團(tuán)隊(duì)人口統(tǒng)計(jì)特征多元化與績(jī)效關(guān)系的元分析*

衛(wèi)旭華 劉詠梅 陳思璇

(1蘭州大學(xué)管理學(xué)院, 蘭州 730000) (2中南大學(xué)商學(xué)院, 長(zhǎng)沙 410083)

1 引言

中國(guó)自古以來就主張多元化人才策略, “一人計(jì)短, 兩人計(jì)長(zhǎng)”、“三個(gè)臭皮匠賽過諸葛亮”等廣為流傳的諺語均體現(xiàn)了多元化所帶來的潛在好處。對(duì)于現(xiàn)代組織, 多元化人才配置策略也得到了企業(yè)管理者的高度重視, 企業(yè)往往通過選聘多學(xué)科和多職業(yè)背景人員來進(jìn)行團(tuán)隊(duì)建設(shè)。在團(tuán)隊(duì)人員配置過程中, 團(tuán)隊(duì)成員人口統(tǒng)計(jì)特征(如學(xué)歷和任期)多元化(diversity)是最直接、最容易操作的人員配置方式之一。這種配置方式之所以受到廣大企業(yè)的歡迎, 一個(gè)重要的原因在于團(tuán)隊(duì)成員的人口統(tǒng)計(jì)特征可以被看作是他們認(rèn)知框架的有效代理機(jī)制, 進(jìn)而影響團(tuán)隊(duì)成員的行為及其交互結(jié)果(Hambrick, 2007)。

盡管近年來團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化得到了工業(yè)與組織心理學(xué)和管理學(xué)領(lǐng)域眾多研究者的關(guān)注(van Dijk &van Engen, 2013; van Knippenberg & Schippers,2007), 但其作用機(jī)理尚存在諸多不一致。一些研究者認(rèn)為多元化是功能性的, 能夠?yàn)閳F(tuán)隊(duì)帶來更多新觀點(diǎn), 進(jìn)而改善團(tuán)隊(duì)工作質(zhì)量(Guillaume, Dawson,Woods, Sacramento, & West, 2013; Williams &O'Reilly, 1998); 而另外一些研究者則認(rèn)為多元化會(huì)帶來刻板印象, 產(chǎn)生內(nèi)群體和外群體, 造成凝聚力和滿意度的下降, 并導(dǎo)致群體內(nèi)沖突和離職概率的增加(Harrison & Klein, 2007)。

造成這些不一致的原因主要有兩個(gè)：一是團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化具有不同類型(Harrison & Klein, 2007); 二是研究情境存在很大差異, 需要將它們分離出來(Bell, Villado, Lukasik, Belau, & Briggs, 2011)。首先,從團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化分類角度來看, 依據(jù)其分布特征可以分為分離型多元化、多樣型多元化和不平等型多元化(Harrison & Klein, 2007)。這些分類有著不同的內(nèi)涵、理論基礎(chǔ)和操作化測(cè)量方式, 因而會(huì)擁有不同的結(jié)果, 但以往研究卻把它們混為一談, 這在中國(guó)多元化研究中尤為明顯。其次, 從研究情境角度來看, 各個(gè)研究都有其特有的情境, 如不同研究可能采用不同類型的團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效作為結(jié)果變量, 也可能采用不同類型的團(tuán)隊(duì)作為研究樣本。同時(shí), 近年來,東方國(guó)家研究者對(duì)團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化的關(guān)注與日俱增, 其中一些研究發(fā)現(xiàn)基于西方國(guó)家的多元化理論和實(shí)踐可能并不適用于東方國(guó)家。這說明不同情境下的多元化對(duì)團(tuán)隊(duì)結(jié)果的影響可能會(huì)有所差異(Joshi &Roh, 2009), 因而需要將這些情境作為調(diào)節(jié)變量,并檢驗(yàn)他們對(duì)研究結(jié)果的影響。

為了彌補(bǔ)這些不足, 本研究對(duì)國(guó)內(nèi)外團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化研究的現(xiàn)狀進(jìn)行了回顧, 并選取了中外相關(guān)的實(shí)證研究進(jìn)行了元分析(meta-analysis), 檢驗(yàn)不同類型多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效的關(guān)系, 以及其中潛在的調(diào)節(jié)變量。

表1 團(tuán)隊(duì)分離、多樣和不平等的測(cè)量

2 理論基礎(chǔ)與研究假設(shè)

2.1 團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化的界定與分類

團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化(team diversity)指的是團(tuán)隊(duì)成員在個(gè)體屬性上的差異(Harrison & Klein, 2007; van Knippenberg & Schippers, 2007), 這些個(gè)體屬性既可以是顯性的人口統(tǒng)計(jì)特征, 也可以是隱性的心理特征。由于團(tuán)隊(duì)成員隱性心理特征很難有效測(cè)量,因而研究者建議通過人口統(tǒng)計(jì)特征來近似代替這些不可見的心理特征(Hambrick, 2007)。在此基礎(chǔ)上,研究者對(duì)團(tuán)隊(duì)人口統(tǒng)計(jì)特征多元化展開了廣泛研究, 但研究結(jié)論卻存在諸多不一致。鑒于此, 研究者開始嘗試對(duì)多元化進(jìn)行分類, 并認(rèn)為不同的多元化會(huì)對(duì)團(tuán)隊(duì)結(jié)果產(chǎn)生不同的影響。其中, 近年來較具影響力的分類是由Harrison和Klein (2007)提出的。他們將團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化分為分離型多元化(diversity as separation)、多樣型多元化(diversity as variety)和不平等型多元化(diversity as disparity)。

