by Kyong Mazzaro

Although the literature on improving team performance is extensive, the differences between performances in high-power teams versus low-power teams are rarely considered. And yet, the quality of interactions between members of, for example, executive-level teams and entry-level teams can be radically dissimilar.

In an effort to understand the impact of power on the way teams achieve their goals, recent research has explored the links between team power, conflict, and performance. In two studies that involved 64 teams in two top companies in the Netherlands, results showed that high-power teams performed worse than low-power teams.

According to this research, high power teams, such as top management teams (TMT’s), being more sensitive to inequalities in the distribution of pay, power and prestige, are impaired by more process and relationship conflicts in comparison to their lower-power counterparts. This significantly affects their performance. In other words: internal conflicts in high-power teams do not allow them to fully capitalize on their superior resources and potential.

While in-group power struggles are inevitable, how can their negative effects on performance be attenuated? The study suggests that addressing the root causes of conflict, such as status contests, may be an answer. For example, congruent team perception, or the degree to which team members see others in the team as they see themselves, can reduce uncertainty and improve coordinated action. The results showed that when roles within high-power teams were clear and accepted by the group, team members spent less energy in defending their views and status and more in achieving group tasks.

Given the importance of high-power teams to organizational success future research should further investigate strategies for improving their performance and ameliorating the negative effects of organizational conflict.