrimination, as well as preferential treatment given to certain individuals in promotions and facilities, had a detrimental effect on the performance of other employees.When employees perceive that their gender is an obstacle to fair attention and equal opportunities, it can lead to feelings of frustration, and decreased job contentment.This, in turn, can negatively impact their performance and productiveness.Moreover, Triana et al. (2019) argued that gender and racial discrimination in the workplace can result in uncivil employee behavior.When individuals experience discrimination based on their gender or race, they may feel devalued and disrespected, leading to increased interpersonal conflicts and incivility among employees.This hostile work environment, coupled with reduced motivation to work due to discrimination, can ultimately result in decreased affective teaching and even cause some educators to leave the organization.Furthermore, gender discrimination and nepotism in educational institutions can also negatively impact employee performance.When employees perceive biased treatment or favoritism based on gender, it can undermine their confidence, job satisfaction, and smooth teaching (Kabat-Farr & Cortina, 2014;Li & Wang, 2021;Tenbrunsel et al., 2018).This highlights that discrimination can have adverse effects not only in the workplace but also in other professional settings like educational institutions.
These studies collectively emphasize that, workplace discrimination, whether based on gender, religion, race, ethnicity, or other factors, has far-reaching consequences.It not only creates an uncomfortable and potentially dangerous environment but also significantly affects employees' emotional well-being and teaching performance.Organizations should strive to promote diversity, inclusion, and equal treatment to mitigate these negative effects and foster a harmonious work environment.Based on this discussion, we draw the following two hypotheses: H4: Discrimination between educators causes interpersonal conflict.H5: Discrimination between educators impacts negatively on SEO.

Teacher's misbehavior
Any inaccurate demeanor that individuals possess against each other at work, whether it is direct, indirect, oral or corporal, is defined as misbehavior (Fahie & Devine, 2014).Accurate words might spawn adverse behavior, when spoken in an aggressive, judgmental, or contradictory way (Thompson, 2017).Conflicting attitude is more likely to occur between educator due to dislike one another, hate and misbehavior.Frequent or infrequent interaction among educators can lead to misbehaviors.For instance, quick conversations exacerbate interpersonal conflict and cause confusion (Cahn & Abigail, 2014;Laksana & Nurhaliza, 2023).Contrarily, frequent interaction can create misunderstanding and subsequent adverse behavior.Similarly, Burke (2017) stated that people frequent link may exchange arguments, later they tend to ignore each other even for a single communication.Individuals also accuse others because of transgressions in facial expressions which lead to conflict.Furthermore, Justino et al. (2013) concur that misconduct such as shouting at others, useless arguments and intentional insult has more intense destructive consequences.The learning performance of the pupils may suffer if teaching personnel consistently engage in inappropriate behavior.It is a demotivating factor for students learning.For instance, Gorham & Christophel (1992) and Petek & Pope (2023) discovered that students perceive faculty misconduct as a factor that demotivates them from learning the material.In a similar vein, students complained that poor behavior by teachers interfered with their study and limited their options for courses (Wanzer & McCroskey, 1998).Another study by Thibaut et al. (2018) looked at how teachers' unfavorable attitudes as a result of their co-workers' poor behavior affect their ability to teach, particularly in science-related courses.
Based on the arguments, we state the following hypothesis regarding the impact of misbehavior on interpersonal conflict and SEO.

H7:
Misbehavior between educators impacts negatively on SEO.

University climate
Organizational structure, physical and social resources, as well as university culture, make up the university climate (Yaman, 2010).Thus, formal guidelines and norms, unwritten principles, job duties, and material resources all make up the university's climate.The overall image of the university is characterized by the "university climate" (Kremer-Hayon & Kurtz, 1985) which includes the teaching methods used by the professors as well as the university's resources, status, professional prestige, and autonomy (Dicke et al., 2020;Zak, 1980).Conflicts may arise and performance impacted by the physical and social surroundings.For instance, Holton (1998) stated that the main causes of workplace conflict in firms are a struggle for limited resources and divergent employee aspirations.Similar evidence has been provided by Barsky (2002) that scare resources cause conflicts between educators.In addition, a number of studies have shown that school atmosphere significantly affects teachers' success which tends to negative influence on students' educational outcomes (Collins & Parson, 2010;Jabeen et al., 2022).In this regard, elements like heavy workloads or scare resources of the school (Gould-Williams et al., 2014;Jomuad et al., 2021;Zia & Syed, 2013) are significant.
Based on the arguments, we state the following hypothesis regarding the impact of university climate on interpersonal conflict and SEO.

