"Diversity in Groups" In: Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral

Diversity in Groups CATARINA R. FERNANDES and JEFFREY T. POLZER Abstract Diversity has the potential to either disrupt group functioning or, conversely, be the source of collective creativity and insight. These two divergent perspectives pose a paradox that has held the attention of scholars for many years. In response, researchers have marshaled evidence to specify the conditions under which diversity leads to more positive outcomes and explain why it does so under these conditions. After describing these foundational perspectives and more recent work that addresses this paradox, we outline several promising directions for research in this domain. We encourage researchers to develop integrative theoretical explanations, use new technologies to gain insight into group processes, study diversity in the context of virtual interaction, and take advantage of opportunities for cross-disciplinary research. INTRODUCTION As the world searches for answers to its most vexing problems, it is a good bet that many solutions will come from people collaborating in diverse groups. In government, business, science, health care, and almost any other domain, diverse groups are on the rise. Yet, for all their promise, diverse groups can pose major challenges for those who work in and lead them. Researchers have taken up this problem by studying collaboration among people who differ demographically, professionally, or along numerous other dimensions that increasingly characterize modern groups. The purpose of this chapter is to briefly describe the foundational research in this domain, review exciting new developments, and propose an agenda for future research. FOUNDATIONAL RESEARCH Research on group processes and performance has a long history in the social sciences, with the study of diversity rising to prominence only in the past few decades. In part, this timing reflects trends and events in the larger society. In the past, most organizations were generally homogeneous in regard to Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Edited by Robert Scott and Stephan Kosslyn. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 978-1-118-90077-2. 1 2EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES gender, race, and nationality, for example, and work groups in organizations were typically composed of people with similar training and backgrounds. Several forces have combined to change these patterns, diversifying many types of groups across a variety of domains. As these societal and organiza- tional changes unfolded, researchers became progressively more interested in diversity’s effects on group functioning. As we describe next, two perspectives on diversity—one focused on disruptive consequences and the other on diversity’s potential benefits—took center stage in this domain. SOCIAL CATEGORIZATION PROCESSES AND THE SIMILARITY-ATTRACTION PARADIGM Social categorization theories, which originated in the study of intergroup relations, quickly became a central theme in research on diverse teams. Scholars recognized early on that relations among team members from different identity groups were essentially interpersonal manifestations of broader intergroup relations. In short, group members compared themselves to one another and, in the presence of diversity, formed in- and outgroup distinctions, leading to subgroup categorizations. These ideas garnered empirical support, with numerous studies showing that group members tended to favor and cooperate more with those categorized as ingroup members, while derogating and distrusting outgroup members. These biases were associated with intergroup conflict, poor communication, and low cohesion, which ultimately decreased team morale and performance. This perspective was reinforced by research on the similarity–attraction paradigm and homophily biases, according to which people prefer to col- laborate with similar group members, increasing their sense of identification and social integration. See Williams and O’Reilly (1998) for a review of this and related perspectives. THE VALUE-IN-DIVERSITY PERSPECTIVE Other scholars countered this pessimistic perspective by proposing that differences among group members could also be a source of insight. Early laboratory experiments, for example, found that heterogeneous groups solved problems more effectively than homogeneous groups. This perspective evolved over the following decades into what became known as the value-in-diversity (or informational-diversity) hypothesis, positing that members of diverse groups bring unique perspectives to the table, creating a larger pool of available information, skills, approaches, and networks. Diversity should thus produce constructive task conflict and debate, causing team members to explore alternative solutions and conduct more thorough analyses of the issues at hand. Such processes should eventually lead to more Diversity in Groups 3 creativity, better decisions, and higher performance relative to homogeneous groups, in which members hold presumably redundant perspectives. See Mannix and Neale (2005) for a more detailed review. CONFLICTING THEORIES AND MIXED RESULTS By the 1990s, it had become evident that the relationship between diversity and group performance was more complicated than just a simple positive or negative main effect. To be sure, some studies provided support for the idea that various dimensions of diversity could improve performance via the integration of divergent perspectives, but for every study supporting this direc- tion, another study documented diversity’s negative effect on group processes, which prevented the group from leveraging its informational advantage. Researchers generally agreed that diverse teams offered great potential, but identifying when and how this potential would be realized remained elu- sive. With this paradox in mind, researchers shifted their focus to moderators and mediators that could help to explain the mixed effects of group diversity, coupled with efforts to bring clarity to the construct of diversity. CUTTING-EDGE RESEARCH MODERATORS OF DIVERSITY’S EFFECTS The idea that diversity holds the potential to either help or harm group functioning triggered a search for moderators of the relationship between diversity and group performance. As a result of this search, we now know that diversity is more likely to enhance group effectiveness when group members share a collectivistic (vs individualistic) culture (Chatman, Polzer, Barsade, & Neale, 1998), an integration-and-learning perspective (vs one focused on equality or fairness; Ely & Thomas, 2001), a high level of psychological safety (Gibson & Gibbs, 2006), a history of working together for a longer period of time (Harrison, Price, & Bell, 1998), or high levels of interpersonal congru- ence (Polzer, Milton, & Swann, 2002). Diversity is also more likely to improve performance when the task is complex and non-routine (Bowers, Pharmer, & Salas, 2000) and characterized by high task interdependence (Schippers, Den Hartog, Koopman, & Wienk, 2003). MEDIATORS OF DIVERSITY’S EFFECTS In reality, most diverse groups possess both the variety of information that can create value as well as the potential for social categorization processes that can disrupt group functioning. Social categories are notoriously mal- leable, however; a particular social category may become psychologically 4EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES activated and divide the members of one group, but have no effect in an otherwise similar group. Such variance across groups in whether social categorization processes become activated may moderate whether groups are able to utilize their diverse information. Some evidence is consistent with the idea that divisive social categorization processes impede the flow of dis- tributed information, although this mechanism has not been tested directly (for a review, see van Knippenberg & Schippers, 2007). Many studies of diversity invoke social categorization processes to explain how diversity affects group functioning, suggesting that researchers should target the mediating role of these processes in future empirical research. Conflict, meanwhile, has received ample empirical attention asalink between diversity and group performance. The central idea is that diverse perspectives can trigger disagreement about the task, labeled task conflict, which should stimulate the creativity and problem-solving activities that increase performance. Conversely, conflict stemming from interpersonal incompatibilities, labeled relationship conflict, should harm performance (e.g., Jehn, Northcraft, & Neale, 1999). Although the negative effect of relationship conflict has received consistent support, the results of task conflict are more mixed, leaving open the question of how conflict systematically mediates the path from diversity to performance (De Dreu & Weingart, 2003). Team reflexivity, the thorough consideration and discussion ofthe group’s functioning that is stimulated when there are divergent perspectives and ideas, is a similar mechanism. Schippers and colleagues (2003) found that diverse teams exhibited higher reflexivity, which in turn increased satisfaction, commitment, and performance. Along with these behavioral indicators of group interaction, other mediators are related to the psychological states of group members. Commitment to the group and group identification, the perception that one belongs tothe group, are two psychological states that mediate the link between diversity and group performance.

Load more