IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/comaot/v14y2008i1d10.1007_s10588-008-9019-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to get the timing right. A computational model of the effects of the timing of contacts on team cohesion in demographically diverse teams

Author

Listed:
  • Andreas Flache

    (ICS, Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Groningen)

  • Michael Mäs

    (ICS, Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Groningen)

Abstract

Lau and Murnighan’s faultline theory explains negative effects of demographic diversity on team performance as consequence of strong demographic faultlines. If demographic differences between group members are correlated across various dimensions, the team is likely to show a “subgroup split” that inhibits communication and effective collaboration between team members. Our paper proposes a rigorous formal and computational reconstruction of the theory. Our model integrates four elementary mechanisms of social interaction, homophily, heterophobia, social influence and rejection into a computational representation of the dynamics of both opinions and social relations in the team. Computational experiments demonstrate that the central claims of faultline theory are consistent with the model. We show furthermore that the model highlights a new structural condition that may give managers a handle to temper the negative effects of strong demographic faultlines. We call this condition the timing of contacts. Computational analyses reveal that negative effects of strong faultlines critically depend on who is when brought in contact with whom in the process of social interactions in the team. More specifically, we demonstrate that faultlines have hardly negative effects when teams are initially split into demographically homogeneous subteams that are merged only when a local consensus has developed.

