Impacts of cognitive diversity of entrepreneurial team on team performance: a moderated double-mediation model

GE Baoshan1,1

(1.School of Management, Jilin University, Changchun, Jilin Province, China 130025)

【Abstract】Nowadays, the competition between organizations and teams becomes fiercer with increasingly environmental change, thereby making diverse teams with various knowledge, information and background being more important and meaningful. Thus, team diversity is becoming a fact of organization life and also gaining growing attention, especially for the entrepreneurial teams. As van Knippenberg and Schippers note, diversity is a characteristic of a social group or team that “reflects the degree to which there are objective or subjective differences between people.” But the effects of team diversity on team effectiveness might be inconsistent. On the one hand, these differences between team members will benefit for the heterogeneity in resource pool and promote the elaboration of valued resources, such as knowledge, information and expertise. On the other hand, the heterogeneity can stimulate team members to distinguish them from others and diminish the possibility of team communication and corporation. Therefore, it is worthy to explore whether diverse teams could have more benefits than homogeneous teams, and in which circumstances diverse teams can show greater competitive advantage. Better understanding of these above questions can provide a useful guidance to manage and take advantage of team diversity. Cognitive diversity, prevailing in teamwork form, profoundly impacts team interaction process and team performance. Generally speaking, cognitive diversity refers to team members’ differences in value, attitudes, knowledge. The core question what we concern about is how cognitive diversity can influence team performance based on “Categorization-Elaboration Model.” By integrating information/decision-making perspective and social categorization perspective, this paper tries to explore the positive pathway of “cognitive diversity–knowledge sharing–team performance” and the negative pathway of “cognitive diversity–emotional support–team performance.” Besides, whether the attitudes towards cognitive diversity (i.e., diversity beliefs) would influence the strengths of these two pathways. Our research examined the mediating effects and contextual factors of the relationship between team cognitive diversity and team performance. Through a questionnaire survey of 110 entrepreneurial teams (110 team leaders and 454 team members) collected in three time points, we find that: (1) After controlling team size, age diversity and gender diversity, team cognitive diversity has positive effects on team members’ knowledge sharing, and also has negative association with team members’ emotional support; (2) Knowledge sharing and emotional support mediate the relationship between team cognitive diversity and team performance; (3) Diversity beliefs moderate the relationship between cognitive diversity and knowledge sharing/emotional support, such that the positive relationship between cognitive diversity and knowledge sharing was more significant and the negative relationship between cognitive diversity and emotional support was less significant for teams with high diversity beliefs; and (4) Team members’ diversity beliefs moderates the mediating effects of “cognitive diversity–knowledge sharing/emotional support–team performance.” That is to say, when the differences in cognitions are regarded as good for the team, team members would tend to share knowledge with and get more support from other members, which could lead to better team performance. This study provided two main theoretical contributions. First, previous research only tested either positive or negative effects of cognitive diversity on team performance, which could not explain the inconsistent findings between cognitive diversity and performance. By adopting “Categorization-Elaboration Model” framework, this study tested the positive pathway between cognitive diversity and team performance through knowledge sharing (at task level) and the negative pathway between cognitive diversity and team performance through emotional support (at relationship level) . Second, this study tested whether diversity beliefs would enhance the positive relationship between cognitive diversity and knowledge sharing, and diminish the negative association between cognitive diversity and emotional support. These results can provide meaningful guidance for theorists and practitioners to manage team diversity. At the end, this study also discussed about the practical implications, limitations and future directions.

【Keywords】 cognitive diversity; information sharing; emotional support; diversity beliefs; team performance;

【DOI】

【Funds】 Project of National Natural Science Foundation of China (71472071)

Download this article

(Translated by ZHU Yunyan)

    References

    [1] Liang, Q., Liu, Z. & Wu, Y. Management Review (管理评论), (11): 51–56 (2008).

    [2] Bowers C A, Pharmer J A, Salas E. When Member Homogeneity is Needed in Work Teams: A Meta-analysis. Small Group Research, 2000, 31, (3): 305–327.

    [3] Williams K Y, O’Reilly C A. Demography and Diversity in Organizations: A Review of 40 Years of Research. Research in Organizational Behavior, 1998, (20): 77–140.

    [4] Kilduff M, Angelmar R, Mehra A. Top Management-team Diversity and Firm Performance: Examining the Role of Cognitions. Organization Science, 2000, 11, (1): 21–34.

    [5] Harrison D A, Price K H, Gavin J H, et al. Time, Teams, and Task Performance: Changing Effects of Surface-and Deep-level Diversity on Group Functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 2002, 45, (5): 1029–1045.

    [6] Harrison D A, Price K H, Bell M P. Beyond Relational Demography: Time and the Effects of Surface-and Deep-level Diversity on Work Group cohesion. Academy of Management Journal, 1998, 41, (1): 96–107.

    [7] Shin S J, Kim T Y, Lee J Y, et al. Cognitive Team Diversity and Individual Team Member Creativity: A Cross-level Interaction. Academy of Management Journal, 2012, 55, (1): 197–212.

