|
|
|
| The Inverted U-shaped Relationship Between Team Status Disparity and Team Creativity: Moderating Effects of Task Characteristics |
| Chang Tao,Pei Feixia |
| (School of Economics and Management, Shanxi University, Taiyuan 030006, China) |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Team is the power source of modern organizational innovation, and how to promote team creativity has become the focus widely discussed by organizations. However, team members long for status in their teams because of great pressure from social competition and strong need to meet career development. Therefore, competition and motivation of status that could make any degree of team status disparity can influence interactive process among members within teams, which will further influence team creativity. Therefore, modern organizations should design team status disparity carefully.#br#However, it is found through literature review that the relevant research about the relationship between team status disparity and team creativity mainly focus on team performance, and little research is specialized in team creativity. Moreover, there are great divergences in the research on team effectiveness among scholars. Some scholars consider that team status disparity is helpful for teams while other scholars consider team status disparity is harmful to teams. In addition, all of the above research is based on the fundamental assumption of simple linear relation. Therefore, this study will break through this limitation of the above fundamental assumption and explore the complex nonlinear relationship between team status disparity and team creativity which probably exists.#br#High level of team creativity can't exit without effective discrete process and effective convergent process for the thinking. Specifically, effective discrete process makes contribution to generate lots of diversified thoughts, while effective convergent process for the thinking makes contribution to understand and further choose and integrate these thoughts. Therefore, this study will explore the influence of team status disparity on team creativity through the above both of interactive processes.#br#Because teams are built due to specific tasks, members will express to seek status accordingly and dynamically adjust the interaction mode with other members. Thus, this study will explore the two task characteristics (i.e. task complexity and task interdependence) which influence the relationship between team status disparity and team creativity through the perspective of interactive processes.#br#Therefore, the theoretical model is built to explore the inverted U-shaped effect of team status disparity on team creativity based on the perspective of interaction within teams. The relative field test was carried out with 455 valid questionnaires collected from 106 teams. As the results tested by Mplus 7.4 are shown, team status disparity has an inverted U-shaped effect on team creativity. Task complexity and task interdependence significantly moderate the above relationship, which influence the position of the inflection point of the inverted U-shaped relationship. Specifically, as task complexity increases, the inflection point of the inverted U-shaped curve moves left and the position of the inflection point becomes higher. Similarly, as task interdependence increases, the inflection point of the inverted U-shaped curve moves left and the position of the inflection point becomes higher.#br#In general, through opening up another nonlinear thinking way, this study further profoundly describes the unique relationship between team status disparity and team creativity, and reconcile the great divergences in the relevant existing research, which broadens a new thinking vision for the research on team status disparity involved in team effectivity in the future. Meanwhile, this study takes the lead in special study on the influence of team status disparity on team creativity, which deepens theoretical insight into team status disparity and opens up a new perspective for further study on team creativity. Furtherly, this study provides the interesting insight into the boundary conditions between team status disparity and team creativity from the perspective of team characteristics. Finally, this study has made some helpful attempts on identification and location of the inflection point of the inverted U-shaped curve,as well as certain contribution to the research on nonlinear curve.#br#
|
|
Received: 04 November 2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] 栾琨.团队共享认同和团队创造力关系 :基于聚合—发散的双路径模型研究[D].杭州:浙江大学,2016.[2] HALEVY N,CHOU E Y,GALINSKY A D,et al.When hierarchy wins:evidence from the national basketball association[J].Social Psychological and Personality Science,2012,3(4):398-406.[3] SIMPSON B,WILLER R,RIDGEWAY C L.Status hierarchies and the organization of collective action[J].Sociological Theory,2012,30(3):149-166.[4] GREER L L.Power in teams: effects of team power structures on team conflict and team outcomes[M]//Handbook of conflict management research. Edward Elgar Publishing, 2014.[5] GREER L L,VAN KLEEF G A.Equality versus differentiation:the effects of power dispersion on group interaction[J].The Journal of Applied Psychology,2010,95(6):1032-1044.[6] HUANG S Y,CUMMINGS J N.When critical knowledge is most critical[J].Small Group Research,2011,42(6):669-699.[7] SKILTON P F,DOOLEY K J.The effects of repeat collaboration on creative abrasion[J].Academy of Management Review,2010,35(1):118-134.[8] HARRISON S H,ROUSE E D.Let's dance! elastic coordination in creative group work:a qualitative study of modern dancers[J].Academy of Management Journal,2014,57(5):1256-1283.