Please address the questions listed in a three to five-page paper. Focusing on work teams: What are the key differences between a team and a working group?At what stage of team development does the te

Get perfect grades by consistently using our affordable writing services. Place your order and get a quality paper today. Take advantage of our current 20% discount by using the coupon code GET20


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper

Please address the questions listed in a three to five-page paper.

Focusing on work teams:

  1. What are the key differences between a team and a working group?
  2. At what stage of team development does the team finally start to see results?
  3. What are some strategies to make conflict more productive?
  4. Why are diverse teams better at decision-making and problem-solving?
  5. What are the key sources of cultural intelligence?
  6. Discuss how managers can use cultural intelligence in the workplace.

You may include outside resources but please include the three attached documents as references too.

Please address the questions listed in a three to five-page paper. Focusing on work teams: What are the key differences between a team and a working group?At what stage of team development does the te
Tit le : A uth ors : S ourc e: D ocu m en t T yp e: S ubje cts : A bstr a ct: T he lin k in fo rm atio n b elo w p ro vid es a p ers is te nt lin k to th e a rtic le y o u’v e r e queste d. P ers is te nt lin k to th is r e co rd : F ollo w in g th e lin k b elo w w ill b rin g y o u to th e s ta rt o f th e a rtic le o r c it a tio n. C ut a nd P aste : T o p la ce a rtic le lin ks in a n e xte rn al w eb d ocu m ent, s im ply c o py a nd p aste th e H TM L b elo w , s ta rtin g w it h ” < a h re f” T o c o ntin ue, in In te rn et E xp lo re r, s e le ct F IL E th en S AVE A S fr o m y o ur b ro w se r’s to olb ar a bove . B e s u re to s a ve a s a p la in te xt file ( .tx t) o r a ‘W eb P age, H TM L o nly ‘ file ( .h tm l) . In F ir e F ox, s e le ct F IL E th en S AVE F IL E A S fr o m y o ur b ro w se r’s to olb ar a bove . In C hro m e, s e le ct rig ht c lic k (w it h y o ur m ouse ) o n th is p age a nd s e le ct S AVE A S Reco rd : 1 D if fe re nces in th e V alu in g o f P ow er A m ong T e am M em bers : a C ontin gency A ppro ach T o w ard E xam in in g th e E ffe cts o f P ow er V alu es D iv ers it y a nd R ela tio nship C onflic t. A lip our, K ent K . M oham med, S usan R aghura m , S um it a J ourn al o f B usin ess & P sycholo gy. A pr2 018, V ol. 3 3 Is sue 2 , p 231-2 47. 1 7p. 1 D ia gra m , 2 C harts , 2 G ra phs. A rtic le O RG AN IZ ATIO NAL b ehavio r G RO UP d ecis io n m akin g C O RPO RATE c ult u re M ETA -a naly sis T E AM S in th e w ork pla ce P urp ose: T he p urp ose o f th is s tu dy w as to in vestig ate th e c ondit io nal e ffe cts o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd r e la tio nship c onflic t.D esig n/M eth odolo gy/A ppro ach: W e u tiliz ed a tim e-la gged s urv ey d esig n a nd m ult ile vel m odelin g to in vestig ate 6 0 te am s w ork in g o n a p ro je ct ta sk o ver th e c ours e o f 4 p re sence o f h ig h p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y w as p artic ula rly h elp fu l fo r r e ducin g r e la tio nship c onflic t. In tu rn , d ecre ased re la tio nship c onflic t te nded to in cre ase te am p erfo rm ance. A ddit io nally , w hen w ork lo ad s harin g w as lo w , h ig h r e la tio nship c onflic t w as e specia lly h arm fu l to te am p erfo rm ance.Im plic atio ns: R esult s s upport th e c onsid era tio n o f te am p artic ip ativ e safe ty c lim ate to b ette r u nders ta nd th e c ondit io ns u nder w hic h p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y is lik ely to le ssen r e la tio nship c onflic t a nd s ubsequently in cre ase te am p erfo rm ance. F in din gs a ls o h ig hlig ht th e im porta nce o f a void in g lo w w ork lo ad sharin g, in th e p re sence o f p ro m in ent r e la tio nship c onflic t, to in cre ase te am p erfo rm ance.O rig in alit y /V alu e: B y e xam in in g re la tio nship c onflic t a s a m edia to r a nd p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate a s a m odera to r o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y ’s e ffe cts , w e m ake a n ovel c ontr ib utio n to e xta nt lit e ra tu re b y h elp in g to e lu cid ate b oth < it a lic > how a lic > a nd < it a lic > under w hat condit io ns< /it a lic > d if fe re nces in p ow er v alu es, a m ong te am m em bers , c an in flu ence te am p erfo rm ance. R ela te dly , w e answ er th e c all fo r m ore r e searc h th at a dopts a c ontin gency a ppro ach to w ard e xam in in g th e e ffe cts o f v alu es d iv ers it y Full T ext W ord C ount: IS SN : DO I: A ccessio n N um ber: P ers is te n t lin k t o t h is r e co rd (P erm alin k): C ut a n d P aste : D ata b ase: and r e la tio nship c onflic t. In d oin g s o, w e h elp to id entif y th e c ondit io ns u nder w hic h p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd re la tio nship c onflic t a re lik ely to d if fe re ntia lly in flu ence im porta nt te am o utc om es. [A BSTR AC T F R O M A U TH O R] Copyrig ht o f J ourn al o f B usin ess & P sycholo gy is th e p ro perty o f S prin ger N atu re a nd it s c onte nt m ay n ot b e c opie d o r em aile d to m ult ip le s it e s o r p oste d to a lis ts erv w it h out th e c opyrig ht h old er’s e xpre ss w rit te n p erm is sio n. H ow ever, u sers m ay p rin t, d ow nlo ad, o r e m ail a rtic le s fo r in div id ual u se. T his a bstr a ct m ay b e a brid ged. N o w arra nty is g iv en a bout th e accura cy o f th e c opy. U sers s hould r e fe r to th e o rig in al p ublis hed v ers io n o f th e m ate ria l fo r th e fu ll a bstr a ct. ( C opyrig ht applie s to a ll A bstr a cts .) 1 3347 0889-3 268 10.1 007/s 10869-0 17-9 488-7 1 28333502 http ://e zpro xy.u m gc.e du/lo gin ?url= http s://s earc h.e bscohost.c om /lo gin .a spx? dir e ct= tr u e& db= heh& AN =128333502& sit e = eds-liv e& scope= sit e < A h re f= “h ttp ://e zpro xy.u m gc.e du/lo gin ?url= http s://s earc h.e bscohost.c om /lo gin .a spx? dir e ct= tr u e& db= heh& AN =128333502& sit e = eds-liv e& scope= sit e “> D if fe re nces in th e V alu in g o f P ow er A m ong T e am M em bers : a C ontin gency A ppro ach T o w ard E xam in in g th e E ffe cts o f P ow er V alu es D iv ers it y a nd R ela tio nship C onflic t. < /A > H ealt h B usin ess E lit e D if fe re n ces in t h e V alu in g o f P ow er A m ong T eam M em bers : a C ontin gen cy A ppro ach T o w ard E xam in in g t h e E ffe cts o f P ow er V alu es D iv ers it y a n d R ela tio nsh ip C onflic t P urp ose: T he p urp ose o f th is s tu dy w as to in vestig ate th e c ondit io nal e ffe cts o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd r e la tio nship c onflic t.D esig n/M eth odolo gy/A ppro ach: W e u tiliz ed a tim e-la gged s urv ey d esig n a nd m ult ile vel m odelin g to in vestig ate 6 0 te am s w ork in g o n a p ro je ct ta sk o ver th e c ours e o f 4 p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate w as h ig h, th e p re sence o f h ig h p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y w as p artic ula rly h elp fu l fo r r e ducin g r e la tio nship c onflic t. In tu rn , d ecre ased re la tio nship c onflic t te nded to in cre ase te am p erfo rm ance. A ddit io nally , w hen w ork lo ad s harin g w as lo w , h ig h r e la tio nship c onflic t w as e specia lly h arm fu l to te am perfo rm ance.Im plic atio ns: R esult s s upport th e c onsid era tio n o f te am p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate to b ette r u nders ta nd th e c ondit io ns u nder w hic h p ow er v alu es div ers it y is lik ely to le ssen r e la tio nship c onflic t a nd s ubsequently in cre ase te am p erfo rm ance. F in din gs a ls o h ig hlig ht th e im porta nce o f a void in g lo w w ork lo ad sharin g, in th e p re sence o f p ro m in ent r e la tio nship c onflic t, to in cre ase te am p erfo rm ance.O rig in alit y /V alu e: B y e xam in in g r e la tio nship c onflic t a s a m edia to r a nd partic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate a s a m odera to r o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y ’s e ffe cts , w e m ake a n ovel c ontr ib utio n to e xta nt lit e ra tu re b y h elp in g to e lu cid ate b oth < it a lic > how a lic > a nd < it a lic > under w hat c ondit io ns< /it a lic > d if fe re nces in p ow er v alu es, a m ong te am m em bers , c an in flu ence te am p erfo rm ance. R ela te dly , w e a nsw er th e c all fo r m ore r e searc h th at a dopts a c ontin gency a ppro ach to w ard e xam in in g th e e ffe cts o f v alu es d iv ers it y a nd r e la tio nship c onflic t. In d oin g s o, w e h elp to id entif y th e c ondit io ns u nder w hic h p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd r e la tio nship c onflic t a re lik ely to d if fe re ntia lly in flu ence im porta nt te am o utc om es. Te am s; P ow er v alu es; D iv ers it y ; R ela tio nship c onflic t; T e am p erfo rm ance In tr o ductio n A lt h ough te am d iv ers it y r e searc h h as o fte n fo cused o n s urfa ce-le vel o r d em ogra phic c hara cte ris tic s ( e .g ., a ge, g ender), r e searc hers h ave r e com mended th at m ore a tte ntio n b e p aid to d eep-le vel o r p sycholo gic al d iv ers it y ( e .g ., v alu es; H olle nbeck e t a l. [4 2] ; V an K nip penberg a nd S chip pers [1 1 7] ) , in p art, b ecause it h as b een fo und to e xhib it g re ate r in flu ence o ver tim e ( H arris on e t a l. [3 9] ) . H ow ever, p rio r s tu die s e xam in in g th e e ffe cts o f d iv ers e p sycholo gic al c hara cte ris tic s have o fte n fo cused o n p ers onalit y tr a it s a nd/o r a ttit u des ( e .g ., H arris on e t a l. [3 8] ; M oham med a nd A ngell [7 8] ) a nd h ave la rg ely ig nore d th e in flu ence o f v alu es div ers it y w it h in te am s ( B ell [6 ] ) . P ow er v alu es d iv ers it y , o r d if fe re nces in th e d esir e to a tta in s ocia l s ta tu s a nd p re stig e, a s w ell a s s ocia l in flu ence o r c ontr o l o ver o th ers , m ay b e e specia lly im porta nt to c onsid er, in te am s, b ecause s uch d iv ers it y r e pre sents d if fe re nces in p ers onal, m otiv atio nal g oals r e gard in g s ocia l in te ra ctio ns ( S chw artz [9 6] ) . A ccord in g to Z it e k a nd T ie dens ( [1 25] ) , “ P eople a re e xposed to h ie ra rc hy fr o m th e e arlie st m om ents in th eir liv es, s in ce p are nt- c hild r e la tio nship s a re ty pic ally h ie ra rc hic al, a nd c ontin ue to b e e xposed to it th ro ughout th eir liv es in a lm ost e very o rg aniz atio n a nd g ro up th ey e ncounte r” ( p . 3 ). G iv en th e s alie nce o f a d om in ance/s ubm is sio n d im ensio n in in te rp ers onal r e la tio ns ( e .g ., L onner [6 8] ) , th e w id espre ad u se o f te am s in m odern o rg aniz atio ns ( S ala s e t a l. [9 5] ; T a nnenbaum e t a l. [1 1 3] ) , a nd a g ro w in g in te re st in p ow er a nd s ta tu s d if fe re nces in s uch te am s ( e .g ., A im e e t a l. [1 ] ; B enders ky a nd S hah [8 ] ) , it is u nfo rtu nate th at te am r e searc h o n p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y is c om para tiv ely la ckin g. T here fo re , in a n e ffo rt to in vestig ate p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y , in te am s, w e fo cus o n r e la tio nship c onflic t ( te nsio n a nd a nim osit y b etw een te am m em bers ) a s a p ro xim al o utc om e a nd p ote ntia l m edia to r o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y ’s e ffe cts o n te am p erfo rm ance. P ast r e searc h in dic ate s th at r e la tio nship c onflic t a ris es fr o m dif fe re nces in v alu es ( e .g ., C hun a nd C hoi [2 3] ; D e D re u [2 5] ; G re er a nd J ehn [3 7] ) a nd h as a h arm fu l im pact o n te am p erfo rm ance ( e .g ., D e D re u a nd W ein gart [2 7] ; d e W it e t a l. [2 9] ; O ʼN eill e t a l. [8 3] ) . T here fo re , h ig hlig htin g c ondit io ns th at m ay m in im iz e th e o ccurre nce o f r e la tio nship c onflic t a nd it s d etr im enta l c onsequences h as im porta nt im plic atio ns fo r b oth r e searc h a nd p ra ctic e. A doptin g a c ontin gency a ppro ach to w ard in vestig atin g p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y is e specia lly im porta nt b ecause d if fe re nces in p ow er v alu es m ay h ave e it h er com ple m enta ry o r c onflic tin g e ffe cts o n te am o utc om es. O n o ne h and, d if fe re nces in p ow er v alu es, a m ong te am m em bers , m ay in cre ase r e la tio nship c onflic t on th e b asis o f m em ber d is sim ila rit y ( e .g ., B yrn e [1 4] ; W oehr e t a l. [1 23] ) . O n th e o th er h and, r e searc h o n d om in ance c om ple m enta rit y s uggests th at te am mate s w ho d em onstr a te a ssertiv e c hara cte ris tic s c an w ork b ette r w it h th ose w ho a ssum e m ore p assiv e r o le s, a nd v ic e v ers a ( K ie sle r [5 9] ; K ris to f- B ro w n et a l. [6 4] ) . In o th er w ord s, te am s c onsis tin g o f m em bers w ho a re m otiv ate d to a tta in c ontr o l o ver te am mate s, in a ddit io n to m em bers w ho w ould r a th er d efe r to o th ers , m ay b enefit fr o m c om ple m enta ry te am m em ber d esir e s. S pecif ic ally , p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y m ay b e e specia lly r e le vant in te am s c hara cte riz ed b y n o fo rm ally a ppoin te d le ader a nd s ubsta ntia l a uto nom y w it h r e spect to h ow w ork is c om ple te d ( e .g ., s elf – m anaged te am s; H um phre y e t a l. [4 4] ; M anz a nd S im s [7 1] ; S ala s e t a l. [9 4] ) . In s uch te am s, m em bers a re fr e e to s tr u ctu re w ork a m ong th em selv es, a nd c an th ere fo re p re sent th eir c om ple m enta ry p ow er-re la te d m otiv atio ns, p ro vid ed th at th ey fe el e ncoura ged a nd in te rp ers onally s afe to d o s o. T hat is , d if fe re nces in p ow er v alu es c an p ote ntia lly h elp to p ro m ote a m ore d esir a ble d iv is io n o f la bor w it h in a uto nom ously fu nctio nin g te am s, a s m em bers ’ m otiv atio ns fo r c ontr o l a nd d om in ance a re c om ple m enta ry r a th er th an conflic tin g in a m anner th at m ay c ontr ib ute to in te rp ers onal te nsio ns b etw een te am mate s. There fo re , g iv en th e p ote ntia lly c ontr a stin g ( i. e ., c om ple m enta ry v s c onflic tin g) e ffe cts o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y , th e p re sent s tu dy a dopts a c ontin gency appro ach to in vestig ate th e in flu ence o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y o n r e la tio nship c onflic t a nd te am p erfo rm ance. C onceptu ally , w e a dvocate fo r th e p ers pectiv e th at te am -le vel v aria ble s a re b est u nders to od w it h in th eir s it u atio nal c ondit io n a nd in c om bin atio n w it h r e le vant p ro cess-re la te d p henom ena ( e .g ., V an K nip penberg a nd S chip pers [1 1 7] ) . T here fo re , w e in vestig ate w heth er th e p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y -re la tio nship c onflic t lin k d epends o n th e c onte xtu al m odera to r of p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate ( s hare d p erc eptio ns th at th e te am is in te rp ers onally n onth re ate nin g a nd e ncoura gin g o f in volv em ent) , a nd w heth er th e in te ra ctio n of p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate , o n te am p erfo rm ance, is m edia te d b y r e la tio nship c onflic t. F urth erm ore , w e e xam in e w ork lo ad sharin g, o r th e e xte nt to w hic h te am m em bers p erc eiv e th at te am mate s d o th eir e xpecte d s hare o f th e w ork , a s a p ro cess-re la te d m odera to r o f th e lin k b etw een re la tio nship c onflic t a nd te am p erfo rm ance. P artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate a nd w ork lo ad s harin g a re c onnecte d in th at b oth a re m ark ed b y c oncern s a bout e quit y a nd c oopera tio n th at a ccom pany r e la tio nship c onflic t ( e .g ., F olg er [3 4] ; J ehn [5 0] ; R en a nd G ra y [9 1] ; S im ons a nd P ete rs on [1 09] ) . O ur r e searc h p ro vid es th re e k ey c ontr ib utio ns to e xta nt lit e ra tu re . F ir s t, w e e xte nd e xis tin g r e searc h o n p ow er v alu es b y s pecif ic ally a nsw erin g th e c all fo r m ore te am r e searc h o n th is u nder-in vestig ate d b ut “ re le vant a spect o f th e v alu es d om ain ,” ( W oehr e t a l. [1 23] , p .1 1 0). A lt h ough m ult ip le s tu die s h ave d em onstr a te d th e im porta nce o f p ow er v alu es in p re dic tin g a v arie ty o f in div id ual- le vel o utc om es ( e .g ., A rth aud-D ay e t a l. [3 ] ; B ond e t a l. [1 1 ] ; B re tt a nd O kum ura [1 3] ; R aub and R obert [9 0] ; S chw artz [1 01] , [1 02] ) , o nly a s m all n um ber o f s tu die s h as in vestig ate d p ow er v alu es in te am s ( e .g ., A rth aud-D ay e t a l. [3 ] ; W oehr e t a l. [1 23] ). M ore over, e ven fe w er s tu die s h ave e xplo re d d iv ers it y o f p ow er v alu es in te am s, d espit e b oth e m pir ic al ( W oehr e t a l. [1 23] ) a nd c onceptu al w ork ( e .g ., S chw artz [9 9] , [1 00] , [1 03] , [1 04] ) s uggestin g th at s uch d iv ers it y is lin ked to te am r e la tio nship c onflic t. S econd, w e a dopt a c ontin gency p ers pectiv e in e xam in in g p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y ’s e ffe cts . P rio r w ork o n p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y h as e m phasiz ed o nly m ain e ffe cts ( W oehr e t a l. [1 23] ) . H ow ever, w e a nsw er th e c all o f te am d iv ers it y r e searc hers w ho h ave a dvocate d fo r m ore c om ple x m odels th at c onsid er b oth m odera tin g a nd m edia tin g v aria ble s in v alu es d iv ers it y r e searc h ( V an K nip penberg a nd S chip pers [1 1 7] ) . T hat is , b y e xam in in g p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate a s a m odera to r a nd r e la tio nship c onflic t a s a m edia to r o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y ’s e ffe cts , w e m ake a n ovel c ontr ib utio n to e xta nt lit e ra tu re b y h elp in g to e lu cid ate b oth h ow a nd u nder w hat c ondit io ns p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y c an in flu ence te am p erfo rm ance. T hir d , r e searc hers h ave s im ila rly a dvocate d fo r a c ontin gency a ppro ach in e xam in in g th e e ffe cts o f r e la tio nship c onflic t ( e .g ., d e W it e t a l. [2 9] ; S haw e t a l. [1 07] ). In th eir m eta -a naly sis o f th e in tr a gro up c onflic t lit e ra tu re , d e W it e t a l. ( [2 9] ) s pecif ic ally c alle d fo r m ore w ork th at e xam in es th e c ondit io ns u nder w hic h perfo rm ance o utc om es o f p ro je ct ta sks m ay b e d if fe re ntia lly in flu enced b y r e la tio nship c onflic t. T here fo re , th e p re sent s tu dy u tiliz es a p ro je ct ta sk to in vestig ate w ork lo ad s harin g a s a m odera to r th at m ay b ette r e lu cid ate th e c ondit io ns u nder w hic h r e la tio nship c onflic t is m ore lik ely to d ele te rio usly im pact te am perfo rm ance. P ow er V alu es A ccord in g to S chw artz ( S chw artz [9 6] , S chw artz [9 7] ) , p ow er v alu es r e fe r to p ers onal, m otiv atio nal g oals fo cused o n th e a tta in m ent o f s ocia l s ta tu s a nd pre stig e, a s w ell a s in flu ence o r c ontr o l o ver p eople a nd r e sourc es. L ik e o th er v alu es, th ey tr a nscend s pecif ic s it u atio ns a nd g uid e th e e valu atio n o f a ctio ns, polic ie s, p eople , a nd e vents . A lt h ough p ow er v alu es m ay b e u nim porta nt to o ne in div id ual, th ey m ay b e v ery im porta nt to a noth er ( B ard i a nd S chw artz [4 ] ) . T hat is , w here as in div id uals w ho a re h ig h o n p ow er v alu es a re g re atly m otiv ate d