分離型多元化指的是團(tuán)隊(duì)成員在立場(chǎng)和觀點(diǎn)上的差異程度, 通常是信念、價(jià)值觀或態(tài)度上的對(duì)立或者不一致(Harrison & Klein, 2007)。例如, 當(dāng)團(tuán)隊(duì)內(nèi)年輕成員支持改革方案, 而年長(zhǎng)成員由于保守而反對(duì)改革時(shí), 就會(huì)形成年齡分離型多元化。從表1可以看到, 當(dāng)團(tuán)隊(duì)內(nèi)所有成員擁有相同觀點(diǎn)時(shí),分離型多元化程度最低; 而當(dāng)團(tuán)隊(duì)內(nèi)形成兩個(gè)勢(shì)均力敵的極端派系時(shí), 分離型多元化程度最高(Solanas, Selvam, Navarro, & Leiva, 2012)。分離型多元化往往通過標(biāo)準(zhǔn)差(standard deviation, SD)或平均歐幾里得距離(mean Euclidean distance, MED)進(jìn)行衡量。

多樣型多元化通常指的是與知識(shí)和經(jīng)歷相關(guān)的種類上的差異, 如專長(zhǎng)、職能背景和行業(yè)經(jīng)歷方面的多元化(Harrison & Klein, 2007)。從表1可以看到, 當(dāng)團(tuán)隊(duì)內(nèi)所有成員處于同一分類時(shí), 多樣型多元化程度最低; 而當(dāng)團(tuán)隊(duì)內(nèi)所有成員所處的分類都不同的時(shí)候, 多樣型多元化程度最高(Harrison &Sin, 2006; Solanas et al., 2012)。多樣型多元化往往通過Blau系數(shù)或熵(Entropy)指數(shù)進(jìn)行衡量。

不平等型多元化通常指的是團(tuán)隊(duì)成員在有價(jià)值的資源或社會(huì)資產(chǎn)方面的差異(Harrison & Klein,2007; Magee & Galinsky, 2008)。例如, 任期較長(zhǎng)的成員在占有組織各項(xiàng)資源上具有明顯優(yōu)勢(shì), 進(jìn)而會(huì)形成團(tuán)隊(duì)任期不平等型多元化。從表 1可以看到,當(dāng)團(tuán)隊(duì)內(nèi)所有成員擁有相同資源時(shí), 不平等型多元化程度最低; 當(dāng)團(tuán)隊(duì)所有資源被一個(gè)人所占有, 而其他成員均處于最底層, 沒有任何資源的時(shí)候, 不平等型多元化程度最高(Harrison & Sin, 2006)。不平等型多元化往往通過基尼系數(shù)(gini coefficient)或變異系數(shù)(coefficient of variation, CV)進(jìn)行衡量。

2.2 團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效

分離型多元化的理論基礎(chǔ)為相似性吸引理論和社會(huì)分類理論。相似性吸引理論認(rèn)為團(tuán)隊(duì)成員的相似性能夠降低分離型多元化, 此時(shí)所有成員的態(tài)度和觀點(diǎn)較為類似, 有助于產(chǎn)生更高的合作水平、信任和社會(huì)整合程度(Guillaume et al., 2013; Williams& O'Reilly, 1998)。而根據(jù)社會(huì)分類理論, 較高的分離型多元化往往會(huì)誘發(fā)團(tuán)隊(duì)斷層(faultlines), 并促進(jìn)團(tuán)隊(duì)內(nèi)部基于身份的子群體的產(chǎn)生(Carton &Cummings, 2012, 2013; Cooper, Patel, & Thatcher,2014)。此時(shí)子群體成員往往會(huì)更關(guān)心子群體內(nèi)部成員的利益, 而將子群體以外成員當(dāng)做威脅, 這會(huì)降低子群體之間的合作意愿和凝聚力。在這種消極氛圍的影響下, 分離型多元化可能會(huì)誘發(fā)更高的子群體間沖突(Carton & Cummings, 2013; Thatcher &Patel, 2011), 進(jìn)而導(dǎo)致更差的任務(wù)績(jī)效(de Wit,Greer, & Jehn, 2012; O'Neill, Allen, & Hastings,2013)。因此提出如下假設(shè)：

假設(shè)1a：分離型多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效負(fù)相關(guān)。

多樣型多元化的理論基礎(chǔ)為信息加工理論和變異-選擇-保留理論, 這些理論通常認(rèn)為擁有不同人口統(tǒng)計(jì)特征的成員可能擁有不同的經(jīng)驗(yàn)和看問題的方式, 會(huì)為團(tuán)隊(duì)帶來不同的決策信息(Han,Han, & Brass, 2014), 能夠拓展團(tuán)隊(duì)視野并促進(jìn)團(tuán)隊(duì)知識(shí)的整合, 從而促進(jìn)更高的團(tuán)隊(duì)創(chuàng)造性、更高的決策質(zhì)量以及更高的團(tuán)隊(duì)靈活性(Guillaume et al.,2013; van Dijk & van Engen, 2013)。因此, 由于積極的信息加工過程, 多樣型多元化能夠改善團(tuán)隊(duì)和組織績(jī)效(Qian, Cao, & Takeuchi, 2013)?；诖? 提出如下假設(shè)：

