ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL
BEHAVIOUR
ISSN 2394-0409; DOI: 10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/issn.2394-0409; Volume 3 Issue 1 (2016)
www.elkjournals.com
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE: EXPLORING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
LEADER CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE, TEAM DIVERSITY AND TEAM
PERFORMANCE
Ms. Aditi Sharma Dogra
Research Scholar
Gautam Buddha University
Greater Noida
Dr. Varsha Dixit
Assistant Professor
Gautam Buddha University
Greater Noida
ABSTRACT:
Leadership today is a challenge due to volatile environment and dynamic workforce. As organizations are becoming
borderless and the workforce are working cross border, it is important to understand why some individuals function
more effectively than others in culturally diverse situations. To date, very few studies have examined the relation
between leader cultural intelligence and team performance. The objective of this research paper is to explore the
relationship between Leader cultural intelligence, team diversity and team performance. This paper tries to build a
conceptual framework establishing a relation between Leader Cultural Intelligence, Team Diversity and Team
Performance. It is not only that the organizations are global nowadays but the people who are global that has resulted
into the origin of Cultural Intelligence. This paper gives a snapshot of various studies that have been done based on
this and hence gives a proposed model which can be undertaken in future.
Keywords: Leader Cultural Intelligence, Globalization, Team Diversity, Team Performance
INTRODUCTION
Managing diverse workforce and steering the
same towards the achievement of global
organizational goals is a challenge faced by
many. Leadership is transforming the
organizations structures and performances.
The blend of a diverse workforce along with
the potential of a Leader enables any
organization to operate globally.
Understanding the need or demands of a
competent workforce and leaders raises a
concern to understand the key factor i.e.
ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL
BEHAVIOUR
ISSN 2394-0409; DOI: 10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/issn.2394-0409; Volume 3 Issue 1 (2016)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
culture which binds leadership, workforce
diversity and global organization together.
The knowledge of culture can drive the
organizational resources, strategies, plans as
well as products to an international level.
This has led to the rise of the concept of CQ
or Cultural Intelligence developed by Ang
Soon and Van Dyne Linn (2006). Ang, Van
Dyne, & Livermore (2007) describe four CQ
capabilities: meta-cognition (CQ Strategy),
cognition (CQ Knowledge), behavior (CQ
Action) and motivation (CQ Drive).
Cultural Intelligence can be defined as an
individual’s capability to understand, adjust
and adapt in various cultural situations. It is
the mental framework of an individual which
makes him/her more conscious towards the
existing cultural differences and drives
him/her to act accordingly. Cultural
Intelligence helps in better understanding of
the existing cultural differences and allows
the individual to engage in intercultural
interactions. Cultural Intelligence further
helps to bridge gaps that can occur due to
cultural differences present at an individual
level as well as at the team level in an
organization.
Diversity comprises of similarities and
differences in age, gender, opinions,
experience, education, nationality and even
values in an individual. Organizations are
more inclined towards building a
heterogeneous team rather than the
homogeneous ones. The differences in ideas
and exposure leads to creation of ideas to
solve problems of any kind or nature. The
significance of diversity is that an
organization becomes a pride owner of a pool
of diversified ideas which further helps it to
take better decisions and avert risks. Groves
and Feyerhem (2011). Workforce diversity is
divided into three: Informational Diversity,
Social category Diversity and Value
Diversity. Jehn, North craft and Neale (1999)
as illustrated in Figure 1.
Performance has been defined as a method in
which team members are concerned about
accomplishing the expected goals and turn
out the desired outcomes (Salas, Cooke &
Rosen 2008).Team Performance can be
measured in terms of conflicts and
innovation. Following Jehn and Mannix
(2001) three types of conflict are examined:
Task, Process and Relationship conflict.
ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL
BEHAVIOUR
ISSN 2394-0409; DOI: 10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/issn.2394-0409; Volume 3 Issue 1 (2016)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Task Conflict: It is an awareness of
differences in viewpoints and opinions
pertaining to a group task. Jehn and
Mannix (2001)
Relationship Conflict: It is an awareness
of interpersonal incompabilities
including affective components such as
feelings, tension and friction. Jehn and
Mannix (2001).