to a tta in c ontr o l o ver o th ers , a s w ell a s s ocia l s ta tu s a nd p re stig e, th ose w ho are lo w o n p ow er v alu es h ave lit tle d esir e fo r p ow er o r s ta tu s, a nd a re m ore m otiv ate d to a ccept th e s ocia l e nvir o nm ent a s it is r a th er th an tr y to c ontr o l it . M ore over, s im ila r to o th er v alu es, p ow er v alu es m ay s erv e a s c rit e ria th at p ro vid e s ocia l ju stif ic atio n fo r d ecis io ns a nd a ctio ns ( R okeach [9 3] ; S chw artz [9 6] ) . Past r e searc h h as s how n th at p ow er v alu es a re r e la te d to b ehavio ra l in te ntio ns ( F eath er [3 3] ) , w hic h in dic ate s th at in div id uals d esir e to a ct in a m anner congru ent w it h th eir p ow er v alu es. F urth erm ore , m ult ip le s tu die s h ave d em onstr a te d th at p ow er v alu es p re dic t b ehavio r c onsis te nt w it h th eir m otiv atio nal g oals ( e .g ., B ard i a nd S chw artz [4 ] ; S chw artz [1 02] ) , in clu din g p re ssurin g o th ers to g o a lo ng w it h p re fe re nces o r o pin io ns a nd c hoosin g fr ie nds b ased o n p erc eiv ed fin ancia l r e sourc es. A ddit io nally , p ow er v alu es h ave b een fo und to in flu ence th e d egre e o f o rg aniz atio nal in volv em ent, p ro socia l b ehavio r ( S chw artz [1 02] ) , tr u st in o th ers ( S chw artz [1 01] ) , a nd c oopera tio n w it h o th ers ( S chw artz [9 8] ) . T hey h ave a ls o b een s how n to p la y a n im porta nt r o le in v ocatio nal c hoic e, c opin g sty le s, c onflic t r e solu tio n ( B ond e t a l. [1 1 ] ) , n egotia tio n s chem as ( B re tt a nd O kum ura [1 3] ) , a nd d ecis io n-m akin g ( S chw artz e t a l. [1 05] ) . T o o ur k now le dge, o nly a s in gle s tu dy h as e xam in ed th e r e la tio nship b etw een p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd r e la tio nship c onflic t. In a s am ple o f u nderg ra duate s tu dents , W oehr e t a l. ( [1 23] ) c onducte d a la bora to ry s tu dy, w here by o ver th e c ours e o f a ppro xim ate ly 7 5 fo r a nd b uild a b rid ge-lik e s tr u ctu re . R esult s d em onstr a te d th at p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y w as p osit iv ely c orre la te d w it h r e la tio nship c onflic t, th ere by d em onstr a tin g it s p ro m is e fo r fu tu re in vestig atio n. H ow ever, th e a uth ors n ote d m ult ip le lim it a tio ns o f th eir s tu dy. S pecif ic ally , th ere w as n o in clu sio n o f m odera tin g v aria ble s, w hic h is h ig hly in consis te nt w it h th e c ontin gency a ppro ach th at h as b een r e com mended fo r th e g enera l te am d iv ers it y ( e .g ., V an K nip penberg a nd S chip pers [1 1 7] ) , v alu es d iv ers it y ( e .g ., V an K nip penberg a nd S chip pers [1 1 7] ) , a nd c onflic t ( e .g ., d e W it e t a l. [2 9] ; S haw e t a l. [1 07] ) lit e ra tu re s. In a ddit io n, th e a uth ors h ig hlig hte d th e fa ct th at fin din gs o f th eir s tu dy “ m ay b e q uit e d if fe re nt a m ong te am s o f lo nger lif e s pans, p urs uin g d if fe re nt o r m ult ip le ta sks, a nd o pera tin g in a m uch le ss c ontr o lle d e nvir o nm ent” ( W oehr e t a l. [1 23] , p . 1 1 8). T hus, fu tu re in vestig atio n in to th e r e la tio nship b etw een p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd r e la tio nship c onflic t is w arra nte d ( W oehr e t a l. [1 23] ) . R ela tio nsh ip C onflic t R ela tio nship c onflic t r e fe rs to d is agre em ents a m ong te am m em bers s te m min g fr o m in te rp ers onal in com patib ilit ie s a nd is c hara cte riz ed b y te nsio n, a nnoyance, anger, a nd a nim osit y ( J ehn [5 0] ; J ehn a nd M annix [5 2] ) . B ased o n p ast v alu es a nd c onflic t r e searc h, r e la tio nship c onflic t w as id entif ie d a s a n im porta nt pro xim al o utc om e a nd p ote ntia l m edia to r o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y ’s e ffe cts . T hat is , r e la tio nship c onflic t w as id entif ie d fo r th re e p rim ary r e asons. F ir s t, p ast re searc h o n v alu es s uggests th at p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y s hould b e lin ked to r e la tio nship c onflic t, a s o pposed to ta sk o r p ro cess c onflic t. M ore s pecif ic ally , w ork o n S chw artz ’s v alu es, w hic h h ave r e ceiv ed c ro ss-c ult u ra l s upport a nd h ave b een c onsid ere d th e m ost r e cogniz ed c onceptu aliz atio n o f v alu es ( s ee H it lin a nd P ilia vin [4 1] ; R ohan [9 2] ) , h as c onsis te ntly a nd e xplic it ly e m phasiz ed th at p ow er v alu es a re in separa bly tie d to a ffe ctiv e a nd/o r e m otio n-re la te d o utc om es ( e .g ., S chw artz [9 9] , [1 00] , [1 03] , [1 04] ) . R ela te dly , r e la tio nship c onflic t, w hic h is o fte n r e fe rre d to a s e m otio nal c onflic t ( e .g ., K acm ar e t a l. [5 6] ; L i a nd H am bric k [6 7] ; S im ons a nd P ete rs on [1 09] ) , is b oth d efin ed a nd m easure d in a m anner in dic atin g a ffe ctiv e c om ponents ( e .g ., J ehn [5 0] ; J ehn a nd M annix [5 2] ) . In c ontr a st, n eit h er ta sk c onflic t n or p ro cess c onflic t is ty pic ally d efin ed o r o pera tio naliz ed in th is m anner ( e .g ., J ehn [5 0] ; J ehn a nd M annix [5 2] ) . S econd, r e la tio nship c onflic t h as b een s uggeste d to a ris e “ w hen m em bers p erc eiv e d is cre pancie s in p ers onalit y , v alu es, o r b elie fs ” ( C hun a nd C hoi [2 3] , p . 439, it a lic s a dded). A ccord in gly , p rio r r e searc h in dic ate s th at r e la tio nship c onflic t is r o ote d in in com patib ilit ie s r e le vant to fu ndam enta l p ers onal d if fe re nces ( e .g ., J ehn [5 0] ) . C onsis te nt w it h th is th in kin g, c onflic t r e searc hers h ave s pecif ic ally n ote d te am m em ber d is agre em ents , b ased o n d if fe rin g p ers onal v alu es, a s exam ple s o f r e la tio nship c onflic t ( e .g ., D e D re u [2 5] ; D e D re u a nd W ein gart [2 7] ; G re er a nd J ehn [3 7] ) . In c ontr a st, ta sk c onflic t d eriv es fr o m d if fe re nt ta sk- re la te d v ie w poin ts o r o pin io ns a bout a g ro up ta sk ( J ehn e t a l. [5 3] ; J ehn a nd M annix [5 2] ; P elle d e t a l. [8 4] ) , a nd p ro cess c onflic t s te m s fr o m d if fe re nt pers pectiv es s pecif ic to h ow th e g ro up ta sk w ill p ro ceed ( J ehn a nd M annix [5 2] ) . T here fo re , ta sk a nd p ro cess c onflic t a re c onceptu ally m ore s im ila r to e ach oth er th an to r e la tio nship c onflic t. S pecif ic ally , w here as r e la tio nship c onflic t is c hara cte riz ed b y in te rp ers onal te nsio n, a nnoyance, a nger, a nd a nim osit y , ta sk conflic t a nd p ro cess c onflic t a re m ore w ork -re la te d a s o pposed to “ p ers onal” ( M artín ez-M ore no e t a l. [7 2] , p .1 59). T hus, w e e xpecte d th at d if fe re nces a m ong te am m em bers , in th eir p ers onal p ow er v alu es, w ere m ore lik ely to a ffe ct r e la tio nship c onflic t, th an ta sk o r p ro cess c onflic t. T a ken to geth er, w e c onte nd th at re searc h in b oth th e v alu es a nd c onflic t lit e ra tu re s s uggests a c le are r lin k b etw een p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd r e la tio nship c onflic t, a s c om pare d to ta sk o r pro cess c onflic t. T hir d , in a ddit io n to p ast w ork c onceptu ally ty in g p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y to r e la tio nship c onflic t, r e cent m eta -a naly tic in vestig atio n h as e xplo re d th e r e la tio nship b etw een th e th re e a fo re m entio ned c onflic t ty pes a nd te am p erfo rm ance, w hen te am p erfo rm ance w as r a te d b y e xperts ( e .g ., c ours e in str u cto rs ) a nd/o r superv is ors ( O ʼN eill e t a l. [8 3] ) . S pecif ic ally , e ffe ct s iz es r e porte d fo r th e r e la tio nship c onflic t- te am p erfo rm ance ( c orre cte d r s uperv is or r a tin gs), ta sk c onflic t- te am p erfo rm ance ( c orre cte d r ( c orre cte d r u nder w hic h it s h arm fu l in flu ence o n te am p erfo rm ance m ay b e m it ig ate d a nd/o r e xacerb ate d. T here fo re , r e la tio nship c onflic t w as id entif ie d a s a k ey m edia tin g pro cess fo r o ur m odel. T heo re tic al D evelo pm en t a n d H yp oth eses T he P ow er V alu es D iv ers it y -R ela tio nsh ip C onflic t L in k ( C om ple m en ta ry V ie w ) Pow er v alu es d iv ers it y m ay a ct a s a d ouble -e dged s w ord in it s in flu ence o n r e la tio nship c onflic t. N ota bly , it is p ossib le th at d if fe re nces in p ow er v alu es m ay h elp t o r e duce r e la tio nship c onflic t. M ore s pecif ic ally , te am m em bers w ho a ttr ib ute g re ate r im porta nce to p ow er v alu es s hould b e m ore m otiv ate d to a ssum e auth orit y o r a tta in p osit io ns o f s ta tu s w it h in th eir te am s. T hat is , th ey a re m ore lik ely to d esir e o pportu nit ie s r e pre senta tiv e o f a n a uth orit a tiv e r o le , s uch a s dele gatin g r e sponsib ilit ie s to o th er te am m em bers . In c ontr a st, m em bers lo w er in p ow er v alu es a re le ss m otiv ate d b y s uch o pportu nit ie s, a nd m ore c om fo rta ble c oopera tin g w it h th e d ir e ctio ns o f th eir te am mate s ( S chw artz [9 6] , [9 7] ) . G iv en th is in fo rm atio n, p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y m ay b e n egativ ely r e la te d to r e la tio nship c onflic t, b ecause d if fe re nces in m em bers ’ p ow er v alu es m ay a llo w fo r c om ple m enta ry fit ( H um phre y e t a l. [4 4] ; K ris to f [6 3] ; M uchin sky a nd M onahan [7 9] ) . In te am s c hara cte riz ed b y c om ple m enta ry fit , m em bers “ fit ” th e te am b ecause th ey a re d if fe re nt th an o th er te am mate s in s om e im porta nt w ay, a nd a re th ere fo re a ble to fill a n eed ( C able a nd E dw ard s [1 5] ; H um phre y e t a l. [4 4] ; M uchin sky a nd M onahan [7 9] ) . A ccord in g to H um phre y e t a l. ( [4 4] ) , c om ple m enta ry fit m ay expedit e th e c la rif ic atio n o f r o le s w it h in a te am . In te am s w it h h ig h p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y , n ot a ll te am m em bers w ill b e m otiv ate d to o bta in a p osit io n o f s ta tu s or d om in ance ( e .g ., a r o le o f d ele gatio n). T e am m em bers w it h lo w er p ow er v alu es m ay b e m ore c om fo rta ble “ g oin g w it h th e flo w ” a nd d efe rrin g to o th ers , w here as m em bers w it h h ig her p ow er v alu es m ay d esir e th e a uth orit y o f a ssig nin g ta sks to te am mate s. T hus, p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y o ffe rs th e p ote ntia l fo r com ple m enta ry te am r o le s, a s te am mate s a re d if fe re ntia lly m otiv ate d to fill u nm et n eeds w it h in th e te am . The P ow er V alu es D iv ers it y -R ela tio nsh ip C onflic t L in k ( C onflic tin g V ie w ) How ever, it is a ls o p la usib le th at p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y m ay b e p osit iv ely r e la te d to r e la tio nship c onflic t. A s s uggeste d b y th e s im ila rit y a ttr a ctio n p ara dig m (B yrn e [1 4] ) , d is sim ila rit y o f v alu es, b elie fs , a nd a ttit u des m ay d ecre ase in te rp ers onal a ttr a ctio n ( e .g ., M annix a nd N eale [7 0] ) . T hat is , te am m em bers w ho attr ib ute le sser im porta nce to p ow er v alu es m ay p erc eiv e “ p ow er h ungry ” te am mate s a s u ncom fo rta bly d om in eerin g. In a ddit io n, th ose h ig her in p ow er v alu es m ay p erc eiv e te am mate s w ho a re n ot e qually m otiv ate d to a tta in p ow er a s u ndesir a bly la ckin g in te re st in th e ta sk. T hus, d if fe re nces in p ow er v alu es m ay cre ate te nsio n a nd a nim osit y in te am m em ber in te ra ctio ns. C onsid erin g th ese p ossib ilit ie s, w e p osit th at w heth er p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y y ie ld s c om ple m enta ry o r c onflic tin g e ffe cts w ill d epend o n c erta in c ondit io ns. A C ontin gen cy A ppro ach Brid gin g r e com mendatio ns fr o m s chola rs in b oth th e te am d iv ers it y a nd c onflic t lit e ra tu re s ( e .g ., d e W it e t a l. [2 9] ; S haw e t a l. [1 07] ; V an K nip penberg a nd S chip pers [1 1 7] ) , w e p re sent a c ontin gency a ppro ach in w hic h th e p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y -re la tio nship c onflic t lin k d epends o n p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate , a nd th e r e la tio nship c onflic t- te am p erfo rm ance lin k d epends o n w ork lo ad s harin g. B ecause r e la tio nship c onflic t h as b een id entif ie d a s a d estr u ctiv e fo rm o f te am m em ber d is agre em ent a nd h as c onsis te ntly b een s how n to h ave n egativ e e ffe cts o n te am p erfo rm ance ( e .g ., D e D re u a nd W ein gart [2 7] ; d e W it e t a l. [2 9] ; O ’N eill e t a l. [8 3] ) , c onsid erin g m odera tin g v aria ble s th at h elp to r e duce r e la tio nship c onflic t, a s w ell a s it s h arm fu l im pact o n te am p erfo rm ance, h as m eanin gfu l im plic atio ns fo r p ra ctic e. R ela te dly , w e c onte nd th at te am -le vel v aria ble s a re b est u nders to od b y jo in tly fo cusin g o n d is tin ct a spects o f th e s it u atio n a nd r e le vant pro cesses ( e .g ., V an K nip penberg a nd S chip pers [1 1 7] ) . In deed, c onte xt a nd p ro cess a re tw o k ey c ontin gency fa cto r c ate gorie s th at h ave b een id entif ie d a s im porta nt to in vestig ate in th e g enera l te am ( e .g ., C am pio n e t a l. [1 6] , [1 7] ) , te am d iv ers it y ( e .g ., J oshi a nd R oh [5 5] ; V an K nip penberg a nd S chip pers [1 1 7] ) , a nd c onflic t ( e .g ., d e W it e t a l. [2 9] ; J ehn e t a l. [5 4] ; M anata [6 9] ; S haw e t a l. [1 07] ) lit e ra tu re s. In th e p re sent s tu dy, w e fe atu re o ne c onte xtu al m odera to r ( p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate ) a nd o ne p ro cess-re la te d m odera to r ( w ork lo ad s harin g) in o ur s tu dy m odel. C lim ate is a k ey c onte xtu al v aria ble in th e te am , d iv ers it y , a nd c onflic t lit e ra tu re s ( e .g ., B ra dle y e t a l. [1 2] ; F ra zie r a nd B ow le r [3 5] ; W ang e t a l. [1 1 9] ) , a nd w ork lo ad s harin g h as b een id entif ie d a s a n im porta nt te am p ro cess th at “ e nhances e ffe ctiv eness b y p re ventin g s ocia l- lo afin g o r fr e e r id in g” ( C am pio n e t a l. [ 1 6] , p . 8 30). U niq uely r e pre sentin g c onte xt a nd p ro cess, r e spectiv ely , p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate a nd w ork lo ad s harin g a re tie d to geth er in th at b oth a re c hara cte riz ed b y c oncern s o ver e quit y a nd c oopera tio n th at a ccom pany r e la tio nship c onflic t ( e .g ., F olg er [3 4] ; J ehn [5 0] ; R en a nd G ra y [9 1] ; S im ons a nd P ete rs on [1 09] ) . W here as p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate c aptu re s p erc eptio ns o f e quit y in d is cussio ns a nd d ecis io n m akin g ( A nders on a nd W est [2 ] ; W est [1 20] ) , w ork lo ad s harin g r e fle cts p erc eptio ns o f e quit y r e gard in g te am m em bers fu lf illin g th eir s hare o f r e sponsib ilit ie s ( E re z e t a l. [3 1] ; M urp hy e t a l. [8 1] ) . M ore over, w here as r e la tio nship c onflic t h as b een s uggeste d to d ecre ase c oopera tio n a m ong te am m em bers ( e .g ., J ehn [5 0] ) , p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate a nd w ork lo ad sharin g h ave b een s uggeste d to in cre ase c oopera tio n ( e .g ., C arle ss a nd D e P aola [1 8] ; W est [1 20] ) . S pecif ic ally , th e p re sence o f a h ig h p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate is c hara cte riz ed b y c oopera tio n in e ncoura gin g te am m em bers to fe el s ocia lly c om fo rta ble a nd p ro m otin g p artic ip atio n in d ecis io n-m akin g. S im ila rly , th e pre sence o f h ig h w ork lo ad s harin g is c hara cte riz ed b y te am m em bers c oopera tin g w it h e ach o th er in d oin g th eir e xpecte d s hare o f te am work . T here fo re , g iv en th at p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate a nd w ork lo ad s harin g a re c onnecte d v ia th eir im porta nce to g ro up c oncern s o ver e quit y a nd c oopera tio n, w hic h m ay b e heig hte ned b y r e la tio nship c onflic t ( e .g ., F olg er [3 4] ; J ehn [5 0] ; R en a nd G ra y [9 1] ; S im ons a nd P ete rs on [1 09] ) , w e e xpect th at p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate a nd w ork lo ad s harin g m ay b e p artic ula rly w ell- s uit e d fo r in vestig atio n a s m odera to rs in th e c urre nt s tu dy. P artic ip ativ e S afe ty C lim ate a s a M odera to r o f t h e P ow er V alu es D iv ers it y -R ela tio nsh ip … A s d iv ers it y s chola rs h ave a dvocate d a nd m eta -a naly ses d em onstr a te , v aria tio n in d iv ers it y e ffe cts is o fte n d ue to m odera to rs ( e .g ., J oshi a nd R oh [5 5] ; V an D ijk e t a l. [1 1 5] ; V an K nip penberg a nd S chip pers [1 1 7] ) . J oshi a nd R oh’s ( [5 5] ) m eta -a naly sis fo und th at d iv ers it y e ffe cts d ouble d o r tr ip le d in s iz e a fte r accountin g fo r m odera tin g c onte xtu al v aria ble s. In a r e vie w o f th e d iv ers it y lit e ra tu re , J ackson a nd J oshi ( [4 7] ) lis te d c ult u re a nd c lim ate a s k ey c onte xtu al m odera to rs th at r e searc hers s hould c ontin ue to in vestig ate . B uild in g o n th is r e searc h, w e in vestig ate th e in te ra ctiv e e ffe cts o f p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate a nd pow er v alu es d iv ers it y o n r e la tio nship c onflic t. P artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate r e fe rs to s hare d p erc eptio ns th at th e te am is in te rp ers onally n onth re ate nin g a nd e ncoura gin g o f in volv em ent ( A nders on a nd W est [2 ] ; P elt o korp i a nd H asu [8 5] ; P ir o la -M erlo e t a l. [8 6] ; W est [1 20] ) . In te am s w it h a h ig h p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate , m em bers a re e ncoura ged to p artic ip ate in d is cussio ns a nd d ecis io n-m akin g, a s th ey p erc eiv e th e te am c lim ate to b e s upportiv e. T his c lim ate o f r e spect w it h in te am s a llo w s m em bers to fe el c om fo rta ble expre ssin g id eas w it h out fe ar o f b ein g d is re gard ed o r n egativ ely p erc eiv ed ( A nders on a nd W est [2 ] ; P elt o korp i a nd H asu [8 5] ; P ir o la -M erlo e t a l. [8 6] ; W est [1 20] ) . P artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate is a n e specia lly im porta nt fa cto r to c onsid er in o ur m odel b ecause d om in ance, a m otiv atio nal g oal a ssocia te d w it h p ow er v alu es, can b e p erc eiv ed a s th re ate nin g a nd th ere by r e duce c oopera tio n a nd in cre ase c onflic t ( C arli e t a l. [1 9] ) . H ence, th e d egre e to w hic h th e te am h as e sta blis hed an a tm osphere o f o pen, s upportiv e, a nd fr e e c om munic atio n a m ong m em bers is c le arly r e le vant. T hat is , th e in flu ence o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y o n r e la tio nship c onflic t is lik ely to d epend o n w heth er g ro up m em bers s hare p erc eptio ns th at th e te am is in te rp ers onally n onth re ate nin g a nd e ncoura gin g o f in volv em ent. W e th ere fo re id entif y p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate a s a d ete rm in in g fa cto r in w heth er th e b enefit s o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y y ie ld m ore c om ple m enta ry o r c onflic tin g effe cts in te am s. B ecause it h elp s to fa cilit a te m utu al u nders ta ndin g o f te am m em bers ’ in te rp ers onal m otiv atio ns a nd b ehavio rs , p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate m ay h elp to r e duce m is attr ib utio ns p re sente d b y d if fe rin g p ow er v alu es a nd th us lim it r e la tio nship