假設(shè)1b：多樣型多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效正相關(guān)。

不平等型多元化的理論基礎(chǔ)為公平理論和社會(huì)等級(jí)理論, 這些理論通常認(rèn)為不平等能夠增加團(tuán)隊(duì)成員之間的競(jìng)爭(zhēng), 降低成員之間的溝通意愿, 并提升成員的不公平感(Connelly, Tihanyi, Crook, &Gangloff, 2014)。團(tuán)隊(duì)成員的人口統(tǒng)計(jì)特征往往會(huì)與團(tuán)隊(duì)內(nèi)有價(jià)值的資源發(fā)生關(guān)聯(lián)(Harrison & Klein,2007; van Dijk & van Engen, 2013)。因此, 當(dāng)人口統(tǒng)計(jì)特征不平等程度較高的時(shí)候, 與這種人口統(tǒng)計(jì)特征發(fā)生關(guān)聯(lián)的團(tuán)隊(duì)資源的不平等程度也較高(Harrison & Klein, 2007)。這可能會(huì)誘發(fā)某些團(tuán)隊(duì)成員的不滿, 降低團(tuán)隊(duì)成員的投入、工作積極性和合作水平, 進(jìn)而降低團(tuán)隊(duì)的績(jī)效水平(Trevor, Reilly,& Gerhart, 2012)。基于此, 提出如下假設(shè)：

假設(shè)1c：不平等型多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效負(fù)相關(guān)。

2.3 績(jī)效類型的調(diào)節(jié)作用

團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化與績(jī)效的關(guān)系可能會(huì)隨著績(jī)效類型的不同而不同。常見的團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效可以分為創(chuàng)新績(jī)效(即創(chuàng)新過程的效率和產(chǎn)出)和一般任務(wù)績(jī)效(既一般任務(wù)過程的效率和產(chǎn)出)兩類(Bell et al., 2011;Joshi & Roh, 2009)。從不同類型的多元化來看, 多樣型多元化能夠整合團(tuán)隊(duì)成員不同的信息來源, 有利于提升團(tuán)隊(duì)創(chuàng)新績(jī)效(van Knippenberg &Schippers, 2007)。然而, 在創(chuàng)新過程中, 多樣型多元化往往會(huì)引發(fā)消極的團(tuán)隊(duì)沖突(Qian et al., 2013),進(jìn)而降低團(tuán)隊(duì)任務(wù)績(jī)效(de Wit et al., 2012)。因此,多樣型多元化與創(chuàng)新績(jī)效的正向關(guān)系可能會(huì)強(qiáng)于其與一般任務(wù)績(jī)效的關(guān)系。從分離型多元化和不平等型多元化來看, 分離和不平等會(huì)降低團(tuán)隊(duì)成員的合作意愿, 這種不合作既不利于團(tuán)隊(duì)創(chuàng)新, 也會(huì)進(jìn)一步影響團(tuán)隊(duì)任務(wù)績(jī)效表現(xiàn)。此外, 分離和不平等會(huì)產(chǎn)生消極的交互過程, 如較低的凝聚力(Thatcher& Patel, 2011)和較高的不公平感(Halevy, Chou, &Galinsky, 2011), 更加不利于任務(wù)績(jī)效的提升。因此,與創(chuàng)新績(jī)效相比, 分離型多元化和不平等型多元化與一般任務(wù)績(jī)效的負(fù)面關(guān)系更強(qiáng)。故提出如下假設(shè)：

假設(shè)2：績(jī)效類型會(huì)調(diào)節(jié)團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效的關(guān)系, 即多樣型多元化與創(chuàng)新績(jī)效的正相關(guān)程度高于一般任務(wù)績(jī)效, 而分離型多元化、不平等型多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)一般任務(wù)績(jī)效的負(fù)相關(guān)程度高于創(chuàng)新績(jī)效。

2.4 國(guó)家地域的調(diào)節(jié)作用

一些研究者指出團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化的作用機(jī)理可能會(huì)隨著國(guó)家和地域的不同而不同(Johnson,Schnatterly, & Hill, 2013)。借鑒先前組織管理領(lǐng)域的元分析, 本研究將國(guó)家地域分為東方國(guó)家和西方國(guó)家兩類(Anderson et al., 2010), 處于同一地域的國(guó)家往往擁有相似的價(jià)值觀和文化(Gupta, Hanges,& Dorfman, 2002)。西方研究者多認(rèn)為分離型多元化會(huì)造成團(tuán)隊(duì)沖突, 進(jìn)而導(dǎo)致團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效的下降(Carton & Cummings, 2012)。然而, 對(duì)于集體主義思想占主流的東方國(guó)家而言, 人們更加傾向于維持和諧的氛圍, 盡力回避潛在的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)和沖突行為(Qian et al., 2013), 這也意味著分離型多元化在東方國(guó)家中的負(fù)面作用會(huì)被削弱。對(duì)于多樣型多元化而言, 同西方國(guó)家相比, 諸如中國(guó)、日本、韓國(guó)等東方國(guó)家的員工更加傾向于相互合作(Kim, Wang,Kondo, & Kim, 2007; Wang, Jing, & Klossek, 2007),因而更可能從成員多樣中獲益, 并產(chǎn)生更高的團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效。對(duì)于不平等型多元化而言, 由于東方集體主義國(guó)家的任務(wù)依賴程度更高, 增加了團(tuán)隊(duì)對(duì)等級(jí)和不平等的需求, 能夠更好的發(fā)揮等級(jí)和不平等的排序和激勵(lì)作用(Halevy et al., 2011), 從而改善團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效?；诖? 提出如下假設(shè)：

假設(shè)3：國(guó)家地域會(huì)調(diào)節(jié)團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效之間的關(guān)系, 即與西方國(guó)家相比, 東方國(guó)家中的多樣型多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效的正面關(guān)系會(huì)更強(qiáng); 而與東方國(guó)家相比, 西方國(guó)家中的分離型多元化和不平等型多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效的負(fù)面關(guān)系會(huì)更強(qiáng)。

