The routines-based approach to operations management emphasizes the role of routines in operational performance. However, little is known about how gender diversity in teams could alter coordination and change behaviors of team members, potentially impacting performance. In this study, we report on two laboratory experiments that induce routines to assess the stability of coordination and adaptability to organizational changes across mixed-gender teams of varying diversity and empirically examine operational performance via routines. Based on frequentist and Bayesian statistical approaches, our findings reveal that compared to other mixed-gender teams, balanced-gender teams (a) attain stability in routines faster, (b) exhibit varying levels of adaptability to internal and external changes, and (c) deliver better economic benefits via resource- and time-efficiencies under normal and change conditions, and this is attributable to their higher pace of routine formation. We find the operational-performance effect more prominent in situations of change than in normal conditions. Alongside our theoretical contributions, our study has several implications for management and effective operations management in terms of team composition, hiring, and staffing decisions.
AdamsRBFerreiraD (2009) Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of Financial Economics94(2): 291–309.
2.
AnandGGrayJSiemsenE (2012) Decay, shock, and renewal: Operational routines and process entropy in the pharmaceutical industry. Organization Science23(6): 1700–1716.
3.
AnandGWardPTTatikondaMV, et al. (2009) Dynamic capabilities through continuous improvement infrastructure. Journal of Operations Management27(6): 444–461.
4.
ApesteguiaJAzmatGIriberriN (2012) The impact of gender composition on team performance and decision making: Evidence from the field. Management Science58(1): 78–93.
5.
ArgoteLGuoJM (2016) Routines and transactive memory systems: Creating, coordinating, retaining, and transferring knowledge in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior36(1): 65–84.
6.
ArgoteLHoraM (2016) Organizational learning and management of technology. Production and Operations Management26(4): 579–590.
7.
ArgoteLMiron-SpektorE (2011) Organizational learning: From experience to knowledge. Organization Science22(5): 1123–1137.
8.
AttanasiGEgidiMManzoniE (2023) Target-the-two: A lab-in-the-field experiment on routinization. Journal of Evolutionary Economics33(1): 1–33.
9.
Baixauli-SolerJSBelda-RuizMSanchez-MarinG (2015) Executive stock options, gender diversity in the top management team, and firm risk taking. Journal of Business Research68(2): 451–463.
10.
BarryDHartiganJA (1993) A Bayesian analysis for change point problems. Journal of the American Statistical Association88(421): 309–319.
11.
BeardAKrumerA (2017) Women respond better than men to competitive pressure. Harvard Business Review95(6): 34–35.
12.
BeckerMC (2004) Organizational routines: A review of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change13(4): 643–678.
13.
BeckerMC(ed) (2008) Handbook of Organizational Routines. Massachusetts, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
BlauPM (1977) Inequality and heterogeneity. In: A Primitive Theory of Social Structure. New York: Free Press, Vol. 7, 677–683.
16.
BockstedtJDruehlCMishraA (2015) Problem-solving effort and success in innovation contests: The role of national wealth and national culture. Journal of Operations Management36(1): 187–200.
17.
BoekerW (1997) Executive migration and strategic change: The effect of top manager movement on product-market entry. Administrative Science Quarterly42(2): 213–236.
18.
BoltonGEKatokE (2008) Learning by doing in the newsvendor problem: A laboratory investigation of the role of experience and feedback. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management10(3): 519–538.
19.
BonoJEMcNamaraG (2011) Publishing in AMJ—part 2: Research design. Academy of Management Journal54(4): 657–660.
20.
BourgeoisJL III (1985) Strategic goals, perceived uncertainty, and economic performance in volatile environments. Academy of Management Journal28(3): 548–573.
21.
BowersCAPharmerJASalasE (2000) When member homogeneity is needed in work teams: A meta-analysis. Small Group Research31(3): 305–327.
22.
CarterABPhillipsKW (2017) The double-edged sword of diversity: Toward a dual pathway model. Social and Personality Psychology Compass11(5): e12313.
23.
CerquetiRCoppierR (2016) A game theoretical analysis of the impact of income inequality and ethnic diversity on fiscal corruption. Annals of Operations Research243(1): 71–87.
