|
|
|
| The Dual Pathway Model of Informational Faultlines and Team Creativity: The Moderating Role of Different Emotional Regulation Strategies |
| Zhang Xiaojie1,liu Xinmei2 |
| (1.Management College, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100,China; 2.School of Management, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049,China) |
|
|
|
|
Abstract In the era of knowledge-based economy, organizations have to continuously generate creative ideas to survive and sustain competitive advantages. As diversified knowledge constitute the foundation for the generation of creative ideas, teams consisting of members with diversified backgrounds has increasingly become an important vehicle for innovation in organizations. However alignment of differences in educational background, functional background, and working experience within such teams can easily lead to informational fautlines in which different subgroups have their own working style and working methods. Informational fautlines have a double-edged sword effect on team creativity. On one hand, informational subgroups provide heterogeneous knowledge that can stimulate the generation of innovative ideas. On the other hand, subgroups may have emotional conflicts, which is a great drain on energy among team members. Therefore, it is essential to understand how to reap the beneficial effects and suppress the negative effects of significance for organizational innovation management.#br#Considering the double-edged sword effect of informational faultlines on team creativity, this study focuses on the moderating and mediating mechanisms in the relationship between informational faultlines and team creativity. A thorough literature reviewed shows two gaps. First, although the generation of creative ideas in teams with subgroups is a process laden with emotions, little attention has been paid to the moderating role of emotional regulations. Second, the current research mainly considers the mediating role of task-related or knowledge-related mechanisms, such as information elaboration, task reflexivity and knowledge sharing, ignoring the mediating role of social-emotional processes and the possibility of multiple intermediaries.#br#Based on the categorization-elaboration model and the emotional regulation process model, the present study investigates the relationship between informational faultlines and team creativity by constructing a research model treating emotion regulation norms of the team as the conditional variables, and knowledge utilization and team vitality as the intermediary variables. A dataset collected from 106 research and development teams is used to empirically test the proposed hypotheses. It is found that when team members’ cognitive reappraisal is high, informational faultlines can promote team creativity; knowledge utilization and team viability have an indirect effect on the relationship among informational faultlines and cognitive reappraisal and team creativity; when team members’ expression suppression is high, informational faultlines can inhibit team creativity; knowledge utilization mediates the relationship between the interactive term of informational faultlines, expression suppression, and team creativity.#br#This research makes important contributions in the following ways. First, it studies the moderating effects of different emotion regulation strategies of team members on the relationship between informational faultlines and team creativity, complementing the research on the moderating variables that has focused on leadership, task characteristics and team motivation. For teams with subgroups, members will inevitably experience the negative emotions of disagreement and conflict, and thus the generation of creative ideas in such context is a process laden with a great amount of emotions. Therefore, although informational faultlines can provide knowledge resource for team creativity, whether this advantage can be realized depends on how team members regulate these negative emotions. By combining the research on emotional regulation strategies and team subgroups, the current research expands the study of the regulatory mechanism of informational faultlines. Further, the current study draws on emotional regulation from the individual-level research and distinguishes team level emotional regulation into two different strategies, namely, cognitive reappraisal and expression suppression, which is a further excavation of the previous team emotion regulation research of single-dimensional conception, and deepens our understanding of the mechanism of different emotion regulation strategies at team level. Second, the current study further opens the black box of the relationship between informational faultlines and team creativity by considering the dual pathway mechanisms. Existing studies generally focus on the role of task-based knowledge process, ignoring the mediating role of social-emotional processes and the possibility of multiple intermediaries. Thus, this study contributes to the literature by simultaneously examining the indirect effect of knowledge utilization (as the task-based process) and team viability (as the socio-emotional process) in the relationship between informational faultlines and team creativity, providing a more complete picture of how informational faultlines affect team creativity.#br#
|
|