H8: University climate causes interpersonal conflict.
H9: University climate impacts negatively on SEO.

Measure of constructs contained in the model
The model presented here (Figure 1) is used to elucidate the resources and consequences of educators' interpersonal conflicts.The hypothesized latent variables are four exogenous (teacher's relationship (TR); teacher's discrimination (TD); teacher's misbehavior (TM); university climate UC).Students' educational outcomes (SEO) are exclusive endogenous dependent variable.The last remaining variable (interpersonal-conflict, IPC) is both independent and dependent by (Cortina et al., 2001;Schwartz, 1997).

Teacher relationship
The scale items were developed by the measures defined by Gulti (2014) and Owusu-Mensah (2007) and partly selected from the Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) scale (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995).We observed relationship between educators with two identical indicators, representing illicit relationship/sexual harassment and friendship.Responses were ranked from (1 strongly disagree to 5 strongly agree).High scores reflect a destructive edification based on instruction and hierarchy between educators.

Teacher discrimination
The scale developed by Poenaru andSava (1998), andNafees et al. (2012) and used in various research studies (Ali et al., 2019;Nafees et al., 2012;Poenaru & Sava, 1998) between the colleagues to determine the lack of discrimination by ethnicity, religion and political thinking.Items are scaled on a 5-point Likert scale.High score predicts problematic and negative discriminatory effects, on the other hand, lower values mean there is no discrimination among the teaching faculty.

Teacher misbehavior
Teacher misbehavior checklist (TMC) assesses the following misbehavior among educators, teachers' hostility, and teachers' transgression in facial expressions (Kearney et al., 1991;Sava, 2002).Teachers' hostility refers to scorn, bigotry and vocal misbehavior.Teachers' transgression in facial expressions includes inappropriate gestures and eye-contact.Respondents were asked to respond and rank from (1 strongly disagree to 5 strongly agree).

University climate
University climate scale was designed to measure the three basic parts: individual social support, scare resources, and excessive workload (Gulti, 2014;Salleh & Adulpakdee, 2012;Sava, 2002).The teachers responded to each item by marking one of the five options ranging from (1 strongly disagree; 5 strongly agree).Higher scores indicate a higher level of discontent.The first three questions were asked to evaluate the absence of colleague supports, determine the civilization and to predict conflict.The last question was used to explore the significance of such detrimental conduct.

Interpersonal conflict
5-items scale of Mukhtar et al. (2011) and Salleh and Adulpakdee (2012) was used, and the respondents are to respond ranging from (1 strongly disagree; 5 strongly agree) to predict interpersonal conflict.Interpersonal conflict can be measured in different formats.Four items were used to measure interpersonal conflict among faculty members: teachers' teaching style, patience, aggression and betrayal among colleagues.Again, responses ranked from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) where higher scores stand for higher interpersonal conflict.

Students' educational outcomes
Finally, students' educational outcomes were measured with two indicators, namely learning in the classroom and passing research proposal/thesis (Barmao, 2012;Owusu-Mensah, 2007).Again, we have used 5-point Likert scale, and the respondents are to respond ranging from (1 strongly disagree; 5 strongly agree) to predict SEO in higher educational institutions.Furthermore, we included several other variables in each model to control for respondents' individual characteristics.Specifically, we included variables to control for gender, age and qualification.

