Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:

login

Log in through your institution.

Journal Article

Team Composition

Antonio S. Mello and Martin E. Ruckes
The Journal of Business
Vol. 79, No. 3 (May 2006), pp. 1019-1039
DOI: 10.1086/500668
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/500668
Page Count: 21
Were these topics helpful?
See something inaccurate? Let us know!

Select the topics that are inaccurate.

  • Download PDF
  • Add to My Lists
  • Cite this Item
We're having trouble loading this content. Download PDF instead.

Abstract

This paper presents a model of team composition. Heterogeneous teams have a greater variety of information sources than homogeneous teams. If information and preferences can be expressed openly, heterogeneous teams reach better decisions. However, members of heterogeneous teams are more likely to diverge in their preferences with respect to courses of action, which is reflected in lower effort. Team leaders who are likely to be either uninformed or well informed about project payoffs prefer to form homogeneous teams. Authority vested in the team leader to replace a subordinate affects the sharing of information and may diminish the value of heterogeneous teams.

Notes and References

This item contains 28 references.

References
  • ['Aghion, Philippe, and Jean Tirole. 1997. Formal and real authority in organizations. Journal of Political Economy 105:1–29.']
  • ['Amason, Allen C. 1996. Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams. Academy of Management Journal 39:123–48.']
  • ['Ancona, Deborah G., and David F. Caldwell. 1992. Demography and design: Predictors of new product team performance. Organization Science 3:321–41.']
  • ['Athey, Susan, Christopher Avery, and Peter B. Zemsky. 2000. Mentoring and diversity. American Economic Review 90:765–86.']
  • ['Bertrand, Marianne, and Antoinette Schoar. 2002. Managing with style: The effect of managers on firm policies. Working Paper no. 4280‐02, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Sloan School of Management.']
  • ['Carrillo, Juan D., and Denis Gromb. 2002. Culture in organizations: Inertia and uniformity. Discussion Paper no. 3613, Centre for Economic Policy Research, London.']
  • ['Cornell, Bradford, and Ivo Welch. 1996. Culture, information, and screening discrimination. Journal of Political Economy 104:542–71.']
  • ['Crémer, Jacques. 1995. Arm’s‐length relationships. Quarterly Journal of Economics 110:275–95.']
  • ['De Bijl, Paul W. J. 1994. Delegation of responsibility in organizations. Discussion Paper no. 9469, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.']
  • ['Dessein, Wouter. 2002. Authority and communication in organizations. Review of Economic Studies 69:811–38.']
  • ['Eisenhardt, Kathleen M., Jean L. Kahwajy, and L. J. Bourgeois III. 1997. Conflict and strategic choice: How top management teams disagree. California Management Review 39 (Winter): 42–62.']
  • ['Friebel, Guido, and Michael A. Raith. 2004. Abuse of authority and hierarchical communication. Rand Journal of Economics 35 (Summer): 224–44.']
  • ['Gibbons, Robert S., and Kevin J. Murphy. 1992. Optimal incentive contracts in the presence of career concerns: Theory and evidence. Journal of Political Economy 100:468–505.']
  • ['Hoffman, L. Richard. 1978. The group problem‐solving process. In Group processes, ed. L. Berkowitz. New York: Academic Press.']
  • ['Hoffman, L. Richard, and Norman R. F. Maier. 1961. Quality and acceptance of problem solutions by members of homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 62:401–7.']
  • ['Jackson, Susan E. 1992. Team composition in organizational settings: Issues in managing an increasingly diverse workforce. In Group process and productivity, ed. Stephen Worchel, Wendy Wood, and Jeffrey A. Simpson. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.']
  • ['Katzenbach, Jon R. 1997. The myth of the top management team. Harvard Business Review (November–December), pp. 83–91.']
  • ['McCain, Bruce E., Charles A. O’Reilly, and Jeffrey Pfeffer. 1983. The effects of departmental demography on turnover: The case of a university. Academy of Management Journal 26:626–41.']
  • ['Milgrom, Paul R. 1988. Employment contracts, influence activities, and efficient organization design. Journal of Political Economy 96:42–60.']
  • ['Nemeth, Charlan. 1986. Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological Review 93:23–32.']
  • ['O’Reilly, Charles A., and Sylvia Flatt. 1989. Executive team demography: Organizational innovation and firm performance. Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Berkeley.']
  • ['Pfeffer, Jeffrey. 1983. Organizational demography. In Research in organizational behavior, vol. 5, ed. Larry L. Cummings and Barry M. Staw. Greenwich, CT: JAI.']
  • ['Prendergast, Canice. 1993. A theory of “yes men.” American Economic Review 83:757–70.']
  • ['Prendergast, Canice, and Lars Stole. 1996. Impetuous youngsters and jaded oldtimers: Acquiring a reputation for learning. Journal of Political Economy 104:1105–34.']
  • ['Steiner, Ivan D. 1972. Group process and productivity. San Diego: Academic Press.']
  • ['Wagner, W. Gary, Jeffrey Pfeffer, and Charles A. O’Reilly III. 1984. Organizational demography and turnover in top‐management groups. Administrative Science Quarterly 29:74–92.']
  • ['Wiersema, Margarethe F., and Karen A. Bantel. 1992. Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Academy of Management Journal 35:91–121.']
  • ['Wiersema, Margarethe F., and Allan Bird. 1993. Organizational demography in Japanese firms: Group heterogeneity, individual dissimilarity, and top management team turnover. Organization Science 5:996–1025.']