Process Conflict: it is defined as an
awareness of controversies about how tsk
accomplishment would proceed. Jehn
et.al (1999).
West and Farr, (1989) define innovation as
`the intentional introduction and application
within a role, group or organization of
concepts, processes, merchandise or
procedures, unaccustomed to the unit of
adoption, designed to considerably benefit
role performance, the group, the
organization or the broader society' (p. 16).
Relatively few studies have centered at the
level-of- analysis of the work group. This
can be a notable disadvantage since it’s often
the case that an innovation is originated and
subsequently developed by a team into
routinized practice within organizations
(West and Farr, 1990; Anderson and King,
1993). For instance, a management team
might initiate changes in organization
procedures; a marketing team might modify
approaches to advertising product lines; and
an assembly team might institute new and
improved ways of product manufacture.
SIGNIFICANCE OF CULTURAL
INTELLIGENCE
Dynamic organizations of today cannot
afford to neglect the benefits delivered by
cultural intelligence and so they insist on
designing and imparting training programs in
international management. The leaders are
well acquainted with the fact that the survival
of a team or an organization solely depends
on synchronizing the benefits derived from
diversity and deep understanding of cultural
differences, cultural intelligence helps to
leverage out of the same.
Though the advantages are countless but
some of them are-
Cultural Intelligence helps to strengthen
the risk taking capability of the
organization across border.
It assists in channelizing the competitive
resources crucial for the performance of
an organization.
It helps in managing and combining the
synergies of the diverse workforce and
ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL
BEHAVIOUR
ISSN 2394-0409; DOI: 10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/issn.2394-0409; Volume 3 Issue 1 (2016)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
directing the same towards the growth of
an organization.
It enables an organization as well as
leaders to build strategies that further
attracts global partners.
Cultural Intelligence links innovation
with performance and reduction of
conflicts.
Though there are various papers which have
discussed the benefits of workforce diversity
and team performance in the organizations
Jonas F.Puck et.al (2010).Anne Nederveen
Pieterse et. Al(2013) but there has been very
few descriptive as well as empirical papers
which have tried to link Leader CQ with
Team Performance and the role of workforce
diversity in the same. Kevin S. Groves and
Ann E. Feyerherm (2011),Kok-Yee NG and
P.Christopher Earley(2006).Kadri Karma
and Rebekka Vedina(2009). The aim of this
research is to integrate conceptualizations of
Leader CQ and Team diversity into one
model for estimation of their effect on Team
Performance. The topic of research is novice
and yet to be explored more. This research is
to identify how teams are able to benefit from
Leader CQ and enhance team performance.
LITERATURE REVIEW
CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE (CQ)
Cultural Intelligence provides a platform to
an individual to seek answers to the questions
related to cultural differences and further
gives an insight to an individual to think,
understand and behave in a cross cultural
environment. Triandis (2006) argues that CQ
can be achieved by an individual if he/she
avoids being judgmental until enough
information is not gathered.
The foundation of Cultural Intelligence was
laid in the beginning of 1960’s and the
offshoots of the same are cultural variation
theory (Berry, 1974, Sternberg, 1985; cf. Ng,
Earley, 2006) and the concept of cultural
intelligence (Earley, 2002). The cultural
variation theory is knitted around the concept
of culture which means that this approach is
culture bounded whereas cultural intelligence
is said to be free from the concept of culture
and can be applied in context to other
cultures.it is not culture specific concept.
These two concepts are interrelated, as
culturally intelligent individuals need to
understand what intelligent behaviors
constitute in different cultures (Ng, Earley,
2006). In this paper second approach has
been taken, that is cultural intelligence
ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL
BEHAVIOUR
ISSN 2394-0409; DOI: 10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/issn.2394-0409; Volume 3 Issue 1 (2016)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
approach because of its impact on today’s
global workplace where the ability to adapt
with different people from different cultural
backgrounds is of great importance.