c onflic t. S pecif ic ally , w hen th e te am c lim ate is n onth re ate nin g, r e spectfu l, a nd e ncoura gin g o f c om munic atio n, m em bers a re lik ely to b e m ore c om fo rta ble a ro und te am mate s a nd le ss o ffe nded b y th ose w ho d esir e to a ssum e p osit io ns o f d om in ance w it h in th e te am . M ore over, th ere m ay b e a g re ate r p ro babilit y th at te am m em ber v alu es a nd s ubsequent r o le s w ill c om ple m ent r a th er th an c onflic t w it h o ne a noth er w hen p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate is h ig h. T he p ro cess o f n egotia tin g ro le s is a c ru cia l s te p in th e fo rm atio n o f te am s ( Ilg en e t a l. [4 5] ) , a nd it m ay c ause c onflic t b etw een te am m em bers w ho d esir e s im ila r r o le s. H ow ever, u nder a h ig h p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate , te am mate s m ay m ore e asily a gre e o n w ho w ill fu lf ill c erta in d utie s w it h in th e te am , a s a c lim ate c hara cte riz ed b y c om fo rt a nd re spect h as b een e sta blis hed ( A nders on a nd W est [2 ] ; W est [1 20] ) .In a ddit io n, c onsis te nt w it h th eory o n c om ple m enta ry fit ( H um phre y e t a l. [4 4] ) , te am m em bers w ho a ttr ib ute d if fe rin g le vels o f im porta nce to p ow er v alu es w ill h ave m ore c om ple m enta ry m otiv atio ns r e gard in g d esir e d te am r o le s. T e am m em bers w ho w is h to d ele gate w ork w ill n eed te am mate s w ho a re w illin g to ta ke o n th ese r e sponsib ilit ie s ( M ein dl [7 7] ) . A s te am m em bers a re a ble to m ore e asily a ssum e c om patib le d utie s th at a re c onsis te nt w it h th eir o w n p ers onal v alu es, th ey m ay n ot o nly b e m ore c onte nt w it h th eir o w n p la ce in th e te am , b ut a ls o w it h th e p la ce o f th eir te am mate s, lo w erin g th e p ossib ilit y o f r e la tio nship c onflic t. H ypoth esis 1 : P artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate w ill m odera te th e a ssocia tio n b etw een p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd r e la tio nship c onflic t: W hen p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate is h ig her ( v s lo w er), th e a ssocia tio n b etw een p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd r e la tio nship c onflic t w ill b e m ore n egativ e. T he C ondit io nal In dir e ct E ffe ct o f P ow er V alu es D iv ers it y T hus fa r, w e h ave p ro posed th at th e in te ra ctio n o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate w ill p re dic t r e la tio nship c onflic t. S pecif ic ally , a s partic ip ativ e c lim ate in cre ases, p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y w ill b e m ore c onduciv e to r e ducin g r e la tio nship c onflic t, b ased o n c ondit io ns p ro m otin g c om ple m enta ry fit ( H um phre y e t a l. [4 4] ) . S ubsequently , it is e xpecte d th at r e la tio nship c onflic t w ill b e n egativ ely r e la te d to te am p erfo rm ance. R ela tio nship c onflic t m ay n egativ ely in flu ence th e in fo rm atio n p ro cessin g a bilit y o f te am m em bers , a s tim e a nd a tte ntio nal r e sourc es a re e xpended o n in te rp ers onal p ro ble m s r a th er th an te am ta sks ( E van [3 2] ; J ehn a nd M annix [5 2] ; S im ons a nd P ete rs on [1 09] ) . T hat is , r e la tio nship c onflic t m ay d etr im enta lly im pact te am s b y d is tr a ctin g m em bers a nd r e str ic tin g th e a tte ntio n th at th ey c an d evote to te am r e sponsib ilit ie s. A ddit io nally , r e la tio nship c onflic t h as b een suggeste d to g enera te n egativ e e m otio ns a nd a ttit u des th at m ay r e duce c oopera tio n a m ong te am m em bers a nd d ecre ase th eir e ffo rts ( C hoi a nd S y [2 2] ; J ehn et a l. [5 1] ) . S upportiv e o f th is r a tio nale , th re e m eta -a naly ses h ave fo und r e la tio nship c onflic t to b e n egativ ely a ssocia te d w it h te am p erfo rm ance ( D e D re u a nd W ein gart [2 7] ; d e W it e t a l. [2 9] ; O ’N eill e t a l. [8 3] ) . There fo re , if th e c om bin ed p re sence o f h ig h p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd a h ig h p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate le ssens r e la tio nship c onflic t, th en te am p erfo rm ance should s ubsequently in cre ase. T hat is , c onsis te nt w it h o ur c ontin gency a ppro ach to w ard in vestig atin g p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y ’s e ffe cts , w e p ro pose th at th e m echanis m b y w hic h th e in te ra ctio n o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate p osit iv ely in flu ences te am p erfo rm ance, is th ro ugh r e la tio nship c onflic t. A s r e la tio nship c onflic t is r e duced, m em bers m ay m ore e asily d evote th eir tim e a nd e ffo rts to w ard c om ple tin g te am ta sks a s o pposed to m anagin g te nse d is agre em ents a nd a nim osit ie s. H ence, th e fo llo w in g w as p re dic te d: H ypoth esis 2 : T here w ill b e a p osit iv e in dir e ct e ffe ct o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y o n te am p erfo rm ance, th ro ugh r e la tio nship c onflic t, w hen p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate is h ig her ( v s lo w er). W ork lo ad S harin g a s a M odera to r o f t h e R ela tio nsh ip C onflic t-T eam P erfo rm an ce L in k A lt h ough th re e m eta -a naly ses h ave d em onstr a te d r e la tio nship c onflic t’s n egativ e e ffe cts o n te am p erfo rm ance, th ere h as c onsis te ntly b een e vid ence o f substa ntia l h ete ro geneit y in e ffe ct s iz es, in dic atin g th e p re sence o f m odera to rs ( D e D re u a nd W ein gart [2 7] ; d e W it e t a l. [2 9] ; O ʼN eill e t a l. [8 3] ) . T here fo re , schola rs h ave c alle d fo r fu rth er in vestig atio n o f m odera to rs r e le vant to th e r e la tio nship c onflic t- te am p erfo rm ance lin k ( e .g ., d e W it e t a l. [2 9] ) . B ecause o f it s d etr im enta l im pact, it is im porta nt to fin d w ays to a m elio ra te r e la tio nship c onflic t’s n egativ e c onsequences fo r te am p erfo rm ance, b oth th eore tic ally a nd pra ctic ally ( R en a nd G ra y [9 1] ) . A ddre ssin g th ese n eeds, w e e xam in e w ork lo ad s harin g a s a m otiv atio n-re la te d te am p ro cess v aria ble a nd m odera to r (C am pio n e t a l. [1 6] , [1 7] ; E re z e t a l. [3 1] ) . P rio r s tu die s c onsid erin g h ow to m anage r e la tio nship c onflic t h ave te nded to fo cus o n r e pair in g th e r e la tio nship th ro ugh v ario us c onflic t r e sponse s ty le s ( e .g ., c olla bora tin g, a void in g, o r c onte ndin g r e sponses; D e D re u a nd V an V ia nen [2 6] ) o r r e sto ra tio n a ctio ns ( e .g ., a polo gie s, p enance, d em onstr a tin g c oncern ; R en and G ra y [9 1] ) . H ow ever, in r e al- tim e, te am p erfo rm ance d em ands a re lik ely to c ontin ue w hile m em bers a re w ork in g o ut th eir d if fe re nces, w hic h m ay n ot b e re solv ed in th e s hort te rm . T here fo re , r a th er th an c oncentr a te o n th e p ote ntia lly tim e-c onsum in g r e pair o f b it te r h ostilit ie s, w e fo cus m ore o n a ctu al te am work a nd r e le vant p ro cesses in th e p re sence o f in te rp ers onal te nsio ns. T hat is , w e s eek to d ete rm in e w heth er r e la tio nship c onflic t’s n egativ e e ffe cts o n te am perfo rm ance a re e xacerb ate d w hen te am m em bers a re p erc eiv ed a s n ot d oin g th eir s hare o f th e w ork lo ad, in th e fa ce o f a nnoyance a nd a nim osit y . H ig h le vels o f w ork lo ad s harin g h ave b een s how n to h ave p osit iv e e ffe cts o n b ehavio ra l m easure s o f te am p ro ductiv it y a nd m anageria l ju dgm ents o f te am e ffe ctiv eness (e .g ., C am pio n e t a l. [1 6] , [1 7] ) . In c ontr a st, th e p erc eptio n th at te am mate s a re n egle ctfu l o f th eir d utie s h as b een fo und to b e d etr im enta l to te am fu nctio nin g (J assaw alla e t a l. [4 9] ) . T here fo re , w e fo cus o n th e in te ra ctiv e e ffe cts o f w ork lo ad s harin g b ecause it h as th e p ote ntia l to e xacerb ate p erfo rm ance d ecre m ents w hen in te rp ers onal in com patib ilit ie s a m ong m em bers e xis t. W e p osit th at th e d egre e to w hic h r e la tio nship c onflic t tr a nsla te s in to d ecre ased p erfo rm ance d epends o n th e e xte nt to w hic h m em bers p erc eiv e th at te am mate s c om ple te r e sponsib ilit ie s a s e xpecte d. S pecif ic ally , it is m ore p ro bable th at r e la tio nship c onflic t w ill n egativ ely im pact p erfo rm ance u nder lo w er w ork lo ad s harin g c ondit io ns. W hen m em bers d o n ot c om ple te th eir e xpecte d s hare o f r e sponsib ilit ie s, h ig h r e la tio nship c onflic t is e specia lly lik ely to r e sult in d ecre ased p erfo rm ance. A s fr u str a te d te am m em bers s plit th eir a tte ntio n b etw een m anagin g in te rp ers onal te nsio ns a nd c om ple tin g n egle cte d w ork , in a ddit io n to fu lf illin g n orm al r e sponsib ilit ie s to m eet p ro je ct d eadlin es, te am p erfo rm ance is lik ely to s uffe r. F urth er, c onsis te nt w it h th e n egativ it y b ia s ( K anouse a nd H anson [5 7] ) , e vents o f a n egativ e n atu re s hould h ave m ore o f a n in flu ence o n te am m em bers ’ c ognit io n a nd b ehavio r th an n eutr a l o r p osit iv e e vents . F or exam ple , a n in sta nce o f th e te am n ot c om ple tin g a d eliv era ble m ay b e m uch m ore s alie nt to m em bers th an a n in sta nce o f th e te am c om ple tin g a ta sk. T his m ay b e p artic ula rly r e le vant w hen th ere a re h ig h le vels o f te nsio n a nd a nim osit y b etw een te am m em bers . A s m em bers d o n ot c om ple te th e w ork e xpecte d o f th em , a lr e ady h ig h le vels o f a nim osit y m ay b ecom e e ven m ore d is tr a ctin g. G iv en th e h ig h le vel o f in te rp ers onal te nsio n p re sent, te am m em bers m ay p erc eiv e th at th ey a re b ein g e xplo it e d o r e ven r e ta lia te d a gain st w hen te am work is le ft u nfin is hed. In tu rn , th ey m ay r e duce th eir e ffo rts , u lt im ate ly d ecre asin g th e a m ount of a tte ntio n d evote d to a ccom plis hin g th e te am ta sk ( K err [5 8] ) . M ore over, te am m em bers m ay lo w er th eir g oals fo r th e g ro up, a s p erc eptio ns o f w ork lo ad in equit y m ay in cre ase a nd fu rth er d em otiv ate m em bers to p erfo rm th eir b est ( M ulv ey a nd K le in [8 0] ) . C onsid erin g th ese p oin ts , th e fo llo w in g w as p re dic te d: H ypoth esis 3 : W ork lo ad s harin g w ill m odera te th e a ssocia tio n b etw een r e la tio nship c onflic t a nd te am p erfo rm ance: W hen w ork lo ad s harin g is lo w er ( v s h ig her), th e a ssocia tio n b etw een r e la tio nship c onflic t a nd te am p erfo rm ance w ill b e m ore n egativ e. M eth od S am ple T he p re sent s tu dy in clu ded 3 05 s tu dents fr o m th e M id -A tla ntic r e gio n o f th e U nit e d S ta te s. P artic ip ants w ere e nro lle d in o ne o f fiv e s ubsectio ns o f a m anagem ent c ours e. In to ta l, 6 0 te am s p artic ip ate d. T e am s r a nged fr o m fo ur to s even m em bers in s iz e, w it h a n a vera ge o f a ppro xim ate ly 5 .1 m em bers p er te am . T e am m em bers w ere 4 5.2 % m ale , a nd o n a vera ge, 2 1.4 B la ck. Team T ask Te am s w ere r e quir e d to w ork o n a p ro je ct o ver th e c ours e o f 4 O utc om e in te rd ependence c hara cte riz ed th e te am ta sk, a s te am mate s w ere lin ked to o ne a noth er w it h r e spect to p ro je ct g ra des ( S hea a nd G uzzo [1 08] ; W agem an [1 1 8] ) . M ore s pecif ic ally , a ll te am m em bers r e ceiv ed th e s am e p ro je ct g ra de, w hic h u lt im ate ly c om pris ed 2 0% o f e ach in div id ual’s fin al c ours e g ra de. To e nsure th at m em bers w ere c onsis te ntly c om munic atin g, d is cussin g p ro gre ss, a nd w ork in g o n te am ta sks, te am s w ere a llo tte d tim e r e gula rly , d urin g c ours e m eetin gs, to w ork o n th e p ro je ct. M ore over, in th e s econd w eek o f th e s em este r, le ctu re s fo cused o n th e to pic o f te am s w it h th e o bje ctiv e o f m akin g s tu dents c onceptu ally a w are o f b asic p rin cip le s o f te am work a nd te am d ynam ic s. M em bers w ere e xplic it ly in str u cte d to a dopt th e c hara cte ris tic s o f s elf – m anaged te am s th ro ughout th eir p ro je ct ( e .g ., a uto nom ously d ete rm in in g p ro to cols , ta sk w ork , m em ber d utie s, d eadlin es fo r s ubta sks; H um phre y e t a l. [4 4] ; M anz a nd S im s [7 1] ; S ala s e t a l. [9 4] ) . T e am s w ere r e sponsib le fo r th e fo llo w in g: ( a ) id entif y in g a c urre nt p ro ble m atic e vent in a n o rg aniz atio n, ( b ) g enera tin g id eas to r e m edy th e p ro ble m , ( c ) d esig nin g a d eta ile d p la n to b e im ple m ente d, a nd ( d ) u sin g e xis tin g r e searc h to e xpla in w hy th e p la n w ould b e s uccessfu l. D ata C olle ctio n P ro ced ure D urin g th e fir s t w eek o f th e c ours e ( tim e 1 ), m em bers c om ple te d a s urv ey th at m easure d th eir o w n p erc eptio n o f p ow er v alu es. A s econd s urv ey m easurin g partic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate , r e la tio nship c onflic t, a nd w ork lo ad s harin g w as a dm in is te re d d urin g th e la st w eek o f th e c ours e ( tim e 2 ). T e am s s ubsequently s ubm it te d th eir p ro je cts o n th e fin al d ay, w hic h w ere e valu ate d b y th e c ours e in str u cto r, w ho a ssig ned e ach te am a n um eric al p erfo rm ance g ra de ( tim e 3 ). F or all d ata c olle ctio n p ro cedure s, p artic ip ants w ere a ssure d th at th eir r e sponses w ould r e m ain c onfid entia l a nd th at d ata w ould o nly b e r e porte d in a ggre gate fo rm . Durin g th e s tu dy, th e in str u cto r w as n ot a w are o f th e p ow er v alu es c om posit io n o f te am s. T he in tr a -te am r e sponse r a te w as 9 9% a t tim e 1 a nd 8 9% a t tim e 2 . M easu re s P ow er v alu es w ere a ssessed v ia fiv e it e m s fr o m th e p ow er s ubscale o f th e S chw artz V alu e S urv ey ( S chw artz [9 6] ) , a nd it e m r e sponses r a nged fr o m − 1 (o pposed to m y v alu es) to 7 ( o f s upre m e im porta nce). E ach te am m em ber r a te d th e im porta nce o f e ach it e m a s a “ m otiv atin g p rin cip le in m y lif e ,” in clu din g “S O CIA L P O W ER ( c ontr o l o ver o th ers , d om in ance).” T he α r e lia bilit y c oeffic ie nt w as.8 3. P artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate w as a ssessed w it h th e fo ur-it e m p artic ip ativ e s afe ty m easure d evelo ped b y K iv im aki a nd E lo vain io ( [6 0] ) , w hic h is a s horte ned vers io n o f th e s cale d evelo ped b y A nders on a nd W est ( [2 ] ) . T he w ord “ P eople ” w as c hanged to “ T e am m em bers ” fo r o ne a pplic able it e m . S pecif ic ally , th e it e m “T e am m em bers fe el u nders to od a nd a ccepte d b y e ach o th er” w as u sed a fte r b ein g a dapte d to in clu de “ te am m em bers ” a s th e r e fe re nt. Ite m r e sponses w ere c oded fr o m 1 , “ s tr o ngly d is agre e,” to 7 , “ s tr o ngly a gre e.” T he α r e lia bilit y w as.8 5. R ela tio nship c onflic t w as m easure d u sin g th re e it e m s a dapte d fr o m th e r e la tio nship c onflic t s cale d evelo ped b y J ehn a nd M annix ( [5 2] ) , in clu din g “ T here w as em otio nal c onflic t in m y w ork g ro up.” Ite m s w ere r a te d o n a s even-p oin t L ik ert s cale fr o m 1 , “ n ot a t a ll, ” to 7 , “ a lo t.” T he α r e lia bilit y fo r th is s cale w as.9 3. W ork lo ad s harin g w as a ssessed w it h fiv e it e m s a dapte d fr o m th e w ork lo ad s harin g m easure u sed b y E re z e t a l. ( [3 1] ) , to in clu de te am m em bers a s th e re fe re nt. A n e xam ple it e m is “ M em bers a dequate ly c om ple te d th eir r e sponsib ilit ie s h ere in th is te am .” Ite m r e sponses r a nged fr o m 1 , “ s tr o ngly d is agre e,” to 7 , “s tr o ngly a gre e.” T he α r e lia bilit y c oeffic ie nt w as.8 8. Te am p erfo rm ance w as a ssessed b y th e c ours e in str u cto r, w ho g ra ded te am s’ fin al p ro je ct r e ports o n a s cale fr o m 0 to 2 5, w it h h ig her s core s r e pre sentin g hig her le vels o f te am p erfo rm ance. C ontr o l V aria b le s Te am s iz e, th e m ean o f p ow er v alu es, a ge d iv ers it y , g ender d iv ers it y , a nd r a ce/e th nic it y d iv ers it y w ere e xam in ed a s c ontr o l v aria ble s. T e am s iz e w as e xam in ed as a c ontr o l v aria ble b ecause la rg er te am s m ay b e m ore h ete ro geneous ( e .g ., J ackson e t a l. [4 6] ) , a nd te am s iz e h as b een fo und to b e a ssocia te d w it h m ult ip le te am o utc om es, in clu din g p erfo rm ance ( e .g ., S om ech [1 11 ] ; W heela n [1 21] ) . F urth erm ore , c onsis te nt w it h r e com mendatio ns o f d iv ers it y s chola rs (B edeia n a nd M osshold er [5 ] ; C ole e t a l. [2 4] ; H arris on a nd K le in [4 0] ) , th e m ean o f p ow er v alu es w as u sed a s a c ontr o l v aria ble . S urfa ce-le vel d iv ers it y c hara cte ris tic s w ere a ls o e xam in ed a s c ovaria te s to d ete rm in e th e e xte nt to w hic h p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y p re dic te d u niq ue v aria nce in o utc om es b eyond th ese backgro und v aria ble s. In a ddit io n, p ast r e searc h h as fo und d em ogra phic d iv ers it y to b e r e la te d to c onflic t ( e .g ., S ta hl e t a l. [1 1 2] ) a nd te am p erfo rm ance ( e .g ., B ell e t a l. [7 ] ) . A ge d iv ers it y w as e xam in ed v ia s ta ndard d evia tio n. G ender R esu lt s P re lim in ary A naly ses a n d A ggre g atio n Ta ble 1 s um mariz es d escrip tiv e s ta tis tic s a nd c orre la tio ns fo r te am -le vel v aria ble s in th e p re sent s tu dy. P ow er v alu es d iv ers it y w as c onceptu aliz ed a s separa tio n d iv ers it y ( H arris on a nd K le in [4 0] ) a nd w as a ssessed u sin g a d is pers io n m odel ( C han [2 0] ) . In div id ual- le vel s core s w ere a ggre gate d to th e te am le vel v ia s ta ndard d evia tio n. T e am p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate , te am r e la tio nship c onflic t, a nd te am w ork lo ad s harin g m easure s w ere a ls o o bta in ed b y aggre gatin g in div id ual- le vel r e sponses to th e te am le vel. H ow ever, b ecause th ey r e pre sent s hare d g ro up p ro pertie s ( K ozlo w ski a nd K le in [6 2] ) , a r e fe re nt- s hif t c onsensus m odel ( C han [2 0] ) w as u tiliz ed. B efo re s core s w ere a ggre gate d, w it h in -g ro up a gre em ent o r c onsensus w as e valu ate d. S pecif ic ally , IC C(1 ) w as u sed to a ssess th e le vel o f c onsensus a nd consis te ncy e xpecte d if a r a te r w as r a ndom ly s ele cte d fr o m th e p opula tio n a nd h is o r h er s core s w ere c om pare d to th e m ean s core o bta in ed fr o m a s am ple o f ra te rs ( B lie se [1 0] ; J am es [4 8] ; L eB re to n a nd S ente r [6 6] ) . IC C(1 ) w as.5 1 fo r p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate ,.3 5 fo r r e la tio nship c onflic t, a nd.4 6 fo r w ork lo ad sharin g. J am es ( [4 8] ) r e porte d a m edia n o bserv ed IC C(1 ) v alu e o f.1 2 in th e in dustr ia l/ o rg aniz atio nal p sycholo gy a nd o rg aniz atio nal b ehavio r lit e ra tu re . IC C(1 ) valu es, in th e c urre nt s tu dy, w ere w ell a bove.1 2. In a ddit io n to IC C(1 ), IC C(2 ) w as c alc ula te d to a ssess th e r e lia bilit y o r s ta bilit y o f te am -le vel m eans. F or IC C(2 ), w e fo llo w ed th e g uid elin e o f v alu es m eetin g o r e xceedin g.7 0 to ju stif y a ggre gatio n ( e .g ., K le in e t a l. [6 1] ; L eana a nd P il [6 5] ) . IC C(2 ) w as.8 4 fo r partic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate ,.7 3 fo r r e la tio nship