Suggested Citation

  • Andreas Flache & Michael Mäs, 2008. "How to get the timing right. A computational model of the effects of the timing of contacts on team cohesion in demographically diverse teams," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 23-51, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:comaot:v:14:y:2008:i:1:d:10.1007_s10588-008-9019-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10588-008-9019-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10588-008-9019-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10588-008-9019-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rainer Hegselmann & Ulrich Krause, 2002. "Opinion Dynamics and Bounded Confidence Models, Analysis and Simulation," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 5(3), pages 1-2.
    2. Laurent Salzarulo, 2006. "A Continuous Opinion Dynamics Model Based on the Principle of Meta-Contrast," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13.
    3. Plott, Charles R & Levine, Michael E, 1978. "A Model of Agenda Influence on Committee Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 68(1), pages 146-160, March.
    4. Ray Reagans & Ezra W. Zuckerman, 2001. "Networks, Diversity, and Productivity: The Social Capital of Corporate R&D Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(4), pages 502-517, August.
    5. Lisa Hope Pelled, 1996. "Demographic Diversity, Conflict, and Work Group Outcomes: An Intervening Process Theory," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(6), pages 615-631, December.
    6. List, Christian, 2004. "A Model of Path-Dependence in Decisions over Multiple Propositions," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(3), pages 495-513, August.
    7. Levine, Michael E. & Plott, Charles R., "undated". "Agenda Influence and Its Implications," Working Papers 151, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    8. Sherry M.B. Thatcher & Karen A. Jehn & Elaine Zanutto, 2003. "Cracks in Diversity Research: The Effects of Diversity Faultlines on Conflict and Performance," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 217-241, May.
    9. Eric Molleman, 2005. "Diversity in Demographic Characteristics, Abilities and Personality Traits: Do Faultlines Affect Team Functioning?," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 173-193, May.
    10. Wander Jager & Frédéric Amblard, 2005. "Uniformity, Bipolarization and Pluriformity Captured as Generic Stylized Behavior with an Agent-Based Simulation Model of Attitude Change," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 295-303, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tanzhe Tang & Amineh Ghorbani & Flaminio Squazzoni & Caspar G. Chorus, 2022. "Together alone: a group-based polarization measurement," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(5), pages 3587-3619, October.
    2. Jianjun Lu & Shozo Tokinaga, 2013. "Analysis of cluster formations on planer cells based on genetic programming," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 426-445, December.
    3. Weimer, Christopher W. & Miller, J.O. & Hill, Raymond R. & Hodson, Douglas D., 2022. "An opinion dynamics model of meta-contrast with continuous social influence forces," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 589(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ghezelbash, Ehsan & Yazdanpanah, Mohammad Javad & Asadpour, Masoud, 2019. "Polarization in cooperative networks through optimal placement of informed agents," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 536(C).
    2. Kurmyshev, Evguenii & Juárez, Héctor A. & González-Silva, Ricardo A., 2011. "Dynamics of bounded confidence opinion in heterogeneous social networks: Concord against partial antagonism," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 390(16), pages 2945-2955.
    3. Shane T. Mueller & Yin-Yin Sarah Tan, 2018. "Cognitive perspectives on opinion dynamics: the role of knowledge in consensus formation, opinion divergence, and group polarization," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 15-48, January.
    4. Weimer, Christopher W. & Miller, J.O. & Hill, Raymond R. & Hodson, Douglas D., 2022. "An opinion dynamics model of meta-contrast with continuous social influence forces," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 589(C).
    5. Andreas Flache, 2018. "About Renegades And Outgroup Haters: Modeling The Link Between Social Influence And Intergroup Attitudes," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(06n07), pages 1-32, September.
    6. André Grow & Andreas Flache, 2011. "How attitude certainty tempers the effects of faultlines in demographically diverse teams," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 196-224, May.
    7. Katerina Bezrukova & Karen A. Jehn & Elaine L. Zanutto & Sherry M. B. Thatcher, 2009. "Do Workgroup Faultlines Help or Hurt? A Moderated Model of Faultlines, Team Identification, and Group Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 35-50, February.
    8. Hong Ren & Barbara Gray & David A. Harrison, 2015. "Triggering Faultline Effects in Teams: The Importance of Bridging Friendship Ties and Breaching Animosity Ties," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 390-404, April.
    9. Francisco J. León-Medina & Jordi Tena-Sánchez & Francisco J. Miguel, 2020. "Fakers becoming believers: how opinion dynamics are shaped by preference falsification, impression management and coherence heuristics," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 385-412, April.
    10. Veltrop, D.B. & Hermes, C.L.M. & Postma, T.J.B.M. & de Haan, J., 2012. "A tale of two factions," Research Report 12001-HRM&OB, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    11. repec:dgr:rugsom:12001-hrmob is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Bruno Trezzini, 2008. "Probing the Group Faultline Concept: An Evaluation of Measures of Patterned Multi-dimensional Group Diversity," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 339-368, June.
    13. George Butler & Gabriella Pigozzi & Juliette Rouchier, 2019. "Mixing Dyadic and Deliberative Opinion Dynamics in an Agent-Based Model of Group Decision-Making," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-31, August.
    14. Charles A. Holt, 2003. "Economic Science: An Experimental Approach for Teaching and Research," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 69(4), pages 754-771, April.
    15. Gabbay, Michael, 2007. "The effects of nonlinear interactions and network structure in small group opinion dynamics," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 378(1), pages 118-126.
    16. Peter Kurrild-Klitgaard, 2014. "Empirical social choice: an introduction," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 297-310, March.
    17. Sylvie Huet & Jean-Denis Mathias, 2018. "Few Self-Involved Agents Among Bounded Confidence Agents Can Change Norms," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(06n07), pages 1-27, September.
    18. Charles Plott, 2014. "Public choice and the development of modern laboratory experimental methods in economics and political science," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 331-353, December.
    19. Richard E. Wagner, 2019. "American Democracy and the Problem of Fiscal Deficits," Public Policy Review, Policy Research Institute, Ministry of Finance Japan, vol. 15(2), pages 199-216, December.
    20. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    21. Zellmer-Bruhn, Mary E. & Maloney, Mary M. & Bhappu, Anita D. & Salvador, Rommel (Bombie), 2008. "When and how do differences matter? An exploration of perceived similarity in teams," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 107(1), pages 41-59, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:comaot:v:14:y:2008:i:1:d:10.1007_s10588-008-9019-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.