Birds of a feather get lost together: new venture team composition and performance

This study explores the relationship between new venture team composition and new venture persistence and performance over time. We examine the team characteristics of a 5-year panel study of 202 new venture teams and new venture performance. Our study makes two contributions. First, we extend earlier research concerning homophily theories of the prevalence of homogeneous teams. Using structural event analysis we demonstrate that team members’ start-up experience is important in this context. Second, we attempt to reconcile conflicting evidence concerning the influence of team homogeneity on performance by considering the element of time. We hypothesize that higher team homogeneity is positively related to short term outcomes, but is less effective in the longer term. Our results confirm a difference over time. We find that more homogeneous teams are less likely to be higher performing in the long term. However, we find no relationship between team homogeneity and short-term performance outcomes.

[1]  D. Shepherd,et al.  Successes and Failures at Research on Business Failure and Learning from It , 2006 .

[2]  S. Webber,et al.  Impact of highly and less job-related diversity on work group cohesion and performance: a meta-analysis , 2001 .

[3]  D. Hambrick,et al.  Upper Echelons: The Organization as a Reflection of Its Top Managers , 1984 .

[4]  Charles W. Hofer,et al.  Measuring Organizational Performance: Metrics for Entrepreneurship and Strategic Management Research , 2007 .

[5]  C. Brush,et al.  A comparison of methods and sources for obtaining estimates of new venture performance , 1992 .

[6]  William B. Gartner,et al.  Handbook of Entrepreneurial Dynamics: The Process of Business Creation , 2004 .

[7]  Catherine M. Dalton,et al.  Initial Public Offering Investor Valuations: An Examination of Top Management Team Prestige and Environmental Uncertainty , 2006 .

[8]  Howard E. Aldrich,et al.  Social Capital and Entrepreneurship , 2005 .

[9]  Wesley Shrum,et al.  Social Structure during the School Years: Onset of the Degrouping Process. , 1987 .

[10]  Johan Wiklund,et al.  Levels of Analysis in Entrepreneurship Research: Current Research Practice and Suggestions for the Future * , 2001 .

[11]  Scott Shane,et al.  Planning for the market: Business planning before marketing and the continuation of organizing efforts , 2004 .

[12]  C. Gersick,et al.  LEARNING FROM ACADEMIA: THE IMPORTANCE OF RELATIONSHIPS IN PROFESSIONAL LIFE , 2000 .

[13]  A. Tsui,et al.  Beyond Simple Demographic Effects: The Importance of Relational Demography in Superior-Subordinate Dyads , 1989 .

[14]  Vandra L. Huber,et al.  Judgment by heuristics: Effects of ratee and rater characteristics and performance standards on performance-related judgments , 1987 .

[15]  A. V. Werder,et al.  Strategic decision making in start-ups: the effect of top management team organization and processes on speed and comprehensiveness , 2005 .

[16]  W. Gartner,et al.  Exploring Start-Up Event Sequences , 1996 .

[17]  K. Vesper.  New venture strategies , 1979 .

[18]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Exploring the Black Box: An Analysis of Work Group Diversity, Conflict and Performance , 1999 .

[19]  D. Harrison,et al.  Time, Teams, and Task Performance: Changing Effects of Surface- and Deep-Level Diversity on Group Functioning , 2002 .

[20]  Rita Gunther McGrath,et al.  More Like Each Other than Anyone Else? A Cross-Cultural Study of Entrepreneurial Perceptions , 1992 .

[21]  M. Ruef,et al.  Strong ties, weak ties and islands: structural and cultural predictors of organizational innovation , 2002 .

[22]  S. Terjesen,et al.  Female Presence on Corporate Boards: A Multi-Country Study of Environmental Context , 2008 .

[23]  S. Jackson,et al.  Some differences make a difference: Individual dissimilarity and group heterogeneity as correlates of recruitment, promotions, and turnover. , 1991 .

[24]  D. Harrison,et al.  Beyond Relational Demography: Time and the Effects of Surface- and Deep-Level Diversity on Work Group Cohesion , 1998 .

[25]  T. Dagger,et al.  Does experience matter?: Differences in relationship benefits, satisfaction, trust, commitment and loyalty for novice and experienced service users , 2010 .

[26]  S. Terjesen,et al.  Entrepreneurial network composition: An analysis across venture development stage and gender , 2007 .

[27]  Todd R. Zenger,et al.  Organizational Demography: The Differential Effects of Age and Tenure Distributions on Technical Communication , 1989 .