24.
CharnessGRustichiniA (2011) Gender differences in cooperation with group membership. Games and Economic Behavior72(1): 77–85.
25.
Chen-RitzoCHHarrisonTPKwasnicaAM, et al. (2005) Better, faster, cheaper: An experimental analysis of a multi-attribute reverse auction mechanism with restricted information feedback. Management Science51(12): 1753–1762.
26.
ChenJGuptaAKChenJ, et al. (2012) Univariate Normal Model. Parametric Statistical Change Point Analysis: With Applications to Genetics, Medicine, and Finance. NY, USA: Springer, 7–88.
27.
CohenMD (2007) Reading dewey: Reflections on the study of routine. Organization Studies28(5): 773–786.
28.
CohenMDBacdayanP (1994) Organizational routines are stored as procedural memory: Evidence from a laboratory study. Organization Science5(4): 554–568.
29.
CorbettCVan WassenhoveL (1993) Trade-offs? What trade-offs? Competence and competitiveness in manufacturing strategy. California Management Review35(4): 107–122.
30.
CorbettCJNarayananS (2022) Special issue of production and operations management “diversity, equity, and inclusion in operations and supply chain management”. Production and Operations Management31(4): 1895–1897.
31.
CrosonRDonohueKKatokE, et al. (2014) Order stability in supply chains: Coordination risk and the role of coordination stock. Production and Operations Management23(2): 176–196.
32.
CrosonRGneezyU (2009) Gender differences in preferences. Journal of Economic Literature47(2): 448–474.
33.
CrossSEMadsonL (1997) Models of the self: Self-construals and gender. Psychological Bulletin122(1): 5–37.
34.
EckleyIAFearnheadPKillickR (2011) Analysis of changepoint models. Bayesian Time Series Models205: 224.
35.
EdmondsonACBohmerRMPisanoGP (2001) Disrupted routines: Team learning and new technology implementation in hospitals. Administrative Science Quarterly46(4): 685–716.
36.
EgidiM (1995) Routines, Hierarchies of Problems, Procedural Behaviour: Some Evidence from Experiments (No. 9503). Cognitive and Experimental Economics Laboratory, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
37.
EgidiMNarduzzoA (1997) The emergence of path-dependent behaviors in cooperative contexts. International Journal of Industrial Organization15(6): 677–709.
38.
FeldmanMS (2000) Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organization Science11(6): 611–629.
39.
FeldmanMSPentlandBT (2003) Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly48(1): 94–118.
40.
FeldmanMSRafaeliA (2002) Organizational routines as sources of connections and understandings. Journal of Management Studies39(3): 309–331.
41.
FerdowsKDe MeyerA (1990) Lasting improvements in manufacturing performance: In search of a new theory. Journal of Operations Management9(2): 168–184.
42.
GarapinAHollardM (1999) Routines and incentives in group tasks. Journal of Evolutionary Economics9: 465–486.
HandleySMBentonWC Jr (2013) The influence of task-and location-specific complexity on the control and coordination costs in global outsourcing relationships. Journal of Operations Management31(3): 109–128.
45.
HansenCB (2007) Generalized least squares inference in panel and multilevel models with serial correlation and fixed effects. Journal of Econometrics140(2): 670–694.
46.
HerringC (2009) Does diversity pay?: Race, gender, and the business case for diversity. American Sociological Review74(2): 208–224.
47.
HeslinPABellMPFletcherPO (2012) The devil without and within: A conceptual model of social cognitive processes whereby discrimination leads stigmatized minorities to become discouraged workers. Journal of Organizational Behavior33(6): 840–862.
48.
HillmanAJShropshireCCannellaAA Jr (2007) Organizational predictors of women on corporate boards. Academy of Management Journal50(4): 941–952.
49.
HongPVonderembseMADollWJ, et al. (2005) Role change of design engineers in product development. Journal of Operations Management24(1): 63–79.
50.
HoogendoornSOosterbeekHVan PraagM (2013) The impact of gender diversity on the performance of business teams: Evidence from a field experiment. Management Science59(7): 1514–1528.
51.