2.5 團(tuán)隊(duì)類型的調(diào)節(jié)作用

團(tuán)隊(duì)類型也可能會(huì)調(diào)節(jié)多元化與績(jī)效之間的關(guān)系(Joshi & Roh, 2009)。常見的團(tuán)隊(duì)類型包括高管團(tuán)隊(duì)、研發(fā)團(tuán)隊(duì)和一般工作團(tuán)隊(duì)等(Bell et al., 2011;de Wit et al., 2012)。從團(tuán)隊(duì)的工作內(nèi)容來看, 高管團(tuán)隊(duì)通常面臨大量復(fù)雜的決策任務(wù), 研發(fā)團(tuán)隊(duì)通常需要?jiǎng)?chuàng)造和開發(fā)新的產(chǎn)品與服務(wù), 而一般工作團(tuán)隊(duì)則以常規(guī)任務(wù)為主(Bell et al., 2011)。

從分離型多元化角度來看, 分離往往形成團(tuán)隊(duì)斷層和子群體, 并誘發(fā)子群體間沖突(Thatcher &Patel, 2011, 2012), 而團(tuán)隊(duì)沖突領(lǐng)域的研究者則發(fā)現(xiàn)團(tuán)隊(duì)沖突的負(fù)面作用在高管團(tuán)隊(duì)以外的團(tuán)隊(duì)類型中表現(xiàn)的更為明顯(de Wit et al., 2012)。因此, 本研究預(yù)期高管團(tuán)隊(duì)的分離型多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效的負(fù)相關(guān)程度低于研發(fā)團(tuán)隊(duì)和一般工作團(tuán)隊(duì)。

從多樣型多元化角度來看, 高管團(tuán)隊(duì)和研發(fā)團(tuán)隊(duì)面臨的任務(wù)具有一定的非常規(guī)性和不確定性, 經(jīng)常需要一些獨(dú)到的觀點(diǎn)和新穎的方案, 因而更加需要團(tuán)隊(duì)成員多樣的觀點(diǎn)來彌補(bǔ)單個(gè)高管決策的不足(de Wit et al., 2012; 任兵, 魏立群, 周思賢,2011)。而對(duì)于一般工作團(tuán)隊(duì)而言, 由于其所面臨的任務(wù)相對(duì)較為常規(guī), 解決起來相對(duì)比較容易, 因而對(duì)團(tuán)隊(duì)多樣的需求較低(Horwitz & Horwitz, 2007)。這說明與一般工作團(tuán)隊(duì)相比, 高管團(tuán)隊(duì)和研發(fā)團(tuán)隊(duì)更能從團(tuán)隊(duì)多樣中獲益。

從不平等型多元化角度來看, 不平等可能會(huì)在權(quán)力更高的團(tuán)隊(duì)(如高管團(tuán)隊(duì))中發(fā)揮更大的負(fù)面作用。研究表明, 當(dāng)團(tuán)隊(duì)成員的權(quán)力都很低時(shí)(如研發(fā)團(tuán)隊(duì)和一般工作團(tuán)隊(duì)), 團(tuán)隊(duì)不平等有助于解決沖突, 促進(jìn)團(tuán)隊(duì)和諧; 而當(dāng)團(tuán)隊(duì)成員的權(quán)力都很高時(shí)(如高管團(tuán)隊(duì)), 團(tuán)隊(duì)成員更傾向于權(quán)力爭(zhēng)斗, 此時(shí)的不平等不利于團(tuán)隊(duì)沖突的解決, 進(jìn)而引發(fā)低績(jī)效(Greer & van Kleef, 2010)。這說明團(tuán)隊(duì)不平等對(duì)于高管團(tuán)隊(duì)更加有害?；诖? 提出如下假設(shè)：

假設(shè)4：團(tuán)隊(duì)類型會(huì)調(diào)節(jié)團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效的關(guān)系, 即與其他類型團(tuán)隊(duì)相比, 高管團(tuán)隊(duì)中的分離型多元化與績(jī)效的負(fù)向關(guān)系更低, 一般工作團(tuán)隊(duì)中的多樣型多元化與績(jī)效的正相關(guān)程度更低, 高管團(tuán)隊(duì)中的不平等型多元化與績(jī)效的負(fù)向關(guān)系更強(qiáng)。

