To Agree or Not to Agree: The Effects of Value Congruence, Individual Demographic Dissimilarity, and Conflict on Workgroup Outcomes

Abstract

To Agree or Not To Agree: The Effects of Value Congruence, Individual Demographic Dissimilarity and Conflict on Workgroup Outcomes In this quasi-experimental study, we investigate value congruence and demographic dissimilarity among group members as factors which influence various types of conflict within workgroups. We also examine whether it is beneficial for members to be different or alike, to agree or disagree, in order to foster work group productivity. Results indicate that visible individual demographic differences (i.e., sex, age) increase relationship conflict, while informational demographic differences (i.e., education) increase task-focused conflict. Value congruence of members decreased both relationship and task conflict, and the specific content of the values held by members influenced performance. Specifically, both detail and outcome group value orientations increased objective performance; outcome, decisiveness, and stability orientations increased perceptions of high performance; and, both decisiveness and supportiveness orientations increased the satisfaction level of group members while a team orientation decreased individual member satisfaction in this sample.

Creating Hybrid Team Cultures: An Empirical Test of Transnational Team Functioning.

“…As challenges or threats confront the team, members retreat toward preexisting subgroup identities for ego protection. Instead of forming a unitary identity, the team divides into preexisting subgroups, creating a potential for relational conflict (Jehn et al, 1997;Lau & Murnighan, 1998). For example, Fielder (1966) conducted a study of heterogeneous groups with Dutch and Belgian members; these people reported a less pleasant atmosphere and experienced more communication problems than the members of homogeneous groups.…”

“…This category covers the amount and style of communication among team members and whether conflict was constructive (task productive) or destructive (interpersonal; Jehn, 1997). All five teams conducted meetings almost entirely in English.…”

Do Workgroup Faultlines Help or Hurt? A Moderated Model of Faultlines, Team Identification, and Group Performance

“…Social category faultlines are hypothetical dividing lines that split a group into subgroups based on members' alignment on social category demographic characteristics. Social category characteristics are attributes such as race/ethnic background, nationality, sex, and age (Cummings et al 1993;Jehn et al 1997Jehn et al , 1999. Whereas members' differences on these characteristics may not be directly relevant to a given task, they do shape people's perceptions and behaviors through mechanisms of categorization, stereotyping, and prejudice (Messick and Mackie 1989).…”

“…On the other hand, information-based faultlines form when group members' multiple attributes come into alignment and split a group into relatively homogeneous subgroups based on informational characteristics. Informational characteristics are underlying attributes of individuals that are directly job related (such as work and education experiences) and are important in the completion of a task (Jackson et al 2003;Jehn et al 1997Jehn et al , 1999. Members' differences on these characteristics-the number of differences as well as the spread of information content and experience (e.g., graduating from the eighth grade versus having a Ph.D.)-are typically associated with a broader array of relevant information and a larger pool of task-relevant skills that group members bring to a team (Jehn et al , 1999Tsui et al 1992;Webber and Donahue 2001;Williams and O'Reilly 1998).…”

Pursuing goals with others: Group identification and motivation resulting from things done versus things left undone.

“…It is interesting that despite the benefits that shared goals produce, individuals do not always work efficiently or effectively in collective settings. Although group members' dissimilar values (e.g., innovativeness, decisiveness) and demographics (e.g., age, education) can explain much of the inefficiency of groups (Jehn, Chadwick, & Thatcher, 1997), group productivity or performance also tends to suffer because of motivational deficits that occur when people share a goal (Karau & Williams, 1993;Sheppard, 1993). In the present research, we accordingly examine the sources of individuals' motivation to contribute to shared goal striving.…”