Team innovation and team effectiveness: The importance of minority dissent and reflexivity

Past research suggests that minority dissent in teams may foster team innovations. It is hypothesized, however, that minority dissent would predict team innovations only when teams have high levels of reflexivity - the tendency to overtly reflect upon the group's objectives, strategies, and processes and adapt them to current or anticipated circumstances. This hypothesis was tested in a field study involving a heterogeneous sample of 32 organizational teams performing complex, ill-defined tasks. Results showed more innovation and greater team effectiveness under high rather than low levels of minority dissent, but only when there was a high level of team reflexivity. Avenues for future research are discussed.

[1]  R. Gonzalez.  Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences , 2003 .

[2]  C. D. De Dreu,et al.  Minority dissent and team innovation: the importance of participation in decision making. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[3]  L. James,et al.  Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. , 1984 .

[4]  Annelies E. M. Van Vianen,et al.  Managing relationship conflict and the effectiveness of organizational teams , 2001 .

[5]  R. Golembiewski.  Handbook of Organizational Behavior , 2001 .

[6]  Melissa C. Thomas-Hunt,et al.  Cognitive Flexibility, Communication Strategy, and Integrative Complexity in Groups: Public versus Private Reactions to Majority and Minority Status , 1998 .

[7]  I. Janis.  Victims of Groupthink: A psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes. By Irving L. Janis. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1972. viii + 276 pp. Map, illustrations, chart, notes, sources, bibliography, and index. Cloth, $7.95; paper $4.50.) , 1973 .

[8]  S. Moscovici,et al.  Influence of a consistent minority on the responses of a majority in a color perception task. , 1969, Sociometry.

[9]  Allen C. Amason.  Distinguishing the Effects of Functional and Dysfunctional Conflict on Strategic Decision Making: Resolving a Paradox for Top Management Teams , 1996 .

[10]  S. Asch.  Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. , 1956 .

[11]  B. S. Georgopoulos,et al.  Organizational structure, problem solving, and effectiveness: A comparative study of hospital emergency services , 1988 .

[12]  D. Tjosvold.  Cooperative and competitive goal approach to conflict: Accomplishments and challenges. , 1998 .

[13]  E. A. Locke,et al.  A study of upward influence in organizations. , 1982 .

[14]  Sigal G. Barsade,et al.  Group demography and innovation: Does diversity help? , 1998 .

[15]  N. Anderson,et al.  Measuring climate for work group innovation: development and validation of the team climate inventory , 1998 .

[16]  S. Fiske,et al.  The Handbook of Social Psychology , 1935 .

[17]  Gina J. Medsker,et al.  RELATIONS BETWEEN WORK GROUP CHARACTERISTICS AND EFFECTIVENESS: IMPLICATIONS FOR DESIGNING EFFECTIVE WORK GROUPS , 1993 .

[18]  K. Jehn.  A Multimethod Examination of the Benefits and Detriments of Intragroup Conflict , 1995 .

[19]  R. Scott Tindale,et al.  Minority and majority influence in freely interacting groups: Qualitative versus quantitative differences , 1996 .

[20]  Michael A. West,et al.  Reflexivity, Effectiveness, and Mental Health in BBC-TV Production Teams , 1998 .

[21]  Carsten K. W. De Dreu,et al.  Group consensus and minority influence: Implications for innovation. , 2001 .

[22]  Tetlock,et al.  Group Dynamics in Top Management Teams: Groupthink, Vigilance, and Alternative Models of Organizational Failure and Success. , 1998, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[23]  W. Wood,et al.  Self-definition, defensive processing, and influence: the normative impact of majority and minority groups. , 1996, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[24]  N. Anderson,et al.  Innovation in top management teams , 1996 .

[25]  C. Argyris.  Reasoning, learning, and action : individual and organizational , 1982 .

[26]  R. Cialdini,et al.  Social influence: Social norms, conformity and compliance. , 1998 .

[27]  Donna L. Mohr,et al.  Multiple Regression , 2002, Encyclopedia of Autism Spectrum Disorders.

[28]  Barry M. Staw,et al.  The Tradeoffs of Social Control and Innovation in Groups and Organizations , 1989 .

[29]  R. Saavedra,et al.  A naturalistic minority influence experiment: Effects on divergent thinking, conflict and originality in work‐groups , 1996 .

[30]  J. Stevens,et al.  Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences , 1993 .

[31]  Robert S. Baron,et al.  The eyes have it : Minority influence in face-to-face and computer-mediated group discussion , 1997 .

[32]  M. West.  Reflexivity and work group effectiveness:a conceptual integration , 1996 .

[33]  C. Nemeth,et al.  Modelling courage: The role of dissent in fostering independence. , 1988 .

[34]  Robert S. Dooley,et al.  Attaining Decision Quality and Commitment From Dissent: The Moderating Effects of Loyalty and Competence in Strategic Decision-Making Teams , 1999 .

[35]  Michael A. West,et al.  Handbook of Work Group Psychology , 1996 .

[36]  Richard A. Guzzo,et al.  Group performance and intergroup relations in organizations. , 1992 .