According to Earley and Ang (2003) CQ is
conceptualized to comprise four dimensions:
Meta cognition
Cognition
Motivation
Behavior
Metacognitive is defined as a mental process
in which an individual tries to procure and
understand knowledge related to culture
without having prior education or experience
about the same. Cognitive is defined as
knowledge about the cultural differences and
norms through education and experience.
Motivational is defined as a source of
stimulation fort an individual which further
helps him/her to streamline the knowledge of
cultural differences into right action.
Behavioral refers to how individuals act and
think in these cross cultural situations. It
encompasses various elements of verbal and
nonverbal.
Many renowned scholars and researchers
have made contributions to define the
concept of Cultural Intelligence also known
as CQ. The study done by And et al (2007)
on a sample of executives suggest that the
dimensions of CQ, motivational and
behavioral are closely connected to general
adjustment. Further he found out that the
cognitive and Meta cognitive helps improvise
decision making of individuals in culturally
diverse setting.
Some scholars like Ang, Van Dyne and Koh
(2006) have tried to study the relationship
between Big Five (Costa, Mcgrae 1988) and
CQ. The major finding was that the Big Five
was positively connected to all the four
dimensions of CQ. According to a researcher,
manager’s behaviors were studied on the
basis of task and relationship and the finding
was that the managers who are relationship
centered are able to avoid and counter
problems related to cultural differences.
CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE AND
TEAM PERFORMANCE
According to some scholars Leaders tend to
greatly impact the outcomes of a team. Ang
and Inkpen (2008). The leaders with high CQ
have the ability to create a climate based on
transparent communication pattern within the
teams and strong trust on each other. The
leaders highlight the importance of change
ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL
BEHAVIOUR
ISSN 2394-0409; DOI: 10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/issn.2394-0409; Volume 3 Issue 1 (2016)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
management within the team’s further
reducing conflicts that can exist due to pool
of similarities and dissimilarities amongst the
team members. The Leaders with high CQ
help the teams with diversified backgrounds
to work together for organizational goals thus
enabling the team members to have a deeper
sensitivity towards the cross cultural
differences that exist within teams. Groves
and Feyerhem (2011).There have been
various studies theoretical as well as
empirical which have tried to analyze the
relation between cultural diversity on
performance.(Anne, Knippenberg &
Dierendonck , 2013;Rosini, 2015) My
research specifically develops a model or a
framework explaining how team cultural
diversity moderates the relation between
Leader CQ and Team Performance.
RESEARCH GAP & HYPOTHESIS
DEVELOPMENT
Most of the prior research has focused on
individual Cultural Intelligence and
Workforce Diversity, but only a few studies
have tried to study the impact of Cultural
Intelligence on Performance (Kevin S.
Groves and Ann E. Feyerherm (2011),Kok-
Yee NG and P.Christopher
Earley(2006).Kadri Karma and Rebekka
Vedina(2009).For this reason research must
consider how Workforce Diversity
moderates the relationship between Leader
CQ and Team Performance. This need is the
starting point of this study, which looks at the
different constructs of Leader CQ,
Workforce Diversity and Team Performance.
This study explores the relationship between
Leader CQ, Workforce Diversity and Team
Performance. The findings from the previous
research lead to the following hypothesis,
which guides the building of this study.
H1: Workforce Diversity will moderate the
relationship between Leader CQ and Team
Performance. The Leader CQ and Team
Performance will be stronger in teams with
greater diversity.
WORKFORCE DIVERSITY
Mostly research on diversity has been
centered on surface level diversity which is
easily observable such as race, age, gender
and nationality. But many scholars are
working in order to define the concept of
diversity in a better way and further are trying
to study the effects of diversity on other
variables. Further in continuation to this
ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL
BEHAVIOUR
ISSN 2394-0409; DOI: 10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/issn.2394-0409; Volume 3 Issue 1 (2016)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
suggestion, Jehn, Northcraft and Neale
(1999) differentiate between three types of
workgroup diversity: social category,
informational and value diversity (Refer
Figure 1).
