Why and When Hierarchy Impacts Team Effectiveness: A Meta-Analytic Integration

Greer, Lindred L.; Jong, Bart de; Schouten, Maartje E.; Dannals, Jennifer

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3069867

Cited by 9 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The current findings also suggest that the functions and dysfunctions of hierarchy (Greer et al, 2018;Halevy et al, 2011) may depend on hierarchy's actual and perceived shape. Our findings suggest that pyramid-like hierarchies can support within-group processes and group performance (Study 3) or at least not harm it (e.g., Study 2).…”

Section: Theoretical Contributionssupporting

confidence: 55%

“…The current article joins recent attempts to understand how different hierarchical shapes affect group processes and outcomes (Bunderson & Van der Vegt, 2018;Greer et al, 2018). Prior research has focused on the degree of hierarchical differentiation within groups (Ronay, Greenaway, Anicich, & Galinsky, 2012), or the effects of different distributions of hierarchy on group outcomes (centralization vs. acyclicity; Bunderson et al, 2016).…”

Section: Theoretical Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whereas functional models of hierarchy suggest that hierarchy can help group functioning via improved coordination and cooperation (Halevy, Chou, & Galinsky, 2011), conflict perspectives on hierarchy suggest it often comes with social costs (Greer, Van Bunderen, & Yu, 2017). Indeed, a recent meta-analysis revealed that hierarchy fuels destructive within-group conflicts, which eventually erode the performance benefits that hierarchy enables (Greer, de Jong, Schouten, & Dannals, 2018). Given the prevalence of hierarchy and its powerful impact on social interactions (e.g., Greer et al, 2018; Hays & Bendersky, 2015; Magee & Galinsky, 2008), it is critical to understand when and why hierarchy may damage social relations within groups and group performance.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, a recent meta-analysis revealed that hierarchy fuels destructive within-group conflicts, which eventually erode the performance benefits that hierarchy enables (Greer, de Jong, Schouten, & Dannals, 2018). Given the prevalence of hierarchy and its powerful impact on social interactions (e.g., Greer et al, 2018; Hays & Bendersky, 2015; Magee & Galinsky, 2008), it is critical to understand when and why hierarchy may damage social relations within groups and group performance.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

On Ladders and Pyramids: Hierarchy’s Shape Determines Relationships and Performance in Groups

Greer

Halevy

et al. 2019

Pers Soc Psychol Bull

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hierarchies take different forms, which individuals mentally represent using different geometric shapes. We propose and empirically demonstrate that individuals’ mental representations of the shape hierarchy takes affect its consequences. Five studies compared two common mental representations of hierarchy shapes—ladders and pyramids—to explore whether, why, and how individuals’ perceptions of hierarchy’s shape undermine constructive relationships within groups and group performance. Study 1 demonstrated that individuals commonly mentally represent hierarchies as ladders and pyramids. In Studies 2 and 3, employees who perceived their workplace hierarchies to be shaped like ladders (as compared with pyramids) experienced worse intragroup relationships. Finally, Studies 4 and 5 experimentally manipulated groups’ hierarchical shape in the lab and found that ladder-shaped hierarchies undermined social relationships and group performance relative to pyramid-shaped hierarchies. Taken together, these findings enhance our understanding of hierarchies’ multifaceted consequences and help shed light on the (dis)utility of hierarchy for group functioning.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Contributionssupporting

confidence: 55%

Section: Theoretical Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

On Ladders and Pyramids: Hierarchy’s Shape Determines Relationships and Performance in Groups

Greer

Halevy

et al. 2019

Pers Soc Psychol Bull

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As suggested above, LMX disparity is negative for groups. A disproportionate concentration of status or task-related resources engenders social stratification and comparative tension among group members (Harrison & Klein, 2007), entailing negative group processes such as competition, undermining, conformity, and silence; emergent states such as climate of injustice; and lowered group effectiveness such as withdrawal and poor performance (e.g., Greer, de Jong, Schouten, & Dannals, 2018). Indeed, feelings of inequity and injustice in groups characterized by disparity might incite “competition, differentiation, and (resentful) deviance among some unit members” (Harrison & Klein, 2007: 1206).…”

Section: Conceptual Building Blocks For Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

LMX Differentiation and Group Outcomes: A Framework and Review Drawing on Group Diversity Insights

Buengeler

Piccolo

Locklear

2020

Journal of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this review, we address inconsistencies and a lack of clarity in the study of leader-member exchange (LMX) differentiation and group outcomes. We do so by drawing on another highly visible group dispersion literature in the management domain, group diversity, based on the recognition that LMX quality is a characteristic on which group members vary. Utilizing insights from Harrison and Klein’s typology of group diversity constructs, we introduce a framework that specifies the meaning and shape of three variations of differentiated leader-member relationships in groups and connects each construct with implications in terms of theorizing and measurement. Specifically, our framework conceptualizes LMX differentiation as LMX separation (dispersion in LMX relationships as disagreement or opposition regarding an opinion, perception, or position), LMX variety (dispersion in LMX relationships as distinctiveness in kind, source, or category), and LMX disparity (dispersion in LMX relationships as inequality in concentration of valued social assets or resources). We then apply this framework to conduct a systematic review of the LMX differentiation literature with particular attention to alignment among a study’s descriptions of the construct, application of theory, expected group outcomes, and construct measurement. Finally, we offer recommendations for future research and for applying our framework to enhance reliability, validity, and generalizability in studies of LMX differentiation and group outcomes.

show abstract

Equity and Game-Theory Strategies to Promote Gender Diversity and Inclusion in an Academic Health Science Centre

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Why and When Hierarchy Impacts Team Effectiveness: A Meta-Analytic Integration

Cited by 9 publications

References 74 publications

On Ladders and Pyramids: Hierarchy’s Shape Determines Relationships and Performance in Groups

On Ladders and Pyramids: Hierarchy’s Shape Determines Relationships and Performance in Groups

LMX Differentiation and Group Outcomes: A Framework and Review Drawing on Group Diversity Insights

Equity and Game-Theory Strategies to Promote Gender Diversity and Inclusion in an Academic Health Science Centre

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About