In two experiments we show how teams can benefit from the presence of multiple sources of deep-level task-related diversity. We manipulated differences (vs. similarities) in task information and personal decision rules in dyads (Study 1) and three-person teams (Study 2). The results indicate that when both sources of diversity are present, partners and team members integrate their unique knowledge and decision rules into the collaboration and report perceptions of common interests, commitment and outcome satisfaction afterwards. This is not the case when there is just one source of diversity, causing the partners and team members to possess different information, but endorse similar decision rules or vice versa. The results are discussed in light of research on congruency and identity processes.
Baron, R.S., & Kenny, D.A. ( 1986). The moderator- mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
2.
Blau, P.M. ( 1977) Inequality and heterogeneity. New York : The Free Press.
3.
Bliese, P.D. ( 2000). Within-team agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implication for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 349-381). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc.
4.
Earley, P.C., & Mosakowski, E. (2000). Creating hybrid team cultures: An empirical test of transnational team functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 26-49.
5.
Ellemers, N., Kortekaas P., & Ouwerkerk, J.W. (1999). Self-categorization, commitment to the group and group self-esteem as related but distinct aspects of social identity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 371-389.
6.
Gigone, D., & Hastie, R. ( 1993). The common-knowledge effect: Information sharing and group judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 65,959-974.
7.
Gruenfeld, D.H., Mannix, E.A., Williams, K.Y., & Neale, M.A. ( 1996). Team composition and decision making: How member familiarity and information distribution affect process and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,67, 1-15.
8.
Harrison, D.A., & Klein, K.J. ( 2007). What’s the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. Academy of Management Review,32, 1199-1228.
9.
Harrison, D.A., Price, K.H., Gavin, J.H., & Florey, A.T. ( 2002). Time, teams, and task performance: Changing effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on group functioning. Academy of Management Journal,45, 1029-1045.
10.
Haslam, S.A. ( 2001). Psychology in organizations: The social identity approach . London: Sage.
11.
Heider, F. ( 1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.
12.
Hinsz, V. ( 1990). Cognitive and consensus processes in group recognition memory performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology ,59, 705-718.
13.
Hollingshead, A.B. ( 1996). The rank-order effect in team decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,68, 181-193.
14.
Homan, A.C., van Knippenberg, D., van Kleef, G.A., & De Dreu, C.K.W. (2007). Bridging faultlines by valuing diversity: Diversity beliefs, information elaboration, and performance in diverse work groups. Journal of Applied Psychology,92, 1189-1199.
15.
Janis, I.L., & Mann, L. ( 1977). Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment. New York: Free Press.
16.
Jehn, M.A., & Mannix, E.A. ( 2001). The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intrateam conflict and team performance. Academy of Management Journal,44, 238-251.
17.
Jetten, J., Postmes, T., & McAuliffe, B.J. (2002). We’re all individuals: Team norms of individualism and collectivism, levels of identification and identity threat. European Journal of Social Psychology,32,189-207.
18.
Kaplan, M.F., & Miller, C.E. ( 1987). Group decision making and normative versus informational influence: Effects of type of issue and assigned decision rule. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,53,306-313.
19.
Krueger, J., & Rothbart, M. ( 1988). Use of categorical and individuating information in making inferences about personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,55, 187-195
20.
Kunda, Z., & Sherman-Williams, B. (1993). Stereotypes and the construal of individuating information. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,19, 90-99.
21.
Larson, J.R., Foster-Fishman, P.G., & Keys, C.B. ( 1994). Discussion of shared and unshared information in decision-making teams. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,67, 446-461.
22.
Lau, D.C., & Murnighan, J.K. (1998). Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Academy of Management Review,23, 325-340.
23.
Okhuysen, G.A., & Eisenhardt, K.M. (2002). Integrating knowledge in groups: How formal interventions enable flexibility. Organization Science, 13, 370-386.
24.
Pelled, L.H., Eisenhardt, K.M., & Xin, K.R. ( 1999). Exploring the black box: An analysis of work team diversity, conflict, and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly ,44, 1-28.
25.
Phillips, K.W. ( 2003). The effects of categorically based expectations on minority influence: The importance of congruence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,29, 3-13.
26.
Phillips, K.W., & Lewin Loyd, D. (2006). When surface and deep-level diversity collide: The effects of dissenting group members. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,99, 143-160.
27.
Phillips, K.W., Mannix, E.A., Neale, M.A., & Gruenfeld, D.A. (2004). Diverse teams and information sharing: The effects of congruent ties. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 497-510.
28.
Phillips, K.W., Northcraft, G.B., & Neale, M.A. ( 2006). Surface-level diversity and decision-making in groups: When does deep-level similarity help? Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 9, 467-482.
29.
Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Cihangir, S. ( 2001). Quality of decision making and team norms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,80,918-930.
30.
Postmes, T., Spears, R., Lee, A.T., & Novak, R.J. ( 2005). Individuality and social influence in teams: Inductive and deductive routes to team identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,89, 747-763.
31.
Rabbie, J.M., Schot, J.C., & Visser, L. ( 1989). Social identity theory: A conceptual and empirical critique from the perspective of a behavioral interaction-model. European Journal of Social Psychology,19, 171-202.
32.
Reynolds, K., Eggins, R., & Haslam, S.A. ( 2003). How best to address issues arising from a diverse workforce: The role of fitting social identities in subteam-superordinate team relations . Australian Journal of Psychology,55, 59-59.
33.
Rico, R., Molleman, E., Sanchez-Manzanares, M., & van der Vegt, G.S. (2007). The effects of diversity faultlines and team task autonomy on decision quality and social integration . Journal of Management, 34, 635-636.
34.
Rink, F., & Ellemers, N. ( 2006). What can you expect? The influence of gender diversity in dyads on work goal expectancies and subsequent work commitment. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 9, 577-588.
35.
Rink, F., & Ellemers, N. ( 2007). The role of expectancies in accepting task-related diversity: Do disappointment and lack of commitment stem from actual differences or violated expectations? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,33, 842-854.
36.
Scheepers, D., Spears, R., Doosje, B., & Manstead, A.S.R. (2003). Two functions of verbal interteam discrimination: Identity and instrumental motives as a result of team identification and threat. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,29, 568-577.
37.
Stasser, G., Stewart, D.D., & Wittenbaum, G.M. (1995). Expert roles and information exchange during discussion: The importance of knowing who knows what. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 244-265.
38.
Stasser, G., & Titus, W. ( 1985). Pooling of unshared information in team decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,48, 1467-1478.
39.
Swann, W.B., Jr., Polzer, J.T., Seyle, D.C., & Ko, S.J. ( 2004). Finding value in diversity: Verification of personal and social self-views in diverse teams. Academy of Management Review,29, 9-28.
40.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J.C. ( 1986). The social identity theory of interteam behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austing (Eds.), The psychology of interteam relations (pp. 7-24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
41.
Thatcher, S.M.B., Jehn, K.A., & Zanutto, E. ( 2003). Cracks in diversity research: The effects of diversity faultlines on conflict and performance. Group Decision and Negotiation, 12, 217-241.
42.
van Knippenberg, D., & Schie, E. ( 2000). Foci and correlates of organizational identification . Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,73, 137-147.
43.
van Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M.C. (2007). Work group diversity. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 515-541.
44.
Wittenbaum, G.M., Hollingshead, A.B., & Botero, I.C. ( 2004). From cooperative to motivated information sharing in teams: Moving beyond the hidden profile paradigm. Communication Monographs, 71, 286-310.