There are a lot of studies linking
demographic diversity and group and
innovation performance. There are a set of
scholars who believe that divergent ideas
tend to cripple group creativity and
innovation. Nahapiet Ghoshal (1998). On the
other side some researchers have proven
through their work that diversity is the source
of creativity and innovation in a group.
Diversity of ideas, views, education and
experience not only generates new ideas but
assists in increasing rate of innovation
adoption within a team. There exists different
approaches for categorization of diversity.
First approach named it surface level and
deeper level (Harrison et al 2002) and the
second approach classifies it into visible and
non-visible differences (Jackson May &
Whitney 1995)Heterogeneity of background
was found to be related to innovation (e.g.
Ancona, Caldwell, 1992, Wiersema, Bantel,
1992; cf. Tsui, Egan, Xin, 1995). The
diversity of knowledge of the team members
helps to understand the importance of
innovation and further enables the group
members to discuss and develop ideas.
Innovation is highly dependent on the
individuals and thus innovation is also a
process comprising of a high degree of
learning and interaction amongst the team
members (Vegt & Janssen 2003). Social
Category Diversity includes differences of
age, gender and ethnicity which can have
positive or negative repercussions at
workplace. If members tend to group
themselves according to this category they
might interact at a higher degrees within the
group but can isolate themselves from people
of other group. Thus the communication
within a group might trigger innovation but
can at the same time hamper due to
disconnection with the other group. Jehn
1999 brought out a proposition in which he
took the positive aspect of social diversity
and conflicts (relationship) in a team.
H2: Social category Diversity will positively
influence Leader CQ and Team Performance.
Informational diversity includes three E’s i.e.
education, experience and expertise.
Diversity of experience and expertise
provides new insight to solve a problem and
helps the teams to work on a better solution.
ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL
BEHAVIOUR
ISSN 2394-0409; DOI: 10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/issn.2394-0409; Volume 3 Issue 1 (2016)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Informational diversity is also related to a
task or a job.Teams based on Informational
diversity can be formed through various ways
in an organization like job rotation or cross
functional teams. Study done by Jehn and
Mannix (2001) proved that if the team
members have a diverse educational
background they often disagree with each
other on the performance of a given task.
Thus he proved that heterogeneous teams
suffer from conflicts in comparison to
homogeneous teams with similar
backgrounds who are able to cope up with the
conflicts in a better way. Informational
diversity too has its own pros and cons. The
team members with high CQ will be able to
streamline their differences in a positive way
towards performance whereas teams with
lower CQ will suffer from stress, conflicts
and inability to perform.
H3: Informational Diversity will increase
Leader CQ and Team Performance.
Value diversity comprises of an individual’s
beliefs, attitude and opinion which is hard to
trace. It is a kind of diversity which is rather
hidden and becomes apparent only when you
know a person well. According to Schein,
value diversity can be observed in the day to
day behavior of the individuals and says that
value diversity has a direct impact on cultural
intelligence. Value diversity too has a high
rate of relatedness with the cultural
intelligence it can be easily seen in the
behavior of new members of a group in
comparison to old members who are well
acquainted with the working style and
system. A lot of research is being conducted
to study the advantages and disadvantages of
workforce diversity in an organization.it is
considered to be an opportunity as well as a
challenge for any global organization.
FRAMEWORK OF LEADER CQ,
WORKFORCE DIVERSITY & TEAM
PERFORMANCE
This section of the paper discusses the
framework which consists of three major
constructs labelled as Leader CQ, Workforce
Diversity and Team Performance (Figure
2).The framework is built depicting a
relationship between the various variables.
There has been a lot of research work based
on individual leader cultural intelligence but
the model built here also tries to focus on
workforce diversity playing a moderating
role between the two. (Refer Fig.2)
ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL
BEHAVIOUR
ISSN 2394-0409; DOI: 10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/issn.2394-0409; Volume 3 Issue 1 (2016)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
The constructs of the model are as follows-
1. Leader CQ
Meta cognition (cognitive strategies
to acquire and develop coping
strategies),
Cognition (knowledge about
different cultures),
Motivation (desire and self-efficacy),
and
Behavior (repertoire of culturally
appropriate behaviors).
