Search results

Several comprehensive reviews are united in drawing the conclusion that the cumulative research evidence on work team diversity is equivocal. Rather than review the extant state of diversity research, in this paper we redirect attention to the context of workplace diversity as a possible explanation for these mixed findings. We discuss how diversity context may be conceptualized, specify various aspects of this context at multiple levels of analysis, and consider how contextual variables can shape the outcomes of work team diversity. We present findings from a literature review (1999–2006) to identify key trends and patterns of results reported in recent research as well as contextual factors that have received attention to date. This paper also considers how the non-significant, positive, negative, and curvilinear effects of diversity reported in studies can be explained by the contextual factors outlined. Implications for future research are also discussed.

Scholarship on workplace diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) is voluminous. Nevertheless, there is relatively little work that examines DEI from an organization development and change (ODC) or systems perspective. As a result, there is no unified framework ODC practitioners can use for DEI diagnosis and intervention. The purpose of this chapter is to review the ODC literature with respect to DEI and propose a diagnostic Context-Levels-Culture (CLC) framework for understanding and addressing diversity-related challenges in organizations. We also present a case example of how this framework can be used in DEI consulting, including implications for future research and practice.

Purpose – Existing research in organizational behavior and social psychology focuses on comparisons in behaviors and attitudes across national groups, instead of studies on interactions among individuals with different national cultural backgrounds. In this chapter, we hope to motivate efforts within cross-national literatures to address some largely unexamined questions regarding dynamics in multicultural diverse teams.

Design/approach – Through a review of the prior perspectives on multicultural teams and a summary of findings in a recent meta-analysis study on multicultural teams in both single nation and multinational settings, we critique the limitations of the current perspectives and propose a new theoretical framework that draws on status perspectives in sociological and ethological research.

Findings – Drawing from status literatures, we explore how the status construction process and the status differential hierarchy of the team may affect trust, psychological safety, and creative problem solving of complex tasks in multicultural teams.

Originality/value – We propose a new theoretical angle of status for future research on interaction dynamics in multicultural teams, and diverse teams in general.

To summarize and build on research that explores the influence of culture on team dynamics, particularly over time. Specifically, we explore culture and teams from a dynamic perspective by providing a framework for understanding both how culture influences team dynamics over time, and where interventions should be targeted at different points to maximize the potential benefits of cultural diversity.

Drawing from a prominent model of team development (Kozlowski, Gully, Nason, & Smith, 1999), we provide mechanisms through which culture exerts an influence, as well as the practical approaches that will be best suited for mitigating potential negative effects at different points in time.

We focus on the following phases: team formation, task compilation, role compilation, team compilation, as well as team maintenance. At first, surface-level characteristics and subgroup formation should be closely monitored along with interventions to develop a group identity when teams are being formed. Later on, emergent states (e.g., trust, conflict) can come to the forefront as team members can develop multiple memberships or yet be resistant to performing in an adaptive manner.

We identify key avenues for future research to serve as a foundation for those studying the cultural diversity within teams via temporal lens, including the role of context and going beyond Hofstede’s cultural dimensions.

Albeit research has started to accumulate regarding how culture influences teams through conflict, communication, trust, cohesion, and creativity, this chapter goes beyond current development to address when different cultural elements influence team dynamics.

Work-life flexibility policies (e.g., flextime, telework, part-time, right-to-disconnect, and leaves) are increasingly important to employers as productivity and well-being strategies. However, policies have not lived up to their potential. In this chapter, the authors argue for increased research attention to implementation and work-life intersectionality considerations influencing effectiveness. Drawing on a typology that conceptualizes flexibility policies as offering employees control across five dimensions of the work role boundary (temporal, spatial, size, permeability, and continuity), the authors develop a model identifying the multilevel moderators and mechanisms of boundary control shaping relationships between using flexibility and work and home performance. Next, the authors review this model with an intersectional lens. The authors direct scholars’ attention to growing workforce diversity and increased variation in flexibility policy experiences, particularly for individuals with higher work-life intersectionality, which is defined as having multiple intersecting identities (e.g., gender, caregiving, and race), that are stigmatized, and link to having less access to and/or benefits from societal resources to support managing the work-life interface in a social context. Such an intersectional focus would address the important need to shift work-life and flexibility research from variable to person-centered approaches. The authors identify six research considerations on work-life intersectionality in order to illuminate how traditionally assumed work-life relationships need to be revisited to address growing variation in: access, needs, and preferences for work-life flexibility; work and nonwork experiences; and benefits from using flexibility policies. The authors hope that this chapter will spur a conversation on how the work-life interface and flexibility policy processes and outcomes may increasingly differ for individuals with higher work-life intersectionality compared to those with lower work-life intersectionality in the context of organizational and social systems that may perpetuate growing work-life and job inequality.

Building on recent theoretical insights from the institutional logics perspective, we examine organizational dynamics in the loosely coupled field of corporate diversity management to develop a theory of the process of logic instantiation. We consider a case in which firms subscribed to the same institutional logic, the business performance logic for diversity management, but varied in adoption of diversity mentoring practices. Employing an inductive and iterative approach to analyze over 50 interviews with diversity managers at large U.S. corporations, we explain how four organizational factors mediated the process of logic instantiation in these firms: (1) the diversity manager’s interpretation and framing of the business performance logic, (2) the formal diversity goals of the firm, (3) the relative organizational power of the diversity manager, and (4) the accepted definition of “diversity.” We discuss implications for theories of social action and diversity management.

Building on recent theoretical insights from the institutional logics perspective, we examine organizational dynamics in the loosely coupled field of corporate diversity management to develop a theory of the process of logic instantiation. We consider a case in which firms subscribed to the same institutional logic, the business performance logic for diversity management, but varied in adoption of diversity mentoring practices. Employing an inductive and iterative approach to analyze over 50 interviews with diversity managers at large U.S. corporations, we explain how four organizational factors mediated the process of logic instantiation in these firms: (1) the diversity manager’s interpretation and framing of the business performance logic, (2) the formal diversity goals of the firm, (3) the relative organizational power of the diversity manager, and (4) the accepted definition of “diversity.” We discuss implications for theories of social action and diversity management.