Interactive Impacts Of Network Structure And Cultural Composition On Team Performance

Importance of Moderately Centralized Network for Team Performance

Question:

Discuss about the Interactive Effects of Network Structure and Cultural Diversity on Team Potency and Performance.

The article investigates the “interactive impacts of network structure and cultural composition on team potency and performance” (Tröster, Mehra & van Knippenberg, 2014). The article takes into consideration the interactive impacts of tasks completed by a team and the impacts of the cultural diversity on the ability of the team members to perform. The article emphasizes upon the fact that a moderately centralized network enhances the team performance. In case of teams that comprised of individuals belonging to different cultures showed more efficiency when there was network density. The teams that comprise of individuals belonging to different cultures required higher level of centralization in order to perform better. The author has emphasized upon two theories that lead to team success namely compositional theory and structural theory. Compositional theory emphasizes upon the personal characteristics and traits of the team members whereas, structural theory emphasizes upon types of interactions between the members of a team. With the increase in globalization, there has been a rise in the number of multinational organizations, which comprise of people belonging to different cultural backgrounds (Miner, 2015). This increases the chances of interpersonal conflicts. Therefore, a proper organizational structure is necessary for managing the teams and improving the relationships among the team members to improve the overall organizational performance. The author emphasizes upon the importance of networks that have a huge impact on the performance of the team members. The article examines the ways in which the aspects of the team context interact with the diversity of the team and the team structure. The paper focuses upon the degree of inter connectedness among the team members and the degree of centralization within the teams.  

The author investigated the impact of centralization on the performance of the teams that comprised of individuals belonging to different cultures in order to determine the best organizational structure for the team success. For this purpose, the author analyzed the data obtained from 91 self- managed teams, which comprised of 456 individuals belonging to 60 nationalities. On investigating, the author found that network density had positive impacts on culturally diverse teams and moderate centralization improves the overall performance of these teams. The article is based upon the organizational behavior in the organizations that comprise of culturally diversified teams. Organizational behavior deals with the study of the human behavior within an organization when the organizational members interact with each other (Luthans, Luthans & Luthans, 2015). This article deals with the study of human behavior in the organizations that comprise of individuals belonging to different cultural backgrounds and the methods that enhance their performance when working in a team.  

Better Group Thinking in Diverse Teams

According to Vasu, Stewart & Garson (2017), globalization has resulted in the cultural diversity in the organizations all over the world. Individuals belonging to different nations, cultures, gender and race work together, which increases the chances of conflicts and disputes within the organizations. The outcome and performance of the team is highly dependent upon the degree of cultural diversity among the teams. Many a times, cultural diversity results in coordination and communication problems among the team members.

On the contrary, according to Jones & George (2015), culturally diverse teams usually have better group thinking. Diverse teams usually examine facts more critically and tend to remain objective. The team members closely observe the actions of the other team members and are more aware of their personal biasness. Diverse teams tend to process the facts cautiously and make better decisions. Since the team members belong to different cultural background, their thinking processes differ to a great extent that results in more creative and innovative ideas and solutions. Hiring individuals belonging to different cultural backgrounds helps an organization to retain the most efficient human resources (Wagner III & Hollenbeck, 2014). Diverse teams tend to be more productive and perform better. Additionally, there is always greater opportunity for personal as well as professional growth in a diverse team.      

On the other hand, according to Wine, Reis & Hantula (2014), in case of negative cultural stereotypes, integration across the diverse teams becomes difficult. Many a times, it becomes difficult to understand the view points of the others and language becomes a major concern in diverse teams. Individuals in a diverse team tend to have different understanding of situations. However, it is necessary to provide some time to the members of diverse teams to adjust and solve the differences among each other. It has been observed many times that diverse teams initially perform poorer when compared with the homogeneous teams. However, with the passage of time they tend to out- perform the homogeneous teams.

The article clearly explains the structure that leads to successful team performance. The article states the interactive effects of network structure and cultural diversity on team potency and performance with the help of proper theories and hypotheses. It explains the relationship between network structure and the performance of a diverse team. Dense network team refers to the groups in which there are proper connections between the team members. The structure of a team is determined by the dispersion of decision making authority and the methods of allocation of tasks among the team members (Hajro, Gibson & Pudelko, 2017). The hypothesis 1 states that team performance in diverse teams is the highest when there is moderate centralization. The hypothesis 2 states that team potency increases with the increase in the network density. The hypothesis 3 states that there network density and team potency are more positive in diverse team when compared with homogenous teams. The hypothesis 4 states that, the inverted u- shaped relationship between the network centralization and performance of the teams is usually moderated by the cultural diversity in the teams. The results have proven that team diversity might be a major contingency factor in the relationship between the network structure of a team, the level of team potency achieved within the team, and the team’s performance (Kaiser et al., 2013). The article has covered all the obvious compounds that drive this effect and the IV/DV have been properly measured in this article.