2. Team/Workforce Diversity
Social Category Diversity
Informational Diversity and
Value Diversity
3. Team Performance
Innovation
Conflicts
The proposed model consists of Independent
variables (IV) as well as Dependent variables
(DV) with various sub variables. Leader CQ
can be measured with the help of Ang et al.’s
(2007) 20-item self-report scale composed of
the four subscales: Meta-Cognitive,
Cognitive, Motivational and Behavioral.
This 20-item scale has been carefully
designed and developed to be used across
cultures and time. Leaders with a high level
of CQ happen to adjust easily to unfamiliar
cultures which further helps to improvise the
performance of teams. A diverse team
comprises of members holding diversity in
terms of age, gender, experience, education
and expertise which helps them to perform
better in cross cultural setting. Leaders
happen to influence team level outcomes,
such as rate of innovation adoption by
encouraging sharing of new ideas and
knowledge within the diverse teams. Leaders
with high CQ do have the impact of
minimizing conflicts and increase team
performance.
FUTURE SCOPE OF RESEARCH
There have been various theoretical and
empirical research being undertaken to study
Leader CQ and Team Cultural Diversity on
individual basis. Due to relative newness of
the concept of Cultural Intelligence, the
models related to the same are not
empirically tested in different cultural zones.
The current studies been conducted are based
on measuring work team diversity but less
attention has been given to value diversity
which may impact team performance. Future
research is needed to develop team
performance metrics apart from measuring
innovation and conflicts. Another important
ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL
BEHAVIOUR
ISSN 2394-0409; DOI: 10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/issn.2394-0409; Volume 3 Issue 1 (2016)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
area of future research is the extension of
Cultural intelligence to higher level of
analyses i.e, Team CQ and Organizational
CQ. There are many imperative research
questions related to cultural intelligence
which still remains unanswered.
CONCLUSION
Organizations of today require a wide array
of skill set in its leaders so as to outshine and
have a competitive advantage over others. So
as to perform better the Leaders need to
sharpen their cultural intelligence and
integrate the same with the performance
which further will help them to give right
direction to the diverse teams in the
organization. This paper tries to build a
framework which establishes a relationship
between Leader CQ, Team Diversity and
Team Performance .This paper highlights the
critical role of Cultural Intelligence on Team
Performance and the moderating role of team
diversity upon them.
REFERENCES
Adler, N. J. (1991). International
dimensions of organizational behavior.
Boston, MA: PWS-Kent.
Allik,J., McCrae, R.R.,(2004).Toward a
Geography of Personalty Traits Patterns
of Profiles across 36 cultures.Journal of
Cross Cultural Psychology.
Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. (1992).
"Bridging the Boundary: External
Activity and Performance in
Organizational Teams". Administrative
Science Quarterly, 37(4), 634-665.
Anderson R.Neil and West Michael
A.(1998).Measuring climate for
workgroup innovation:development and
validation of the team climate inventory.
Journal of Organizational Behaviour.
Anderson,N.R. and
King,N.(1993).Innovation in
Organization.International Review of
Industrial Organizational Psychology.
Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., & Koh, C. (2006,
February). Personality correlates of the
four factor model of cultural intelligence.
Groups & Organizational
Management,31(1), 100 124
Bechtoldt (2007).Main and moderating
effects of self-control, organizational
justice, and emotional labour on
counterproductive behaviour at work.
European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology.
ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL
BEHAVIOUR
ISSN 2394-0409; DOI: 10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/issn.2394-0409; Volume 3 Issue 1 (2016)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Berry,J.,W.,Ward,
C,(2006).Commentary on Redefining
Interactions across Cultures and
Organizations.Group and Organization
Management.
Berry,J.,W.,Ward,
C,(2006).Commentary on Redefining
Interactions across Cultures and
Organizations.Group and Organization
Management.
Billig, Michael and Henri Tajfel (1973),
“Social categorization and similarity in
intergroup behavior,’’ European Journal
of Social Psychology, 3, 27-52.