c onflic t, a nd.8 1 fo r w ork lo ad s harin g. F urth erm ore , b ased o n r e com mendatio ns fr o m p ast r e searc h ( e .g ., L eB re to n a nd S ente r [6 6] ; W oehr e t a l. [1 24] ) , r v alu es w ere c alc ula te d a nd r e porte d fo r te am p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate , te am r e la tio nship c onflic t, a nd te am w ork lo ad s harin g r a tin gs. A u nif o rm n ull d is tr ib utio n w as th eoriz ed to b e m ost a ppro pria te , as w e d id n ot a ssum e a s yste m atic r e sponse b ia s ( L eB re to n a nd S ente r [6 6] ) . F or in sta nce, a le nie ncy b ia s w as th ought to b e u nlik ely , b ecause a ll p artic ip ants w ere a ssure d th at th eir r e sponses w ould r e m ain c onfid entia l a nd w ould o nly b e u sed fo r r e searc h p urp oses. W e fo llo w ed th e h euris tic o f m edia n r v alu es m eetin g o r e xceedin g.7 0 to fu rth er ju stif y a ggre gatio n ( e .g ., M ath ie u e t a l. [7 5] ; M ath ie u a nd S chulz e [7 4] ; R app a nd M ath ie u [8 9] ; S im sek e t a l. [1 1 0] ) , b eyond IC Cs. A lt h ough 4 te am s fo r p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate , 2 1 te am s fo r r e la tio nship c onflic t, a nd 2 2 te am s fo r w ork lo ad s harin g h ad c oeffic ie nts b elo w .7 0, m edia n valu es w ere s till a bove m in im um s ta ndard s. S pecif ic ally , th e m edia n r v alu e w as.8 9 fo r p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate ( M m axim um m in im um v alu es d em onstr a te d a ppro pria te w it h in -te am a gre em ent, ju stif y in g a ggre gatio n to th e te am le vel. C onfir m ato ry F acto r A naly sis C onfir m ato ry fa cto r a naly sis w as u tiliz ed to a ssess th e th eoriz ed fo ur-fa cto r s tr u ctu re o f th e m easure m ent m odel. F it in dic es a s w ell a s C hi- s quare d if fe re nce te sts w ere u sed to d ete rm in e if th e p ro posed m easure m ent m odel fit th e d ata a ppro pria te ly . P ow er v alu es, p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate , r e la tio nship c onflic t, a nd w ork lo ad s harin g w ere e xpecte d to lo ad o n s epara te fa cto rs . T here fo re , th e fo ur-fa cto r m odel w as e xpecte d to p ro vid e th e b est fit to th e d ata a s c om pare d to a lt e rn ativ e m odels . R esult s in dic ate d th at th e h ypoth esiz ed fo ur-fa cto r m easure m ent m odel fit th e d ata r e asonably w ell ( χ ( N S R M R model d id n ot fit th e d ata w ell ( χ ( N (N w ere s et to lo ad o n a s epara te fa cto r th an p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate , r e la tio nship c onflic t, a nd w ork lo ad s harin g, w hic h w ere c om bin ed in to a s in gle fa cto r. F or th e th re e-fa cto r m odel, p ow er v alu es a nd r e la tio nship c onflic t w ere s et to lo ad o n tw o s epara te fa cto rs , w hile p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate a nd w ork lo ad s harin g w ere c om bin ed in to a noth er fa cto r. B oth th e tw o-fa cto r ( χ ( N ( N d f ( N fa cto r ( ∆ χ ( N fo ur-fa cto r m odel, s ta ndard iz ed fa cto r lo adin gs fo r p ow er v alu es ( .7 3,.6 9,.7 4,.6 5,.7 6), r e la tio nship c onflic t ( .8 7,.9 4,.9 1), p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate ( .7 5,.8 4,.7 9,.7 7), a nd w ork lo ad s harin g ( .7 9,.7 8,.8 2,.8 2,.6 7) r a nged fr o m .6 5 to .9 4. A ll it e m s s ig nif ic antly lo aded o n th eir r e spectiv e la te nt fa cto rs ( p S ig nif ic ant c orre la tio ns e xis te d b etw een th e r e la tio nship c onflic t a nd p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate fa cto rs ( e stim ate w ork lo ad s harin g fa cto rs ( e stim ate to geth er, r e sult s s upport th e d is crim in ant v alid it y o f m easure s u sed in th e c urre nt s tu dy. N este d D ata w g(j) w g(j) w g(j) w g(j) 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Because te am s w ere n este d w it h in m anagem ent c ours e s ubsectio ns, IC C(1 ) v alu es w ere c alc ula te d to d ete rm in e th e a m ount o f v aria nce in r e la tio nship c onflic t and te am p erfo rm ance a ttr ib uta ble to s ubsectio n m em bers hip . IC C(1 ) v alu es w ere .0 1 fo r r e la tio nship c onflic t a nd.1 2 fo r te am p erfo rm ance. T hat is , 1 % o f th e varia nce in r e la tio nship c onflic t a nd 1 2% o f th e v aria nce in te am p erfo rm ance w ere fo und to b e a ttr ib uta ble to c ours e s ubsectio ns. B ecause c ours e s ubsectio n had a s m all e ffe ct o n r e la tio nship c onflic t s core s a nd a m ediu m to la rg e e ffe ct o n te am p erfo rm ance s core s ( L eB re to n a nd S ente r [6 6] ) , m ult ile vel m odelin g w as u sed, a nd p re dic to rs w ere g ra nd-m ean c ente re d. T his a llo w ed fo r th e e stim atio n o f le vel 1 ( te am ) e ffe cts w hile a ccountin g fo r le vel 2 ( s ubsectio n) e ffe cts . S pecif ic ally , h ypoth eses w ere a ssessed v ia m ult ile vel p ath a naly sis in M PLU S 7 , u sin g m axim um lik elih ood e stim atio n. B ecause w e d id n ot h ypoth esiz e th at re la tio nship s w ould s ig nif ic antly d if fe r b ased o n s ubsectio n m em bers hip , in te rc epts w ere a llo w ed to v ary a cro ss s ubsectio ns, b ut s lo pes w ere fix ed fo r th e te stin g o f a ll le vel 1 ( te am -le vel) r e la tio nship s. H yp oth eses T estin g H ypoth esis 1 p re dic te d th at p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate w ould m odera te th e r e la tio nship b etw een p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd r e la tio nship c onflic t. W hile c ontr o llin g fo r a ge d iv ers it y , g ender d iv ers it y , r a ce/e th nic it y d iv ers it y , te am s iz e, a nd th e m ean le vel o f p ow er v alu es, w e fo und a s ig nif ic ant in te ra ctio n b etw een pow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate in p re dic tin g r e la tio nship c onflic t ( γ 1 2% o f th e v aria nce in r e la tio nship c onflic t b eyond c ontr o ls a nd m ain e ffe cts . A p lo t o f th e s im ple s lo pes a t o ne s ta ndard d evia tio n a bove a nd b elo w th e m ean re veale d th at th e fo rm o f th e in te ra ctio n w as c onsis te nt w it h p re dic tio ns ( s ee F ig . 1 ). P ow er v alu es d iv ers it y w as fo und to b e n egativ ely r e la te d to r e la tio nship c onflic t w hen p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate w as h ig h ( + 1S D : e stim ate e stim ate d iv ers it y a nd r e la tio nship c onflic t. * N ote . T he s olid lin e ( h ig h p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate ) is s ta tis tic ally d if fe re nt fr o m z ero a t o ne s ta ndard d evia tio n a bove th e m ean ( p A s e xpecte d, r e la tio nship c onflic t w as n egativ ely r e la te d to te am p erfo rm ance ( γ ([8 7] ) , w e fo und, a s p re dic te d in h ypoth esis 2 , a p osit iv e in dir e ct e ffe ct o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y o n te am p erfo rm ance, th ro ugh r e la tio nship c onflic t, w hen partic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate w as h ig h ( + 1S D : e stim ate S E is c onsid ere d m ost a ppro pria te b ecause it a ccounts fo r th e n on-n orm al s am plin g d is tr ib utio n o f th e in dir e ct e ffe ct ( P re acher e t a l. [8 8] ) . R esult s a t 2 0,0 00 re petit io ns s how ed th at th e c onfid ence in te rv als d id n ot in clu de z ero ( 9 5% C I [.2 3, 1 .5 9]) fo r th e p osit iv e in dir e ct e ffe ct w hen p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate w as hig h, w hic h p ro vid ed s upport fo r h ypoth esis 2 . H ypoth esis 3 p re dic te d th at w ork lo ad s harin g w ould m odera te th e r e la tio nship b etw een r e la tio nship c onflic t a nd te am p erfo rm ance. A s s how n in T a ble 2 , a s ta tis tic ally s ig nif ic ant in te ra ctio n w as fo und ( γ re la tio nship c onflic t. A n e xam in atio n o f th e s im ple s lo pes a t o ne s ta ndard d evia tio n b elo w a nd a bove th e m ean r e veale d th at th e fo rm o f th e in te ra ctio n w as consis te nt w it h p re dic tio ns ( s ee F ig . 2 ). R ela tio nship c onflic t w as n egativ ely r e la te d to te am p erfo rm ance w hen w ork lo ad s harin g w as lo w ( − 1S D : estim ate s upporte d. S ta ndard iz ed c oeffic ie nt e stim ate s o f th e fin al m odel a re p re sente d in F ig . 3 . U nsta ndard iz ed e stim ate s, w it h th eir s ta ndard e rro rs , a re r e porte d in T a ble 2 .W ork lo ad s harin g m odera tin g th e r e la tio nship b etw een r e la tio nship c onflic t a nd te am p erfo rm ance. * N ote . T he d otte d lin e ( lo w w ork lo ad s harin g) is sta tis tic ally d if fe re nt fr o m z ero a t o ne s ta ndard d evia tio n b elo w th e m ean ( p a re p ro vid ed. * p D is cu ssio n This s tu dy y ie ld ed th re e m ajo r fin din gs. F ir s t, th e in te ra ctio n b etw een p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate w as a s ig nif ic ant p re dic to r o f re la tio nship c onflic t. W hen p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate w as h ig her, p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y w as e specia lly h elp fu l in r e ducin g r e la tio nship c onflic t. S econd, th is r e duced r e la tio nship c onflic t w as s ubsequently a ssocia te d w it h in cre ased te am p erfo rm ance. T hat is , p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y e xhib it e d a p osit iv e in dir e ct e ffe ct on te am p erfo rm ance, th ro ugh r e la tio nship c onflic t, w hen p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate w as h ig her. T hir d , w ork lo ad s harin g m odera te d th e a ssocia tio n b etw een re la tio nship c onflic t a nd te am p erfo rm ance. W hen w ork lo ad s harin g w as lo w er, r e la tio nship c onflic t w as fo und to b e p artic ula rly d etr im enta l to te am perfo rm ance. T hese fin din gs h ig hlig ht th e c ondit io ns u nder w hic h p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd r e la tio nship c onflic t m ay d if fe re ntia lly in flu ence te am o utc om es. T heo re tic al Im plic atio ns a n d F utu re D ir e ctio ns W e c onsid ere d te am p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate a s a m odera to r o f th e a ssocia tio n b etw een p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd r e la tio nship c onflic t. In d oin g s o, w e b uilt u pon th e o nly p rio r s tu dy o n te am p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y , w hic h s ole ly e xam in ed m ain e ffe cts , a nd e xplic it ly r e cogniz ed th e e xclu sio n o f s it u atio nal m odera to rs a s a lim it a tio n ( W oehr e t a l. [1 23] ) . D ra w in g fr o m a c ontin gency a ppro ach to w ard th e in vestig atio n o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y ’s e ffe cts , w e fo und th at th e m odera tin g r o le o f p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate in th e p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y -re la tio nship c onflic t lin k c an b e e xpla in ed b y th eory o n c om ple m enta ry fit ( e .g ., H um phre y e t a l. [4 4] ) . S pecif ic ally , in th e p re sence o f a h ig h p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate , h ig h p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y is a ccom panie d b y a ccepta nce a nd encoura gem ent a m ong te am m em bers , w hic h m ay fa cilit a te te am m em bers ’ d esir e s to c om ple m ent r a th er th an c onflic t w it h o ne a noth er. T hus, a te am ’s c lim ate m ay b e c ru cia l fo r m axim iz in g th e d esir a ble e ffe cts o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y o n r e la tio nship c onflic t. R ela te dly , o ur w ork h ig hlig hts th e n eed to c onsid er th e in flu ence o f c onte xtu al m odera to rs in fu tu re r e searc h o n p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y . M em bers h ig her in p ow er v alu es m ay h ave th eir m otiv atio nal g oals e ncoura ged m ore , d ependin g o n s pecif ic g ro up a nd/o r o rg aniz atio nal v aria ble s. F or e xam ple , te am mate s m otiv ate d to a tta in p osit io ns o f p ow er m ay b e norm ativ ely a ccepte d in d ecentr a liz ed o rg aniz atio ns o r g ro ups in w hic h h ig h e m pow erm ent e xis ts . H ow ever, th ey m ay b e d is coura ged in s ettin gs w here s tr ic t norm s c onflic t w it h th eir g oals . G iv en th ese p ossib ilit ie s, fu tu re w ork m ay h elp to e lu cid ate a ddit io nal c ondit io ns u nder w hic h p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y is lik ely to d if fe re ntia lly in flu ence r e la tio nship c onflic t a nd te am p erfo rm ance. B y in vestig atin g th e im pact o f w ork lo ad s harin g o n th e r e la tio nship c onflic t- te am p erfo rm ance lin k, w e a nsw ere d th e c all to g ain fu rth er in sig ht in to th e c ondit io ns under w hic h p erfo rm ance o utc om es o f p ro je ct ta sks a re d if fe re ntia lly im pacte d b y r e la tio nship c onflic t ( d e W it e t a l. [2 9] ) . W hen te am m em bers p erc eiv ed th at th eir te am mate s fa ile d to d o a n a ppro pria te s hare o f th e w ork , th e p re sence o f h ig h r e la tio nship c onflic t w as p artic ula rly lik ely to h in der te am p erfo rm ance. F ru str a te d te am m em bers fo rc ed to s plit th eir a tte ntio n b etw een m anagin g in te rp ers onal te nsio ns, a nim osit ie s, a nd r e la te d c om plic atio ns in a ddit io n to th e te am ta sk, m ay b e m ore lik ely to b e o verb urd ened a nd/o r d em otiv ate d b y s la ckin g te am mate s. T hus, w ork lo ad s harin g m ay b e a n im porta nt m odera to r o f th e re la tio nship c onflic t- te am p erfo rm ance r e la tio nship . F utu re in vestig atio ns in to m odera to rs o f th e r e la tio nship c onflic t- te am p erfo rm ance a ssocia tio n s hould a ssess th e im pact o f w ork lo ad s harin g in c onju nctio n w it h d if fe re nt ta sk ty pes ( e .g ., c re ativ it y , d ecis io n-m akin g, p ro ductio n, m ix ed; d e W it e t a l. [2 9] ; M cG ra th [7 6] ) , w hic h m ay p ro ve fr u it fu l in id entif y in g th e e xte nt to w hic h th e in te ra ctio n o f r e la tio nship c onflic t a nd w ork lo ad s harin g o n te am p erfo rm ance, is r e le vant to o th er te am ta sks in a ddit io n to p ro je ct ta sks. F or in sta nce, th e u ndesir a ble e ffe cts o f lo w er w ork lo ad s harin g, o n th e r e la tio nship c onflic t- te am p erfo rm ance lin k, m ay b e le ss d etr im enta l in p ro ductio n ta sks c hara cte riz ed b y lo w c om ple xit y a nd r o utin e e xecutio n. Furth erm ore , w e h eeded th e r e quests o f d iv ers it y s chola rs b y n ot o nly in vestig atin g m odera to rs o f te am d iv ers it y -te am o utc om e r e la tio nship s, b ut a ls o p ayin g atte ntio n to th e c ondit io ns u nder w hic h te am p ro cesses m edia te th e e ffe cts o f d iv ers it y ( V an K nip penberg a nd S chip pers [1 1 7] ) . T hat is , w hen p artic ip ativ e safe ty c lim ate w as h ig her ( v s lo w er), a p osit iv e in dir e ct e ffe ct o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y o n te am p erfo rm ance, th ro ugh r e la tio nship c onflic t, w as p re sent. T a ken to geth er, th e c urre nt s tu dy h ig hlig hts u nder w hat c ondit io ns th e e ffe cts o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y c an b e c om ple m enta ry , o r d esir a ble , in a uto nom ously f u nctio nin g te am s. A lt h ough r e searc h o n th e c om ple m enta ry e ffe cts o f d iv ers it y h as te nded to fo cus o n d if fe re nces in s kills , in fo rm atio n, a nd e xpertis e ( M annix a nd N eale [7 0] ) , d iv ers it y o f v alu es, a nd p ow er v alu es in p artic ula r, m ay w arra nt fu rth er a tte ntio n. T hat is , b y e xam in in g a m odera te d m edia tio n m odel in w hic h surfa ce-le vel d iv ers it y c hara cte ris tic s ( i. e ., a ge, g ender, r a ce/e th nic it y d iv ers it y ) w ere a ccounte d fo r, th e p re sent s tu dy w as th e fir s t to e m pir ic ally d em onstr a te th at p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y c an b e b enefic ia l fo r r e ducin g r e la tio nship c onflic t a nd in cre asin g te am p erfo rm ance. A ddit io nally , e vid ence fu rth er s uggests th at th e posit iv e e ffe cts o f te am d iv ers it y a re n ot lim it e d to th e ty pic ally s tu die d d iv ers it y c hara cte ris tic s r e le vant to fu nctio nal b ackgro und, w hic h h ave g enera lly n ot b een em pir ic ally s upporte d w it h r e spect to d ir e ct e ffe cts ( V an K nip penberg a nd S chip pers [1 1 7] ) . T here fo re , fu tu re r e searc h o n th e c om ple m enta ry e ffe cts o f p ow er valu es d iv ers it y s hould n ot o nly c onsid er m odels th at in clu de b oth m odera tin g a nd m edia tin g v aria ble s, b ut s hould a ls o c onsid er d em onstr a tin g p ow er v alu es div ers it y ’s in flu ence a bove a nd b eyond o th er p ote ntia lly r e le vant d iv ers it y v aria ble s ( e .g ., fu nctio nal b ackgro und, o th er v alu es, p ers onalit y tr a it s ). N ota bly , p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y w as fo und to b e n egativ ely r e la te d to r e la tio nship c onflic t. T hese r e sult s a re in c ontr a st to th e o nly p rio r s tu dy e xam in in g th e re la tio nship b etw een p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd r e la tio nship c onflic t, w hic h fo und a p osit iv e c orre la tio n ( W oehr e t a l. [1 23] ) . H ow ever, it s hould b e n ote d th at W oehr a nd c olle agues d id n ot a ccount fo r s urfa ce-le vel d iv ers it y , a nd a fte r c ontr o llin g fo r th e te am m ean o f p ow er v alu es, th e r e la tio nship d is covere d b y W oehr and c olle agues b ecam e n on-s ig nif ic ant. In th e p re sent s tu dy, in a ddit io n to c ontr o llin g fo r th e te am m ean o f p ow er v alu es, m ult ip le s urfa ce-le vel d iv ers it y d em ogra phic s w ere a ls o a ccounte d fo r ( i. e ., a ge, g ender, r a ce/e th nic it y ), w hic h m ay in flu ence th e r e la tio nship o bserv ed. T here fo re , a s a n e xte nsio n o f p ast w ork a nd a s tr e ngth o f th e c urre nt r e searc h, o ur s tu dy is th e fir s t to d em onstr a te th e u niq ue a nd in cre m enta l e ffe cts o f p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y b eyond o th er div ers it y v aria ble s. M ore over, d if fe re nces in e ffe ct s iz es, a cro ss s tu die s, m ay p ro vid e fu rth er s upport fo r a n e m phasis o n m ore c om ple x m odels th at in clu de m odera to rs in te am d iv ers it y r e searc h, a s w ell a s v alu es d iv ers it y r e searc h in p artic ula r ( V an K nip penberg a nd S chip pers [1 1 7] ) . R ela te dly , T e tt e t a l. ( [1 1 4] ) c onclu ded th at b id ir e ctio nalit y , a cro ss s tu die s, is c om mon a nd m ay b e a ttr ib ute d in p art, to th e s tu dy c onte xt. F or in sta nce, p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y m ay b e m ore b enefic ia l to te am m em ber in te ra ctio ns in s pecif ic ty pes o f te am s a nd/o r ta sks. In th e la bora to ry s tu dy c onducte d b y W oehr e t a l. ( [1 23] ) , s tu dents w ho d id n ot know e ach o th er b efo re p artic ip atin g in th e s tu dy, w ork ed to geth er fo r a ppro xim ate ly 7 5 re quir e d to w ork to geth er fo r a v ery s hort d ura tio n, c le ar a nd s pecif ic in str u ctio ns w ere p re sente d, a nd o ne o ptim al s olu tio n e xis te d, a tte m pts to a ssum e dom in ance o r c ontr o l o ver o th er m em bers , b y la rg ely u nfa m ilia r te am mate s, m ay b e p erc eiv ed a s u nnecessary a nd o ffe nsiv e, r e gard le ss o f m em bers ’ com ple m enta ry v alu es. P erh aps n ot s urp ris in gly , W oehr a nd c olle agues s ta te d th at “ th e fin din gs o f th e p re sent s tu dy m ay b e q uit e d if fe re nt a m ong te am s o f lo nger lif e s pans, p urs uin g d if fe re nt o r m ult ip le ta sks a nd o pera tin g in a m uch le ss c ontr o lle d e nvir o nm ent” ( p . 