The preventative benefit of group diversification on group performance decline: An investigation with latent growth models

Abstract

Summary Integrating the open systems perspective of groups and the contingency approach to diversity, we study how group diversification (i.e., a process in which a group becomes more diverse over time as members join and/or leave the group) affects group performance change in an adverse task environment. We argue that diversification benefits performance by reducing group performance decline in times of adversity. Group size increase, however, attenuates this preventative benefit of group diversification. Focusing on organizational tenure and gender, we studied 279 sales groups (3277 individuals) in a large German financial consulting company from 2004 to 2008. In this period, a national legislative change prompted the company to withdraw its star product from the market and presented adversity to the sales groups. Results from latent growth models (LGMs) overall support our arguments. This research extends the (conditional) beneficial view of diversity from a static theoretical space about group being diverse to a dynamic one about group becoming diverse.

The Use of Trajectories in Management Research: A Review and Insights for Future Research

“…Two distinct practices exist in the current literature regarding controlling for a certain measurement occasion. The first practice involves coding the time variable to align the meaning of its intercept with a certain measurement occasion and then controlling for the estimated intercept in the model (e.g., coding time as 0, 1, and 2 and then controlling for the estimated intercept representing the first measurement occasion; Li et al, 2021). This practice offers researchers the ability to control for any measurement occasion by coding the specific measurement occasion as zero and adjusting the coding of time at other measurement occasions accordingly (e.g., controlling for the third of four equally spaced measurement occasions would be coded as −2, −1, 0, and 1).…”

“…The diversity in methodological choices made by researchers, while possibly justifiable for each study, can produce seemingly conflicting results across studies that impede scholars trying to reconcile and build on the research. For instance, multiple studies examining the trajectories of the same construct may find support for disparate trajectory shapes because they used distinctive but theoretically meaningful timeframes or coded measurement occasions using different time metrics (e.g., team performance; Clarke, Richter, & Kilduff, 2022; Dierdorff & Fisher, 2022; Li, Shemla, & Wegge, 2021). Describing the various methodological decisions required in trajectory studies and explaining how those can affect findings should help scholars resolve and integrate the insights across discordantly designed studies.…”

Intragroup conflict dynamics and their linkages with horizontal power disparity configurations, upper management conflicts and coworker support

“…Scholars have cautioned that one cannot simply assume that models performed at different levels (e.g. between vs within levels ) are similar because the mechanisms that account for their emergence and their effects are more likely to be different to each level due to change (Curran and Bauer, 2011; Mathieu et al , 2017; Li et al , 2021). The intraindividual or intragroup change reflects the extent to which a person’s or group’s perceived level of dynamic process at one point in time, or on one occasion, deviates from the average level process throughout the survey waves.…”