In modern military and civilian organizations, teams are increasingly composed of members from very different cultural backgrounds. This heterogeneity in cultural composition poses a unique set of challenges on the process of building and maintaining effective teams. This paper describes the concept of friction points in multicultural team performance, establishes their importance, and outlines an approach to measurement. Information from the proposed measurement process can be used to identify friction points in multicultural teams for the purposes of research as well as for developing various interventions in the field such as job aides (e.g., team metacognitive checklists), and generating feedback and remediation during training.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BurkeC. S.StaglK. C.SalasE.PierceL.KendallD. (2006). Understanding team adaptation: A conceptual analysis & model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6), 1189–1207.
2.
ChaoG. T. (2000). Multilevel Issues and Culture: An Integrative View. In KleinK. J.KozlowskiS. W. J.Multilevel Theory, Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and New Directions (pp. 308–346. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
3.
EarleyP. C.MosakowskiE. (2000). Creating hybrid team cultures: An empirical test of transnatioanl team functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 43(1), 26–49.
4.
ErezM.GatiE. (2004). A dynamic, multi-level model of culture: From the micro level of the individual to the macro level of a global culture. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53(4), 583–598.
5.
FlinR.MartinL. (2001). Behavioral markers for crew resource management: A review of current practice. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 11(2), 95–118.
6.
HambrickD. C.DavisonS. C.SnellS. A.SnowC. C. (1998). When groups consist of multiple nationalities: Towards a new understanding of the implications. Organization Studies, 19(2), 181–205.
7.
HofstedeG. (1980). Culture's consequences. Beverly HIlls, CA: Sage.
8.
KitayamaS. (2002). Culture and basic psychological processes– Toward a system view of Culture: Comment on Oyserman (2002). Psychological Bulletin, 128(1), 89–96.
9.
LondonM.SessaV. I. (2007). The development of group interaction patterns: How groups become adaptive, generative, and transformative learners. Human Resource Development Review, 6(4), 353–376.
10.
RosenM. A.BedwellW. L.WildmanJ.FritzscheB. A.SalasE.BurkeC. S. (under review). So you want to measure team adaptation?: Some guiding principles. Small Group Research.
11.
SalasE.BurkeC. S.Wilson-DonnellyK. A.FowlkesJ. E. (2004). Promoting effective leadership within multicultural teams: An event-based approach. In DayD. V.ZaccaroS. J.HalpinS. M.Leader development for transforming organizations: Growing leaders for tomorrow (pp. 293–323. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
12.
SalasE.RosenM. A.BurkeC. S.GoodwinG. F.FioreS. (2006). The making of a dream team: When expert teams do best. In EricssonK. A.CharnessN.FeltovichP. J.HoffmanR. R.The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance (pp. 439–453. New York: Cambridge University Press.
13.
SalasE.RosenM. A.BurkeC. S.NicholsonD.HowseW. R. (2007). Markers for enhancing team cognition in complex environments: The power of team performance diagnosis. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine Special Supplement on Operational Applications of Cognitive Performance Enhancement Technologies, 78(5), B77–85.
14.
SieckW. R.SmithJ. L.McHughA. P. (2007). Cross-national comparison of team competency values. Paper presented at the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 51st Annual Meeting, Baltimore, MD.
15.
SperberD.HirschfeldL. (1999). Culture, Cognition, and Evolution. In WilsonR. A.KeilF. C.The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences (pp. cxi–cxxxii). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16.
SuttonJ. L.PierceL. G.BurkeC. S.SalasE. (2006). Cultural adaptability. In BurkeC. S.PierceL. G.SalasE.Understanding adaptability: A prerequisite for effective performance within complex environments (pp. 143–173. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