1 1 8). In c ontr a st, th e m ore a uto nom ous te am s in t h e c urre nt s tu dy w ork ed o n ill- d efin ed p ro ble m s olv in g ta sks, o r ta sks la ckin g p re dete rm in ed o r c onclu siv e s olu tio ns ( W ild m an e t a l. [1 22] ) . T hese ta sks, chara cte riz ed b y h ig h c om ple xit y , w ere c arrie d o ut o ver th e c ours e o f 4 o f w ork . T here fo re , p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y , w hic h is c hara cte riz ed b y m em bers ’ m otiv atio ns to a ssum e c om ple m enta ry d utie s, m ay h ave b een p erc eiv ed m ore fa vora bly , a s d if fe re ntia l r o le s a nd r e sponsib ilit ie s w ere lik ely n ecessary to m anage th e c om ple xit ie s o f te am ta sks. B ecause te am m em bers h old m any v alu es, a nd th ey m ay a ttr ib ute g re ate r im porta nce to c erta in v alu es th an o th ers ( B ard i a nd S chw artz [4 ] ; S chw artz [9 6] ) , fu tu re w ork s hould n ot o nly c ontin ue to a dopt a c ontin gency a ppro ach to w ard th e s tu dy o f v alu es d iv ers it y , b ut s hould a ls o s eek to e xpand c urre nt k now le dge wit h r e spect to in te ra ctio ns a m ong v alu e ty pes. F or e xam ple , it is p ossib le th at p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y m ay in te ra ct w it h a chie vem ent v alu es to p re dic t te am perfo rm ance. G iv en th at p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y is a ssocia te d w it h c om ple m enta ry m otiv atio ns b etw een te am m em bers w it h r e spect to a ssum in g s pecif ic d utie s, th e a dded p re sence o f h ig h m ean a chie vem ent v alu es w it h in th e te am s uggests th at, in g enera l, m em bers w ill a ls o b e h ig hly m otiv ate d to d em onstr a te th eir c om pete nce a nd p erfo rm w ell. T here fo re , r e searc hers s hould e xplo re th e e xte nt to w hic h d if fe re nces in te am m em bers ’ p ow er v alu es in te ra ct w it h o th er valu e ty pes to p re dic t te am o utc om es. F urth er, a lt h ough th e c urre nt s tu dy fo cused o n p ow er v alu es, a nd in d oin g s o, h elp ed to b ro aden th e r a nge o f v alu es pre vio usly c onsid ere d in te am s, fu tu re r e searc hers s hould c ontin ue to e xplo re th e c ondit io ns u nder w hic h o th er s pecif ic ty pes o f v alu es d iv ers it y , in a ddit io n to p ow er, a re r e le vant to te am o utc om es. T his is n ote w orth y, a s p ast w ork h as o fte n c onceptu aliz ed v alu es d iv ers it y , a nd v alu es in g enera l, a s if th e n um ero us valu e ty pes ( e .g ., p ow er, a chie vem ent, tr a dit io nalis m ) w ere e quiv ale nt. F or in sta nce, a skin g p artic ip ants a bout th e d egre e to w hic h th eir g enera l v alu es a re s im ila r to , o r d if fe re nt fr o m , o th er g ro up m em bers m ay n ot b e p artic ula rly in fo rm ativ e fo r u nders ta ndin g th e p re cis e, u nderly in g v alu e ty pe(s ) in flu encin g ( a nd m echanis m s e xpla in in g) m em bers ’ b ehavio r. B y c onsid erin g v alu es in a n o verly g enera l m anner, th e e ffe cts o f s pecif ic v alu e ty pes m ay b e o bscure d a nd/o r th ose v alu e ty pes th at a re m ost s alie nt to r a te rs m ay b e m is re pre sente d. T here fo re , fu tu re w ork o n v alu es d iv ers it y , a nd v alu es in g enera l, s hould c onsid er th e specif ic v alu e ty pes th at a re c onceptu ally r e le vant to th e r e searc h q uestio n(s ) o f in te re st, a nd o pera tio naliz e th em a ppro pria te ly . In a ddit io n, r e searc hers s hould c ontin ue to in vestig ate c ondit io ns u nder w hic h th e p osit iv e e ffe cts o f v alu es d iv ers it y m ay b e m axim iz ed. F or in sta nce, e xta nt lit e ra tu re h as d em onstr a te d th at d iv ers it y is m ore lik ely to h ave b enefic ia l e ffe cts w hen te am m em bers b elie ve in th e v alu e o f d iv ers it y ( D e M euse a nd H osta ger [2 8] ; V an K nip penberg a nd H asla m [1 1 6] ) . S pecif ic ally , H om an e t a l. ( [4 3] ) fo und th at d iv ers e te am s h ad g re ate r p erfo rm ance w hen m em bers v alu ed d iv ers it y a s c om pare d to w hen th ey d id n ot. T hus, th e v alu e o f d iv ers it y a s w ell a s c onte xtu al v aria ble s s uch a s c lim ate s th at s upport d iv ers it y m ay b e p ro m is in g dir e ctio ns fo r s ubsequent s tu dy. W it h r e spect to lim it a tio ns o f th e p re sent s tu dy, th e s am ple u sed m ay lim it th e g enera liz abilit y o f fin din gs. W e in vestig ate d s tu dent p ro je ct te am s, w hic h w ere re sponsib le fo r p erfo rm in g a ta sk o ver th e c ours e o f s evera l m onth s fo r w hic h th ey r e ceiv ed a g ra de. T hese te am s w ould h ave e xis te d r e gard le ss o f d ata c olle ctio n, a nd w ere m ost s im ila r to ta sk fo rc es w it h a d h oc m em bers hip , lim it e d lif e tim es, a nd n arro w ly d efin ed g oals . H ow ever, fu tu re w ork s hould in vestig ate th e e xte nt to w hic h fin din gs g enera liz e to lo nger-te rm te am s in o rg aniz atio ns. A ddit io nally , th e c urre nt s tu dy m ay b e lim it e d in r e gard to te am s’ le vel o f ta sk in te rd ependence. S pecif ic ally , v ario us fo rm s o f ta sk in te rd ependence w ere lik ely p re sent, d ependin g o n th e s pecif ic p ro je ct s ubta sk a t h and ( e .g ., W ild m an e t a l. [1 22] ) . F or e xam ple , a lt h ough in it ia l c olle ctiv e b ra in sto rm in g e ffo rts a nd subsequent p erio ds o f in fo rm atio n s ynth esis m ay h ave b een c hara cte riz ed b y r e cip ro cal a nd/o r in te nsiv e ta sk in te rd ependence, in w hic h m ult ip le m em bers o r entir e te am s jo in tly c olla bora te d in b ack-a nd-fo rth c om munic atio ns ( W ild m an e t a l. [1 22] ) , it is lik ely th at, a t tim es, e ffo rts w ere d iv id ed o n v ario us ta sks in a m anner c hara cte ris tic o f p oole d in te rd ependence. A lt h ough w e r e cogniz e th ese p ote ntia l c hanges in ta sk in te rd ependence a s a lim it a tio n o f th e c urre nt s tu dy, w e a ls o c onte nd th at th is is lik ely s im ila r to h ow m any te am s fu nctio n in o rg aniz atio ns. F or in sta nce, W ild m an e t a l. ( [1 22] ) , in p re sentin g a ta xonom y o f in te gra tiv e te am ta sk ty pes a nd te am -le vel c hara cte ris tic s, s uggeste d th at te am s in o rg aniz atio ns m ove fr o m o ne s ubta sk to a noth er, a nd th is m ay b e accom panie d b y s hif ts in ta sk in te rd ependence. C onsequently , fu tu re w ork s hould c onsid er o th er ty pes o f te am ta sks, a nd in vestig ate th e e xte nt to w hic h ta sk in te rd ependence in o rg aniz atio nal te am s c hanges o ver tim e, a s w ell a s th e c ondit io ns u nder w hic h s uch c hanges m ay r e la te to te am p ro cesses ( e .g ., r e la tio nship c onflic t, w ork lo ad s harin g) a nd te am p erfo rm ance. P ra ctic al Im plic atio ns a n d C onclu sio n Stu dy r e sult s s uggest th at m anagers m ay b enefit fr o m e ncoura gin g te am s w it h d iv ers e p ow er v alu es to fo rm a h ig h p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate , w hic h m ay h elp t o d ecre ase th e lik elih ood o f r e la tio nship c onflic t. C erta in c hara cte ris tic s o f le aders m ay b e a nte cedents to fo ste rin g a h ig h p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate . F or exam ple , le ader in clu siv eness ( N em bhard a nd E dm ondson [8 2] ) , le ader a ccessib ilit y , a nd le ader a cknow le dgem ent o f fa llib ilit y ( E dm ondson [3 0] ) h ave b een fo und to b e a ssocia te d w it h th e e sta blis hm ent o f a n in te rp ers onally s afe te am c lim ate . G iv en th ese fin din gs, it m ay b e b enefic ia l to tr a in le aders o n th ese chara cte ris tic s, o r c onsid er a ppoin tin g le aders w ho e xhib it th em . More over, to m it ig ate th e d ele te rio us e ffe cts o f r e la tio nship c onflic t o n te am p erfo rm ance, m anagers m ay b enefit fr o m e ncoura gin g h ig her w ork lo ad s harin g. T he use o f te am c harte rs m ay b e a w ay to fa cilit a te h ig her w ork lo ad s harin g. In a s am ple o f M BA te am s, h ig h-q ualit y c harte rs , w hic h in corp ora te d w rit te n expecta tio ns fo r e ach te am m em ber r e gard in g w ork r e sponsib ilit ie s, c ontin gency p la ns, a nd d eadlin es, w ere a ssocia te d w it h g re ate r te am p erfo rm ance b y th e m id poin t ( e .g ., C hid am bara m a nd B ostr o m [2 1] ; G ers ic k [3 6] ) o f a te am ta sk ( M ath ie u a nd R app [7 3] ) . In c onclu sio n, o ur s tu dy is th e fir s t to h ig hlig ht h ow a nd u nder w hat c ondit io ns p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y in flu ences te am o utc om es. C onsis te nt w it h th e contin gency a ppro ach r e com mended b y b oth te am d iv ers it y a nd c onflic t s chola rs , w e h elp to e lu cid ate th e c ondit io nal e ffe cts o f b oth p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y a nd re la tio nship c onflic t. R esult s s upport th e u tilit y o f c onsid erin g te am p artic ip ativ e s afe ty c lim ate to b ette r u nders ta nd th e c ondit io ns u nder w hic h d if fe re nces in p ow er v alu es, a m ong te am m em bers , a re lik ely to r e duce r e la tio nship c onflic t a nd s ubsequently b enefit te am p erfo rm ance. F in din gs a ls o h ig hlig ht th e m odera tin g r o le o f w ork lo ad s harin g fo r u nders ta ndin g th e c ondit io ns u nder w hic h r e la tio nship c onflic t is m ore lik ely to u ndesir a bly im pact te am p erfo rm ance. T he p re sent s tu dy a dds to th e e m erg in g r e searc h a dvocatin g fo r m ore c om ple x m odels th at c onsid er b oth th e m odera tin g a nd m edia tin g e ffe cts o f te am div ers it y , a s w ell a s m ore r e searc h o n te am v alu es d iv ers it y in p artic ula r. F urth erm ore , a lt h ough r e searc h o n th e c om ple m enta ry e ffe cts o f te am d iv ers it y h as com monly p ro posed d iv ers it y v aria ble s r e le vant to s kills , in fo rm atio n, a nd e xpertis e, w e d em onstr a te th at p ow er v alu es d iv ers it y , o r d if fe re nces in th e d esir e to a tta in s ocia l s ta tu s a nd p re stig e a s w ell a s s ocia l in flu ence o r c ontr o l o ver o th ers , w arra nts fu tu re c onsid era tio n w it h r e spect to b enefic ia l e ffe cts o n b oth te am pro cesses a nd te am p erfo rm ance. A ckn ow le d gem en ts T he fir s t a uth or w ould lik e to th ank M aria D . A lip our, E den B . K in g, a nd tw o a nonym ous r e vie w ers fo r th eir h elp fu l c om ments o n e arlie r v ers io ns o f th is p aper. R efe re n ces C it a tio ns 1 A im e F , H um phre y S , D eR ue D S, P aul J B , T he r id dle o f h ete ra rc hy: p ow er tr a nsit io ns in c ro ss-fu nctio nal te am s, A cadem y o f M anagem ent J ourn al, 2 014, 5 7, 2, 3 27, 3 52 2 A nders on N R, W est M A, M easurin g c lim ate fo r w ork g ro up in novatio n: d evelo pm ent a nd v alid atio n o f th e te am c lim ate in vento ry , J ourn al o f O rg aniz atio nal B ehavio r, 1 998, 1 9, 3 , 2 35, 2 58 3 A rth aud-D ay M L, R ode J C , T urn le y W H, D ir e ct a nd c onte xtu al e ffe cts o f in div id ual v alu es o n o rg aniz atio nal c it iz enship b ehavio r in te am s, J ourn al o f A pplie d P sycholo gy, 2 012, 9 7, 4 , 7 92, 8 07 4 B ard i A , S chw artz S H , V alu es a nd b ehavio r: s tr e ngth a nd s tr u ctu re o f r e la tio ns, P ers onalit y a nd S ocia l P sycholo gy B ulle tin , 2 003, 2 9, 1 207, 1 220 5 B edeia n A G , M osshold er K W , O n th e u se o f th e c oeffic ie nt o f v aria tio n a s a m easure o f d iv ers it y , O rg aniz atio nal R esearc h M eth ods, 2 000, 3 , 2 85, 2 97 6 B ell S T, D eep-le vel c om posit io n v aria ble s a s p re dic to rs o f te am p erfo rm ance: a m eta -a naly sis , J ourn al o f A pplie d P sycholo gy, 2 007, 9 2, 5 95, 6 15 7 B ell S T, V illa do A J, L ukasik M , B ela u L , B rig gs A , G ettin g s pecif ic a bout d em ogra phic d iv ers it y v aria ble a nd te am p erfo rm ance r e la tio nship s: a m eta – analy sis , J ourn al o f M anagem ent, 2 011 , 3 7, 7 09, 7 43 8 B enders ky C , S hah N P, T he c ost o f s ta tu s e nhancem ent: p erfo rm ance e ffe cts o f in div id uals ’ s ta tu s m obilit y in ta sk g ro ups, O rg aniz atio n S cie nce, 2 012, 23, 2 , 3 08, 3 22 9 B la u P M , In equalit y a nd h ete ro geneit y : a p rim it iv e th eory o f s ocia l s tr u ctu re , 1 977, N ew Y ork , F re e P re ss 10 B lie se P D , K le in K J, K ozlo w ski S W J, W it h in g ro up a gre em ent, n on-in dependence, a nd r e lia bilit y : im plic atio ns fo r d ata a ggre gatio n a nd a naly sis , M ult ile vel th eory , r e searc h, a nd m eth ods in o rg aniz atio ns: fo undatio ns, e xte nsio ns, a nd n ew d ir e ctio ns, 2 000, S an F ra ncis co, J ossey-B ass, 3 48, 3 81 11 B ond M H, L eung K , A u A , T o ng K K, C hem onges-N ie ls on Z , C om bin in g s ocia l a xio m s w it h v alu es in p re dic tin g s ocia l b ehavio urs , E uro pean J ourn al o f P ers onalit y , 2 004, 1 8, 3 , 1 77, 1 91 12 B ra dle y B H , P ostle th w ait e B E, K lo tz A C , H am dani M R, B ro w n K G , R eapin g th e b enefit s o f ta sk c onflic t in te am s: th e c rit ic al r o le o f te am p sycholo gic al safe ty c lim ate , J ourn al o f A pplie d P sycholo gy, 2 012, 9 7, 1 , 1 51, 1 58 13 B re tt J M , O kum ura T , In te r-a nd in tr a cult u ra l n egotia tio n: U S a nd J apanese n egotia to rs , A cadem y o f M anagem ent J ourn al, 1 998, 4 1, 5 , 4 95, 5 10 14 B yrn e D , T he a ttr a ctio n p ara dig m , 1 971, N ew Y ork , A cadem ic P re ss 15 C able D M , E dw ard s J R , C om ple m enta ry a nd s upple m enta ry fit : a th eore tic al a nd e m pir ic al in te gra tio n, J ourn al o f A pplie d P sycholo gy, 2 004, 8 9, 5 , 8 22, 834 16 C am pio n M A, M edsker G J, H ig gs A C , R ela tio ns b etw een w ork g ro up c hara cte ris tic s a nd e ffe ctiv eness: im plic atio ns fo r d esig nin g e ffe ctiv e w ork g ro ups, P ers onnel P sycholo gy, 1 993, 4 6, 4 , 8 23, 8 47 17 C am pio n M A, P apper E M , M edsker G J, R ela tio ns b etw een w ork te am c hara cte ris tic s a nd e ffe ctiv eness: a r e plic atio n a nd e xte nsio n, P ers onnel P sycholo gy, 1 996, 4 9, 2 , 4 29, 4 52 18 C arle ss S A, D e P aola C , T he m easure m ent o f c ohesio n in w ork te am s, S m all G ro up R esearc h, 2 000, 3 1, 1 , 7 1, 8 8 19 C arli L L, L aF le ur S J, L oeber C C, N onverb al b ehavio r, g ender, a nd in flu ence, J ourn al o f P ers onalit y a nd S ocia l P sycholo gy, 1 995, 6 8, 1 030, 1 041 20 C han D , F unctio nal r e la tio ns a m ong c onstr u cts in th e s am e c onte xt d om ain a t d if fe re nt le vels o f a naly sis : a ty polo gy o f c om posit io n m odels , J ourn al o f A pplie d P sycholo gy, 1 998, 8 3, 2 34, 2 46 21 C hid am bara m L , B ostr o m R , G ro up d evelo pm ent ( I) : a r e vie w a nd s ynth esis o f d evelo pm ent m odels , G ro up D ecis io n a nd N egotia tio n, 1 997, 6 , 2 , 1 59, 187 22 C hoi J N , S y T , G ro up-le vel o rg aniz atio nal c it iz enship b ehavio r: e ffe cts o f d em ogra phic fa ult lin es a nd c onflic t in s m all w ork g ro ups, J ourn al o f O rg aniz atio nal B ehavio r, 2 010, 3 1, 7 , 1 032, 1 054 23 C hun J S , C hoi J N , M em bers ’ n eeds, in tr a gro up c onflic t, a nd g ro up p erfo rm ance, J ourn al o f A pplie d P sycholo gy, 2 014, 9 9, 3 , 4 37, 4 50 24 C ole M S, B edeia n A G , H ir s chfe ld R R, V ogel B , D is pers io n-c om posit io n m odels in m ult ile vel r e searc h a d ata -a naly tic fr a m ew ork , O rg aniz atio nal R esearc h M eth ods, 2 011 , 1 4, 4 , 7 18, 7 34 25 D e D re u C K, W hen to o lit tle o r to o m uch h urts : e vid ence fo r a c urv ilin ear r e la tio nship b etw een ta sk c onflic t a nd in novatio n in te am s, J ourn al o f M anagem ent, 2 006, 3 2, 1 , 8 3, 1 07 26 D e D re u C K, V an V ia nen A E, M anagin g r e la tio nship c onflic t a nd th e e ffe ctiv eness o f o rg aniz atio nal te am s, J ourn al o f O rg aniz atio nal B ehavio r, 2 001, 2 2, 3, 3 09, 3 28 27 D e D re u C KW , W ein gart L R , T a sk v ers us r e la tio nship c onflic t, te am p erfo rm ance, a nd te am m em ber s atis fa ctio n: a m eta -a naly sis , J ourn al o f A pplie d P sycholo gy, 2 003, 8 8, 4 , 7 41, 7 49 28 D e M euse K P, H osta ger T J, D evelo pin g a n in str u m ent fo r m easurin g a ttit u des to w ard a nd p erc eptio ns o f w ork pla ce d iv ers it y : a n in it ia l r e port, H um an R esourc e D evelo pm ent Q uarte rly , 2 001, 1 2, 1 , 3 3, 5 1 29 W it F R C, G re er L L, J ehn K A, T he p ara dox o f in tr a gro up c onflic t: a m eta -a naly sis , J ourn al o f A pplie d P sycholo gy, 2 012, 9 7, 2 , 3 60, 3 90 30 E dm ondson, A . C . ( 2 003). M anagin g th e r is k o f le arn in g: P sycholo gic al s afe ty in w ork te am s. In M . W est, D . T jo svold , & K . G . S m it h ( E ds.) , In te rn atio nal handbook o f o rg aniz atio nal te am work a nd c oopera tiv e w ork in g. d oi: 1 0.1 002/9 780470696712.c h13. 31 E re z A , L eP in e J A , E lm s H , E ffe cts o f r o ta te d le aders hip a nd p eer e valu atio n o n th e fu nctio nin g a nd e ffe ctiv eness o f s elf – m anaged te am s: a q uasi- e xperim ent, P ers onnel P sycholo gy, 2 002, 5 5, 9 29, 9 48 32 E van W , C onflic t a nd p erfo rm ance in R &D o rg aniz atio ns, In dustr ia l M anagem ent R evie w , 1 965, 7 , 3 7, 4 6 33 F eath er, N . T . ( 1 995). V alu es, v ale nces, a nd c hoic e: th e in flu ences o f v alu es o n th e p erc eiv ed a ttr a ctiv eness a nd c hoic e o f a lt e rn ativ es., J ourn al o f P ers onalit y a nd S ocia l P sycholo gy, 6 8( 6), 1 1 35-1 1 51. 34 F olg er, R . ( 1 987). R efo rm ula tin g th e p re condit io ns o f r e sentm ent: a r e fe re nt c ognit io ns m odel. In J . C . M aste rs & W . P . S m it h ( E ds.) , S ocia l c om paris on, ju stic e, a nd r e la tiv e d epriv atio n: th eore tic al, e m pir ic al, a nd p olic y p ers pectiv es ( p p. 1 83-2 15). H ills dale : E rlb aum . 35 F ra zie r M L, B ow le r W M, V oic e c lim ate , s uperv is or u nderm in in g, a nd w ork o utc om es a g ro up-le vel e xam in atio n, J ourn al o f M anagem ent, 2 015, 4 1, 3 , 8 41, 863 36 G ers ic k C J, T im e a nd tr a nsit io n in w ork te am s: to w ard a n ew m odel o f g ro up d evelo pm ent, A cadem y o f M anagem ent J ourn al, 1 988, 3 1, 1 , 9 , 4 1 37 G re er L L, J ehn K A, T he p iv ota l r o le o f n egativ e a ffe ct in u nders ta ndin g th e e ffe cts o f p ro cess c onflic t o n g ro up p erfo rm ance, R esearc h o n m anagin g gro ups a nd te am s, 2 007, 1 0, 2 3, 4 5 38 H arris on D A, P ric e K H , B ell M P, B eyond r e la tio nal d em ogra phy: tim e a nd th e e ffe cts o f s urfa ce-a nd d eep-le vel d iv ers it y o n w ork g ro up c ohesio n, A cadem y o f M anagem ent J ourn al, 1 998, 4 1, 1 , 9 6, 1 07 39 H arris on D A, P ric e K H , G avin J H , F lo re y A T, T im e, te am s, a nd ta sk p erfo rm ance: c hangin g e ffe cts o f s urfa ce a nd d eep-le vel d iv ers it y o n g ro up fu nctio nin g, A cadem y o f M anagem ent J ourn al, 2 002, 4 5, 5 , 1 029, 1 045 40 H arris on D A, K le in K J, W hat’s th e d if fe re nce? D iv ers it y c onstr u cts a s s epara tio n, v arie ty , o r d is parit y in o rg aniz atio ns, A cadem y o f M anagem ent R evie w , 2007, 3 2, 4 , 1 1 99, 1 228 41 H it lin , S ., & P ilia vin , J . A . ( 2 004). V alu es: r e viv in g a d orm ant c oncept., A nnual R evie w o f S ocio lo gy, 3 59-3 93. 