Brewer, M. B., & Kramer, R. M. (1985).
The psychology of intergroup attitudes
and behavior. Annual review of
psychology, 36 (1), 219-243
Brislin, R., Worthley, R., et al., (2006).
“Cultural Intelligence: Understanding
Behaviors that Serve People’s Goals”.
Group and Organization Management,
Vol. 31(1), pp 40-55
Buckley, P and Brooke M (1992)
International Business Studies: An
Overview, Oxford: Blackwell.
Chemers et.al.(1995).Book on Diversity
in Organizations.
Costa Jr., Paul T.; McCrae, Robert R.
(1988). From catalog to classification:
Murray's needs and the five-factor model.
Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, Vol 55(2), Aug 1988, 258-
265.
Earley, C. P. (2002). Refining
interactions across cultures and
organization: Moving forward with
cultural intelligence. Research in
Organizational Behavior, 24, 271–299
Earley, C. P., & Ang, S. (2003). Cultural
intelligence: Individual interactions
across cultures. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford
University Press
Earley, P. C., & Mosakowski, E. (2000).
Creating hybrid team cultures: An
empirical test of transnational team
functioning. Academy of Management
Journal, 43, 26-49.
Elenkov, D. & Manev, I. (2009) Senior
Expatriates Leadership’s Effects on
Innovation and the Role of Cultural
Intelligence, Journal of World Business,
44 (4), 357-369.
Fishman, D.B. (1999) The Case for a
Pragmatic Psychology. New York, New
York University Press. Fishman, D.B.
(2005) „Editor‟s introduction to PCSP-
from single case to database: a new
method for enhancing psychotherapy
ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL
BEHAVIOUR
ISSN 2394-0409; DOI: 10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/issn.2394-0409; Volume 3 Issue 1 (2016)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
practice‟. Pragmatic Case Studies in
Psychotherapy, 1(1): 1-50.
Floor Rink, Naomi Ellemers (2008),
Diversity, newcomers, and team
innovation: The importance of a common
identity, in Katherine W.
Phillips (ed.) Diversity and Groups
(Research on Managing Groups and
Teams, Volume 11) Emerald Group
Publishing Limited, pp.221 – 243
Friedman, L., Thomas. (2005). The world
is flat.
Granovetter, M. 1974, Getting a Job: A
Study of Contacts and Careers.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Groves S Kevin, & Feyerherm E Ann.
(2011). Leader Cultural Intelligence in
Context: Testing the Moderating Effects
of Team Cultural Diversity on Leader and
Team Performance. SAGE
Hackman, J. (1990) Groups that Work.
And Those that Doesn't, Jossey-Bass
Publishers, San Francisco/Oxford.
Hambrick, D. C., Li, J. T., Xin, K. R., &
Tsui, A. S. 2001. Compositional gaps and
downward spirals in international joint
venture management groups. Strategic
Management Journal, 22(11): 1033–
1053.
Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H. Gavin, J. H.,
& Florey, A. T. 2002. Time, teams, and
task performance: Changing effects of
surface- and deep-level diversity on
group functioning. Academy of
Management Journal, 45(5): 1029–1045.
Harrison, D., Price, K., & Bell, M. 1998.
Beyond relational 330 Academy of
Management Journal April demography:
Time and the effects of surface- and deep-
level diversity on work group cohesion.
Academy of Management Journal, 41:
96-107.
Jackson, S. E., May, K. E., & Whitney, K.
(1995). Under the dynamics of diversity
in decision-making teams. In R. A. Guzzo
& E. Salas (Eds.), Team effectiveness and
decision making in organizations (pp.
204–261). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Janine Nahapiet; Sumantra Ghoshal
(1998). Social Capital, Intellectual
Capital, and the Organizational
Advantage. The Academy of
Management Review.
Jehn A. Karen, Northcraft B.Gregory and
Neale A. Margaret (1999).Why
Differences make a Difference: A Field
Study of Diversity, Conflict, and
Performance in Workgroups. JSTOR.
ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL
BEHAVIOUR
ISSN 2394-0409; DOI: 10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/issn.2394-0409; Volume 3 Issue 1 (2016)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Jehn, K., & Mannix, E. (2001). The
dynamic nature of conflict: A
longitudinal study of intragroup conflict
and group performance. Academy of
Management Journal, 44, 238 –251.
Jehn, K., Northcraft, G., & Neale, M.
(1999). Why differences make a
difference: A field study of diversity,
conflict, and performance in workgroups.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 44,
741–763.
K Möller, S Svahn (2004).Crossing East-
West boundaries: Knowledge sharing in
intercultural business networks.
Industrial Marketing Management.
Karma Kadri, & Vedina
Rebekka.(2009).Cultural Intelligence as
a prism between Workforce Diversity and
Performance in a modern
organization.Review of International
Comparative Management
Kim, K., Kirkman, B. L., & Chen, G.
2008. Cultural intelligence and
international assignment effectiveness: A
conceptual model and preliminary
findings. In Ang, S., & Van Dyne, L.
(Eds.) Handbook on cultural intelligence:
Theory, measurement and applications:
71- 90. New York: M.E. Sharpe.
Kok-Yee NG & P. Christopher Earley,
(2006).Culture + Intelligence Old
Constructs and New Frontiers.Group &
Organization Management, Sage
Publication.
Lau, D.C., & Murnighan, K. (1998).
Demographic diversity and faultlines:
The compositional dynamics of
organizational groups. Academy of
Management Review, 23(2), 325-340.
Mannix, E. and Neale, M. A.(2005)
“What differences make a difference”
Psychological Science in the Public
Interest 6: 31-55
Mumford, M., Scott, G., Gaddis, B., &
Strange,J.(2002). Leading creative
people: Orchestrating expertise and
relationships. Leadership Quarterly,
14,163-171.
Pelled Hope Lisa (1996). Demographic
Diversity, Conflict, and Work Group
Outcomes: An Intervening Process
Theory. INFORMS
Puck, F. Jonas, Neyer Katrin Anne and
Dennerlein Tobias (2010).Diversity and
conflict in teams: a contingency
perspective. European J. International
Management.
Richard Mead (1994) International
Management—Cross-Cultural
ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL
BEHAVIOUR
ISSN 2394-0409; DOI: 10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/issn.2394-0409; Volume 3 Issue 1 (2016)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Dimensions Cambridge: Blackwell
Publishers.
Rink, F., & Ellemers, N. (2006a).
Benefiting from informational
differences: How diversity can help focus
on common group goals. Working
paper: Leiden University, The
Netherlands
Salas, E., Cooke, N. J., & Rosen, M. A.
(2008). On teams, teamwork, and team
performance: Discoveries and
developments. Human Factors, 50, 540-
547. doi: 10.1518/001872008X288457
Schein Edgar. H (1992).Book on
Organizational Culture and Leadership.
Senge PM. (1990). The fifth discipline,
the art and practice of the learning
organization. New York: Doubleday
Sessa, V.I., and Jackson, S.E., 1995,
Diversity in decision-making teams: All
differences are not created equal. In
Diversity in organizations new
perspectives for a changing workplace,
pp. 133-156. California: SAGE
Publications. Inc.
Souder W.E., Jenssen S.A., (1999),
‘Management practices influencing new
product success and failure in the United
States and Scandivavia: a cross-cultural
comparative study’, Journal of Product
Innovation Management, 16, 183-203
Sternberg, R.J.,
Detterman,D.K.(1986).Whta is
Intelligence?Contemporary viewpoints
on its nature and definition.
Norwood,NJ:Ablex.
Stewart,M., & Johnson,O.(2009).
Leader-member exchange as a moderator
of the relationship between workgroup
diversity and team performance.Group &
Organization Management,34,507-535.
Tajfel Henri(1982).Social Psychology of
Intergroup Relations.Annual Review of
Psychology.
