Diverse teams may potentiate greater creativity through divergent thinking. Yet research suggests these teams face a dilemma: the very features that make them promising are associated with persistent communication challenges that threaten their effectiveness. We turn to the literature on dialectical tensions to argue that a process of oscillation, consisting of repeated alternation between moments of divergence, emphasizing the differentiation of perspectives, and moments of convergence, emphasizing integrating ideas to produce coordination, may mobilize the tension between differentiation and integration effectively. We explore the utility of our framework by applying it to the experiences of a diverse cohort of researchers who engaged in a purposefully designed oscillatory process to generate research projects related to climate resilience. Our multimethod evaluation of this case indicates that oscillation was effective for creative idea generation. This work contributes to both practice and scholarship in interdisciplinary teamwork support, creativity, and organizations.
AmabileT. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Westview Press.
2.
AmabileT. M.BarsadeS. G.MuellerJ. S.StawB. M. (2005). Affect and creativity at work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53(3), 367-403. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2005.50.3.367
3.
BaxterL. A.MontgomeryB. M. (1996). Relating: Dialogues and dialectics. Guilford Press.
4.
BrandonD.HollingsheadB. (2004). Transactive memory systems in organizations: Matching tasks, expertise and people. Organization Science, 15(6), 633-644. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0069.
5.
BrophyD. R. (2001). Comparing the attributes, activities, and performance of divergent, convergent, and combination thinkers. Creativity Research Journal, 13(3-4), 439-455. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1334_20
6.
CarlileP. R. (2004). Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organization Science, 15(5), 555-568. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0094
7.
ChunleiW.RodanS.FruinM.XiaoyanX. U. (2014). Knowledge networks, collaboration networks, and exploratory innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 57(2), 454-514. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0917
8.
ClarkB. R. (2010). Small worlds, different worlds: The uniqueness and troubles of American academic professions. In HarperS. R.JacksonJ. F. L. (Eds.), Introduction to American higher education (pp. 19-31). Routledge.
9.
Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research & Committee on Science Engineering and Public Policy. (2005). Facilitating interdisciplinary research. (NAP Publication No. 11153). National Academies Press. http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11153.html
10.
Committee on Key Challenge Areas for Convergence and Health. (2014). Convergence: Facilitating transdisciplinary integration of life sciences, physical sciences, engineering and beyond (NAP Publication No. 18722). National Research Council.
11.
CorbinJ.StraussA. (2014). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage.
12.
CraryM. (2017). Working from dominant identity positions: Reflections from “diversity-aware” White people about their cross-race work relationships. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 53(2), 290-316. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886317702607
CummingsJ. N.KieslerS. (2007). Coordination costs and project outcomes in multiuniversity collaborations. Research Policy, 36(10), 1620-1634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.09.001
15.
CummingsJ. N.KieslerS.Bosagh ZadehR.BalakrishnanA. D. (2013). Group heterogeneity increases the risks of large group size: A longitudinal study of productivity in research groups. Psychological Science, 24(6), 880-890. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612463082
16.
De ClercqD. (2019). Getting creative with resources: How resilience, task interdependence, and emotion sharing mitigate the damage of employee role ambiguity. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 55(3), 369-391. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886319853803
17.
DelbecqA. L.Van de VenA. H.GustafsonD. H. (1975). Group techniques for program planning: A guide to nominal group and delphi processes. Scott Foresman.
EisenhardtK. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550. https://doi.org/10.2307/258557
20.
ErhardtN.GibbsJ. L. (2014). The dialectical nature of impression management in knowledge work: Unpacking tensions in media use between managers and subordinates. Management Communication Quarterly, 28(2), 155-186. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318913520508
21.
FerdmanB. M. (2017). Paradoxes of inclusion: Understanding and managing the tensions of diversity and multiculturalism. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 53(2), 235-263. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886317702608
22.
FolgerJ.PooleM. S.StutmanR. (2018). Working through conflict: Strategies for relationships, groups, and organizations. Routledge.
23.
GeorgievG. V.GeorgievD. D. (2018). Enhancing user creativity: Semantic measures for idea generation. Knowledge-Based Systems, 151(July), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2018.03.016
24.
GioiaD. A.CorleyK. G.HamiltonA. L. (2012). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15-31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428112452151
25.
GohK. T.GoodmanP. S.WeingartL. R. (2013). Team innovation processes: An examination of activity cycles in creative project teams. Small Group Research, 44(2), 159-194. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496413483326
26.
GrantR. M. (1996). Prospering in dynamically competitive environments: Organizational capability as knowledge integration. Organization Science, 7(4), 375-387. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.7.4.375
27.