42 H olle nbeck J R , D eR ue D S, G uzzo R , B rid gin g th e g ap b etw een I/O r e searc h a nd H R p ra ctic e: im pro vin g te am c om posit io n, te am tr a in in g, a nd te am ta sk desig n, H um an R esourc e M anagem ent, 2 004, 4 3, 4 , 3 53, 3 66 43 H om an A C , V an K nip penberg D , V an K le ef G A, D e D re u C K, B rid gin g fa ult lin es b y v alu in g d iv ers it y : d iv ers it y b elie fs , in fo rm atio n e la bora tio n, a nd perfo rm ance in d iv ers e w ork g ro ups, J ourn al o f A pplie d P sycholo gy, 2 007, 9 2, 5 , 1 1 89, 1 1 99 44 H um phre y S E, H olle nbeck J R , M eyer C J, Ilg en D R, T ra it c onfig ura tio ns in s elf – m anaged te am s: a c onceptu al e xam in atio n o f th e u se o f s eedin g to m axim iz e a nd m in im iz e tr a it v aria nce in te am s, J ourn al o f A pplie d P sycholo gy, 2 007, 9 2, 3 , 8 85, 8 92 45 Ilg en D R, H olle nbeck J R , J ohnson M D, J undt D K, T e am s in o rg aniz atio ns: fr o m in put- p ro cess-o utp ut m odels to IM OI m odels , A nnual R evie w o f P sycholo gy, 2 005, 5 6, 5 17, 5 43 46 J ackson S E, B re tt J F, S essa V I, C ooper D M , J ulin J A , P eyro nnin K , S om e d if fe re nces m ake a d if fe re nce: in div id ual d is sim ila rit y a nd g ro up h ete ro geneit y a s c orre la te s o f r e cru it m ent, p ro m otio ns, a nd tu rn over, J ourn al o f A pplie d P sycholo gy, 1 991, 7 6, 6 75, 6 89 47 J ackson, S . E ., & J oshi, A . ( 2 011 ). W ork te am d iv ers it y . In S . Z edeck ( E d.) , A PA h andbook o f in dustr ia l a nd o rg aniz atio nal p sycholo gy ( v ol. 1 , p p. 6 51- 686). W ashin gto n, D C: A m eric an P sycholo gic al A ssocia tio n. 48 J am es, L . R . ( 1 982). A ggre gatio n b ia s in e stim ate s o f p erc eptu al a gre em ent., J ourn al o f A pplie d P sycholo gy, 6 7( 2), 2 19-2 29. 49 J assaw alla A , S ashit ta l H , S ashit ta l A , S tu dents ’ p erc eptio ns o f s ocia l lo afin g: it s a nte cedents a nd c onsequences in u nderg ra duate b usin ess c la ssro om te am s, A cadem y o f M anagem ent L earn in g & E ducatio n, 2 009, 8 , 1 , 4 2, 5 4 50 J ehn, K . A . ( 1 995). A m ult im eth od e xam in atio n o f th e b enefit s a nd d etr im ents o f in tr a gro up c onflic t., A dm in is tr a tiv e S cie nce Q uarte rly , 2 56-2 82. 51 J ehn K A, C hadw ic k C , T hatc her S M , T o a gre e o r n ot to a gre e: th e e ffe cts o f v alu e c ongru ence, in div id ual d em ogra phic d is sim ila rit y , a nd c onflic t o n w ork gro up o utc om es, In te rn atio nal J ourn al o f C onflic t M anagem ent, 1 997, 8 , 4 , 2 87, 3 05 52 J ehn K A, M annix E A, T he d ynam ic n atu re o f c onflic t: a lo ngit u din al s tu dy o f in tr a gro up c onflic t a nd g ro up p erfo rm ance, A cadem y o f M anagem ent J ourn al, 2 001, 4 4, 2 38, 2 51 53 J ehn K A, N orth cra ft G B, N eale M A, W hy d if fe re nces m ake a d if fe re nce: a fie ld s tu dy o f d iv ers it y , c onflic t a nd p erfo rm ance in w ork gro ups, A dm in is tr a tiv e S cie nce Q uarte rly , 1 999, 4 4, 4 , 7 41, 7 63 54 J ehn K A, R is pens S , T hatc her S M , M anagin g c onflic t in g ro ups a nd te am s: c onflic t a bout c onflic t, L ookin g b ack, m ovin g fo rw ard : a r e vie w o f g ro up a nd te am -b ased r e searc h ( re searc h o n m anagin g g ro ups a nd te am s), 2 012, 1 5, 1 33, 1 59 55 J oshi A , R oh H , T he r o le o f c onte xt in w ork te am d iv ers it y r e searc h: a m eta – a naly tic r e vie w , A cadem y o f M anagem ent J ourn al, 2 009, 5 2, 3 , 5 99, 6 27 56 K acm ar K M , B achra ch D G , H arris K J, N oble D , E xplo rin g th e r o le o f s uperv is or tr u st in th e a ssocia tio ns b etw een m ult ip le s ourc es o f r e la tio nship c onflic t and o rg aniz atio nal c it iz enship b ehavio r, T he L eaders hip Q uarte rly , 2 012, 2 3, 1 , 4 3, 5 4 57 K anouse D E, H anson L R , J r, J ones E E, K anouse D E, K elle y H H, N is bett R E, V alin s S , W ein er B , N egativ it y in e valu atio ns, A ttr ib utio n: p erc eiv in g th e causes o f b ehavio r, 1 972, M orris to w n, N J, G enera l L earn in g P re ss, 4 7, 6 2 58 K err N L, M otiv atio n lo sses in s m all g ro ups: a s ocia l d ile m ma a naly sis , J ourn al o f P ers onalit y a nd S ocia l P sycholo gy, 1 983, 4 5, 8 19, 8 28 59 K ie sle r D J, T he 1 982 in te rp ers onal c ir c le : a ta xonom y fo r c om ple m enta rit y in h um an tr a nsactio ns, P sycholo gic al R evie w , 1 983, 9 0, 3 , 1 85, 2 14 60 K iv im aki M , E lo vain io M , A s hort v ers io n o f th e te am c lim ate in vento ry : d evelo pm ent a nd p sychom etr ic p ro pertie s, J ourn al o f O ccupatio nal a nd O rg aniz atio nal P sycholo gy, 1 999, 7 2, 2 , 2 41, 2 46 61 K le in , K . J ., B lie se, P . D ., K ozolo w ski, S . W ., D ansere au, F ., G avin , M . B ., G rif fin , M . A .,… & B lig h, M . C . ( 2 000). M ult ile vel a naly tic al te chniq ues: C om monalit ie s, d if fe re nces, a nd c ontin uin g q uestio ns. In K . J . K le in & S . W . J . K ozlo w ski ( E ds.) , M ult ile vel th eory , r e searc h, a nd m eth ods in o rg aniz atio ns: fo undatio ns, e xte nsio ns, a nd n ew d ir e ctio ns ( p p. 5 13-5 53). S an F ra ncis co: J ossey-B ass. 62 K ozlo w ski S W J, K le in K J, K le in K J, K ozlo w ski S W J, A m ult ile vel a ppro ach to th eory a nd r e searc h in o rg aniz atio ns: c onte xtu al, te m pora l, a nd e m erg ent pro cesses, M ult ile vel th eory , r e searc h, a nd m eth ods in o rg aniz atio ns: fo undatio ns, e xte nsio ns, a nd n ew d ir e ctio ns, 2 000, S an F ra ncis co, C A, J ossey-B ass, 3, 9 0 63 K ris to f A L, P ers on-o rg aniz atio n fit : a n in te gra tiv e r e vie w o f it s c onceptu aliz atio ns, m easure m ent, a nd im plic atio ns, P ers onnel P sycholo gy, 1 996, 4 9, 1 , 1 , 49 64 K ris to f- B ro w n A , B arric k M R, K ay S te vens C , W hen o pposit e s a ttr a ct: a m ult i- s am ple d em onstr a tio n o f c om ple m enta ry p ers on-te am fit o n e xtr a vers io n, Journ al o f P ers onalit y , 2 005, 7 3, 4 , 9 35, 9 58 65 L eana C R, P il F K , S ocia l c apit a l a nd o rg aniz atio nal p erfo rm ance: e vid ence fr o m u rb an p ublic s chools , O rg aniz atio n S cie nce, 2 006, 1 7, 3 , 3 53, 3 66 66 L eB re to n, J . M ., & S ente r, J . L . ( 2 008). A nsw ers to 2 0 q uestio ns a bout in te rra te r r e lia bilit y a nd in te rra te r a gre em ent., O rg aniz atio nal R esearc h M eth ods, 11 , 8 15-8 52. 67 L i J , H am bric k D C, F actio nal g ro ups: a n ew v anta ge o n d em ogra phic fa ult lin es, c onflic t, a nd d is in te gra tio n in w ork te am s, A cadem y o f M anagem ent Journ al, 2 005, 4 8, 5 , 7 94, 8 13 68 L onner W J, T he s earc h fo r p sycholo gic al u niv ers als , H andbook o f c ro ss-c ult u ra l p sycholo gy, 1 980, 1 , 1 43, 2 04 69 M anata , B . ( 2 016). E xplo rin g th e a ssocia tio n b etw een r e la tio nship c onflic t a nd g ro up p erfo rm ance., G ro up D ynam ic s: T heory , R esearc h, a nd P ra ctic e, 20( 2), 9 3-1 04. 70 M annix E , N eale M A, W hat d if fe re nces m ake a d if fe re nce? T he p ro m is e a nd r e alit y o f d iv ers e te am s in o rg aniz atio ns, P sycholo gic al S cie nce in th e P ublic I n te re st, 2 005, 6 , 2 , 3 1, 5 5 71 M anz, C . C ., & S im s J r, H . P . ( 1 987). L eadin g w ork ers to le ad th em selv es: T he e xte rn al le aders hip o f s elf – m anagin g w ork te am s., A dm in is tr a tiv e S cie nce Q uarte rly , 1 06-1 29. 72 M artín ez-M ore no, E ., Z orn oza, A ., G onzále z-N avarro , P ., & T hom pson, L . F . ( 2 012). In vestig atin g fa ce-to -fa ce a nd v ir tu al te am work o ver tim e: w hen d oes early ta sk c onflic t tr ig ger r e la tio nship c onflic t? , G ro up D ynam ic s: T heory , R esearc h, a nd P ra ctic e, 1 6( 3), 1 59-1 71. 73 M ath ie u, J . E ., & R app, T . L . ( 2 009). L ayin g th e fo undatio n fo r s uccessfu l te am p erfo rm ance tr a je cto rie s: th e r o le s o f te am c harte rs a nd p erfo rm ance str a te gie s., J ourn al o f A pplie d P sycholo gy, 9 4( 1), 9 0-1 03. 74 M ath ie u, J . E ., & S chulz e, W . ( 2 006). T he in flu ence o f te am k now le dge a nd fo rm al p la ns o n e pis odic te am p ro cess-p erfo rm ance r e la tio nship s., A cadem y of M anagem ent J ourn al, 4 9( 3), 6 05-6 19. 75 M ath ie u, J . E ., G ils on, L . L ., & R uddy, T . M . ( 2 006). E m pow erm ent a nd te am e ffe ctiv eness: a n e m pir ic al te st o f a n in te gra te d m odel. , J ourn al o f a pplie d psycholo gy, 9 1( 1), 9 7-1 08. 76 M cG ra th J E , G ro ups: in te ra ctio n a nd p erfo rm ance, 1 984, E ngle w ood C lif fs , N J, P re ntic e-H all 7 7 M ein dl J R , R ein ventin g le aders hip : a r a dic al, s ocia l p sycholo gic al a ppro ach, S ocia l p sycholo gy in o rg aniz atio ns: A dvances in th eory a nd r e searc h, 1 993, 12, 1 59, 2 03 78 M oham med S , A ngell L C , S urfa ce- a nd d eep-le vel d iv ers it y in w ork gro ups: e xam in in g th e m odera tin g e ffe cts o f te am o rie nta tio n a nd te am p ro cess o n re la tio nship c onflic t, J ourn al o f O rg aniz atio nal B ehavio r, 2 004, 2 5, 1 015, 1 039 79 M uchin sky P M , M onahan C J, W hat is p ers on-e nvir o nm ent c ongru ence? S upple m enta ry v ers us c om ple m enta ry m odels o f fit , J ourn al o f V ocatio nal B ehavio r, 1 987, 3 1, 3 , 2 68, 2 77 80 M ulv ey P W , K le in H J, T he im pact o f p erc eiv ed lo afin g a nd c olle ctiv e e ffic acy o n g ro up g oal p ro cesses a nd g ro up p erfo rm ance, O rg aniz atio nal B ehavio r and H um an D ecis io n P ro cesses, 1 998, 7 4, 6 2, 8 7 81 M urp hy S M , W ayne S J, L id en R C, E rd ogan B , U nders ta ndin g s ocia l lo afin g: th e r o le o f ju stic e p erc eptio ns a nd e xchange r e la tio nship s, H um an r e la tio ns, 2003, 5 6, 1 , 6 1, 8 4 82 N em bhard IM , E dm ondson A C , M akin g it s afe : th e e ffe cts o f le ader in clu siv eness a nd p ro fe ssio nal s ta tu s o n p sycholo gic al s afe ty a nd im pro vem ent effo rts in h ealt h c are te am s, J ourn al o f O rg aniz atio nal B ehavio r, 2 006, 2 7, 9 41, 9 66 83 O ’N eill T A , A lle n N J, H astin gs S E, E xam in in g th e “ p ro s” a nd “ c ons” o f te am c onflic t: a te am -le vel m eta -a naly sis o f ta sk, r e la tio nship , a nd p ro cess c onflic t, H um an P erfo rm ance, 2 013, 2 6, 3 , 2 36, 2 60 84 P elle d L H , E is enhard t K M , X in K R , E xplo rin g th e b la ck b ox: a n a naly sis o f w ork g ro up d iv ers it y , c onflic t a nd p erfo rm ance, A dm in is tr a tiv e S cie nce Q uarte rly , 1 999, 4 4, 1 , 1 , 2 8 85 P elt o korp i V , H asu M , H ow p artic ip ativ e s afe ty m atte rs m ore in te am in novatio n a s te am s iz e in cre ases, J ourn al o f B usin ess a nd P sycholo gy, 2 014, 2 9, 1, 3 7, 4 5 86 P ir o la -M erlo A , H ärte l C , M ann L , H ir s t G , H ow le aders in flu ence th e im pact o f a ffe ctiv e e vents o n te am c lim ate a nd p erfo rm ance in R &D te am s, T he Leaders hip Q uarte rly , 2 002, 1 3, 5 , 5 61, 5 81 87 P re acher K J, R ucker D D, H ayes A F, A ddre ssin g m odera te d m edia tio n h ypoth eses: th eory , m eth ods, a nd p re scrip tio ns, M ult iv aria te B ehavio ra l R esearc h, 2 007, 4 2, 1 , 1 85, 2 27 88 P re acher, K . J ., Z yphur, M . J ., & Z hang, Z . ( 2 010). A g enera l m ult ile vel S EM fr a m ew ork fo r a ssessin g m ult ile vel m edia tio n., P sycholo gic al M eth ods, 15( 3), 2 09-2 33. 89 R app, T . L ., & M ath ie u, J . E . ( 2 007). E valu atin g a n in div id ually s elf – a dm in is te re d g eneric te am work s kills tr a in in g p ro gra m a cro ss tim e a nd le vels ., S m all G ro up R esearc h, 3 8( 4), 5 32-5 55. 90 R aub S , R obert C , D if fe re ntia l e ffe cts o f e m pow erin g le aders hip o n in -ro le a nd e xtr a -ro le e m plo yee b ehavio rs : e xplo rin g th e r o le o f p sycholo gic al em pow erm ent a nd p ow er v alu es, H um an R ela tio ns, 2 010, 6 3, 1 1 , 1 743, 1 770 91 R en H , G ra y B , R epair in g r e la tio nship c onflic t: h ow v io la tio n ty pes a nd c ult u re in flu ence th e e ffe ctiv eness o f r e sto ra tio n r it u als , A cadem y o f M anagem ent R evie w , 2 009, 3 4, 1 , 1 05, 1 26 92 R ohan M J, A r o se b y a ny n am e? T he v alu es c onstr u ct, P ers onalit y a nd S ocia l P sycholo gy R evie w , 2 000, 4 , 3 , 2 55, 2 77 93 R okeach M , T he n atu re o f h um an v alu es, 1 973, N ew Y ork , F re e P re ss 94 S ala s, E ., B urk e, C . S ., & F ow lk es, J . E . ( 2 006). M easurin g te am p erfo rm ance ‘in th e w ild ’: , C halle nges a nd tip s. P erfo rm ance m easure m ent: C urre nt pers pectiv es a nd fu tu re c halle nges, 2 45-2 72. 95 S ala s, E ., P rie st, H . A ., S ta gl, K . C ., S im s, D . E ., & B urk e, C . S . ( 2 007). W ork te am s in o rg aniz atio ns: a h is to ric al r e fle ctio n a nd le ssons le arn ed., H is to ric al p ers pectiv es in in dustr ia l a nd o rg aniz atio nal p sycholo gy, 4 07-4 38. 96 S chw artz S H , Z anna M P, U niv ers als in th e c onte nt a nd s tr u ctu re o f v alu es: th eore tic al a dvances a nd e m pir ic al te sts in 2 0 c ountr ie s, A dvances in e xperim enta l s ocia l p sycholo gy, 1 992, N ew Y ork , A cadem ic P re ss, 1 , 6 5 97 S chw artz S H , A re th ere u niv ers al a spects in th e s tr u ctu re a nd c onte nts o f h um an v alu es?, J ourn al o f S ocia l Is sues, 1 994, 5 0, 4 , 1 9, 4 5 98 S chw artz S H , S elig m an C , O ls on J M , Z anna M P, V alu e p rio rit ie s a nd b ehavio r: a pply in g o f th eory o f in te gra te d v alu e s yste m s, T he p sycholo gy o f v alu es: th e O nta rio s ym posiu m , 1 996, H ills dale , N J, E rlb aum , 1 , 2 4 99 S chw artz , S . H . ( 2 003). A p ro posal fo r m easurin g v alu e o rie nta tio ns a cro ss n atio ns., Q uestio nnair e P ackage o f th e E uro pean S ocia l S urv ey, 2 59-2 90. 100 S chw artz S H , A th eory o f c ult u ra l v alu e o rie nta tio ns: e xplic atio n a nd a pplic atio ns, C om para tiv e S ocio lo gy, 2 006, 5 , 2 , 1 37, 1 82 101 S chw artz , S . H . ( 2 007). V alu e o rie nta tio ns: M easure m ent, a nte cedents a nd c onsequences a cro ss n atio ns., M easurin g a ttit u des c ro ss-n atio nally : Lessons fr o m th e E uro pean S ocia l S urv ey, 1 61-1 93. 102 S chw artz S H , M ik ulin cer M , S haver P R , B asic v alu es: h ow th ey m otiv ate a nd in hib it p ro socia l b ehavio r, P ro socia l m otiv es, e m otio ns, a nd b ehavio r: th e bette r a ngels o f o ur n atu re , 2 009, W ashin gto n, D C, A m eric an P sycholo gic al A ssocia tio n, 2 21, 2 41 103 S chw artz S H , B asic v alu es: h ow th ey m otiv ate a nd in hib it p ro socia l b ehavio r, P ro socia l m otiv es, e m otio ns, a nd b ehavio r: T he b ette r a ngels o f o ur natu re , 2 010, 1 4, 2 21, 2 41 104 S chw artz , S . H . ( 2 012). A n O verv ie w o f th e S chw artz T heory o f B asic V alu es., O nlin e R eadin gs in P sycholo gy a nd C ult u re , 2 ( 1) . d oi: 1 0.9 707/2 307- 0919.1 11 6. 105 S chw artz S H , C apra ra G V, V ecchio ne M , B asic p ers onal v alu es, c ore p olit ic al v alu es, a nd v otin g: a lo ngit u din al a naly sis , P olit ic al P sycholo gy, 2 010, 3 1, 3, 4 21, 4 52 106 S elig , J . P ., & P re acher, K . J . ( 2 008). M onte C arlo m eth od fo r a ssessin g m edia tio n: A n in te ra ctiv e to ol fo r c re atin g c onfid ence in te rv als fo r in dir e ct e ffe cts [C om pute r s oftw are ]. 1 07 S haw J D , Z hu J , D uffy M K, S cott K L, S hih H A, S usanto E , A c ontin gency m odel o f c onflic t a nd te am e ffe ctiv eness, J ourn al o f A pplie d P sycholo gy, 2 011 , 9 6, 2 , 3 91, 4 00 108 S hea G P, G uzzo R A, G ro ups a s h um an r e sourc es, R esearc h in P ers onnel a nd H um an R esourc es M anagem ent, 1 987, 5 , 3 23, 3 56 109 S im ons T , P ete rs on R , T a sk c onflic t a nd r e la tio nship c onflic t in to p m anagem ent te am s: th e p iv ota l r o le o f in tr a gro up tr u st, J ourn al o f A pplie d P sycholo gy, 2 000, 8 5, 1 02, 1 11 11 0 S im sek, Z ., H eavey, C ., & V eig a, J . J . F . ( 2 010). T he im pact o f C EO c ore s elf – e valu atio n o n th e fir m ’s e ntr e pre neuria l o rie nta tio n., S tr a te gic M anagem ent Journ al, 3 1( 1), 1 1 0-1 1 9. 111 S om ech A , T he e ffe cts o f le aders hip s ty le a nd te am p ro cess o n p erfo rm ance a nd in novatio n in fu nctio nally h ete ro geneous te am s, J ourn al o f M anagem ent, 2 006, 3 2, 1 , 1 32, 1 57 11 2 S ta hl G K, M aznevski M L, V oig t A , J onsen K , U nra velin g th e e ffe cts o f c ult u ra l d iv ers it y in te am s: a m eta -a naly sis o f r e searc h o n m ult ic ult u ra l w ork g ro ups, J ourn al o f In te rn atio nal B usin ess S tu die s, 2 010, 4 1, 4 , 6 90, 7 09 11 3 T a nnenbaum S I, M ath ie u J E , S ala s E , C ohen D , T e am s a re c hangin g: a re r e searc h a nd p ra ctic e e volv in g fa st e nough?, In dustr ia l a nd O rg aniz atio nal P sycholo gy, 2 012, 5 , 1 , 2 , 2 4 11 4 T e tt R P, J ackson D N, R oth ste in M , R eddon J R , M eta -a naly sis o f b id ir e ctio nal r e la tio ns in p ers onalit y -jo b p erfo rm ance r e searc h, H um an P erfo rm ance, 1999, 1 2, 1 , 1 , 2 9 11 5 V an D ijk H , E ngen M L, K nip penberg D , D efy in g c onventio nal w is dom : a m eta -a naly tic al e xam in atio n o f th e d if fe re nces b etw een d em ogra phic a nd jo b- re la te d d iv ers it y r e la tio nship s w it h p erfo rm ance, O rg aniz atio nal B ehavio r a nd H um an D ecis io n P ro cesses, 2 012, 1 1 9, 1 , 3 8, 5 3 11 6 V an K nip penberg , D ., & H asla m , S . A . ( 2 003). R ealiz in g th e d iv ers it y d iv id end: e xplo rin g th e s ubtle in te rp la y b etw een id entit y , id eolo gy, a nd r e alit y . In S . A. H asla m , D . v an K nip penberg , M . J . P la to w , & N . E lle m ers ( E ds.) , S ocia l id entit y a t w ork : d evelo pin g th eory fo r o rg aniz atio nal p ra ctic e ( p p. 6 1-7 7). N ew Y ork : P sycholo gy P re ss. 11 7 V an K nip penberg D , S chip pers M C, W ork g ro up d iv ers it y , A nnual R evie w o f P sycholo gy, 2 007, 5 8, 5 15, 5 41 11 8 W agem an, R . ( 2 001). T he m eanin g o f in te rd ependence. In M . E . T urn er ( E d.) , G ro ups a t w ork : th eory a nd r e searc h ( p p. 1 97-2 17). M ahw ah: E rlb aum . 11 9 W ang, P ., R ode, J . C ., S hi, K ., L uo, Z ., & C hen, W . ( 2 013). A w ork gro up c lim ate p ers pectiv e o n th e r e la tio nship s a m ong tr a nsfo rm atio nal le aders hip , w ork gro up d iv ers it y , a nd e m plo yee c re ativ it y ., G ro up & O rg aniz atio n M anagem ent, 3 8( 3), 3 34-3 60. 120 W est, M . A . ( 1 990). T he s ocia l p sycholo gy o f in novatio n in g ro ups. In M . A . W est & J . L . F arr ( E ds.) , In novatio n a nd c re ativ it y a t w ork : p sycholo gic al a nd org aniz atio nal s tr a te gie s ( p p. 3 09-3 33). C hic heste r: W ile y. 1 21 W heela n, S . A . ( 2 009). G ro up s iz e, g ro up d evelo pm ent, a nd g ro up p ro ductiv it y ., S m all G ro up R esearc h, 4 0( 2), 2 47-2 62. 122 W ild m an, J . L ., T hayer, A . L ., R osen, M . A ., S ala s, E ., M ath ie u, J . E ., & R ayne, S . R . ( 2 012). T a sk ty pes a nd te am -le vel a ttr ib ute s: s ynth esis o f te am cla ssif ic atio n lit e ra tu re ., H um an R esourc e D evelo pm ent R evie w , 1 1 ( 1), 9 7-1 29. 123 W oehr D J, A rc in ie ga L M , P olin g T L, E xplo rin g th e e ffe cts o f v alu e d iv ers it y o n te am e ffe ctiv eness, J ourn al o f B usin ess a nd P sycholo gy, 2 013, 2 8, 1 07, 121 124 W oehr D J, L oig non A C , S chm id t P B, L oughry M L, O hla nd M W, J ustif y in g a ggre gatio n w it h c onsensus-b ased c onstr u cts a r e vie w a nd e xam in atio n o f cuto ff v alu es fo r c om mon a ggre gatio n in dic es, O rg aniz atio nal R esearc h M eth ods, 2 015, 1 8, 4 , 7 04, 7 37 125 Z it e k E M , T ie dens L Z , T he flu ency o f s ocia l h ie ra rc hy: th e e ase w it h w hic h h ie ra rc hic al r e la tio nship s a re s een, r e m em bere d, le arn ed, a nd lik ed, J ourn al of P ers onalit y a nd S ocia l P sycholo gy, 2 012, 1 02, 1 , 9 8, 1 1 5 P H O TO ( C O LO R) PH O TO ( C O LO R) PH O TO ( C O LO R) ~~~~~~~~ B y K ent K . A lip our; S usan M oham med a nd S um it a R aghura m Journ al o f B usin ess & P sycholo gy is a c opyrig ht o f S prin ger, 2 018. A ll R ig hts R eserv ed.