本研究的概念模型如圖1所示。

圖1 研究模型

3 研究方法

3.1 文獻(xiàn)查找

文獻(xiàn)查找的時(shí)間范圍限定于1984～2014年間公開發(fā)表的學(xué)術(shù)論文。中文文獻(xiàn)為發(fā)表在心理學(xué)CSSCI期刊(如心理學(xué)報(bào)、心理科學(xué))以及國(guó)家自然科學(xué)基金委認(rèn)定的30種管理科學(xué)重要期刊上(如管理世界、南開管理評(píng)論)的論文, 通過在中國(guó)知網(wǎng)(CNKI)搜索主題包含“團(tuán)隊(duì)”或“群體”, 并且包含“異質(zhì)性”、“多元化”、“多樣性”、“性別”、“年齡”、“任期”、“教育背景”、“學(xué)歷”、“職能背景”或“人口統(tǒng)計(jì)”等關(guān)鍵詞, 并結(jié)合檢索到文章的參考文獻(xiàn)進(jìn)行查漏補(bǔ)充, 初步篩選出254篇文獻(xiàn)。隨后本研究按照如下標(biāo)準(zhǔn)對(duì)文獻(xiàn)進(jìn)行二次篩選：(1)實(shí)證研究;(2)采用SD、MED、Blau、Entropy、CV或gini來衡量團(tuán)隊(duì)人口統(tǒng)計(jì)特征多元化; (3)文章涉及績(jī)效變量;(4)文章中明確報(bào)告了相關(guān)的效應(yīng)值(effect size); (5)樣本與其他研究沒有重復(fù)。根據(jù)這五個(gè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn), 最終得到33篇中文文獻(xiàn)。英文文獻(xiàn)在Web of Knowledge中檢索公開發(fā)表的 SSCI期刊(如 Academy of Management Journal、Strategic Management Journal),搜 索 主 題 包 含 “team”或 “group”, 并 且 包 含“heterogeneity”、“diversity”、“dispersion”、“gender/sex”、 “age”、 “tenure”、 “education”、 “function background”或“demography”等關(guān)鍵詞。為了減少發(fā)表偏差(publication bias), 本研究也通過參考以往元分析的文獻(xiàn)部分進(jìn)行查漏補(bǔ)缺, 初步篩選出 663篇文獻(xiàn)。根據(jù)前面五條文獻(xiàn)篩選標(biāo)準(zhǔn), 最終得到104篇相關(guān)英文文獻(xiàn)。這137篇中英文獻(xiàn)共涉及49個(gè)期刊(期刊目錄詳見附錄), 包含 345個(gè)效應(yīng)值,79639個(gè)團(tuán)隊(duì), 所涉及個(gè)體超過 537071人。其中,西方國(guó)家研究論文86篇, 東方國(guó)家研究論文51篇(中國(guó)44篇, 東西方國(guó)家地域區(qū)分詳見下文)。

3.2 變量編碼

本研究遵循Harrison和Klein (2007)的界定及其操作化測(cè)量方式, 將通過SD或者M(jìn)ED來衡量多元化的變量編碼為分離型多元化; 將通過 Blau或者Entropy指數(shù)來衡量多元化的變量編碼為多樣型多元化; 將通過CV或gini來衡量多元化的變量編碼為不平等型多元化。本研究中的團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效是指常規(guī)任務(wù)過程和創(chuàng)新過程中的效率和產(chǎn)出(Joshi &Roh, 2009)。除了收集各類多元化與績(jī)效的效應(yīng)值之外, 還收集了通過量表測(cè)量的團(tuán)隊(duì)主觀績(jī)效的內(nèi)部一致性信度系數(shù), 以用于后續(xù)元分析的測(cè)量誤差修正。對(duì)于某些未報(bào)告信度的主觀績(jī)效變量, 通過元分析樣本中的信度平均值替代。對(duì)于團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化和客觀績(jī)效變量, 由于都是客觀數(shù)據(jù), 因而假定其不存在測(cè)量誤差(Hülsheger, Anderson, & Salgado,2009)。

績(jī)效類型、國(guó)家地域和團(tuán)隊(duì)類型依據(jù)各論文研究方法部分的樣本描述進(jìn)行識(shí)別?？?jī)效類型主要包含一般任務(wù)績(jī)效和創(chuàng)新績(jī)效。其中, 一般任務(wù)績(jī)效主要是指一般任務(wù)過程的效率和產(chǎn)出(Joshi & Roh,2009), 而創(chuàng)新績(jī)效主要是指創(chuàng)新過程的效率和產(chǎn)出(Bell et al., 2011)。國(guó)家地域類型主要包括西方國(guó)家和東方國(guó)家。本研究通過對(duì)Hofstede (1984)研究中所報(bào)告的 50個(gè)國(guó)家的文化數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行聚類分析,將樣本中的美國(guó)、荷蘭、德國(guó)、以色列、瑞典、西班牙、愛爾蘭、英國(guó)、加拿大、澳大利亞和意大利歸類為西方國(guó)家, 將中國(guó)內(nèi)地、中國(guó)臺(tái)灣、中國(guó)香港、新加坡、韓國(guó)和日本歸為東方國(guó)家和地區(qū)。這一結(jié)果與Gupta等(2002)基于61個(gè)國(guó)家的文化聚類分析結(jié)果類似。本研究借鑒Bell等(2011)關(guān)于團(tuán)隊(duì)的分類, 將團(tuán)隊(duì)類型劃分為高管團(tuán)隊(duì)、研發(fā)團(tuán)隊(duì)和其他團(tuán)隊(duì)(即混合工作團(tuán)隊(duì))。

為了保證多元化類型、效應(yīng)值數(shù)據(jù)以及各情境調(diào)節(jié)變量編碼的準(zhǔn)確性, 由兩名博士生對(duì)所有實(shí)證研究進(jìn)行獨(dú)立編碼, 隨后進(jìn)行比對(duì)。各變量的評(píng)定者間信度介于0.83到1.00之間, 均值為0.92, 說明變量編碼存在較高的一致性。對(duì)于有差異的數(shù)據(jù),兩名博士生再次檢查核對(duì)論文中的原始數(shù)據(jù), 對(duì)于仍存在差異的數(shù)據(jù)在討論后達(dá)成一致。

3.3 元分析過程

元分析軟件采用Comprehensive Meta Analysis 2.0, 首先使用Hunter和Schmidt (2004)的元分析程序估計(jì)未修正的基于樣本加權(quán)的平均相關(guān)系數(shù)

r

,其次估計(jì)根據(jù)測(cè)量誤差(信度)修正后的總體相關(guān)系數(shù)

