Untitled

Thatcher, Sherry M. B.; Jehn, Karen A.; Zanutto, Elaine

doi:10.1023/a:1023325406946

Cited by 344 publications

(121 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

120

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thatcher et al (2003) proposed a formula for diversity faultline strength that is suitable for numerical data and provides a member-to-subgroup association. For all possible splits g ¼ 1, 2, .…”

Section: Measures For Quantifying Diversity Faultline Strengthmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It can also be understood as a variance-based approach that quantifies a spilt as the twosubgroup configuration delivering the largest ratio of between-subgroup variance over the total group variance of attributes. Thatcher et al (2003) limited their method to two subgroups, partly because the number of required calculations for all possible subgroup splits for an unknown number of subgroups equals the Bell Number (E. Bell, 1934), which is an extremely fast growing sequence. For example, the number of possible partitions of a 20-person group equals 51,724,158,235,371, and this many permutations require about 27,000 years of computation time on a powerful computer of today.…”

Section: Measures For Quantifying Diversity Faultline Strengthmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To our knowledge, there are eight different ways of quantifying faultlines (Barkema & Shvyrkov, 2007;Bezrukova, Jehn, Zanutto, & Thatcher, 2009;Lawrence & Zyphur, 2011;Li & Hambrick, 2005;Shaw, 2004;Thatcher, Jehn, & Zanutto, 2003;Trezzini, 2008;van Knippenberg, Dawson, West, & Homan, 2011), all of which have certain disadvantages (Thatcher & Patel, 2012). This multitude of measures makes it difficult for researchers to choose the appropriate measure for their studies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Team Faultline Measures

Meyer

Glenz

2013

Organizational Research Methods

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Team faultlines-hypothetical dividing lines based on member attributes that split a team into relatively homogeneous subgroups-influence team processes across contexts, as recent meta-analytic findings show. We review the available faultline measures with regard to their properties and identify several limitations, including dealing with more than two subgroups. We thus propose a new cluster-based approach, average silhouette width (ASW), that identifies the number of subgroups and subgroup membership. We then compare the measures with 1,400 simulated teams with varying properties and investigate their factor structure and their behavior under missing values. We also investigate the predictive validity of the measures with data from real work teams. Results show that different measures respond to different team features in different ways but that most of them load on two correlated factors. Taken together, the ASW measure had the most favorable attributes and was the only measure that accurately determined subgroup membership in the presence of more than two subgroups. We discuss limitations and further research opportunities pertaining to faultline measures and provide software for calculating all investigated measures at http://www.groupfaultlines.org.The labor market has become more heterogeneous: Globalization, outsourcing, increased workforce mobility, demographic changes, an increased percentage of women in previously male-dominated jobs, and an increased internationalization of education are only some of the factors contributing

show abstract

Section: Measures For Quantifying Diversity Faultline Strengthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Measures For Quantifying Diversity Faultline Strengthmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Team Faultline Measures

Meyer

Glenz

2013

Organizational Research Methods

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Empirical research in the wake of Lau and Murnighan's contribution has partially confirmed the expected negative effects of strong faultlines (Lau and Murnighan 2005;Molleman 2005;Thatcher et al 2003). At the same time, the theory neglects hitherto an important insight from social psychological research on social influence that-as we argue in this paper-might yield new theoretical implications for the effects of faultlines on team cohesion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 54%

How attitude certainty tempers the effects of faultlines in demographically diverse teams

Grow

Flache

2011

Comput Math Organ Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lau and Murnighan's faultline theory suggests that strong demographic faultlines can undermine cohesion in work teams. A strong faultline splits a team into internally homogeneous but mutually dissimilar subgroups based on demographic characteristics. Social influence processes within these subgroups then lead to the polarization of team members' attitudes along the divisions imposed by the faultline. However, faultline theory hitherto neglects effects of attitude certainty. Research shows that the certainty with which individuals hold their attitudes affects social influence processes. We extend theoretical faultline research by integrating attitude certainty. For this, we incorporate the interplay of the dynamics of attitude certainty and social influence into a formal model of demographic faultline effects developed by Flache and Mäs. Computational experiments suggest a moderation effect. Demographic faultlines only affect team cohesion if attitude certainty is low. We discuss implications for future research.

show abstract

“…Prior research on group conflict has typically shown that team composition is an antecedent of team conflict, for example, heterogeneity in teams is related to higher levels of team conflict in comparison to homogeneous teams (Jehn, Chadwick, & Thatcher, 1997). As noted above, prior research on team conflict has focused predominantly on the likelihood of conflict in heterogeneous teams (e.g., Li & Hambrick, 2005;Thatcher, Jehn, & Zanutto, 2003), or the comparison between heterogeneous and homogeneous teams (e.g., Chatman & Flynn, 2001). However, I argue that conflict may occur differently in culturally homogeneous East…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

When Should We Disagree? The Effect of Conflict on Team Identity in North American and East Asian Teams

Liang¹,

Adair²,

Hideg³

et al. 2012

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior literature on conflict in teams has generally established that team heterogeneity (vs. homogeneity) influences the extent to which conflict occurs in teams. However, to date literature has not examined different types of culturally homogeneous teams' experience of team conflict and its effect on team identity. In two field studies, I look at the effect of team cultural composition and conflict on team identity (Study 1) and the effect of team cultural composition on the tendency to engage in conflict over time (Study 2). Consistent with the literature on culture and dialectical reasoning that suggests East Asians are better able to tolerate contradictions and mixed emotions which usually accompany conflict situations, my results revealed that conflict did not affect East Asian teams' identity, but it negatively impacted North American teams' identity. Further, my results revealed that North American teams reported higher levels of conflict during the initial team interaction, but East Asian teams reported higher levels of conflict during later team interactions. I discuss contributions to theory on team conflict and identity and implications for managing culturally homogeneous North American and East Asian teams.

show abstract

Untitled

Cited by 344 publications

References 50 publications

Team Faultline Measures

Team Faultline Measures

How attitude certainty tempers the effects of faultlines in demographically diverse teams

When Should We Disagree? The Effect of Conflict on Team Identity in North American and East Asian Teams

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About