Data collection and respondents demographic profile
Initially, the researcher was asking from the head of the departments that they were agreed and they allowed to conferring with teachers and students within the same department to participate in the survey.For this, the researcher sends email to all the universities located in the Punjab province of Pakistan; therefore, 36 universities were agreed to participate in the survey.However, due to shortage of time, one more university disagrees to participate in the survey, so the researcher went to 16 universities to collect data from the teachers and students.Negative interactions among teachers are often considered offensive by the researchers; some moral considerations make this area difficult to study.It was difficult to select the participants who discriminate, misbehave and having a relationship with colleagues as not many of the people and organizations wanted outsiders to know about their conflicts as they think it could damage the image and reputation of the university.Additionally, many of them did not want to disclose their university names when they agree for participating in the survey.It is believed that conflict and conflict management is a sensitive topic for the universities; however, they allowed to reveal the detail about their cities.We describe a brief detail about the area of the cities, where from the participants are chosen to participate in the survey.We have chosen 10 cities from the Punjab province of Pakistan, and the criteria to select these 10 cities are based on the increased number of population and universities in these cities.The names of all the cities that were chosen are as follows: Lahore, Faisalabad, Gujranwala, Sargodha, Multan, Rawalpindi, Bahawalpur, Sialkot, Sahiwal, and Dera Ghazi Khan.Map 1 shows the location of the cities partaken in this survey.Two questionnaires were designed by keeping in view significant elements of the study are showing major areas of the research covered in the study.It incorporates various questions that have a direct or indirect association with teacher's misbehavior, teacher's discrimination, university climate, conflict-inducing attitude and students' educational outcomes from students to inquire about the teacher's attitude towards them and the learning outcomes of the students.Teaching faculty was surveyed to inquire about conflict because they are a key part of the university.The criteria for choosing the faculty members were that at least two nominated course classes must be taught by them.Of those who meet these criteria, 87% were agreed to take part in the study.The researcher served independently during the survey period.Throughout face-to-face paper-based survey, 324 teachers and 546 students were conferred a few hours to fill up the given questionnaires, and it took almost 3 months to get the whole data from nominated partakers.We Map 1. Punjab province of Pakistan.
comprised all the students from selected classes for the survey.The students were assured that teachers or heads of departments are unable to see their answers for questionnaires.Every student was requested to evaluate a particular professor who was randomly allotted to him/her, and the students must be a 2 nd year or higher year students.Each selected faculty member was assessed by various numbers of students ranging from 5 to 10 respondents.An average score was then calculated collectively for faculty members comprised this research study.
A brief description of the study participant is as under: shown in Map 1 Ethical consideration is a specific standard for moralities and values about how research experts and educational institutions' should perform themselves, while dealing with the research partakers, when managing research members, the users of their analysis and society by and large.As a researcher, we set up the subsequent proper considerations the reason being that; if we follow standard ethical procedures, we had assented from contributors before they participated in the study, the participants were guaranteed that the information they gave would be made mysterious; this implies that the names of the member have been removed in order to ensure that their identity and names of their universities are referred to using codes rather than their actual names.Furthermore, the information collected was handled with privacy and there was a great deal of consideration taken in this survey as it was managing an extremely gentle and educated group in the public eye.The members were guaranteed that they would be secured as the research is only for academic purposes.Table 1 reports the demographic profiles of both teachers and students who participated in the survey.Blank indicators were not asked from participants.

Construct validity
Preliminary factor analysis with varimax rotation was used to analyze the constructs.A factor analysis of the variables revealed detrimental effects on SEO after anticipated the interpersonal conflict.Composite reliability and Cronbach's alphas ("α") were determined to test the relevant reliability.The factor loading and average variance extracted were examined to determine discriminant and convergent validity (please see Table 2) (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988).The convergent validity gauges how well different items assessing the same concept agree with one another.After verifying the measurement models, correlation and regression analyses were carried out, for statistical analysis, the SPSS 24.0 software was employed.For discriminant validity, by comparing the square roots of the AVE of each construct (in the diagonal parts of Tables 3 and 4) with the correlation coefficients across all theoretically related constructs (in the off-diagonal elements of Tables 3 and 4), indicating that the measure does not account for other variables (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).The statistical results predicted that the overall fitness of the model is satisfactory.* Correlation is significant at the level 0.05 (two-tailed) and ** Correlation is significant at the level 0.01 (two-tailed).

Statistical evidence
Tables 3 and 4 report the means, standard deviations and pair-wise correlations for the variables.
Pairwise correlation values in Table 3 for educators, show that TR, TD, TM and UC have significant positive relationship with IPC and SEO.All correlations are significant at one percent level.Thus, according to the correlations found in the educator data is that strained relationships, discrimination between educators, educators' misbehavior towards each other and higher discontent with university climate cause interpersonal conflict and adversely affected SEO.Similarly, the findings in student data (Table 4) are TR, TD, TM and UC which have significant positive relations with IPC and SEO.Thus, according to the correlations found in the student data, discriminatory behavior, uncivil attitude, strained relations and higher discontent with university climate were negatively associated with SEO and positively associated with IPC.Collectively, the outcomes of the correlation analyses support our study hypotheses.Next, we carried out multivariate regression analysis to estimate our results for both educator and student data.The estimated regression results presented here are first for educators and second for students.First, IPC is used as a dependent variable as presented in "figure 2" and then SEO (see Figure 3) for the connection between both independent and dependent variables.TR, TD, TM and UC are the primary independent variables in our models.After that, we have included IPC as an independent variable in those models where SEO is taken as the dependent variable.Inclusion of interpersonal conflict variable controls for the indirect effects that four main independent variables might have on SEO through the channel of interpersonal conflict.
First, we report consequence when IPC is utilized as a dependent variable.Therefore, according to the regression analysis found in the both educator and student data, the result of TR and TD on IPC are insignificant (see Table 5).The results (β = .01and β = .01),respectively, for educators and pupils show that students-teachers believed that discriminatory behavior and strained relation between educators are not the cause of IPC in higher educational institutions.These outcomes are not supportive for our second and fourth hypotheses.Thus, H2 and H4 are rejected.The impact of UC on IPC is not the same for both group perspectives, and educator's perspective shows in the results (β = .12,p < .001)reveals that higher discontent with UC causes IPC between educators.Contrarily, student results reveal that the regression analysis in student data is insignificant due to negative entry of the beta value (β = −.08,p < .01).Therefore, collectively, the results provide limited support to our hypothesis H8 that UC causes IPC between educators.Finally, misbehavior appears as a positive and significant variable in both educator (β = .06,p < .01)and student data (β =.93, p < .001),showing that misbehavior among faculty members causes IPC between them.These misbehavior results provide strong support for our hypothesis H6.Hence, our sixth hypothesis is accepted.
Altogether, the foregoing findings suggest that several of our primary independent factors are causing IPC, which in turn can impair SEO.
Next, we report the results, where SEO is used as dependent variable, IPC variable is used as independent variable here and shown positive as well as significant (β = .37,p < .001),(β = .12,p < .001)association with SEO for both groups of students and educators, respectively.Because larger values of the SEO variable indicate poor performance, these findings support our hypothesis H1 that workplace conflict between educators has a negative impact on students' educational outcomes.The findings reported in above paragraph that TM and UC cause IPC, as well as the findings that IPC has a negative effect on SEO, support our conjecture that our four main variables can affect students' educational outcomes through the channel of interpersonal conflict.TR variable also shows positive and significant impact on SEO in both group perspectives, educator perspective (β = .22,p < .001)and student perspective (β = .11,p< .001).Therefore, our 3 rd hypothesis is accepted that educator relations have a negative impact on SEO.Similarly, robust results are found for TM, both educator and student results are significant (β =.15, p < .001)and (β = 1.12, p< .001),respectively, confirming our 7 th hypothesis that TM has a negative effect on SEO.Results of UC variable are not consistent across educator's and student's perspective.They show significant results for educator data (β =.25, p < .001),which indicates that educators think that the discontent with UC adversely effects SEO.However, the regression analysis for student data shows that UC is insignificant (β = −.21,p < .001).Collectively, both results show that the evidence for H9, which argues that UC has a significant effect on SEO, is not robust.Likewise, the evidence for H5 is also not robust as TD variable is insignificant in educator data (β = −.03,p = .69)while positive and significant in student data (β = .21,p < .001).These results suggest that educator data show that the discrimination between them not impacting SEO, while student data show that discriminatory behavior between educators has adverse impact on their learning, education and performance.

DV=
Together, these results provide robust evidence that strained relationships and misbehavior between educators have negative impact on students' educational outcomes in higher educational institutions.These results suggest that educator data show that the discrimination between them not impacting SEO, while student data show that discriminatory behavior between educators has adverse impact on their learning, education and performance.The results (β = .01and β = .01),respectively, for educators and pupils show that students-teachers believed that discriminatory behavior and strained relation between educators are not the cause of IPC in higher educational institutions.These outcomes are not supportive for our second and fourth hypotheses.