[9] GREER L L,DE JONG B A,SCHOUTEN M E,et al.Why and when hierarchy impacts team effectiveness:a meta-analytic integration[J].The Journal of Applied Psychology,2018,103(6):591-613.[10] WAGEMAN R,GORDON F M.As the twig is bent:how group values shape emergent task interdependence in groups[J].Organization Science,2005,16(6):687-700.[11] BUNDERSON J S,VAN DER VEGT G S,CANTIMUR Y,et al.Different views of hierarchy and why they matter:hierarchy as inequality or as cascading influence[J].Academy of Management Journal,2016,59(4):1265-1289.[12] CHRISTIE A M,BARLING J.Beyond status:relating status inequality to performance and health in teams[J].The Journal of Applied Psychology,2010,95(5):920-934.[13] CANTIMUR Y,RINK F,VAN DER VEGT G S.When and why hierarchy steepness is related to team performance[J].European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,2016,25(5):658-673.[14] 常涛,刘智强,景保峰.家长式领导与团队创造力:基于三元理论的新发现[J].研究与发展管理,2016,28(1):62-72.[15] 常涛,吴佳敏,刘智强.地位稳定性与团队创造力:任务相关特征的影响[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2019,40(9):119-134.[16] DRAZIN R,GLYNN M A,KAZANJIAN R K.Multilevel theorizing about creativity in organizations:a sensemaking perspective[J].Academy of Management Review,1999,24(2):286-307.[17] LEONARD D, SWAP W.When sparks fly: igniting creativity in groups[M].Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1999.[18] PERRY-SMITH J E,SHALLEY C E.A social composition view of team creativity:the role of member nationality-heterogeneous ties outside of the team[J].Organization Science,2014,25(5):1434-1452.[19] 张晓洁,刘新梅.团队亲社会动机与团队创造力:一个双中介模型[J].科技进步与对策,2018,35(11):139-146.[20] 臧维,赵联东,徐磊,等.团队跨界行为、知识整合能力与团队创造力[J].管理学报,2019,16(7):1063-1071.[21] YUAN F R,ZHOU J.Effects of cultural power distance on group creativity and individual group member creativity[J].Journal of Organizational Behavior,2015,36(7):990-1007.[22] KILDUFF G J,WILLER R,ANDERSON C.Hierarchy and its discontents:status disagreement leads to withdrawal of contribution and lower group performance[J].Organization Science,2016,27(2):373-390.[23] ANDERSON C,BROWN C E.The functions and dysfunctions of hierarchy[J].Research in Organizational Behavior,2010,30:55-89.[24] TARAKCI M,GREER L L,GROENEN P J F.When does power disparity help or hurt group performance[J].The Journal of Applied Psychology,2016,101(3):415-429.[25] BROOKS A K.Power and the production of knowledge:collective team learning in work organizations[J].Human Resource Development Quarterly,1994,5(3):213-235.[26] KAMPHUIS W,GAILLARD A W K,VOGELAAR A L W.The effects of physical threat on team processes during complex task performance[J].Small Group Research,2011,42(6):700-729.[27] CHOI J N.External activities and team effectiveness[J].Small Group Research,2002,33(2):181-208.[28] WANG D N,WALDMAN D A,ZHANG Z.A meta-analysis of shared leadership and team effectiveness[J].The Journal of Applied Psychology,2014,99(2):181-198.[29] THYLEFORS I.All professionals are equal but some professionals are more equal than others? dominance,status and efficiency in Swedish interprofessional teams[J].Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences,2012,26(3):505-512.[30] HOCH J E,KOZLOWSKI S W J.Leading virtual teams:hierarchical leadership,structural supports,and shared team leadership[J].The Journal of Applied Psychology,2014,99(3):390-403.[31] CARZO R,YANOUZAS J N.Effects of flat and tall organization structure[J].Administrative Science Quarterly,1969,14(2): 178-191.[32] WANG X H,KIM T Y,LEE D R.Cognitive diversity and team creativity:effects of team intrinsic motivation and transformational leadership[J].Journal of Business Research,2016,69(9):3231-3239.[33] 邓传军,刘智强,王凤娟.非正式地位、错误管理文化与员工创新行为选择[J].管理评论,2017,29(4):154-162,195.[34] 赵新宇,尚玉钒,李瑜佳.基于高校科研团队的领导语言框架、工作复杂性、认知评价与创造力关系研究[J].管理学报,2016,13(5):671-679.[35] DE WIT F R C,GREER L L,JEHN K A.The paradox of intragroup conflict:a meta-analysis[J].The Journal of Applied Psychology,2012,97(2):360-390.[36] RONAY R,GREENAWAY K,ANICICH E M,et al.The path to glory is paved with hierarchy:when hierarchical differentiation increases group effectiveness[J].Psychological Science,2012,23(6):669-677.[37] NICOLAIDES V C,LAPORT K A,CHEN T R,et al.The shared leadership of teams:a meta-analysis of proximal,distal,and moderating relationships[J].The Leadership Quarterly,2014,25(5):923-942.[38] D'INNOCENZO L,MATHIEU J E,KUKENBERGER M R.A meta-analysis of different forms of shared leadership-team performance relations[J].Journal of Management,2016,42(7):1964-1991.[39] 戴万亮,杨皎平,李庆满.内部社会资本、二元学习与研发团队创造力[J].科研管理,2019,40(1):159-169.[40] KANKANHALLI A,TAN B C Y,WEI K K.Conflict and performance in global virtual teams[J].Journal of Management Information Systems,2006,23(3):237-274.[41] HAN H G,BAI Y T.In need of each other:the moderator of task interdependence between LMX variability and justice[J].Journal of Nursing Management,2014,22(6):743-750.[42] 张正堂,刘颖,王亚蓓.团队薪酬、任务互依性对团队绩效的影响研究[J].南开管理评论,2014,17(3):112-121.[43] FREEMAN L C.Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification[J].Social Networks,1978,1(3):215-239.[44] HACKMAN J R,OLDHAM G R.Development of the job diagnostic survey[J].Journal of Applied Psychology,1975,60(2):159-170.[45] CHEN M H.Understanding the benefits and detriments of conflict on team creativity process[J].Creativity and Innovation Management,2006,15(1):105-116.[46] HAANS R F J,PIETERS C,HE Z L.Thinking about U:theorizing and testing U- and inverted U-shaped relationships in strategy research[J].Strategic Management Journal,2016,37(7):1177-1195.[47] PIERCE J R,AGUINIS H.The too-much-of-a-good-thing effect in management[J].Journal of Management,2013,39(2):313-338. |
|
|
|
