Randall S. Peterson

The dynamic relationship between performance feedback, trust, and conflict in groups: A longitudinal study

Abstract Moderate task conflict has generally been associated with higher group performance, and relationship conflict associated with lower performance. Past studies have most often discussed their findings as though differences in level of intragroup conflict cause differences in group performance—rather than testing the additional possibility that reported group conflict is a reaction to feedback on past group performance. This paper explores the dynamic relationships between intragroup conflict and performance with a longitudinal design. Results from 67 groups suggest that initial performance feedback to groups can have significant consequences for future team interaction. We find evidence to suggest that, (a) negative initial group performance feedback results in later increases in both task and relationship conflict, but that (b) groups with high early intragroup trust are buffered from experiencing the worst of future relationship conflict.

Focus Versus Flexibility Majority and Minority Influence Can Both Improve Performance

Charlan Nemeth argued in 1986 that exposing people to a majority point of view causes them to focus exclusively on that view (convergent thought). Exposure to a minority viewpoint stimulates people to consider an issue from multiple perspectives (divergent thought) -to go beyond what is given by either the majority or the minority. This study supports and extends that cognitive processing hypothesis by demonstrating that (a) minority influence encourages understanding an issue from multiple perspectives and encourages flexible, or integrative, thinking among those perspectives, (b) majority influence can aid performance tasks requiring convergence on one dimension of a two-dimensional task (i.e., the Stroop task), and (c) majority influence can teach multiple perspectives on a problem one at a time but does not encourage flexible thinking among those perspectives. The convergent nature of majority-influenced thought interferes with the ability to use both of the dimensions simultaneously.

Conflict in Small Groups: The Meaning and Consequences of Process Conflict

Through three studies of interacting small groups, we aimed to better understand the meaning and consequences of process conflict. Study 1 was an exploratory analysis of qualitative data that helped us to identify the unique dimensions of process conflict to more clearly distinguish it from task and relationship conflict. Study 2 used a broader sampling of participants to (a) demonstrate why process conflict has been difficult to discriminate from task conflict in many conflict scales, and (b) develop a two-factor Process Conflict Scale that effectively distinguishes process from task conflict. Study 3 used this new scale to examine the relationship between process conflict and group viability (group performance, satisfaction, and effective group process). The results showed that process conflict negatively affects group performance, member satisfaction, and group coordination.

Flattering and unflattering personality portraits of integratively simple and complex managers

Research has revealed a good deal about both the situational determinants and judgmental and behavioral consequences of integrative complexity. Little is known, however, about people who are prone to think in integratively simple or complex ways. The present study fills this gap by drawing on data collected during in-depth assessments of master of business administration candidates. Integrative complexity was correlated with a broad range of self-report, observer-rating, semiprojective, and managerial-simulation measures. Results revealed a more complex pattern of correlates than one would expect from the flattering theoretical portrayals of integrative complexity. On self-report measures, complex persons scored higher on openness and creativity and lower on social compliance and conscientiousness. On personality-observer ratings, they emerged as narcissistic and somewhat antagonistic. On managerial-observer ratings, complex persons emerged as higher on initiative and self-objectivity. On semiprojective measures, complex persons scored higher on power motivation. The integratively complex manager is reminiscent of creative architects, scientists, and writers who participated in previous assessments over the past 3 decades.

The Functional Perspective as a Lens for Understanding Groups

The functional perspective is a normative approach to describing and predicting group performance that focuses on the functions of inputs and/or processes. The aim of theory and research from this perspective is to understand why some groups are successful and others are not. This article investigates theory and, to a lesser extent, research of small groups based on the functional perspective. The authors present the underlying theoretical assumptions and review theories that fit into the functional perspective from several representative areas of research. They conclude by outlining notable strengths and weaknesses associated with viewing groups from this perspective and propose some directions for future theory development.

7. A contingent configuration approach to understanding the role of personality in organizational groups

Abstract We argue that past research has taken one of three basic theoretical approaches to explaining the nature of member personality effects on group process and team performance: (1) universal - certain traits always predict teamwork success; (2) contingent - certain traits predict team performance depending on the task or organizational culture; and (3) configuration - the mix of traits within a group, or the “fit” of individual members with each other, predicts team performance. Each of these three approaches to personality in groups has received significant empirical support in the literature and yet has some shortcomings. We offer suggestions for improving research using each approach but argue that a full understanding of the role of personality in group processes must integrate all three of these approaches into what we call the contingent configuration approach. We conclude by discussing the implications of adopting this approach to understanding the role of personality in organizational groups.

Can You have too Much of a Good Thing? The Limits of Voice for Improving Satisfaction with Leaders

Research on procedural justice has consistently found that increases in voice are associated with enhanced ratings of procedural fairness, satisfaction with leaders, and acceptance of decisions made by authorities. This research extends those findings in two ways by (a) replicating the voice effect in small group decision making with a low status leader and (b) illustrating the limit of voice in improving support for leaders under conditions of persistent conflict. Results from Study 1 suggest that people care about their treatment by leaders because it provides them with information about their value within the group rather than because the leader controls important resources. Study 2 demonstrates that very high levels of voice can be associated with reduced leader support and lower levels of decision satisfaction under conditions of persistent conflict. These results suggest that extensive use of voice by leaders has limited advantages when people fundamentally disagree.

A Dynamic Perspective on Diverse Teams: Moving from the Dual-Process Model to a Dynamic Coordination-based Model of Diverse Team Performance

AbstractThe existing literature on diverse teams suggests that diversity is both helpful to teams in making more information available and encouraging creativity and damaging to teams in reducing cohesion and information sharing. Thus the extant literature suggests that diversity within teams is a double-edged sword that leads to both positive and negative effects simultaneously. This literature has not, however, fully embraced the increasing calls in the broader groups literature to take account of time in understanding how groups function [e.g. Cronin, M. A., Weingart, L. R., & Todorova, G. (2011). Dynamics in groups: Are we there yet? The Academy of Management Annals, 5, 571–612]. We review the literature on diverse teams employing this lens to develop a dynamic perspective that takes account of the timing and flow of diversitys effects. Our review suggests that diversity in groups has different short-term and long-term effects in ways that are not fully captured by the currently dominant double-edged...

Cultural Intelligence and the Multinational Team Experience: Does the Experience of Working in a Multinational Team Improve Cultural Intelligence?

In this chapter, we explore the interrelationships between team member cultural intelligence (CQ) and multinational team functioning and performance. We argue that CQ, an individuals capability to adapt to different cultural contexts, can be enhanced through experience working in a multinational team, suggesting that CQ is not simply a stable individual difference. We propose a conceptual framework, and demonstrate empirical support through a longitudinal study, that links the effectiveness of team experience to shared norms and positive performance feedback. Additionally, we present evidence that mean level of team member CQ predicts intragroup trust, cohesion, and performance for the multinational team.

Sinking slowly: Diversity in propensity to trust predicts downward trust spirals in small groups.

This paper examines the phenomenon of trust spirals in small groups. Drawing on literature on the spiral reinforcement of trust, we theorize that diversity in propensity to trust has affective and cognitive consequences related to trust (i.e., feelings of frustration and perceptions of low similarity), reducing the level of experienced intragroup trust early in a groups development. Reduced experienced trust then fuels relationship conflict and lowers trust even further over time, ultimately having a negative effect on group performance. These ideas are tested using a sample of MBA student groups surveyed at 3 time periods over 4 months. Results confirm our hypothesis that diversity in propensity to trust is sufficient to trigger a downward trust spiral and poor performance in small groups.