ρ

, 并基于此計(jì)算修正后的總體相關(guān)系數(shù)的 95%置信區(qū)間。本研究遵循Borenstein, Hedges, Higgins和Rothstein (2011)的建議, 在元分析過程中全部采用隨機(jī)效應(yīng)模型。在進(jìn)行各組變量關(guān)系的元分析之前, 首先采用漏斗圖法、Egger檢驗(yàn)法以及Begg和Mazumdar檢驗(yàn)法來檢驗(yàn)各組變量關(guān)系效應(yīng)值的發(fā)表偏差問題(Borenstein et al., 2011)。整體而言, 各組變量關(guān)系效應(yīng)值的漏斗圖顯示效應(yīng)值多呈對(duì)稱分布, 且集中在平均值附近; Egger檢驗(yàn)以及 Begg和Mazumdar檢驗(yàn)結(jié)果均未達(dá)到統(tǒng)計(jì)上的顯著性水平, 說明本研究所包含樣本的發(fā)表偏差效應(yīng)并不明顯。元分析過程中調(diào)節(jié)變量的顯著性通過統(tǒng)計(jì)量

Q

進(jìn)行衡量, 如果該統(tǒng)計(jì)量顯著, 則表明效應(yīng)值在不同類別間存在顯著差異。

Q

是進(jìn)行組內(nèi)異質(zhì)性檢驗(yàn)的統(tǒng)計(jì)量, 如果顯著則表明組內(nèi)仍存在未被識(shí)別的調(diào)節(jié)變量。

4 結(jié)果

從表2可以看到, 分離型多元化與績(jī)效弱負(fù)相關(guān), 但未達(dá)到顯著水平; 多樣型多元化與績(jī)效顯著正相關(guān)(

ρ

= 0.07,

p

< 0.001); 不平等型多元化與績(jī)效的關(guān)系不顯著。因而, 假設(shè)1b得到支持, 假設(shè)1a和1c沒有得到驗(yàn)證。從表2的異質(zhì)性檢驗(yàn)可以看到, 所有效應(yīng)值的

Q

統(tǒng)計(jì)量均達(dá)到顯著水平, 說明在不同類型多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效的關(guān)系鏈中存在一些潛在的情境調(diào)節(jié)變量。由于本研究的團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效既包含一般任務(wù)績(jī)效,也包含創(chuàng)新績(jī)效(Bell et al., 2011; Joshi & Roh,2009), 因此我們也比較了團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化與不同類型績(jī)效之間關(guān)系的差異, 即績(jī)效類型的潛在調(diào)節(jié)作用(見表3)?？梢钥吹? 多樣型多元化與創(chuàng)新績(jī)效(

ρ

=0.12,

p

< 0.001)和任務(wù)績(jī)效(

ρ

= 0.05,

p

< 0.01)的正相關(guān)程度存在顯著差異(

Q

= 6.43,

p

< 0.001), 而不平等型多元化與創(chuàng)新績(jī)效(

ρ

= 0.05,

p

< 0.05)和任務(wù)績(jī)效(

ρ

= –0.02,

p

= 0.18)的關(guān)系也存在顯著差異(

Q

= 5.87,

p

< 0.05), 說明績(jī)效類型能夠顯著調(diào)節(jié)多元化與績(jī)效之間的關(guān)系。因此, 假設(shè)2得到部分驗(yàn)證。表 4列出了地域作為潛在調(diào)節(jié)變量的分析結(jié)果?？梢钥吹? 地域?qū)Χ鄻有投嘣c績(jī)效的調(diào)節(jié)作用顯著(

Q

= 7.63,

p

< 0.01)。在東方國(guó)家中, 多樣型多元化與績(jī)效強(qiáng)相關(guān)(

ρ

= 0.10,

p

< 0.001); 而在西方國(guó)家中, 多樣型多元化與績(jī)效邊際正相關(guān)(

ρ

=0.03,

p

< 0.10)。地域?qū)Σ黄降刃投嘣c績(jī)效的調(diào)節(jié)作用也是顯著的(

Q

= 4.62,

p

< 0.05)。在東方國(guó)家中, 盡管不平等型多元化與績(jī)效的關(guān)系不顯著,但表現(xiàn)出了一定正相關(guān)的趨勢(shì); 而在西方國(guó)家中,不平等型多元化與績(jī)效邊際負(fù)相關(guān)(

ρ

= –0.02,

p

<0.10)。然而, 地域?qū)Ψ蛛x型多元化與績(jī)效關(guān)系的調(diào)節(jié)作用不顯著。因而, 假設(shè)3得到了部分驗(yàn)證。表5列出了團(tuán)隊(duì)類型作為潛在調(diào)節(jié)變量的分析結(jié)果?？梢钥吹? 團(tuán)隊(duì)類型對(duì)多樣型多元化與績(jī)效關(guān)系的調(diào)節(jié)作用顯著(

Q

= 24.34,

p

< 0.001), 多樣型多元化與研發(fā)團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效(

ρ

= 0.23,

p

< 0.001)和高管團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效(

ρ

= 0.07,

p

< 0.001)顯著正相關(guān), 但多樣型多元化與混合工作團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效關(guān)系并不顯著。團(tuán)隊(duì)類型對(duì)其他類型多元化與績(jī)效關(guān)系的調(diào)節(jié)作用不顯著, 因此假設(shè)4得到部分驗(yàn)證。為了更進(jìn)一步理解團(tuán)隊(duì)和地域的調(diào)節(jié)作用, 我們對(duì)團(tuán)隊(duì)類型和地域進(jìn)行了交叉, 以比較特定團(tuán)隊(duì)類型中地域的調(diào)節(jié)作用, 結(jié)果如表6所示?？梢钥吹? 東、西方國(guó)家研發(fā)團(tuán)隊(duì)的多樣型多元化與績(jī)效關(guān)系存在顯著差異(

