Multidimensionality: A Cross-Disciplinary Review and Integration

Abstract

Individuals are inherently multidimensional, containing bundles of attributes and social relations. As multidimensionality research has evolved independently and in a disconnected fashion, our knowledge of multidimensionality and its outcomes in organizations is fragmented and rarely integrated. By reviewing relevant articles from the intersectionality, faultlines, and multiplexity literatures, we present a comprehensive overview of each literature, as well as discuss their theoretical foundations, measurement, and current state. Thus, we provide a holistic and synthesized perspective of how multidimensionality is experienced in organizations. We further identify a series of research questions to spur future research on multidimensionality.

A multiplex view of leadership structure in management teams

“…The current study thus joins and grows this line of research by distinguishing management team singular leadership tie configuration from multiplex tie configuration, which echoes Liu et al. (2019) call for more research attention to dyadic multiplexity and relation bundles in organizational research.…”

“…First, the differential effects of singular versus multiplex leadership density on management team cohesion and subsequently business unit performance reported in the current study offer a potential direction to articulate the fine‐grained mechanisms associated with different management team leadership configurations from a multiplex perspective. In particular, grounded in social network theory (Granovetter, 1973; Liu et al., 2019), our new conceptualization of leadership ties successfully distinguished the opposite motivational reactions triggered by management team leadership density and helped settle the debate between the conflict‐initiating view and the functional view of a dense leadership network (Ensley, Hmieleski, & Pearce, 2006; Halevy, Chou, & Galinsky, 2011; Smith, Houghton, Hood, & Ryman, 2006). This investigation thus represents a meaningful conversation between social network research and organizational research.…”

“…However in practice, social ties tend to exist in bundles and should include more foci and contents as relationship develops (Altman & Taylor, 1973;Schulte, Cohen, & Klein, 2012). Hence, a new trend in the work relationship research has emerged to explore the coevolution and multiplexity of workplace network ties (e.g., Liu et al, 2019;Methot et al, 2016). The current study thus joins and grows this line of research by distinguishing management team singular leadership tie configuration from multiplex tie configuration, which echoes Liu et al (2019) call for more research attention to dyadic multiplexity and relation bundles in organizational research.…”

“…It is important to note that contrary to the limited attention to TMT leadership network in the upper echelon research, there has been a growing interest in leveraging social network approaches to study leadership in the micro teams literature, which has proven fruitful in advancing leadership theories (for a review, see Carter, DeChurch, Braun, & Contractor, 2015). However, these investigations have largely focused on the effects of the within‐team leadership tie in and of itself, and ignored the fact that social relations are inherently multidimensional and exist in network bundles (Liu, Park, Hymer, & Thatcher, 2019). Such a blind spot thus prohibits an in‐depth understanding of how leadership influence works at the dyadic level, as the effects of leading‐following dynamics may differ depending on the coexistence (or the lack) of other ties in the dyad.…”

Diversity at a crossroads: How diversity research can contribute to the fight for social justice

“… Intersectional: So far, an extensive body of diversity theorizing has focused mainly on single categories of difference in isolation from others (Nkomo et al, 2019) -i.e., gender or age or race or ethnicity. Although a number of scholars have proposed the adoption of multiple demographic characteristics and intersectional lenses (e.g., Cha & Roberts, 2019;Holvino, 2010;Liu et al, 2019;Ramarajan, 2014), this is reflected less in empirical studies in mainstream diversity research (intersectionality remaining mainly the staple of critical management - Nkomo et al, 2019). Single categories of diversity, pointing to one feature of being different, i.e.…”