[28]  H. P. Sims,et al.  Top Management Team Demography and Process: The Role of Social Integration and Communication , 1994 .

[29]  J. A. Timmons.  New Venture Creation: Entrepreneurship in the 1990s , 1990 .

[30]  A. Duperier.  The Positive Effect , 1958 .

[31]  Paul D. Reynolds,et al.  The Prevalence of Nascent Entrepreneurs in the United States: Evidence from the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics , 2004 .

[32]  P. Davidsson,et al.  The role of social and human capital among nascent entrepreneurs , 2000 .

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

[34]  Hans Westlund,et al.  Local Social Capital and Entrepreneurship , 2003 .

[35]  S. Jackson,et al.  Top management and innovations in banking: Does the composition of the top team make a difference? , 1989 .

[36]  James D. Westphal,et al.  Who Shall Govern? CEO/Board Power, Demographic Similarity, and New Director Selection , 1995 .

[37]  Scott Shane,et al.  Does experience matter? The effect of founding team experience on the survival and sales of newly founded ventures , 2006 .

[38]  Daniel J. Brass,et al.  At the Margins: A Distinctiveness Approach to the Social Identity and Social Networks of Underrepresented Groups , 1998 .

[39]  C. Fischer.  To Dwell Among Friends , 1982 .

[40]  J. Seeger,et al.  Entrepreneurial Teams in New Venture Creation: A Research Agenda , 1990 .

[41]  R. A. Cosier,et al.  POSITIVE EFFECTS OF CONFLICT: A FIELD ASSESSMENT , 1990 .

[42]  Martin Ruef,et al.  A structural event approach to the analysis of group composition , 2002, Soc. Networks.

[43]  N. Carter,et al.  The Structure of Founding Teams: Homophily, Strong Ties, and Isolation among U.S. Entrepreneurs , 2003 .

[44]  D. Byrne.  The Attraction Paradigm , 1971 .

[45]  Brian R. Flay,et al.  Levels of analysis , 1989 .

[46]  Allen C. Amason,et al.  Understanding the dynamics of new venture top management teams: cohesion, conflict, and new venture performance , 2002 .

[47]  M. Wright,et al.  Novice, portfolio, and serial founders: are they different? , 1998 .

[48]  L. Verbrugge.  The Structure of Adult Friendship Choices , 1977 .

[49]  L. H. Pelled.  Demographic Diversity, Conflict, and Work Group Outcomes: An Intervening Process Theory , 1996 .

[50]  Allen C. Amason,et al.  RESOLVING THE PARADOX OF CONFLICT, STRATEGIC DECISION MAKING, AND ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE , 1994 .

[51]  H. Tajfel.  Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. , 1978 .

[52]  M. Diane Burton,et al.  Founding the Future: Path Dependence in the Evolution of Top Management Teams from Founding to IPO , 2008, Organ. Sci..

[53]  Subodh Bhat,et al.  Opportunity Recognition: An Exploratory Investigation of a Component of the Entrepreneurial Process in the Context of the Health Care Industry , 2000 .

[54]  Jennifer A. Chatman.  Matching People and Organizations: Selection and Socialization in Public Accounting Firms , 1989 .

[55]  Allen C. Amason,et al.  The Effects of Top Management Team Size and interaction Norms on Cognitive and Affective Conflict , 1997 .

[56]  Allan Bird,et al.  ORGANIZATIONAL DEMOGRAPHY IN JAPANESE FIRMS: GROUP HETEROGENEITY, INDIVIDUAL DISSIMILARITY, AND TOP MANAGEMENT TEAM TURNOVER , 1993 .

[57]  Robert Carton,et al.  Measuring organizational performance , 2006 .

[58]  J. V. Maanen,et al.  Toward a theory of organizational socialization , 1977 .

[59]  A. Murray.  Top management group heterogeneity and firm performance , 1989 .

[60]  C. M. Riordan,et al.  Relational demography within groups: Past developments, contradictions, and new directions , 2000 .

[61]  K. Jehn.  A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimensions in , 1997 .

[62]  Lynn Smith-Lovin,et al.  Sex Segregation in Voluntary Associations , 1986 .

[63]  Deborah G. . Ancona,et al.  Bridging the Boundary: External Activity and Performance in Organizational Teams. , 1992 .

[64]  Warren E. Watson,et al.  Cultural diversity''s impact on interaction process and performance: Comparing homogeneous and diver , 1993 .