Q

= 4.98,

p

< 0.05), 與西方國(guó)家研發(fā)團(tuán)隊(duì)相比(

ρ

= 0.06,

p

= 0.52), 東方國(guó)家研發(fā)團(tuán)隊(duì)多樣型多元化與績(jī)效的正相關(guān)程度更強(qiáng)(

ρ

=0.31,

p

< 0.001)。此外, 與東方國(guó)家高管團(tuán)隊(duì)相比,西方高管團(tuán)隊(duì)的不平等型多元化表現(xiàn)出顯著的負(fù)面作用(

ρ

= –0.03,

p

< 0.05), 說明地域?qū)τ诟吖軋F(tuán)隊(duì)中的不平等型多元化與績(jī)效關(guān)系的調(diào)節(jié)作用顯著(

Q

= 5.93,

p

< 0.05)。

表2 團(tuán)隊(duì)分離、多樣與不平等對(duì)團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效的影響

表3 績(jī)效類型對(duì)團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效關(guān)系的調(diào)節(jié)作用

表4 地域?qū)F(tuán)隊(duì)多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效關(guān)系的調(diào)節(jié)作用

表5 團(tuán)隊(duì)類型對(duì)團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效關(guān)系的調(diào)節(jié)作用

表6 不同團(tuán)隊(duì)類型中地域的調(diào)節(jié)作用

5 討論

5.1 不同類型多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效

從元分析的主效應(yīng)來看, 多樣型多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效正相關(guān), 這與信息加工理論的基本假設(shè)相一致。然而, 分離型多元化和不平等型多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效的主效應(yīng)并不顯著。這些結(jié)果說明對(duì)團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化進(jìn)行合理分類是非常必要的, 并不是所有的團(tuán)隊(duì)人口統(tǒng)計(jì)特征多元化都會(huì)對(duì)團(tuán)隊(duì)結(jié)果產(chǎn)生顯著影響。通過對(duì)以往國(guó)內(nèi)文獻(xiàn)的回顧, 我們發(fā)現(xiàn)國(guó)內(nèi)研究很少明確區(qū)分這些維度, 并采用與之匹配的理論和操作化測(cè)量方式。相反, 國(guó)內(nèi)研究多是通過 CV衡量連續(xù)型人口統(tǒng)計(jì)特征多元化, 通過 Blau或Entropy指數(shù)衡量離散型人口統(tǒng)計(jì)特征多元化。我們的研究結(jié)果表明這種研究取向是不可取的。從理論角度而言, 不同的測(cè)量對(duì)應(yīng)于不同的多元化類型(見表 1), 而不同類型的多元化又具有不同的理論含義及影響機(jī)理。研究者必須根據(jù)理論基礎(chǔ)來選擇相對(duì)應(yīng)的操作化方式。如果研究者將團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化界定為多樣型多元化, 本應(yīng)通過Blau或Entropy指數(shù)進(jìn)行操作化, 但在實(shí)際操作過程中卻采用CV或SD的測(cè)量方式, 就可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致錯(cuò)誤的結(jié)果。此外, 從元分析中所涉及的中文實(shí)證研究來看, 中國(guó)學(xué)者對(duì)分離型多元化的關(guān)注度較低, 限制了對(duì)該類型多元化在中國(guó)文化背景下作用機(jī)制的理解, 這也有待今后研究者進(jìn)行拓展。

5.2 績(jī)效類型對(duì)多元化-績(jī)效關(guān)系的調(diào)節(jié)作用

調(diào)節(jié)效應(yīng)檢驗(yàn)結(jié)果顯示, 團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化與不同類型績(jī)效的關(guān)系存在顯著差異。多樣型多元化與創(chuàng)新績(jī)效的相關(guān)性高于與一般任務(wù)績(jī)效的相關(guān)性, 這說明多樣型多元化有利于促進(jìn)新想法的產(chǎn)生, 但在轉(zhuǎn)化為最終團(tuán)隊(duì)輸出的時(shí)候, 其效力有所下降。令我們感到意外的是, 不平等型多元化能夠顯著提升團(tuán)隊(duì)創(chuàng)新績(jī)效, 但與任務(wù)績(jī)效關(guān)系并不顯著。這可能得益于社會(huì)等級(jí)帶來的溝通效率的提升(Magee &Galinsky, 2008), 進(jìn)而改善團(tuán)隊(duì)創(chuàng)新績(jī)效水平, 但與此同時(shí), 不平等可能對(duì)團(tuán)隊(duì)成員態(tài)度造成消極影響(Harrison & Klein, 2007), 進(jìn)而削弱了創(chuàng)新向任務(wù)結(jié)果的轉(zhuǎn)化。因此, 我們建議研究者在進(jìn)行團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化的相關(guān)研究時(shí), 需要明確區(qū)分團(tuán)隊(duì)結(jié)果變量類型以及多元化類型, 提升研究結(jié)論的針對(duì)性和可靠性。

