Cited by 907Team Dynamics and PerformanceGender Diversity and InequalitySocial and Intergroup Psychology

Getting Specific about Demographic Diversity Variable and Team Performance Relationships: A Meta-Analysis

Bell, Suzanne T., Villado, Anton J., Lukasik, Marc A., Belau, Larisa, Briggs, Andrea L.·2011·Journal of Management

Abstract

The authors revisited the demographic diversity variable and team performance relationship using meta-analysis and took a significant departure from previous meta-analyses by focusing on specific demographic variables (e.g., functional background, organizational tenure) rather than broad categories (e.g., highly job related, less job related). They integrated different conceptualizations of diversity (i.e., separation, variety, disparity) into the development of their rationale and hypotheses for specific demographic diversity variable—team performance relationships. Furthermore, they contrasted diversity with the team mean on continuous demographic variables when elevated levels of a variable, as opposed to differences, were more logically related to team performance. Functional background variety diversity had a small positive relationship with general team performance as well as with team creativity and innovation. The relationship was strongest for design and product development teams. Educational background variety diversity was related to team creativity and innovation and to team performance for top management teams. Other variables generally thought to increase task-relevant knowledge (e.g., organizational tenure) and team performance were unrelated to team performance, although these variables were almost never studied as the variety conceptualization (i.e., the conceptualization that can reflect the breadth of knowledge that can be applied to the task). Team mean organizational tenure was related to team performance in terms of efficiency. Race and sex variety diversity had small negative relationships with team performance, whereas age diversity was unrelated to team performance regardless of diversity conceptualization. Implications for staffing teams and future research are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0149206310365001

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bell, S. T., Villado, A. J., Lukasik, M. A., Belau, L., & Briggs, A. L.
Affiliations
  • DePaul University (US)
  • Rice University (US)
Corresponding author
Bell, Suzanne T.
Venue
Journal of Management
Published
2010-09-01
Volume
37
Issue
3
Pages
709-743
ISSN
  • 0149-2063 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-1211
OpenAlex
W1993164540
Cited by
907
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 41 · 2025: 57 · 2024: 68 · 2023: 78 · 2022: 69 · 2021: 91 · 2020: 80 · 2019: 78 · 2018: 68 · 2017: 61 · 2016: 50 · 2015: 61 · 2014: 38 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 23
FWCI
2.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Management (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Diversity and Inequality
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
demographic diversity, team performance, educational background diversity, organizational tenure, team creativity, team innovation, top management teams, age diversity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review