GuillaumeY. R. F.BrodbeckF. C.RikettaM. (2012). Surface- and deep-level dissimilarity effects on social integration and individual effectiveness related outcomes in work groups: A meta-analytic integration. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 85(1), 80-115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.2010.02005.x
28.
GuillaumeY.DawsonJ.PriolaV.SacramentoC.WoodsS.HigsonH.BudhwarP.WestM. (2014). Managing diversity in organizations: An integrative model and agenda for future research. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23(5), 783-802. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2013.805485
29.
HargadonA. (2003). How breakthroughs happen: The surprising truth about how companies innovate. Harvard Business School Press.
30.
JehnK. A.NorthcraftG. B.NealeM. A. (1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(4), 741-763. https://doi.org/10.2307/2667054
LarkeyL. K. (1996). Toward a theory of communicative interactions in culturally diverse workgroups. Academy of Management Review, 21(2), 463-499. https://doi.org/10.2307/258669
33.
LawrenceP. R.LorschJ. W. (1967). Differentiation and integration in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12(1), 1-47. https://doi.org/10.2307/2391211
34.
LeaheyE.BeckmanC. M.StankoT. L. (2017). Prominent but less productive: The impact of interdisciplinarity on scientists’ research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 62(1), 105-139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839216665364
35.
LiuY.XuS.ZhangB. (2020). Thriving at work: How a paradox mindset influences innovative work behavior. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 56(3), 347-366. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886319888267
36.
MarchJ. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
37.
MarchJ. G.SimonH. A. (1958). Organizations. John Wiley & Sons.
NonakaI. (1996). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14-37. https://doi.org/10.1.1.115.2590
40.
PooleM. S. (2013). Paradoxes of collaboration: Caroll C. Arnold memorial lecture. National Communication Association.
41.
PooleM. S.Van de VenA. H. (1989). Using paradox to build management and organization theories. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 562-578. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1989.4308389
42.
PuranamP.SinghH.ChaudhuriS. (2009). Integrating acquired capabilities: When structural integration is (un)necessary. Organization Science, 20(2), 313-328. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0422
43.
PutnamL. L. (1986). Contradiction and paradoxes in organizations. In ThayerL. (Ed.), Organizational communication: Emerging perspectives (Vol. I, pp. 151-167). Ablex.
44.
PutnamL. L.FairhurstG. T.BanghartS. (2016). Contradictions, dialectics, and paradoxes in organizations: A constitutive approach. Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 65-171. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2016.1162421
45.
SuedfeldP.TetlockP.StreufertS. (1992). Conceptual/integration complexity. In SmithC. (Ed.), Motivation and personality: Handbook of thematic content analysis. Cambridge University Press.
46.
TerjesenS.PatelP. C.SandersN. R. (2012). Managing differentiation-integration duality in supply chain integration. Decision Sciences, 43(2), 303-339. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2011.00345.x
47.
TracyS. J. (2013). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact. Wiley-Blackwell.
48.
TurnerC. S. V.GonzalezJ. C.WoodJ. L. (2010). Faculty of color in academe: What 20 years of literature tells us. In HarperS. R.JacksonJ. F. (Eds.), Introduction to American higher education (pp. 41-73). Routledge.
van der VegtG. S.BundersonJ. S. (2005). Learning and performance in multidisciplinary teams: The importance of collective team identification. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3), 532-547. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159674
51.
van DijkH.MeyerB.van EngenM.LoydD. L. (2017). Microdynamics in diverse teams: A review and integration of the diversity and stereotyping literatures. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 517-557. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2014.0046
52.
van DijkH.van EngenM. L.van KnippenbergD. (2012). Defying conventional wisdom: A meta-analytical examination of the differences between demographic and job-related diversity relationships with performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 119(1), 38-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.06.003
53.
van KnippenbergD. L.HoeverI. J. (2017). Team diversity and team creativity: A categorization-elaboration perspective. In Team creativity and innovation (pp. 41-60). https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190222093.003.0003.
54.
van KnippenbergD. L.MellJ. N. (2016). Past, present, and potential future of team diversity research: From compositional diversity to emergent diversity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 136(September), 135-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.05.007
WeingartL. R.BehfarK. J.BenderskyC.TodorovaG.JehnK. A. (2015). The directness and oppositional intensity of conflict expression. Academy of Management Review, 40(2), 235-262. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2013.0124
57.
ZhangY. (2016). Functional diversity and group creativity: The role of group longevity. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 52(1), 97-123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886315591364
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