Please address the questions listed in a three to five-page paper. Focusing on work teams: What are the key differences between a team and a working group?At what stage of team development does the te
Tit le : A uth ors : S ourc e: D ocu m en t T yp e: S ubje cts : A bstr a ct: T he lin k in fo rm atio n b elo w p ro vid es a p ers is te nt lin k to th e a rtic le y o u’v e r e queste d. P ers is te nt lin k to th is r e co rd : F ollo w in g th e lin k b elo w w ill b rin g y o u to th e s ta rt o f th e a rtic le o r c it a tio n. C ut a nd P aste : T o p la ce a rtic le lin ks in a n e xte rn al w eb d ocu m ent, s im ply c o py a nd p aste th e H TM L b elo w , s ta rtin g w it h ” < a h re f” T o c o ntin ue, in In te rn et E xp lo re r, s e le ct F IL E th en S AVE A S fr o m y o ur b ro w se r’s to olb ar a bove . B e s u re to s a ve a s a p la in te xt file ( .tx t) o r a ‘W eb P age, H TM L o nly ‘ file ( .h tm l) . In F ir e F ox, s e le ct F IL E th en S AVE F IL E A S fr o m y o ur b ro w se r’s to olb ar a bove . In C hro m e, s e le ct rig ht c lic k (w it h y o ur m ouse ) o n th is p age a nd s e le ct S AVE A S Reco rd : 1 H ow to P re em pt T e am C onflic t. T O EG EL, G IN KA BAR SO UX, J E AN -L O UIS H arv ard B usin ess R evie w . J un2016, V ol. 9 4 Is sue 6 , p 78-8 3. 6 p. 1 C olo r P hoto gra ph. A rtic le M AN AG EM EN T o f te am s in th e w ork pla ce IN TE R PER SO NAL c onflic t C O M MUNIC ATIO N in m anagem ent C O W ORKER r e la tio nship s T R UST G RO UP p ro cess E M OTIO NS Te am c onflic t c an a dd v alu e o r d estr o y it . G ood c onflic t fo ste rs r e spectfu l d ebate a nd y ie ld s m utu ally a gre ed-u pon solu tio ns th at a re o fte n fa r s uperio r to th ose fir s t o ffe re d. B ad c onflic t o ccurs w hen te am m em bers s im ply c an’t g et p ast th eir d if fe re nces, k illin g p ro ductiv it y a nd s tif lin g in novatio n. D estr u ctiv e c onflic t ty pic ally s te m s n ot fr o m d if fe re nces o f opin io n b ut fr o m a p erc eiv ed in com patib ilit y b etw een th e w ay c erta in te am m em bers th in k a nd a ct. T he c onventio nal appro ach to w ork in g th ro ugh s uch c onflic t is to r e spond to c la shes a s th ey a ris e. B ut th is a ppro ach r o utin ely fa ils b ecause it a llo w s fr u str a tio ns to b uild fo r to o lo ng, m akin g it d if fic ult to r e set n egativ e im pre ssio ns a nd r e sto re tr u st.In th eir r e searc h o n te am d ynam ic s a nd e xperie nce w ork in g w it h e xecutiv e te am s, T o egel a nd B ars oux h ave fo und a p ro activ e appro ach to b e m uch m ore e ffe ctiv e. In th is a rtic le , th ey in tr o duce a m eth odolo gy th at fo cuses o n h ow p eople lo ok, a ct, s peak, th in k, a nd fe el. T e am le aders fa cilit a te fiv e c onvers atio ns— one fo cused o n e ach c ate gory — befo re th e te am g ets u nder w ay, to b uild a s hare d u nders ta ndin g o f th e p ro cess, r a th er th an th e c onte nt, o f w ork a nd la y th e fo undatio n fo r effe ctiv e c olla bora tio n. [A BSTR AC T F R O M A U TH O R] Copyrig ht 2 016 H arv ard B usin ess P ublis hin g. A ll R ig hts R eserv ed. A ddit io nal r e str ic tio ns m ay a pply in clu din g th e u se o f th is c onte nt a s a ssig ned c ours e m ate ria l. P le ase c onsult y our in stit u tio n’s lib ra ria n a bout a ny r e str ic tio ns th at m ig ht a pply Full T ext W ord C ount: IS SN : Accessio n N um ber: P ers is te n t lin k t o t h is r e co rd (P erm alin k): C ut a n d P aste : D ata b ase: S ectio n: under th e lic ense w it h y our in stit u tio n. F or m ore in fo rm atio n a nd te achin g r e sourc es fr o m H arv ard B usin ess P ublis hin g in clu din g H arv ard B usin ess S chool C ases, e Learn in g p ro ducts , a nd b usin ess s im ula tio ns p le ase v is it h bsp.h arv ard .e du. (C opyrig ht a pplie s to a ll A bstr a cts .) 2 906 0017-8 012 11 5490552 http ://e zpro xy.u m gc.e du/lo gin ?url= http s://s earc h.e bscohost.c om /lo gin .a spx? dir e ct= tr u e& db= heh& AN =11 5490552& sit e = eds-liv e& scope= sit e < A h re f= “h ttp ://e zpro xy.u m gc.e du/lo gin ?url= http s://s earc h.e bscohost.c om /lo gin .a spx? dir e ct= tr u e& db= heh& AN =11 5490552& sit e = eds-liv e& scope= sit e “> H ow to P re em pt T e am C onflic t.< /A > H ealt h B usin ess E lit e S PO TLIG HT O N M ANAG IN G T E A M S How t o P re em pt T eam C onflic t Jeff P erro tt, B urd en o f G ood, 2 014 O il o n lin en Te am c onflic t c an a dd v alu e o r d estr o y it . G ood c onflic t fo ste rs r e spectfu l d ebate a nd y ie ld s m utu ally a gre ed-u pon s olu tio ns th at a re o fte n fa r s uperio r to th ose fir s t o ffe re d. B ad c onflic t o ccurs w hen te am m em bers s im ply c an’t g et p ast th eir d if fe re nces, k illin g p ro ductiv it y a nd s tif lin g in novatio n. D is para te o pin io ns a re n’t th e r o ot o f th e p ro ble m , h ow ever. M ost d estr u ctiv e c onflic t s te m s fr o m s om eth in g d eeper: a p erc eiv ed in com patib ilit y in th e w ay vario us te am m em bers o pera te d ue to a ny n um ber o f fa cto rs , in clu din g p ers onalit y , in dustr y , r a ce, g ender, a nd a ge. T he c onventio nal a ppro ach to w ork in g th ro ugh s uch c onflic t is to r e spond to c la shes a s th ey a ris e o r w ait u ntil th ere is c le ar e vid ence o f a p ro ble m b efo re a ddre ssin g it . B ut th ese a ppro aches ro utin ely fa il b ecause th ey a llo w fr u str a tio ns to b uild fo r to o lo ng, m akin g it d if fic ult to r e set n egativ e im pre ssio ns a nd r e sto re tr u st. In o ur 2 5 y ears o f r e searc hin g te am d ynam ic s, c oachin g te am s in F ortu ne 5 00 c orp ora tio ns, a nd te achin g th ousands o f e xecutiv es a t D uke U niv ers it y , L ondon B usin ess S chool, a nd IM D, w e’v e fo und th at a p ro activ e a ppro ach is m uch m ore e ffe ctiv e. W hen y ou s urfa ce d if fe re nces b efo re a te am s ta rts w ork – – e ven w hen th e g ro up s eem s h om ogeneous a nd h arm onio us – – y ou c an p re em pt d estr u ctiv e c onflic t. W e h ave d evelo ped a nd te ste d a m eth odolo gy th at fo cuses o n fiv e a re as: h ow p eople lo ok, a ct, s peak, th in k, a nd fe el. T e am le aders fa cilit a te a s erie s o f 2 0- to 3 0-m in ute c onvers atio ns, e ncoura gin g m em bers to e xpre ss th eir p re fe re nces a nd e xpecta tio ns in e ach a re a, id entif y th e m ost lik ely a re as o f m is alig nm ent o r fr ic tio n, a nd c om e u p w it h s uggestio ns fo r h ow th ose w it h d if fe rin g e xpecta tio ns c an w ork to geth er. T hro ugh th e n onju dgm enta l e xchange o f id eas a nd fe edback, te am s e sta blis h a fo undatio n o f tr u st a nd u nders ta ndin g a nd a re a ble to s et g ro und r u le s fo r e ffe ctiv e c olla bora tio n. T hough s ettin g a sid e tim e fo r th ese c onvers atio ns u p fr o nt m ig ht s eem o nero us, w e’v e fo und th at it ‘s a w orth w hile in vestm ent fo r a ny te am – – n ew o r o ld , C – suit e o r fr o ntlin e – – th at w ill b e c olla bora tin g o n s ig nif ic ant w ork fo r a n e xte nded p erio d o f tim e. L eaders n eed n o s pecia l tr a in in g to fa cilit a te th e d is cussio ns. In deed, w e’v e fo und th at m anagers c an m aste r th ese c onflic t- p re ventio n s kills fa r m ore e asily th an th ose r e quir e d fo r c onflic t r e solu tio n. F iv e C onvers atio ns B ecause th e fiv e c onvers atio ns w e p ro pose g o s o fa r b eyond ty pic al ” g ettin g to k now y ou” c hit c hat, it ‘s im porta nt to k ic k th em o ff p ro perly . F ir s t, a lt h ough th is m ay s eem o bvio us, m ake s ure to in clu de e very one o n th e te am a nd e xpla in w hy y ou’r e in it ia tin g th e d is cussio ns. Y ou m ig ht s ay s om eth in g lik e: ” W ork in g o n a te am m eans c olla bora tin g w it h p eople w hose a ppro aches m ay d if fe r fr o m y our o w n. L et’s e xplo re th ese d if fe re nces n ow , w hile th e p re ssure is o ff, s o th at th ey don’t c atc h u s b y s urp ris e a nd g enera te u npro ductiv e c onflic t a t a n in opportu ne m om ent.” E xpla in th at th e fo cus o f th e d is cussio ns w ill b e o n th e p ro cess o f w ork r a th er th an th e c onte nt. A s th e fa cilit a to r, m ake s ure th at p eople a re c om fo rta ble s harin g a t th eir o w n p ace a nd c oach th em o n h ow to a sk c la rif y in g, n onju dgm enta l q uestio ns o f o ne anoth er. E ncoura ge e very one to b egin s ta te m ents w it h ” In m y w orld …” a nd q uestio ns w it h ” In y our w orld .? ” T his p hra sin g, b orro w ed fr o m o rg aniz atio nal b ehavio r schola r E dgar S chein , r e in fo rc es th e id ea th at u nderly in g s ourc es o f d if fe re nces a re ir re le vant. W hat d oes m atte r is th e a ttit u des a nd b ehavio rs e xpre ssed a s a r e sult o f e ach p ers on’s c um ula tiv e p ers onal a nd p ro fe ssio nal e xperie nce. F or e xam ple , th e fa ct th at y ou a re a ssertiv e m ay b e r e la te d to y our p ers onalit y , g ender, o r c ult u re , b ut th e o nly th in g y our c olle agues n eed to k now is th at y ou te nd to v ocaliz e y our o pin io ns in p la in te rm s. Te am m em bers a re lik ely to b e h esit a nt a s y ou b egin , s o e ase e very one in to th e p ro cess b y v olu nte erin g to s hare fir s t. O nce th e d ia lo gue g ain s s te am , le t oth ers g uid e ( b ut n ot d om in ate ) it . E ventu ally , p eople w ill m ove fr o m s uperfic ia l d is clo sure s to d eeper d is cussio n. A s th ey lis te n to th e r e sponses o f o th ers a nd offe r th eir o w n, th ey w ill d evelo p n ot o nly a b ette r u nders ta ndin g o f th eir c olle agues b ut a ls o g re ate r s elf – a w are ness. T he fiv e to pic s c an b e a ddre ssed in a ny o rd er; h ow ever, w e’v e fo und th e s equence p re sente d h ere to b e th e m ost lo gic al, e specia lly w it h n ew te am s, b ecause w e p erc eiv e fir s t h ow o th ers lo ok a nd th en h ow th ey s peak a nd a ct. O nly a fte r o bserv in g th em fo r a lo nger p erio d c an w e in fe r h ow th ey th in k o r fe el. T hat s aid , fa cilit a to rs s hould n ot g et h ung u p o n th e c ate gorie s, b ecause th ere is in evit a ble o verla p. L ik ew is e, if p artic ip ants s tr u ggle w it h th e ” In m y w orld ” la nguage, it c an be tw eaked. L et’s n ow c onsid er th e fiv e c ate gorie s in tu rn . L O OK: Spottin g t h e D if fe re n ce C olle agues r o utin ely m ake fa st ju dgm ents ( e specia lly n egativ e o nes) a bout th e c hara cte r, c om pete nce, o r s ta tu s o f th eir p eers o n th e b asis o f th e b rie fe st exposure – – w hat N alin i A m bady a nd R obert R osenth al, in r e searc h c onducte d a t H arv ard , c alle d ” th in s lic es” o f b ehavio r. T hese r e actio ns a re o fte n tr ig gere d b y dif fe re nces in th e w ay p eople p re sent th em selv es. W e u nconscio usly r e spond to c ues in h ow th ey lo ok, m ove, a nd d re ss, in th eir to ne o f v oic e, a nd in w hat th ey s ay a bout th em selv es. T he g oal o f th is c onvers atio n is to h elp te am m em bers r e fle ct o n h ow th ey in te nd to c om e a cro ss to o th ers – – a nd h ow th ey a ctu ally d o. A g ood p la ce to b egin is a d is cussio n a bout th e d riv ers o f s ta tu s in te am m em bers ‘ r e spectiv e ” w orld s.” F or e xam ple , s om e p eople p ut a p re m iu m o n jo b- r e la te d c hara cte ris tic s, s uch as e xperie nce, c onnectio ns, a nd fu nctio nal b ackgro und. F or o th ers , s ta tu s is lin ked to d em ogra phic c ues s uch a s a ge, g ender, n atio nalit y , a nd e ducatio n. T e am m em bers c an q uic kly p ut c olle agues o ff b y e m phasiz in g th e w ro ng c re dentia ls , a doptin g a n u nsuit a ble p ers ona, o r e ven d re ssin g in appro pria te ly fo r th e c ult u re . O ne e xecutiv e fr o m th e ” b utto ned-u p” b ankin g s ecto r fa ced th is ty pe o f c onflic t w hen h e jo in ed a n a dvertis in g g ro up. In a te am d is cussio n, o ne o f h is c olle agues to ld h im , ” T he n orm h ere is b usin ess c asual. S o b y w earin g a s uit a nd tie a t a ll tim es, it ‘s lik e y ou th in k y ou’r e s pecia l, a nd th at c re ate s d is ta nce.” A s im ila r s it u atio n a ro se a t a h eavy-e ngin eerin g c om pany w hen a fe m ale d esig ner jo in ed it s b oard . H er c olo rfu l c lo th in g a nd in tr o ducto ry c om ments , w hic h in clu ded tw o lit e ra ry r e fe re nces, m ade h er p ra gm atic p eers th in k s he v alu ed s ty le o ver s ubsta nce, w hic h s et h er u p to b e m arg in aliz ed. A n e xam ple th at h ig hlig hts th e v alu e o f d is cussin g p erc eptio ns u p fr o nt c om es fr o m a g lo bal fo od g ro up, w here a le aders hip -d evelo pm ent r o ta tio n o f p ro m is in g young e xecutiv es h ad b een c re atin g r e sentm ent a m ong o ld er s ubsid ia ry e xecutiv es, m ost n ota bly in th e A ustr a lia n o pera tio n. T he lo cal te am h ad d evelo ped a d ysfu nctio nal ” k eep y our h ead d ow n” a ttit u de a nd s im ply to le ra te d e ach a m bit io us M BA u ntil h e o r s he m oved o n. B ut w hen o ne in com in g m anager e ngaged h is t e am in th e fiv e c onvers atio ns a t th e s ta rt o f h is te rm , h e w as a ble to d is pel th eir n egativ e p re conceptio ns a nd d evelo p fa r-m ore – p ro ductiv e r e la tio nship s th an his p re decessors h ad. Q UESTIO NS T O A SK ” In y o ur w orld … …what m akes a g ood fir s t im pre ssio n? A b ad o ne? …w hat d o y ou n otic e fir s t a bout o th ers ( d re ss, s peech, d em eanor)? …what d oes th at m ake y ou th in k a bout th em ( rig id , p ushy, la zy)? …w hat in ta ngib le c re dentia ls d o y ou v alu e ( e ducatio n, e xperie nce, c onnectio ns)? …h ow d o y ou p erc eiv e s ta tu s d if fe re nces?” A CT: M is ju dgin g B eh avio r O n d iv ers e te am s, c la shin g b ehavio ra l n orm s a re c om mon s ourc es o f tr o uble . S eem in gly tr iv ia l g estu re s c an h ave a d is pro portio nate im pact, a ggra vatin g ste re oty pes, a lie natin g p eople , a nd d is ru ptin g c om munic atio n flo w s. P hysic al b oundarie s a re o fte n a p ro ble m a re a. C onsid er th e m edia fir e sto rm th at r e tir e d F re nch s occer p la yer T hie rry H enry s et o ff w hen, a s a T V p undit r e actin g to s urp ris in g b re akin g n ew s, h e to uched th e th ig h o f h is m ale E nglis h c olle ague. F re nch c ult u re a ccepts th at s ort o f in te ra ctio n, b ut fo r te le vis io n s tu dio c olle agues in th e m acho w orld o f B rit is h fo otb all, it w as a s te p to o fa r. O r c onsid er th e in tr o verte d, h ig h- a nxie ty e xecutiv e w e w ork ed w it h w hose w arm a nd gre gario us p eer m ade h im u ncom fo rta ble : T heir e xpecta tio ns fo r th e p ro per d is ta nce a t w hic h to in te ra ct d if fe re d s ta rk ly . ” I w as ta kin g a c offe e w it h h im a t o ne o f th ose s ta ndin g ta ble s,” h e r e m em bers . ” W e lit e ra lly s huffle d r o und th e ta ble a s h e m oved to w ard m e a nd I tr ie d to r e esta blis h m y b uffe r z one.” A ttit u des a bout tim e c an s tir u p c onflic t, to o. P eople d if fe r w id ely – – e ven w it h in th e s am e fir m o r d epartm ent – – w it h r e gard to th e im porta nce o f b ein g p unctu al and r e spectfu l o f o th er p eople ‘s s chedule s. M ore b ro adly , th e v alu e o f k eepin g p ro je cts o n p ace a nd h it tin g m ile sto ne d eadlin es m ay b e p ara m ount to s om e, w here as o th ers m ay v alu e fle xib ilit y a nd th e a bilit y to n im bly r e spond a s c ir c um sta nces u nfo ld . A n e xam ple c om es fr o m a N ord ic in dustr ia l m achin ery c om pany th at h ad r e curre nt te nsio ns in th e to p te am . T he n on-N ord ic e xecutiv es in th e g ro up w ere d eeply fr u str a te d b y w hat th ey s aw a s a la ck o f u rg ency show n b y th eir N ord ic c olle agues, a nd th ey r e sponded w it h b ru squeness – – w hic h, o f c ours e, u pset th eir p eers . E ventu ally , th e g ro up d is cussed th e s it u atio n and s et n ew r u le s o f e ngagem ent. B ut a p re em ptiv e c onvers atio n w ould h ave s aved th em a ll a g re at d eal o f tim e a nd e nerg y. D if fe rin g le vels o f a