HorwitzSKHorwitzIB (2007) The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: A meta-analytic review of team demography. Journal of Management33(6): 987–1015.
52.
HuckmanRSStaatsBR (2011) Fluid tasks and fluid teams: The impact of diversity in experience and team familiarity on team performance. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management13(3): 310–328.
53.
JacksonSEMayKEWhitneyK, et al. (1995) Understanding the dynamics of diversity in decision-making teams. Team Effectiveness and Decision Making in Organizations204: 261.
54.
JoshiANeelyBEmrichC, et al. (2015) Gender research in AMJ: An overview of five decades of empirical research and calls to action: Thematic issue on gender in management research. Academy of Management Journal58(5): 1459–1475.
55.
KanterRM (1977) Some effects of proportions on group life: Skewed sex ratios and responses to token women. American Journal of Sociology82(5): 965–990.
56.
KatokE (2011) Using laboratory experiments to build better operations management models. Foundations and Trends® in Technology, Information and Operations Management5(1): 1–86.
57.
KetokiviMSchroederR (2004) Manufacturing practices, strategic fit and performance: A routine-based view. International Journal of Operations & Production Management24(2): 171–191.
58.
KillickREckleyI (2014) Changepoint: An R package for changepoint analysis. Journal of Statistical Software58(3): 1–19.
59.
KillickRFearnheadPEckleyIA (2012) Optimal detection of changepoints with a linear computational cost. Journal of the American Statistical Association107(500): 1590–1598.
60.
KirchmeyerC (1995) Demographic similarity to the work group: A longitudinal study of managers at the early career stage. Journal of Organizational Behavior16(1): 67–83.
61.
KochAJD’MelloSDSackettPR (2015) A meta-analysis of gender stereotypes and bias in experimental simulations of employment decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology100(1): 128–161.
62.
LeeCFarhJL (2004) Joint effects of group efficacy and gender diversity on group cohesion and performance. Applied Psychology53(1): 136–154.
63.
LevinthalDRerupC (2006) Crossing an apparent chasm: Bridging mindful and less-mindful perspectives on organizational learning. Organization Science17(4): 502–513.
64.
LiMLBouardiHTLamiOS, et al. (2022) Forecasting COVID-19 and analyzing the effect of government interventions. Operations Research71(1): 184–201.
65.
LidenRCAnandSVidyarthiP (2016) Dyadic relationships. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior3: 139–166.
66.
LonatiSQuirogaBFZehnderC, et al. (2018) On doing relevant and rigorous experiments. Review and recommendations. Journal of Operations Management64(1): 19–40.
67.
MaSHaoLAloysiusJA (2021) Women are an advantage in supply chain collaboration and efficiency. Production and Operations Management30(5): 1427–1441.
68.
MenorLJRothAVMasonCH (2001) Agility in retail banking: A numerical taxonomy of strategic service groups. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management3(4): 273–292.
69.
Moss-RacusinCADovidioJFBrescollVL, et al. (2012) Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of The National Academy of Sciences109(41): 16474–16479.
70.
NaduzzoARoccoEWarglienM (2000) Talking about routines in the field. The Nature and Dynamics of Organizational Capabilities41(1): 27–50.
71.
NarayananSTerrisE (2020) Inclusive manufacturing: The impact of disability diversity on productivity in a work integration social enterprise. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management22(6): 1112–1130.
72.
NarayananSTerrisEColeD (2021) Disability inclusion in operations. In: Responsible Business Operations. Cham.: Springer, 115–135.
73.
NelsonRRWinterSG (2002) Evolutionary theorizing in economics. Journal of Economic Perspectives16(2): 23–46.
74.
ÖzerÖZhengYChenKY (2011) Trust in forecast information sharing. Management Science57(6): 1111–1137.
75.
PelledLH (1996) Demographic diversity, conflict, and work group outcomes: An intervening process theory. Organization Science7(6): 615–631.
76.
PelledLHEisenhardtKMXinKR (1999) Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly44(1): 1–28.
77.
PengDXSchroederRGShahR (2008) Linking routines to operations capabilities: A new perspective. Journal of Operations Management26(6): 730–748.
78.
PentlandBTHæremTHillisonD (2011) The (n) ever-changing world: Stability and change in organizational routines. Organization Science22(6): 1369–1383.
79.
PerrymanAAFernandoGDTripathyA (2016) Do gender differences persist? An examination of gender diversity on firm performance, risk, and executive compensation. Journal of Business Research69(2): 579–586.
80.
PierceLWangLWZhangDJ (2021) Peer bargaining and productivity in teams: Gender and the inequitable division of pay. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management23(4): 933–951.
81.
RerupCFeldmanMS (2011) Routines as a source of change in organizational schemata: The role of trial-and-error learning. Academy of Management Journal54(3): 577–610.
82.
RichardOCBarnettTDwyerS, et al. (2004) Cultural diversity in management, firm performance, and the moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation dimensions. Academy Of Management Journal47(2): 255–266.
83.
RoscoeSCousinsPDHandfieldR (2019) The microfoundations of an operational capability in digital manufacturing. Journal of Operations Management65(8): 774–793.
84.
SalvatoCRerupC (2011) Beyond collective entities: Multilevel research on organizational routines and capabilities. Journal of Management37(2): 468–490.
85.
SamaniegoFJ (2010) A Comparison of the Bayesian and Frequentist Approaches to Estimation. New York: Springer.
86.
SchroederRGBatesKAJunttilaMA (2002) A resource-based view of manufacturing strategy and the relationship to manufacturing performance. Strategic Management Journal23(2): 105–117.
87.
ShiXGallagherCLundR, et al. (2022) A comparison of single and multiple changepoint techniques for time series data. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis170: 107433.
SuHCLindermanKSchroederRG, et al. (2014) A comparative case study of sustaining quality as a competitive advantage. Journal of Operations Management32(7–8): 429–445.
90.
SunarNSwaminathanJ (2022) Socially relevant and inclusive operations management. Production and Operations Management31(12): 4379–4392.
91.
SunderMVGaneshLSMaratheRR (2021) A dynamic capabilities view of lean in a service context. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management70(11): 3887–3901.
92.
SwinkMNarasimhanRWangC (2007) Managing beyond the factory walls: Effects of four types of strategic integration on manufacturing plant performance. Journal of Operations Management25(1): 148–164.
93.
TangYGuoPTangCS, et al. (2021) Gender-related operational issues arising from on-demand ride-hailing platforms: Safety concerns and system configuration. Production and Operations Management30(10): 3481–3496.
94.
TeeceDJ (2007) Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal28(13): 1319–1350.
95.
TulvingESchacterDL (1990) Priming and Human Memory Systems. Science247(4940): 301–306.
96.
Van de VenAH (1986) Central problems in the management of innovation. Management Science32(5): 590–607.
97.
VossCA (2005) Paradigms of manufacturing strategy re-visited. International Journal of Operations & Production Management25(12): 1223–1227.
98.
WeggeJRothCNeubachB, et al. (2008) Age and gender diversity as determinants of performance and health in a public organization: The role of task complexity and group size. Journal of Applied Psychology93(6): 1301–1313.
99.
WeickKE (1995) Sensemaking in Organizations (Vol. 3). NJ, USA: Sage.
100.
WeickKERobertsKH (1993) Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly38: 357–381.
101.
WeickKESutcliffeKM (2006) Mindfulness and the quality of organizational attention. Organization Science17(4): 514–524.
102.
WilliamsKYO’ReillyCA III (1998) Demography and Research in Organizational Behavior. USA: JAI Press Inc, Vol. 20, 77–140.
103.
WollersheimJHeimeriksKH (2016) Dynamic capabilities and their characteristic qualities: Insights from a lab experiment. Organization Science27(2): 233–248.
104.
YangYKonradAM (2011) Understanding diversity management practices: Implications of institutional theory and resource-based theory. Group & Organization Management36(1): 6–38.
105.
ZhangL (2020) An institutional approach to gender diversity and firm performance. Organization Science31(2): 439–457.
ZolloMReuerJJSinghH (2002) Interorganizational routines and performance in strategic alliances. Organization Science13(6): 701–713.
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.
