30 July 2010
Research sheds light on pros and cons of team diversity
National diversity can be harder to accommodate in team work than differences in expertise, according to research by a University of Sheffield psychology student.
Research carried out by doctoral researcher and lecturer Tom Calvard into diversity in work groups, explored when, how, and under what conditions groups harness the value of their own diversity.
The study focused on 46 Australian Master´s of Business Administration project teams, with an average of five members per team, and tracked how much each of the teams displayed indications of `perspective taking´ - a group´s ability to engage with seeing the world from different points of view.
The three indicators of team `perspective taking´ measured were:
• Positive attributions – tendency to accept that the root causes of the behaviour of others arises from a particular situation (e.g. workload, other pressures) which can be constructively changed to help improve their work contribution, rather than `blaming´ more rigid aspects of their character, personality etc.
• Empathic concern – tendency to feel and make appropriate displays of compassion, concern, and sharing in the emotional situations of others.
• Contrasting perspectives – understanding that other group members can have opposing or disputable viewpoints on the same subject, and trying to get at the underlying reasons for this so reconciliation can be reached.
The study measured two types of diversity: nationality/ethnicity and expertise area, and looked at the amount at which the indicators were used to see how well the teams were getting on with the task in hand and using their diversity to help their group work together well.
The research showed that national diversity within a team appeared to be a negative influence as it reduced effective group work, team `perspective taking,´ and produced higher levels of conflict. However, expertise area diversity was largely an all-round positive influence – promoting effective group work, team `perspective taking,´ and producing limited amounts of work-relevant conflict.
The second major finding was that teams higher in `perspective taking´ were not affected by national diversity, as their confidence remained high no matter how diverse they were and conflicts remained constructive and work-related, instead of parties blaming one another, taking sides or taking things personally.
In contrast, teams lower in the three kinds of `perspective taking´ would suffer from sharply decreasing confidence the more national diversity they had. Teams high on expertise diversity did not require high levels of `perspective taking´ to maintain as high levels of confidence, because they were already making good progress with their work – the differences in expertise could be directly related to the task at hand.
The research builds upon current debates as to whether group diversity can enhance the quality of decision-making and creative solutions by uncovering more useful viewpoints or whether it creates categories and splits within a group that can lead to conflict and stereotyping. It is hoped this new research can be used to help project teams by highlighting the importance of understanding the possible viewpoints/reactions held within groups in the three ways specified to prevent stereotyping, reduce harmful conflict, and keep people working together smoothly.
Doctoral researcher and lecturer Tom Calvard, from the University of Sheffield´s Department of Psychology, said: "Surface aspects of diversity are often mutually exclusive and create threatening feelings of `either-or´ and `us-and-them´ but `perspective taking´ efforts can help diversity appear more flexible and overlapping, allowing attention to be given to deeper differences in expertise that are important viewpoints valuable to a group´s core work."
For further information please contact: Shemina Davis, Media Relations Officer, on 0114 2225339 or email shemina.davis@sheffield.ac.uk
« Return to news releases
|