Discussion
Educators are primarily responsible for teaching and mentoring students, interactions and collaborations within faculty members can shape the overall educational environment.Conversely, if educators have strained relationships, they negatively affect the educational experience for students (Sethi & Scales, 2020).Our findings show that pleasant and unpleasant interactions between educators have a negative impact on SEO.Specifically, the findings indicate that factors such as friendship with the boss and sexual harassment among teachers have a negative impact on SEO.Faculty members who have strong friendships are more likely to relax while performing their duties, excessive leaves from institutions, usually educators serve as role models for students by demonstrating effective communication, teamwork, and professionalism.However, our results revealed that educators' friendships lead to favoritism and exclusion of others, thus negatively impact the SEO by creating an uneven playing field for students.Strained relationship between educators is a rare incidence (Blase, 1988).Our findings are consistent with the previous research, such as Hargreaves (2001) stated that friendly relations among individuals seem like an exception rather than natural, normally the educators suffer silent conflict.The presence of silence, spying, and inequity, as stated by Sava (2002), had a significant impact on pupils' education.Sexual harassment by educators has serious effects for students and the educational environment.It created a hostile and uncomfortable learning environment for pupils, which lead to emotional distress and distractions from their studies.They lose trust in faculty and the institution, discouraging them from seeking educational assistance, further affecting their well-being and potentially resulting to low educational outcomes (. ..).Faculty conflicts and lack of rivalry between them lead to disorganization, inconsistency, and a less supportive academic environment.However, the link among educator relationship and interpersonal conflict is insignificant, because faculty members are well educated, they are less likely to be involved in conflicts based on friendship or other comparable motives.
Faculty misbehavior demonstrated to have a negative impact on SEO, since it upsets students and can lead to lack of focus from teachers (Huberman, 1993).Our findings are congruent with the research findings of Gorham and Christophel (1992) who indicated that 43% of elements that discourage students originated from teachers' uncivil behavior.Misbehavior between faculty members certainly impacts students' educational outcomes, it sets a poor example, potentially affecting students' own behavior and attitudes, bothers students and leads to laziness in students.Fostering a culture of professionalism, respect, and inclusion within the academic community is essential for ensuring that students have a positive and productive learning experience and can achieve their educational goals.Among high professionals, hostile and aggressive attitude is considered unacceptable and it not only induces but also generates IPC within teammates (Nelsen et al., 2011).
As perceived from the results of the student data that discrimination among educators at higher educational institutions can have several significant impacts on students, such discrimination can take various forms, including based on race, gender, sexual orientation and ethnicity.TD can lead to poor job performance, demotivation, reduction in emphasis on quality of teaching, research and education they give.Consequently, students may not receive the best possible educational experience.These findings are consistent with the recent researches (Chen et al., 2023;Haitembu, 2023).When educators are faced prejudice, it can spill over into their interactions with students, impacting the learning environment and potentially hindering students' ability to focus on their studies.Furthermore, negatively impact on students' well-being, leading to stress and anxiety, this in turn can have impact on SEO.Our results for discrimination found by teachers data are not consistent with the students results.These results might be due to specific context of our data set which is collected from same province and by the large our respondents have same religion and same ethnic group.Furthermore, our findings from educators and students revealed that discrimination is not a cause of IPC, which is consistent with the findings of (Kurbonalievna & Adxamovna, 2021;Tovar-García et al., 2015).
University climate is crucial for students' educational outcomes.The overall environment and culture within a university have a significant impact on students in various ways, influencing their academic success and personal development (Rafiq et al., 2022).A negative university climate halts educators for access to essential resources and mentorship opportunities.According to our results, higher levels of unhappiness with university climate lead to conflict and have a detrimental impact on students' educational outcomes.Workplace conditions cause conflicts and have an impact on the performance.University climate includes factors such as non-supportive behavior, university services and resources, professional prestige, excessive workload, low wages and the absence of autonomy, contributes to conflict and affects educational performance, as consistent with the studies presented by Kremer-Hayon & Kurtz (1985) and Sava (2002).
Teaching style that lacks enthusiasm, it reduced comprehension and retention of course material, hindering students' interest in the subject matter.Impatient and aggressive behavior by instructors created an environment where students are afraid to ask questions or seek help.This results to reduce confidence in their abilities and prevent their willingness to participate.Our results show that aggressive teaching styles disrupt the classroom atmosphere, making it challenging for students to focus on their studies and engage in the learning process (Ahmed et al., 2020).Similarly, impatient instructors cause students to feel anxious and stressed, thus adversely affecting educational outcomes.Witnessing betrayal and conflicts among faculty members can lead to a loss of trust in the academic community.Faculty members who display professionalism and collaboration serve as positive role models for students.Betrayal and conflicts can undermine these positive examples, potentially leading to cynicism or a lack of respect for faculty members, impacting students' overall educational experience and sense of belonging (Pham, 2023).Our results are consistent with (Whetten & Cameron, 2014), interpersonal conflict, regardless of its occurrence, consistently has a negative impact on colleagues, leading to a decline in discipline and ultimately decreases students' educational outcomes.

