Cited by 1,362Team Dynamics and PerformanceGender Diversity and InequalitySocial and Intergroup Psychology

The Role Of Context In Work Team Diversity Research: A Meta-Analytic Review

Joshi, Aparna, Roh, Hyuntak·2009·Academy of Management Journal

Abstract

Integrating macro and micro theoretical perspectives, we conducted a meta-analysis examining the role of contextual factors in team diversity research. Using data from 8,757 teams in 39 studies conducted in organizational settings, we examined whether contextual factors at multiple levels, including industry, occupation, and team, influenced the performance outcomes of relations-oriented and task-oriented diversity. The direct effects were very small yet significant, and after we accounted for industry, occupation, and team-level contextual moderators, they doubled or tripled in size. Further, occupation- and industry-level moderators explained significant variance in effect sizes across studies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5465/amj.2009.41331491

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?

  • The direct relationship between team diversity and performance is generally small and strongly dependent on context.

    “Meta-analytic work similarly shows that the direct relationship between team diversity and performance is generally small and strongly dependent on context (Joshi & Roh, 2009).”
  • Joshi and Roh (2009), synthesizing data from 8,757 teams across 39 organizational studies, found very small direct diversity effects but stronger relationships once industry, occupation, and team-level moderators were considered.

    “Joshi and Roh (2009), synthesizing data from 8,757 teams across 39 organizational studies, found very small direct diversity effects but stronger relationships once industry, occupation, and team-level moderators were considered.”
  • According to the Categorization-Elaboration Model, the effects of diversity on team performance can be understood by considering the favorable and unfavorable processes that diversity may instigate.

    “According to the Categorization-Elaboration Model (CEM; Van Knippenberg et al., 2004), the effects of diversity on team performance can be understood by considering the favorable and unfavorable processes that diversity may instigate (Joshi & Roh, 2009;Van Knippenberg et al., 2004;Williams & O'Reilly, 1998).”

    From Leading diversity: Towards a theory of functional leadership in diverse teams. (2020) · cites this paper as Joshi & Roh, 2009

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Joshi, A., & Roh, H.
Affiliations
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
Venue
Academy of Management Journal
Published
2009-06
Volume
52
Issue
3
Pages
599-627
ISSN
  • 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
  • 1948-0989
OpenAlex
W2115638724
Cited by
1,362
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 55 · 2025: 68 · 2024: 87 · 2023: 80 · 2022: 98 · 2021: 100 · 2020: 92 · 2019: 107 · 2018: 109 · 2017: 95 · 2016: 87 · 2015: 96 · 2014: 73 · 2013: 74 · 2012: 59
FWCI
60.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Academy of Management Journal (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
team diversity, contextual factors, team performance, macro and micro perspectives

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