FACULTY OF SPORT SCIENCE AND
RECREATION
DIPLOMA IN SPORT STUDIES
ELC 231: INTEGRATED LANGUAGE SKILLS III
CLASS: NSR1133B
TOPIC: ARGUMENTATIVE ARTICLE
PREPARED BY:
NAME MATRIC NO.
NURALIIF SYAHMI BIN MUHAMMAD SAIFOL 2023103651
PREPARED FOR:
NURUL SYAFAWANI BINTI HALIM
SUBMISSION DATE:
WEEK-14
In an increasingly complex and competitive business world,how is a
company to generate the creative ideas needed for ongoing success? Many
managers believe that forming teams with cross-functional diversity is the
answer (Sethi etal., 2002), and this is becoming increasingly common (Mu &
Gnyawali, 2003). However, while diversity in group membership may lead to the
diversity of ideas needed for innovative problem solving, it is argued here that
that managers need to be aware that there are many ways that diversity can in
fact hinder team performance, though there are strategies that both teams and
their managers can use to reduce the potential negatives and enhance the
potential positives.
Aside from the cross-functional diversity, many other types of diversity
can have effects on team performance and some of these types of diversity can
have inherently negative effects. For example, any negative stereotyping by
group members resulting from diversity in terms of gender, age or ethnicity will
reduce team social cohesion and hence group performance (Fiske & Neuberg,
1990, as cited in Harrison et al., 2002) because a certain amount of social
cohesion has been found to be correlated with effective group performance
(Harrison et al., 2002). Other aspects of diversity, such as in attitudes towards
the group’s tasks, in values, and in time management styles, can also negatively
affect group social cohesion and hence group performance (Fiske & Neuberg,
1990, as cited in Harrison et al., 2002).
1
The sorts of diversity that are most likely to be beneficial to group
performance, such as diversity in relevant knowledge, experience and skills
(Harrison et al., 2002), can unfortunately also cause problems for group
performance. Having too many diverse views and opinions to coordinate can,
for example, cause cognitive overload amongst group members and so impede
its decision making processes (Mu & Gnyawali, 2003; Sethi et al., 2002). This
is especially likely to be a problem when the team has a limited amount of time
to complete its tasks (Mu & Gnyawali, 2003). The cross functional diversity
mentioned above can also cause problems if group members have difficulty
understanding and coordinating the differing world views and values of group
members from different functional areas (Colbeck et al.,2000 and Gallos, 1989,
as cited in Mu & Gnyawali, 2003).
Given all the above-mentioned problems associated with diversity, are
there strategies that a team and its managers can implement to reduce the
potential negatives and enhance the potential positives? Regarding cognitive
overload, evidently a team needs to be given an adequate amount of time to
complete its task. Scheduling frequent collaboration can also be used to build
social cohesion and overcome the potential negative impacts of stereotypes
(Harrison et al., 2002) provided “team psychological safety” is fostered in the
group (Mu & Gnyawali, 2003). And since too much social cohesion can cause
teams to avoid the robust debate needed to generate the best thinking in order
to protect social relationships, management encouragement of the group to be
“venturesome” in its work can also be helpful (Sethi et al., 2002).
2
In conclusion, it appears that if managers wish to create especially
effective teams, they should seek to minimise diversity in terms of task and time
management values, while looking to maximise differences in relevant
knowledge and skills. They should further aim to foster as much collaboration
as possible so as to develop team social cohesion, have rules about interactions
which foster team psychological safety, and encourage the team to be
venturesome. Unless these things are done, managers will likely find diversity
more a hindrance than a help for group performance.
3
References
Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H. Gavin, J. H., & Florey, A. T. (2002). Time, teams,
and task performance: changing effects of surface- and deep level diversity on
group funchoning.
Academy o Monogement Journal, 45151. 1029-1045
Mu, S., & Gryawali, D. R. (2003). Developing synergistic knowledge in student
groups.
Journal of Higher Education, 74(6), 689-711
Sethi, R., Smith, D. C. & Park, C. W. (2002). How to kill a team's creativity.
Harvard Business
Review, 80(8), 16-17.