Conclusions
Survey conducted from educators and students in the universities of the Punjab province of Pakistan,Investigates the main contributors for interpersonal conflict, and its impacts on students' educational outcomes.The findings of our research affirm that educator relations, educators misbehavior and dissatisfaction with university climate adversely effects SEO.To arrive at these results, we considered the indirect effect of these variables on educational outcomes through the pathway of interpersonal conflict.By controlling for this indirect effect, our analysis provides a more comprehensive understanding of the relationships between the variables.Furthermore, the results of our analysis revealed that educators misbehavior and dissatisfaction with the university climate are significant factors in causing interpersonal conflict, subsequently exerting a negative influence on students' educational outcomes.This highlights the importance of addressing and mitigating these negative behaviors and environmental factors within educational institutions.By identifying these factors and understanding their impact on students' educational outcomes, our research provides valuable insights for improving the teaching and learning environment.Overall, our study contributes to unraveling the intricate dynamics involving interpersonal conflict, faculty behavior, university climate, and students' educational outcomes in higher learning institutions.The findings underscore the necessity for interventions and strategies that promote positive interactions among faculty members and create a supportive and conducive learning environment for students.The study suggests that fostering positive teacher relationships, addressing faculty misbehavior, and enhancing the university climate can significantly contribute to improved educational outcomes for students.

Managerial implications
The first managerial implication is that the need for leaders to recognize and address the consequences of interpersonal conflict.Although it may not be possible to completely eliminate misbehavior, it is crucial to control and manage these factors as they can lead to teacher aggression, physical violence, and negative emotional states.Leaders should take proactive measures to prevent and address such behaviors, promoting a harmonious and respectful work environment.
The second implication is related to the importance of the university climate.Previous research has often overlooked the impact of university climate on interpersonal conflict and educational outcomes.Our findings highlight that the university climate significantly influences both interpersonal conflict and students' educational outcomes.This suggests that universities should focus on improving their norms, addressing power imbalances, and providing adequate resources.By creating a supportive and positive university climate, universities can contribute to reducing conflict and enhancing educational outcomes.
Finally, managers should actively monitor the relationships among teachers, particularly with regard to factors such as sexual harassment and inappropriate relationships with colleagues or superiors.Implementing training programs for teachers and establishing clear rules and consequences, such as demotion or termination, can help control these factors.By taking these measures, managers can foster a professional and respectful working environment that minimizes the potential for conflicts arising from such relationships.
Overall, these managerial implications highlight the importance of leadership involvement in addressing interpersonal conflict and improving the university climate.By proactively managing these factors, leaders can create a conducive and supportive environment for faculty members, leading to enhanced educational outcomes for students.

Limitations and future research
This study's variables lacked a mediator or moderator to control interpersonal conflict as well as causes; future research could include management policies/strategies as a mediator/moderator.This metric may withdraw further understandings that influence how educators connect with each other.If we eliminate this constraint in future study, it will help researchers and educationalists to maintain the importance of strong educational relationships, to achieving a greater common goal and a better university for students.Secondly, due to shortage of time and small sample size, we are unable to analyses SEM which will be more significant if the data set is large enough.
Figure 1.Conceptual model of this study.
Figure 3. Causes of students educational outcomes.
square root of average variance extracted presented within parenthesis.

Table 3 . Correlation and discriminant validity (teacher's perspective)
Notes: The square root of average variance extracted presented within parenthesis.* Correlation is significant at the level 0.05 (two-tailed) and ** Correlation is significant at the level 0.01 (two-tailed).