Tajfel, H. and Turner, J. C. (1986). The
social identity theory of inter-group
behavior. In S. Worchel and L. W. Austin
(eds.), Psychology of Intergroup
Relations. Chigago: Nelson-Hall.
Tan,J.S.,(2004). Cultural Intelligence and
the Global Economy.Leadership in
Action.Vol 24.
Teachman, J.D. (1980) ‘Analysis of
population diversity: measures of
qualitative variation’, Sociological
Methods Research, Vol. 8, pp.341–362.
Templer, K. J., Tay, C., & Chandrasekar,
N.A. (2006). Motivational Cultural
ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL
BEHAVIOUR
ISSN 2394-0409; DOI: 10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/issn.2394-0409; Volume 3 Issue 1 (2016)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Intelligence, realistic job preview,
realistic living conditions preview, and
cross cultural adjustment. Group and
Organization Management, 31, 154-173.
Triandis, H. C. (1972). .The Analysis of
Subjective Culture. Wiley-Interscience,
New York, N.Y.
Trianidis, C. Harry (2006). Cultural
Intelligence in Organizations. Group &
Organization Management. Sage
Publication.
Tsui, A. S., T. D. Egan, and K. R. Xin.
1995. Diversity in Organizations Lessons
from Demography Research, In Chemers,
Martin M., Stuart Oskamp, and Mark A.
Costanzo. Diversity in Organizations:
New Perspectives for a Changing
Workplace, Sage Publications.Thousand
Oaks CA,191- 219
Tsui, A. S., Egan, T. D., & O'Reilly, C.
A. (1992). Being different: Relational
demography and organizational
attachment. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 37, 549–579.
Van der Vegt, G. S., & Janssen, O.
(2003). Joint impact of interdependence
and group diversity on innovation.
Journal of Management, 29, 729–751.
Van Dyne, L., & Ang, S. (2006). A self-
assessment of your CQ. In P.C. Earley, S.
Ang, & J-S Tan. CQ: Developing cultural
intelligence at work (pp. 217-227).
Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press
Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., & Nielsen, T.M.
(2007). Cultural intelligence. In S. Clegg
& J. Bailey, (Eds.), International
encyclopedia of organization studies, 1:
345-350. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Wencang Zhou Elizabeth Rosini
Entrepreneurial Team Diversity and
Performance: Toward an Integrated
Model Entrepreneurship Research
Journal 5(1):31–60 · January 2015 with
959 Reads DOI: 10.1515/erj-2014-0005.
West, M.A., & Farr, J.L. (1989).
Innovation at work: Psychological
perspectives. Social Behavior, 4, 15-30.
West, M.A. and Farr, J.
L.(1990).Innovation and Creativity at
work: Psychological and Organizational
Strategies,Wiley.
Wiersema MF, Bantel KA. 1992. Top
Management Team Demography and
Corporate Strategic Change. Academy of
Management Journal 35 (1): 91-121.
Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., &
Griffin, R. W. (1993). Toward a theory of
organizational creativity. Academy of
Management Review, 18, 293-321.
ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL
BEHAVIOUR
ISSN 2394-0409; DOI: 10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/issn.2394-0409; Volume 3 Issue 1 (2016)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in
organizations (6th ed.). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson-Prentice Hall.
ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL
BEHAVIOUR
ISSN 2394-0409; DOI: 10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/issn.2394-0409; Volume 3 Issue 1 (2016)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
LIST OF FIGURES:
Figure 1 A framework of workforce diversity (based on Jehn et al.’s (1999) typology
*Workforce Diversity has been addressed as Workgroup Diversity and same would be taken
for our study.
Workforce
Diversity
Social
Category
Diversity
Informational
Diversity
Value
Diversity
Generic demographic attributes (age,
gender, and ethnicity)
Self categorization (e.g. social,
cultural and ethnic identity
Background Attributes
(education,tenure,experience)
ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL
BEHAVIOUR
ISSN 2394-0409; DOI: 10.16962/EAPJHRMOB/issn.2394-0409; Volume 3 Issue 1 (2016)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Figure 2: A Framework of Leader CQ, Workforce Diversity and Team Performance