    [8] Olson B J, Parayitam S, and Bao Y. Strategic Decision Making: The Effects of Cognitive Diversity, Conflict, and Trust on Decision Outcomes. Journal of Management, 2007, 33, (2): 196–222.

    [9] van Knippenberg D, De Dreu C K W, Homan A C.Work Group Diversity and Group Performance: An Integrative Model and Research Agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2004, 89, (6): 1008–1022.

    [10] Meyer B, Scholl W. Complex Problem Solving after Unstructured Discussion: Effects of Information Distribution and Experience. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 2009, 12, (4): 495–515.

    [11] Liu, B. & Lin, X. Business Management Journal (经济管理), (11): 74–80 (2010).

    [12] Hogg M A, Terry D I. Social Identity and Self-categorization Processes in Organizational Contexts. Academy of Management Review, 2000, 25, (1): 121–140.

    [13] Van Dick R, Van Knippenberg D, Hägele S, et al. Group Diversity and Group Identification: The Moderating Role of Diversity Beliefs. Human Relations, 2008, 61, (10): 1463–1492.

    [14] Ellis, A.P.J., Mai, K.M., Christian, J.S. Examining the Asymmetrical Effects of Goal Faultlines in Groups: A Categorization-Elaboration Approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2013, 98, (6): 948–961.

    [15] van Knippenberg, D., Schippers, M.C. Work Group Diversity. Annual Review Psychology, 2007, (58): 515–541.

    [16] Jehn K A, Northcraft G B, Neale M A. Why Differences Make a Difference: A Field Study of Diversity, Conflict and Performance in Workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1999, 44, (4): 741–763.

    [17] Chen, X., Cui, X. & Yu, G. Business Management Journal (经济管理), (19): 112–118 (2015).

    [18] Pieterse A N, Van Knippenberg D, van Ginkel W P. Diversity in Goal Orientation, Team Reflexivity, and Team Performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2011, 114, (2): 153–164.

    [19] Zhang, Z., Zhang, Y. Hou, L. et al. Nanjing Business Review (南大商学评论), (2): 127–146 (2012).

    [20] Wang S, Noe R A. Knowledge Sharing: A Review and Directions for Future Research. Human Resource Management Review, 2010, 20, (2): 115–131.

    [21] Xu, E., Zheng, P. & Wu, X. Business Management Journal (经济管理), (24): 10–16 (2006).

    [22] Cummings J N. Work groups, Structural Diversity, and Knowledge Sharing in a Global Organization. Management Science, 2004, 50, (3): 352–364.

    [23] Gilson L L, Lim H S, Luciano M M, et al. Unpacking the Cross-level Effects of Tenure Diversity, Explicit Knowledge, and Knowledge Sharing on Individual Creativity. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 2013, 86, (2): 203–222.

    [24] Homan A C, Van Knippenberg D, Van Kleef G A, et al. Bridging Faultlines by Valuing Diversity: Diversity Beliefs, Information Elaboration, and Performance in Diverse Work Groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2007, 92, (5): 1189–1199.

    [25] Gao, Z. & Zhao, C. Business Management Journal (经济管理), (12): 68–78 (2015).

    [26] Mohammed S, Ringseis E. Cognitive Diversity and Consensus in Group Decision Making: The Role of Inputs, Processes, and Outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2001, 85, (2): 310–335.

    [27] Kearney E, Gebert D, Voelpel S C. When and How Diversity Benefits Teams: The Importance of Team Members’ Need for Cognition. Academy of Management Journal, 2009, 52, (3): 581–598.

    [28] You, S., Jia, L. & Cai, Y. Business Management Journal (经济管理), (1): 70–79 (2013).

    [29] Pelled L H, Eisenhardt K M, Xin K R. Exploring the Black Box: An Analysis of Work Group Diversity, Conflict and Performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1999, 44, (1): 1–28.

    [30] Dijkstra M T M, van Dierendonck D, Evers A, et al. Conflict and Well-being at Work: The Moderating Role of Personality. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 2005, 20, (2): 87–104.

    [31] De Dreu C K W. When too Little or too Much Hurts: Evidence for a Curvilinear Relationship between Task Conflict and Innovation in Teams. Journal of Management, 2006, 32, (1): 83–107.

    [32] Yong K, Sauer S J, Mannix E A. Conflict and Creativity in Interdisciplinary Teams. Small Group Research, 2014, 45, (3): 266–289.

    [33] Tekleab A G, Quigley N R. Team Deep-level Diversity, Relationship Conflict, and Team Members’ Affective Reactions: A Cross-level Investigation. Journal of Business Research, 2014, 67, (3): 394–402.

    [34] Liu, Y., Che, X. & Wei, X. Journal of Psychological Science (心理科学), (2): 425–432 (2014).

    [35] Sawyerr O O, Strauss J, Yan J. Individual Value Structure and Diversity Attitudes: The Moderating Effects of Age, Gender, Race, and Religiosity. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 2005, 20, (6): 498–521.

    [36] Homan A C, Hollenbeck J R, Humphrey S E, et al. Facing Differences with an Open Mind: Openness to Experience, Salience of Intragroup Differences, and Performance of Diverse Work Groups. Academy of Management Journal, 2008, 51, (6): 1204–1222.

