Whether it is the military, a multi-national company, or a food processing plant, organizations are often comprised of multiple teams working together to complete complex tasks. As a result, these sets of teams – each with their own perspectives and ways of operating – must set goals, make decisions, and plan how they will accomplish tasks together. In this goal setting and planning process, is it preferable for all teams to agree on the course of action from the start or for there to be differing perspectives on how to approach a given project or task?
A recent study sought to address this question by examining the performance of sets of teams of U.S. Air Force officers participating in a complex military-operation simulation; each set was comprised of two subordinate teams and a leadership team. Specifically, the researchers examined how team performance was affected by the extent to which the teams agreed on the amount of risk to take during the simulation. Based on their findings, greater agreement among the leadership and subordinate teams during the planning stage was associated with lower performance. In contrast, teams who disagreed more during the planning stage about the amount of risk to tended to take on challenges that were based on reliable information and that would result in a large reward if successful. These teams performed better overall and over time, which suggests that these teams learned and improved throughout the simulation.
In light of these results, there are a number of real-world implications for organizations and practitioners working with teams. In particular, the researchers point out that differing perspectives should be promoted during the initial planning stages of teams working together. They also note that leaders can play a role in encouraging teams to share their true perspectives. Similarly, practitioners can implement interventions that foster exploration of divergent perspectives when working with teams where dissimilar perspectives are rarely shared. Overall, the study illustrates the importance of setting conditions where diverse perspectives in teams and organizations can be shared and explored.
Lanaj, K., Foulk, T. A., & Hollenbeck, J. R. (2018). The benefits of not seeing eye to eye with leadership: divergence in risk preferences impacts multiteam system behavior and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 61(4), 1554 – 1582.