Managing Interpersonal Conflicts in Diverse Teams

The findings obtained from this article can be utilized by the real organizations in solving the issues of interpersonal conflicts. Some of the major organizations that have cultural diversity are Pwc, Johnson & Johnson, Abbott, Deloitte, Procter & Gamble, Accenture, and several others. These organizations have their presence in several countries and comprises of employees belonging to different cultures and backgrounds. From the findings of this article, these organizations can improve their overall efficiency by ensuring that there is moderate centralization in the team (Triana et al., 2014).  The organizations can implement workflow network density in the organizations as it positively impacts the team potency. Since the network density has positive relation with the team potency in diverse teams, the multi cultural organizations must proper workflow network density in order to enhance the team potency.

It is necessary to handle the interpersonal conflicts in diverse teams with much care. Workplace conflict is a common issue witnessed in diverse teams, which occurs due to cultural differences, personality, traits and working style. The conflicts might occur between employees and the employers and also among the employees (Huettermann, Kunze & Bruch, 2015). This has huge negative impacts on the organizational performance and is required to be solved. Therefore, it is necessary to provide team members sufficient time to adjust with the working environment and cope up with the challenges. The team members are required to be given proper training so that they can embrace the workplace diversity. For example, Accenture is aiming towards maintaining an equal ratio of men and women within the organization. The organization comprises of employees belonging to different nations and cultures (Smith, 2017). The organization has attempted to create a positive inclusive environment within the organization by demonstrating that biasness can appear to be expected as well as unexpected.

Therefore, it can be concluded that team diversity can prove to be fruitful for the organizational growth and success if managed properly. The human behavior in the organizations comprises of individuals belonging to different cultural backgrounds and the methods that enhance their performance when working in a team (Singh & Selvarajan, 2013). The article emphasized upon the fact that a moderately centralized network enhances the team performance. In case of organizations that are comprised of individuals belonging to different cultures showed more efficiency when there was network density. The teams that comprise of individuals belonging to different cultures required higher level of centralization in order to perform better. The diverse teams in which the members are more interconnected are deemed to perform better than the homogeneous teams. However, it is necessary to provide some time to the members of diverse teams to adjust and solve the differences among each other. The structural theories are very useful in improving the coordination and performance of the diverse teams as it emphasizes on the patterns of interactions between the team members.

References:     

Hajro, A., Gibson, C. B., & Pudelko, M. (2017). Knowledge exchange processes in multicultural teams: Linking organizational diversity climates to teams’ effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 60(1), 345-372.

Huettermann, H., Kunze, F., & Bruch, H. (2015, January). Promoting Diversity Climate: The Interplay of Organizational-Level LMX and Top Management Leadership. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2015, No. 1, p. 14317). Academy of Management.

Jones, G., & George, J. (2015). Contemporary management. McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

Kaiser, C. R., Major, B., Jurcevic, I., Dover, T. L., Brady, L. M., & Shapiro, J. R. (2013). Presumed fair: ironic effects of organizational diversity structures. Journal of personality and social psychology, 104(3), 504.

Luthans, F., Luthans, B. C., & Luthans, K. W. (2015). Organizational behavior: An evidence-based approach. IAP.

Miner, J. B. (2015). Organizational behavior 1: Essential theories of motivation and leadership. Routledge.

Singh, B., & Selvarajan, T. T. (2013). Is it spillover or compensation? Effects of community and organizational diversity climates on race differentiated employee intent to stay. Journal of business ethics, 115(2), 259-269.

Smith, W. C. (2017). Power and Intersectionality: Interpreting the Dutch Organizational Diversity Program (Master’s thesis).

Triana, M. C., Rabl, T., Byun, S. Y., & Chapa, O. (2014, January). Organizational Diversity Efforts and Employee Discrimination Claims: Organizational Motives Matter. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2014, No. 1, p. 10784). Academy of Management.

Tröster, C., Mehra, A., & van Knippenberg, D. (2014). Structuring for team success: The interactive effects of network structure and cultural diversity on team potency and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 124(2), 245-255.

Vasu, M. L., Stewart, D. W., & Garson, G. D. (Eds.). (2017). Organizational Behavior and Public Management, Revised and Expanded. Routledge.

Wagner III, J. A., & Hollenbeck, J. R. (2014). Organizational behavior: Securing competitive advantage. Routledge.

Wine, B., Reis, M., & Hantula, D. A. (2014). An evaluation of stimulus preference assessment methodology in organizational behavior management. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 34(1), 7-15.