Received: 08 December 2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] VAN KNIPPENBERG D. Team innovation[J]. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior,2017,4(1):211-233.[2] LAU D C, MURNIGHAN J K. Demographic diversity and faultlines: the compositional dynamics of organizational groups[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1998, 23(2): 325-340.[3] 屈晓倩,刘新梅. 信息型团队断裂影响团队创造力的作用机理研究[J]. 管理科学,2016,29(2):18-28.[4] BEZRUKOVA K,JEHN K A,ZANUTTO E L,et al. Do workgroup faultlines help or hurt? a moderated model of faultlines,team identification,and group performance[J]. Organization Science,2009,20(1):35-50.[5] CHUNG Y,LIAO H,JACKSON S E,et al. Cracking but not breaking:joint effects of faultline strength and diversity climate on loyal behavior[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2015,58(5):1495-1515.[6] 霍生平,赵葳. 众创空间创客团队断裂带对创新行为的影响:基于知识共享的中介跨层研究[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理,2019,40(4):94-108.[7] COOPER D,PATEL P C,THATCHER S M B. It depends:environmental context and the effects of faultlines on top management team performance[J]. Organization Science,2014,25(2):633-652.[8] REN H,GRAY B,HARRISON D A. Triggering faultline effects in teams:the importance of bridging friendship ties and breaching animosity ties[J]. Organization Science,2015,26(2):390-404.[9] 屈晓倩,刘新梅,雷宏振. 外部视角下信息型断裂影响团队创造力的作用机理研究[J]. 管理学报,2020,17(4):536-543.[10] SPOELMA T M,ELLIS A P J. Fuse orfracture? threat as a moderator of the effects of diversity faultlines in teams[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,2017,102(9):1344-1359.[11] 陈慧,梁巧转,张悦. 基于Meta分析的团队断裂研究:分类,效果与情境[J]. 管理评论,2019,31(3):116-130.[12] ELLIS A P J,MAI K M,CHRISTIAN J S. Examining the asymmetrical effects of goal faultlines in groups:a categorization-elaboration approach[J]. The Journal of Applied Psychology,2013,98(6):948-961.[13] SCHLMERICH F,SCHERMULY C C,DELLER J. How leaders' diversity beliefs alter the impact of faultlines on team functioning[J]. Small Group Research,2016,47(2):177-206.[14] VAN KNIPPENBERG D,DE DREU C KW,HOMAN A C. Work group diversity and group performance:an integrative model and research agenda[J]. The Journal of Applied Psychology,2004,89(6):1008-1022.[15] MUELLER J,CRONIN M A. How relational processes support team creativity[M]. UK:Emerald Group Publishing Limited,2009:291-310.[16] CARTON A M,CUMMINGS J N. The impact of subgroup type and subgroup configurational properties on work team performance[J]. The Journal of Applied Psychology,2013,98(5):732-758.[17] THATCHER S MB,PATEL P C. Group faultlines[J]. Journal of Management,2012,38(4):969-1009.[18] SHIN SJ,ZHOU J. When is educational specialization heterogeneity related to creativity in research and development teams? transformational leadership as a moderator[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,2007,92(6):1709-1721.[19] SUNG S Y,CHOI J N. Effects of team knowledge management on the creativity and financial performance of organizational teams[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,2012,118(1):4-13.[20] HU J,LIDEN R C. Making a difference in the teamwork:linking team prosocial motivation to team processes and effectiveness[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2015,58(4):1102-1127.[21] GROSS J J,JOHN O P. Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes:implications for affect,relationships,and well-being[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2003,85(2):348-362.[22] 张晓洁,刘新梅,屈晓倩. 团队任务冲突如何影响个体创造力:一个跨层的中介调节模型[J]. 预测,2016,35(1):22-27,61.[23] DRUSKAT V U, WOLFF S B. Group emotional competence and its influence on group effectiveness[M]. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2001.[24] ASHKANASY N M,HRTEL C E J,DAUS C S. Diversity and emotion:the new frontiers in organizational behavior research[J]. Journal of Management,2002,28(3):307-338.[25] JIANG J Y,ZHANG X,TJOSVOLD D. Emotion regulation as a boundary condition of the relationship between team conflict and performance:a multi-level examination[J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior,2013,34(5):714-734.[26] SHIN Y. Positivegroup affect and team creativity[J]. Small Group Research,2014,45(3):337-364.[27] 汤超颖,艾树,龚增良. 积极情绪的社会功能及其对团队创造力的影响:隐性知识共享的中介作用[J]. 南开管理评论,2011,14(4):129-137.[28] GALINSKY A D,MOSKOWITZ G B. Perspective-taking:decreasing stereotype expression,stereotype accessibility,and in-group favoritism[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2000,78(4):708-724.[29] BELL S T,MARENTETTE B J. Team viability for long-term and ongoing organizational teams[J]. Organizational Psychology Review,2011,1(4):275-292.[30] 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.[31] HOBFOLL S E. Conservation of resources： a new attempt at conceptualizing stress[J]. The American Psychologist,1989,44(3):513-524.[32] ALLEN NJ,STANLEY D J,WILLIAMS H M,et al. Assessing the impact of nonresponse on work group diversity effects[J]. Organizational Research Methods,2007,10(2):262-286.[33] MEYER B,GLENZ A. Teamfaultline measures[J]. Organizational Research Methods,2013,16(3):393-424.[34] PELLED L H,EISENHARDT K M,XIN K R. Exploring the black box:an analysis of work group diversity,conflict,and performance[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,1999,44(1):1.[35] JORDAN P J,ASHKANASY N M,HRTEL C E J,et al. Workgroup emotional intelligence:scale development and relationship to team process effectiveness and goal focus[J]. Human Resource Management Review,2002,12(2):195-214.[36] AIKEN L S, WEST S G. Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions[M]. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 1991. |
|
|
|