ssertiv eness b etw een te am m em bers c an p re sent p ro ble m s a s w ell. M ale e xecutiv es, fo r e xam ple , o r p eople fr o m in div id ualis tic c orp ora te a nd n atio nal c ult u re s, o fte n fe el q uit e c om fo rta ble v olu nte erin g fo r s pecia l a ssig nm ents o r n om in atin g th em selv es to ta ke o n a ddit io nal r e sponsib ilit ie s b ecause th ey c onsid er it a s ig n o f c om mit m ent, c om pete nce, a nd s elf – c onfid ence. B ut o th ers m ay s ee th ose a ctio ns a s b la ta nt, u ndig nif ie d, a nd s hallo w s elf – p ro m otio n. E xpecta tio ns fo r h ow m uch c olle agues s hould h elp o ne a noth er, a s o pposed to c ontr ib utin g in div id ually to th e g ro up e ffo rt, c an a ls o v ary w id ely . F or e xam ple , a te am o f s oftw are e ngin eers r a n in to p ro ble m s w hen it b ecam e c le ar th at s om e m em bers w ere v ery s ele ctiv e in g iv in g a id to p eers , w hile o th ers d id s o w henever a sked. T hose w ho s pent m ore tim e h elp in g o th ers u nders ta ndably b egan to fe el r e sentfu l a nd d is advanta ged, s in ce d oin g s o o fte n in te rfe re d w it h th eir o w n w ork . It’s im porta nt to e sta blis h te am n orm s a ro und a ll th ese b ehavio rs u p fr o nt to a void u nnecessary a nta gonis m . QUESTIO NS T O A SK ” In y o ur w orld … …how im porta nt a re p unctu alit y a nd tim e lim it s ? …are th ere c onsequences o f b ein g la te o r m is sin g d eadlin es? …what is a c om fo rta ble p hysic al d is ta nce fo r in te ra ctin g in th e w ork pla ce? …should p eople v olu nte er fo r a ssig nm ents o r w ait to b e n om in ate d? …w hat g ro up b ehavio rs a re v alu ed ( h elp in g o th ers , n ot c om pla in in g)? ” S PEA K: Div id in g b y L an guag e C om munic atio n s ty le s h ave m any d im ensio ns – – th e w ord s p eople c hoose to e xpre ss th em selv es, to le ra nce fo r c andor, h um or, p auses a nd in te rru ptio ns, a nd so o n – – a nd th e p ossib ilit ie s fo r m is unders ta ndin g a re e ndle ss. Te am s m ade u p o f p eople w it h d if fe re nt n ativ e la nguages p re sent s ig nif ic ant c halle nges in th is a re a. B ut e ven w hen e very one is flu ent in a p artic ula r la nguage, th ere m ay b e d eep d if fe re nces in h ow in div id uals e xpre ss th em selv es. F or e xam ple , d ependin g o n c onte xt, c ult u re , a nd o th er fa cto rs , ” y es” c an m ean ” m aybe” or ” le t’s tr y it ” o r e ven ” n o w ay.” A t a E uro pean s oftw are fir m w e w ork ed w it h , tw o e xecutiv es w ere a t e ach o th er’s th ro ats o ver w hat o ne o f th em c alle d ” b ro ken pro m is es.” D is cussio n r e veale d th at w ord s o ne h ad in te rp re te d a s a fir m c om mit m ent w ere m ere ly a spir a tio nal to h is c ounte rp art. S om etim es e ven la udable o rg aniz atio nal g oals c an e ngender tr o uble som e c om munic atio n d ynam ic s: F or e xam ple , c orp ora tio ns th at p ro m ote a c ult u re o f posit iv it y m ay e nd u p w it h e m plo yees w ho a re r e lu cta nt o r a fr a id to c halle nge o r c rit ic iz e. A s th e m ark etin g d ir e cto r o f a fa st- m ovin g c onsum er g oods fir m to ld u s: ” Y ou’r e n ot s upposed to b e n egativ e a bout p eople ‘s id eas. W hat’s g oin g th ro ugh th e b ack o f y our m in d is ‘I c an’t s ee th is w ork in g.’ B ut w hat c om es o ut o f your m outh is ‘Y eah, th at’s g re at.'” W hen te am s d is cuss a t th e o uts et h ow m uch c andor is a ppro pria te , th ey c an e sta blis h c le ar g uid elin es a bout s peakin g u p o r p ushin g b ack o n o th ers . A t a G erm an in vestm ent b ank, a to p te am th at h ad b een d om in ate d b y s evera l a ssertiv e c onsult a nts a dopte d a ” fo ur s ente nce” r u le – – a c uto ff fo r e ach p ers on’s c ontr ib utio ns in m eetin gs – – a s a w ay to e ncoura ge ta kin g tu rn s a nd g iv e m ore -re serv ed m em bers a c hance to c ontr ib ute . A t H ein eken U SA, b oard m em bers u se lit tle to y h ors es th at s it o n th e c onfe re nce ta ble to a ccom plis h th e s am e g oal: If y ou’r e ta lk in g a nd s om eone tip s o ne o ver, y ou k now y ou’r e b eatin g a d ead hors e a nd it ‘s tim e to m ove o n. Q UESTIO NS T O A SK “In y o ur w orld … …is a p ro m is e a n a spir a tio n o r a g uara nte e? …w hic h is m ost im porta nt: d ir e ctn ess o r h arm ony? …are ir o ny a nd s arc asm a ppre cia te d? …do in te rru ptio ns s ig nal in te re st o r r u deness? …does s ile nce m ean r e fle ctio n o r d is engagem ent? …should d is sentin g v ie w s b e a ir e d in p ublic o r d is cussed o ff- lin e? …is u nsolic it e d fe edback w elc om e?” T H IN K: O ccu pyin g D if fe re n t M in dsets P erh aps th e b ig gest s ourc e o f c onflic t o n te am s s te m s fr o m th e w ay in w hic h m em bers th in k a bout th e w ork th ey’r e d oin g. T heir v arie d p ers onalit ie s a nd experie nces m ake th em a le rt to v ary in g s ig nals a nd c ause th em to ta ke d if fe re nt a ppro aches to p ro ble m s olv in g a nd d ecis io n m akin g. T his c an r e sult in th eir w ork in g a t c ro ss-p urp oses. A s o ne e xecutiv e w it h a U .S . a ppare l c om pany n ote d: ” T here is o fte n te nsio n b etw een th e r e ady-fir e -a im ty pes o n o ur te am a nd th e m ore a naly tic al c olle agues.” W e fo und th is d ynam ic in a n ew -p ro duct te am a t a D utc h c onsum er g oods c om pany. M em bers ‘ c ognit iv e s ty le s d if fe re d g re atly , p artic ula rly w it h r e gard to m eth odic al v ers us in tu it iv e th in kin g. O nce a w are o f th e p ro ble m , th e p ro je ct m anager in it ia te d d is cussio ns a bout w ays to r o ta te le aders hip o f th e p ro je ct, m atc hin g te am n eeds to m in dsets . D urin g th e m ore c re ativ e a nd c onceptu al p hases, th e fr e eth in kers w ould b e in c harg e, w hile a naly tic al a nd d eta il- o rie nte d m em bers w ould ta ke o ver e valu atio n, o rg aniz atio n, a nd im ple m enta tio n a ctiv it ie s. A ll m em bers c am e to u nders ta nd th e v alu e o f th e d if fe re nt a ppro aches. Te am s a ls o n eed to fin d a lig nm ent o n to le ra nce fo r r is k a nd s hif tin g p rio rit ie s. A s tr ik in g e xam ple c om es fr o m a b io te ch te am m ade u p o f s cie ntis ts a nd executiv es. B y v ir tu e o f th eir tr a in in g, th e s cie ntis ts e m bra ced e xperim enta tio n, a ccepte d fa ilu re a s p art o f th e d is covery p ro cess, a nd v alu ed th e c ontin ued purs uit o f b re akth ro ughs, r e gard le ss o f tim e h oriz on o r p ote ntia l fo r c om merc ia l a pplic atio ns. T hat m in dset ja rre d th eir M BA-tr a in ed p eers , w ho s ought pre dic ta bilit y in r e sult s a nd p re fe rre d to k ill p ro je cts th at fa ile d to m eet e xpecta tio ns. T o b rid ge th ose d if fe re nces, a fa cilit a to r u sed r o le p la y to h elp th e tw o gro ups b ette r u nders ta nd e ach o th er’s p ers pectiv e. Q UESTIO NS T O A SK “In y o ur w orld … …is u ncerta in ty v ie w ed a s a th re at o r a n o pportu nit y ? …w hat’s m ore im porta nt: th e b ig p ic tu re o r th e d eta ils ? …is it b ette r to b e r e lia ble o r fle xib le ? …w hat is th e a ttit u de to w ard fa ilu re ? …how d o p eople to le ra te d evia tio ns fr o m th e p la n?” F E EL: C hartin g E m otio nals T e am m em bers m ay d if fe r w id ely in th e in te nsit y o f th eir fe elin gs, h ow th ey c onvey p assio n in a g ro up, a nd th e w ay th ey m anage th eir e m otio ns in th e fa ce o f dis agre em ent o r c onflic t. Som etim es e nth usia sm c an o verw helm p eers o r fu el s keptic is m . A n e xtr o verte d C M O a t a lo gis tic s c om pany w e w ork ed w it h a ssum ed th at th e m ore p assio n she s how ed fo r h er id eas, th e m ore r e sponsiv e th e g ro up w ould b e to th em . B ut h er ” ra h-ra h” a ppro ach w as to o m uch fo r th e in tr o verte d, p ra gm atic C EO . S he w ould s ta rt p ic kin g a part p ro posals w henever th e C M O g ot e xcit e d. A t th e o th er e xtr e m e, s tr o ng n egativ e e m otio ns – – e specia lly o vert d is pla ys o f a nger – – c an be u psettin g o r in tim id atin g. N egativ e fe elin gs c an b e a s ensit iv e is sue to b ro ach, s o it ‘s h elp fu l to s ta rt b y ta lk in g a bout th e k in d o f c onte xt te am m em bers a re u sed to . F ro m th ere , th e dis cussio n c an g et m ore p ers onal. F or e xam ple , in o ne c onvers atio n w e fa cilit a te d a t a c onstr u ctio n c om pany, a n e xecutiv e to ld h is c olle agues th at ” y ellin g w as com mon” in h is p re vio us w ork pla ce – – b ut th at it w as a h abit h e w ante d to c orre ct. H e to ld u s th at h e h ad m ade th is d is clo sure to ” k eep [h im ]s elf h onest” in p urs uit o f th at g oal. E arly d is cussio ns s hould to uch o n n ot o nly th e r is ks o f v entin g b ut a ls o th e d anger o f b ottlin g th in gs u p. T he te ndency to s ig nal ir rit a tio n o r d is conte nt in dir e ctly – – th ro ugh w it h dra w al, s arc asm , a nd p riv ate ly c om pla in in g a bout o ne a noth er – – c an b e ju st a s d estr u ctiv e a s v ola tile o utb urs ts a nd in tim id atio n. It’s im porta nt to a ddre ss th e c auses o f d is engagem ent d ir e ctly , th ro ugh o pen in quir y a nd d ebate , a nd c om e u p w it h w ays to d is agre e p ro ductiv ely . Q UESTIO NS T O A SK “In y o ur w orld … …what e m otio ns ( p osit iv e a nd n egativ e) a re a ccepta ble a nd u naccepta ble to d is pla y in a b usin ess c onte xt? …h ow d o p eople e xpre ss a nger o r e nth usia sm ? …how w ould y ou r e act if y ou w ere a nnoyed w it h a te am mate ( w it h s ile nce, b ody la nguage, h um or, th ro ugh a th ir d p arty )? ” T H E B EN EFIT S of a ntic ip atin g a nd h eadin g o ff c onflic t b efo re it b ecom es d estr u ctiv e a re im mense. W e’v e fo und th at th ey in clu de g re ate r p artic ip atio n, im pro ved c re ativ it y , a nd, u lt im ate ly , s m arte r d ecis io n m akin g. A s o ne m anager p ut it : ” W e s till d is agre e, b ut th ere ‘s le ss b ad b lo od a nd a g enuin e s ense o f valu in g e ach o th er’s c ontr ib utio ns.” H BR R eprin t R 1606F Id ea in B rie f T H E P R O BLE M Te am c onflic t e ru pts n ot b ecause o f d if fe re nces in o pin io n b ut b ecause o f a p erc eiv ed in com patib ilit y in th e w ay d if fe re nt te am m em bers th in k a nd a ct. W hen people c an’t g et p ast th eir d if fe re nces, th e r e sult in g c la shes k ill p ro ductiv it y a nd s tif le in novatio n. A N A LT E R NATIV E V IE W D if fe re nces in p ers pectiv e a nd e xperie nce c an g enera te g re at v alu e, o f c ours e. A n ew m eth odolo gy h elp s le aders g uid e th eir te am s th ro ugh fiv e c onvers atio ns befo re w ork s ta rts , to b uild s hare d u nders ta ndin g a nd la y th e fo undatio n fo r e ffe ctiv e c olla bora tio n. IN P R ACTIC E The a ppro ach fo cuses o n th e p ro cess o f w ork r a th er th an th e c onte nt. L eaders fa cilit a te ta rg ete d d is cussio ns th at e xplo re th e v ary in g w ays te am m em bers lo ok, a ct, s peak, th in k, a nd fe el, to im muniz e th e te am a gain st u npro ductiv e c onflic t w hen th e p re ssure is o n. ~~~~~~~~ B y G IN KA T O EG EL a nd J E AN -L O UIS B AR SO UX G in ka T o egel is a p ro fe ssor o f o rg aniz atio nal b ehavio r a nd le aders hip a t IM D in L ausanne, S w it z erla nd. Jean-L ouis B ars oux is a s enio r r e searc h fe llo w a t IM D. Copyrig ht 2 016 H arv ard B usin ess P ublis hin g. A ll R ig hts R eserv ed. A ddit io nal r e str ic tio ns m ay a pply in clu din g th e u se o f th is c onte nt a s a ssig ned c ours e m ate ria l. P le ase c onsult y our in stit u tio n’s lib ra ria n a bout a ny r e str ic tio ns th at m ig ht a pply u nder th e lic ense w it h y our in stit u tio n. F or m ore in fo rm atio n a nd te achin g r e sourc es fr o m H arv ard B usin ess P ublis hin g in clu din g H arv ard B usin ess S chool C ases, e Learn in g p ro ducts , a nd b usin ess s im ula tio ns p le ase v is it h bsp.h arv ard .e du.
Please address the questions listed in a three to five-page paper. Focusing on work teams: What are the key differences between a team and a working group?At what stage of team development does the te
Tit le : A uth ors : P ublic atio n In fo rm atio n: R eso urc e T yp e: D escrip tio n: S ubje cts : C ate g orie s: R ela te d IS B Ns: O CLC : Accessio n N um ber: P ublis h er P erm is sio ns: T he lin k in fo rm atio n b elo w p ro vid es a p ers is te nt lin k to th e a rtic le y o u’v e r e queste d. P ers is te nt lin k to th is r e co rd : F ollo w in g th e lin k b elo w w ill b rin g y o u to th e s ta rt o f th e a rtic le o r c it a tio n. C ut a nd P aste : T o p la ce a rtic le lin ks in a n e xte rn al w eb d ocu m ent, s im ply c o py a nd p aste th e H TM L b elo w , s ta rtin g w it h ” < a h re f” T o c o ntin ue, in In te rn et E xp lo re r, s e le ct F IL E th en S AVE A S fr o m y o ur b ro w se r’s to olb ar a bove . B e s u re to s a ve a s a p la in te xt file ( .tx t) o r a ‘W eb P age, H TM L o nly ‘ file ( .h tm l) . In F ir e F ox, s e le ct F IL E th en S AVE F IL E A S fr o m y o ur b ro w se r’s to olb ar a bove . In C hro m e, s e le ct rig ht c lic k (w it h y o ur m ouse ) o n th is p age a nd s e le ct S AVE A S Reco rd : 1 C ult u ra l In te llig ence : T he C om petit iv e E dge fo r L eaders C ro ssin g B oundarie s Julia M id dle to n London : A &C B la ck B usin ess In fo rm atio n a nd D evelo pm ent. 2 014 eB ook. R ig ht n ow , v ast a m ounts o f tim e a nd m oney a re b ein g in veste d a ll r o und th e w orld in b uild in g g lo bal b ra nds a nd org anis atio ns. B ut w here a re th e g lo bal le aders w ho w ill le ad th em ? L eaders w ho c an c ro ss c ult u ra l b oundarie s: b etw een east a nd w est, a nd n orth a nd s outh ; b etw een fa it h s a nd b elie fs ; b etw een p ublic , p riv ate a nd v olu nta ry s ecto rs ; a nd betw een th e g enera tio ns? W here a re th e le aders w ho c an le ad in w hat J ulia c alls th e “ m agnet c it ie s” o f th e w orld : w here th e w orld ‘s m ost ta le nte d y oung p eople w ill c onvene? B ecause th ese p eople w ill s im ply tu rn th eir b acks o n b osses w ho dem and th at th eir te am s th in k a nd b ehave a lik e. T he r a ce is o n to d evelo p le aders w it h C Q . A nd th is b ook is d esig ned to g iv e r e aders a d ecis iv e h ead s ta rt. In th e p ro cess, J ulia h as s poken to le aders a ll r o und th e w orld , a nd in vit e d th em to te ll t h eir o w n C Q s to rie s: s uccessfu l a nd d is astr o us, s erio us a nd fu nny, p oig nant, p ra gm atic a nd o fte n h ig hly p ers onal. T he re sult is s urp ris in g, c halle ngin g a nd fr e quently u ncom fo rta ble ( th ere is n o s im plis tic a dvic e h ere a bout h ow to e xchange busin ess c ard s in th e c orre ct lo cal m anner). B ut th e a m bit io n is h uge. A s is th e p riz e fo r th e n ext g enera tio n o f le aders w ho s ee th e o pportu nit y s he o utlin es – a nd g ra sp it . C ult u ra l in te llig ence Leaders hip B U SIN ESS & E C O NO M IC S / M anagem ent B U SIN ESS & E C O NO M IC S / H um an R esourc es & P ers onnel M anagem ent 9781472904812. 9 781472971784. 9 781472904836. 9 781472904829. 879074510 761263 P rin t/E -m ail/ S ave 5 0 P ages R estr ic te d C opy/P aste Pers is te n t lin k t o t h is r e co rd (P erm alin k): C ut a n d P aste : D ata b ase: http ://e zpro xy.u m gc.e du/lo gin ?url= http s://s earc h.e bscohost.c om /lo gin .a spx? dir e ct= tr u e& db= nle bk& AN =761263& sit e = eds-liv e& scope= sit e < A h re f= “h ttp ://e zpro xy.u m gc.e du/lo gin ?url= http s://s earc h.e bscohost.c om /lo gin .a spx? dir e ct= tr u e& db= nle bk& AN =761263& sit e = eds-liv e& scope= sit e “> C ult u ra l In te llig ence : T he C om petit iv e E dge fo r L eaders C ro ssin g B oundarie s< /A > eB ook C olle ctio n ( E BSC O host)

Have your paper completed by a writing expert today and enjoy posting excellent grades. Place your order in a very easy process. It will take you less than 5 minutes. Click one of the buttons below.


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper