Cited by 32Team Dynamics and PerformanceSocial and Intergroup PsychologyCultural Differences and Values

Blurred Lines: How the Collectivism Norm Operates Through Perceived Group Diversity to Boost or Harm Group Performance in Himalayan Mountain Climbing

Chatman, Jennifer A., Greer, Lindred L., Sherman, Eliot, Doerr, Bernadette·2019·Organization Science

Abstract

We develop a theory explaining how collectivism causes people to “blur” demographic differences, that is, to see less diversity than actually exists in a group, and reconciling contradictions in how collectivistic norms influence group performance. We draw on the perceived diversity literature, hypothesizing that collectivistic norms cause group members to blur demographic differences, resulting in perceptions that group members are more similar than they actually are. Whether this benefits or harms group performance depends on the group’s objective diversity and the relevance of the perceived diversity attribute for accomplishing the task. For conjunctive tasks, the group’s performance is determined by its weakest member, demanding high levels of cohesion. Our theory suggests that collectivism benefits group conjunctive performance when objective national diversity is high by blurring divisive relational differences but has no effect in groups with low objective national diversity. In contrast, for disjunctive tasks, the group’s performance is determined by its best member. We predict that collectivism harms group disjunctive performance when objective expertness diversity is high by blurring differences in task-relevant expertness but has no effect in low objective expertness diversity groups. We find support for our theory in two studies, an archival study of 5,214 Himalayan climbing expeditions and a laboratory experiment assessing 366 groups. Our results show that collectivism has benefits and detriments for diverse groups and that these contradictory effects can be understood by identifying how the collectivistic blurring of perceived group diversity helps or hurts groups based on the type of tasks on which they are working.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/orsc.2018.1268

Cites

115 of 115 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Diversity has greater potential to benefit performance on complex and interdependent rather than simple and independent tasks.

    “Additionally, as diversity has greater potential to benefit performance on complex and interdependent rather than simple and independent tasks (Bowers et al., 2000;Chatman, Greer, Sherman, & Doerr, 2019;Jehn, Northcraft, & Neale, 1999;Van der Vegt & Janssen, 2003;Wegge, Roth, Neubach, Schmidt, & Kanfer, 2008), our analysis focuses on interdependent teams working on more complex tasks (e.g.,”

    From Leading diversity: Towards a theory of functional leadership in diverse teams. (2020) · cites this paper as Chatman, Greer, Sherman, & Doerr, 2019

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 116 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chatman, J. A., Greer, L. L., Sherman, E., & Doerr, B.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
  • London Business School (GB)
  • Belmont, CA
Venue
Organization Science
Published
2019-03
Volume
30
Issue
2
Pages
235-259
ISSN
  • 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5455
OpenAlex
W2930453529
Cited by
32
References
116
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2
FWCI
5.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Organization Science (publishedVersion)
  • London Business School Research Online (London Business School) (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Cultural Differences and Values
Keywords
collectivism, group performance, national diversity, group cohesion, cultural values

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