TO AGREE OR NOT TO AGREE: THE EFFECTS OF VALUE CONGRUENCE, INDIVIDUAL DEMOGRAPHIC DISSIMILARITY, AND CONFLICT ON WORKGROUP OUTCOMES

In this quasi‐experimental study we investigate value congruence and demographic dissimilarity among group members as factors which influence various types of conflict within workgroups. We also examine whether it is beneficial for members to be different or alike, to agree or disagree, in order to foster work group productivity. Results indicate that visible individual demographic differences (i.e., sex, age) increase relationship conflict, while informational demographic differences (i.e., education) increase task‐focused conflict. Value congruence of members decreased both relationship and task conflict, and the specific content of the values held by members influenced performance. Specifically, both detail and outcome group value orientations increased objective performance; outcome, decisiveness, and stability orientations increased perceptions of high performance; and both decisiveness and supportiveness orientations increased the satisfaction level of group members while a team orientation decreased individual member satisfaction in this sample.

[1]  Theodore Kunin.  The Construction of a New Type of Attitude Measure , 1955 .

[2]  J. McGrath,et al.  Task and group characteristics as factors influencing group performance , 1969 .

[3]  M. Rokeach.  The Nature Of Human Values , 1974 .

[4]  E. Ramsden.  Group Process and Productivity , 1973 .

[5]  Mary Anne Devanna.  Men and Women of the Corporation , 1978 .

[6]  A. Bandura.  Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency , 2024, Psihologìâ ì suspìlʹstvo.

[7]  D. Reddy,et al.  Perceptions of functioning in mixed-sex and male medical training groups. , 1982, Journal of medical education.

[8]  D. Rousseau.  Issues of level in organizational research: Multi-level and cross-level perspectives. , 1985 .

[9]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[10]  R. Liden,et al.  Leader-Member Exchange Model of Leadership: A Critique and Further Development , 1986 .

[11]  L. Smith-Lovin,et al.  Homophily in voluntary organizations: Status distance and the composition of face-to-face groups. , 1987 .

[12]  Cathy A. Enz,et al.  The Role of Value Congruity in Intraorganizational Power , 1988 .

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

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

[15]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Organizational Growth: Linking Founding Team, Strategy, Environment, and Growth among U.S. Semiconductor Ventures, 1978-1988. , 1990 .

[16]  Deborah G. . Ancona.  Outward Bound: Strategic for Team Survival in an Organization , 1990 .

[17]  Charles R. Schwenk,et al.  The performance edge: Strategic and value dissensus , 1991 .

[18]  Jennifer A. Chatman,et al.  PEOPLE AND ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE: A PROFILE COMPARISON APPROACH TO ASSESSING PERSON-ORGANIZATION FIT , 1991 .

[19]  A. Bandura.  Social cognitive theory of self-regulation☆ , 1991 .

[20]  Deborah G. . Ancona,et al.  Demography and Design: Predictors of New Product Team Performance , 1992 .

[21]  Charles A. O'Reilly,et al.  Being different: Relational demography and organizational attachment. , 1991 .

[22]  Karen A. Jehn,et al.  Do friends perform better than acquaintances? the interaction of friendship, conflict, and task , 1993 .

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

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

[25]  Jennifer A. Chatman,et al.  Assessing the Relationship between Industry Characteristics and Organizational Culture: How Different can You Be? , 1994 .

[26]  K. Jehn.  ENHANCING EFFECTIVENESS: AN INVESTIGATION OF ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF VALUE‐BASED INTRAGROUP CONFLICT , 1994 .

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

[28]  Anne S. Tsui,et al.  Diversity in organizations: Lessons from demography research. , 1995 .

[29]  Anne S. Tsui,et al.  Relational demography: The missing link in vertical dyad linkage. , 1995 .

[30]  K. Jehn,et al.  INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS AND TASK PERFORMANCE: AN EXAMINATION OF MEDIATING PROCESSES IN FRIENDSHIP AND ACQUAINTANCE GROUPS. , 1996 .

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

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

[33]  Karen A. Jehn,et al.  Interpersonal relationships and task performance: An examination of mediation processes in friendship and acquaintance groups. , 1997 .

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

[35]  Stuart Oskamp,et al.  Diversity in organizations : new perspectives for a changing workplace , 1998 .