    [37] Van Knippenberg D, Haslam S A, Platow M J. Unity through Diversity: Value-in-diversity Beliefs, Work Group Diversity, and Group Identification. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 2007, 11, (3): 207–222.

    [38] Shanock L R, Eisenberger R. When Supervisors Feel Supported: Relationships with Subordinates’ Perceived Supervisor Support, Perceived Organizational Support, and Performance. Journal of Applied psychology, 2006, 91, (3): 689–695.

    [39] Zaheer A, McEvily B, Perrone V. Does Trust Matter? Exploring the Effects of Interorganizational and Interpersonal Trust on Performance. Organization Science, 1998, 9, (2): 141–159.

    [40] Van der Vegt G S, Janssen O. Joint Impact of Interdependence and Group Diversity on Innovation. Journal of Management, 2003, 29, (5): 729–751.

    [41] Liu, J. 管理研究方法: 原理与应用. Beijing: Renmin University of China Press, (2008).

    [42] James L R. Aggregation Bias in Estimates of Perceptual Agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1982, (67): 219–229.

    [43] James L R, Demaree R G, Wolf, G. Estimating within-group Interrater Reliability with and without Response Bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1984, (69): 85–98.

    [44] Gonzalez-Mulé E, Courtright S H, DeGeest D, et al. Channeled Autonomy: The Joint Effects of Autonomy and Feedback on Team Performance through Organizational Goal Clarity. Journal of Management, 2016, 42, (7): 2018–2033.

    [45] Bartol K M, Liu W, Zeng X, Wu K. Social Exchange and Knowledge Sharing among Knowledge Workers: The Moderating Role of Perceived Job Security. Management and Organization Review, 2009, 5, (2): 223–240.

    [46] Methot J R, Lepine J A, Podsakoff N P, Christian J S. Are Workplace Friendships a Mixed Blessing? Exploring Tradeoffs of Multiplex Relationships and their Associations with Job Performance. Personnel Psychology, 2015, 69, (2), 311–355.

    [47] Schippers M C, Den Hartog D N, Koopman P L, et al. Diversity and Team Outcomes: The Moderating Effects of Outcome Interdependence and Group Longevity and the Mediating Effect of Reflexivity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2003, 24, (6): 779–802.

    [48] Allison P D. Measures of Inequality. American Sociological Review, 1978, 43, (6): 865–880.

    [49] Teachman J D. Analysis of Population Diversity: Measures of Qualitative Variation. Sociological Methods & Research, 1980, 8, (3): 341–362.

    [50] Hair J F Jr, Anderson R E, Tatham R L, Black W C. Multivariate Data Analysis. UK: Prentice Hall International, 1998.

    [51] Baron R M, Kenny D A. The Moderator-mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1986, 51, (6): 1173–1182.

    [52] MacKinnon D P, Krull J L, Lockwood C M. Equivalence of the Mediation, Confounding and Suppression Effect. Prevention Science, 2000, 1, (4): 173–181.

    [53] Cole M S, Walter F, Bruch H. Affective Mechanisms Linking Dysfunctional Behavior to Performance in Work Teams: A moderated mediation study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2008, 93, (5): 945–958.

    [54] Perry-Smith J E. Social Network Ties Beyond Nonredundancy: An Experimental Investigation of the Effect of Knowledge Content and Tie Strength on Creativity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2014, 99, (5): 831–846.

    [55] Santos A, Wang W, Lewis J. Emotional Intelligence and Career Decision-making Difficulties: The Mediating Role of Career Decision Self-efficacy. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 2018, (107): 295–309.

    [56] Chen, C., Shi, K. & Lu, J. Journal of Management Science (管理科学), (4): 11–22 (2015).

    [57] Wen, Z. & Ye, B. Advances in Psychological Science (心理科学进展), (5): 731–745 (2014).

    [58] Cohen J, Cohen P, West S G, et al. Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Routledge, 2013.

    [59] Preacher K J, Curran P J, Bauer D J. Computational Tools for Probing Interactions in Multiple Linear Regression, Multilevel Modeling, and Latent Curve Analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 2006, 31, (4): 437–448.

    [60] Liu D, Zhang Z, Wang M. Mono-Level and Multilevel Mediated Moderation and Moderated Mediation. In Chen, X., Tsui, A.and Farh, I. (Eds.), Empirical Methods in Organization and Management Research (2nd ed.). Beijing, China: Peking University Press, 2012.

    [61] Deng, J. & Wang, C. Scientific Management Research (科学管理研究), (6): 25–27 (2008).

    [62] Li, S., Liang, Q. & Yang, L. Science of Science and Management of S.&T. (科学学与科学技术管理), (12): 153–159 (2012).

This Article

ISSN:1002-5766

CN: 11-1047/F

Vol 40, No. 12, Pages 123-137

December 2018

Downloads:0

Share
Article Outline

Abstract

  • 1 Introduction
  • 2 Research theory and hypothesis
  • 3 Research methods
  • 4 Data analyses and results
  • 5 Research conclusions and discussions
  • References