5.3 國(guó)家地域?qū)Χ嘣?績(jī)效關(guān)系的調(diào)節(jié)作用

先前的研究很少比較不同國(guó)家團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化研究結(jié)果的差異。我們的研究結(jié)果證實(shí)了國(guó)家地域的調(diào)節(jié)作用, 這說明在不同國(guó)家地域中, 企業(yè)應(yīng)當(dāng)采取不同的多元化管理策略。盡管多樣型多元化對(duì)于東西方國(guó)家都具有積極作用, 但是在受儒家思想影響較大的東方國(guó)家中, 多樣型多元化與績(jī)效的相關(guān)性明顯高于西方國(guó)家。這可能得益于東方國(guó)家的集體主義取向, 在團(tuán)隊(duì)協(xié)作方面較西方團(tuán)隊(duì)更勝一籌(Wang et al., 2007), 因而東方國(guó)家的團(tuán)隊(duì)更能夠發(fā)揮多樣型多元化的優(yōu)點(diǎn)。此外, 與社會(huì)等級(jí)理論的核心觀點(diǎn)相一致, 元分析結(jié)果表明西方國(guó)家不平等型多元化的負(fù)面作用更強(qiáng)。這是因?yàn)槲鞣絿?guó)家以高個(gè)體主義和低權(quán)力距離價(jià)值觀為主, 彼此之間的相互依賴程度較低, 且更加注重組織和團(tuán)隊(duì)公平, 因而團(tuán)隊(duì)資源的不平等配置往往會(huì)帶來消極的結(jié)果(Halevy et al., 2011)。同時(shí), 儒家思想所倡導(dǎo)的關(guān)系取向使東方人更加注重內(nèi)部和諧(Chen, Chen, &Huang, 2013), 這也使得東方國(guó)家不平等型多元化的負(fù)面作用較西方國(guó)家明顯下降。

5.4 團(tuán)隊(duì)類型對(duì)多元化-績(jī)效關(guān)系的調(diào)節(jié)作用

元分析結(jié)果驗(yàn)證了團(tuán)隊(duì)類型對(duì)多元化和績(jī)效關(guān)系的調(diào)節(jié)作用。對(duì)于決策型的高管團(tuán)隊(duì)和智力型的研發(fā)團(tuán)隊(duì)而言, 由于成員彼此之間的相互依賴程度較高, 多樣型多元化能夠較好地促進(jìn)知識(shí)和經(jīng)歷的整合, 因而其積極作用更大; 而對(duì)于一般的工作團(tuán)隊(duì)而言, 由于工作任務(wù)的相互依賴程度較低, 多樣型多元化并不能發(fā)揮信息整合的優(yōu)勢(shì)。

同時(shí), 通過進(jìn)一步的元分析, 我們發(fā)現(xiàn)研發(fā)團(tuán)隊(duì)、高管團(tuán)隊(duì)的多元化與績(jī)效的關(guān)系也存在地域差異。在東方國(guó)家中, 研發(fā)團(tuán)隊(duì)的多樣型多元化表現(xiàn)出了更強(qiáng)的正面作用, 我們認(rèn)為這主要是得益于東方國(guó)家人們?cè)谘邪l(fā)任務(wù)中展示出較高的合作水平(Kim et al., 2007); 而在西方國(guó)家中, 研發(fā)團(tuán)隊(duì)的多樣型多元化與績(jī)效的關(guān)系并不顯著, 其可能的原因在于西方個(gè)體主義國(guó)家的人們?cè)谘邪l(fā)任務(wù)中更加傾向于說服其他人, 展示出較多的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)行為(O'Neill et al., 2013), 進(jìn)而削弱了研發(fā)團(tuán)隊(duì)的績(jī)效。此外, 在西方國(guó)家中, 高管團(tuán)隊(duì)不平等型多元化表現(xiàn)出了較強(qiáng)的負(fù)面作用, 這與西方的高管團(tuán)隊(duì)等級(jí)研究結(jié)果較為一致; 而在東方國(guó)家中, 高管團(tuán)隊(duì)不平等型多元化與績(jī)效的關(guān)系并不顯著, 可能的原因在于中國(guó)是高權(quán)力距離社會(huì), 對(duì)于不平等的接納程度更高(Hofstede, 1984), 從而在一定程度上削弱了團(tuán)隊(duì)不平等的消極作用。

5.5 研究啟示和局限

從企業(yè)實(shí)踐的角度來講, 本文的研究結(jié)果有助于跨國(guó)企業(yè)和中國(guó)本土企業(yè)通過合理的多元化管理來提升團(tuán)隊(duì)和企業(yè)績(jī)效。企業(yè)應(yīng)當(dāng)意識(shí)到多樣型多元化所帶來的好處, 尤其是在東方國(guó)家以及研發(fā)和高管團(tuán)隊(duì)中所發(fā)揮的重要作用。同時(shí), 企業(yè)也應(yīng)當(dāng)意識(shí)到團(tuán)隊(duì)所處情境的重要性, 必須根據(jù)自身特點(diǎn)制定適合自己的人才多元化管理策略。東方國(guó)家團(tuán)隊(duì)管理者更應(yīng)該重視多樣型多元化配置策略, 發(fā)揮集體的作用; 而西方國(guó)家團(tuán)隊(duì)管理者除了發(fā)揮團(tuán)隊(duì)多樣的潛在好處之外, 還要避免團(tuán)隊(duì)成員特征的不平等配置。

本研究也不可避免的存在一些缺陷。首先, 部分元分析的效應(yīng)值數(shù)量偏少, 可能會(huì)限制其有效性。其次, 本文所關(guān)注的調(diào)節(jié)變量是遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不夠的,元分析結(jié)果中很多組內(nèi)效應(yīng)異質(zhì)性檢驗(yàn)的

Q

統(tǒng)計(jì)量也是顯著的, 表明仍有很多情境變量尚未考慮進(jìn)來, 也需要今后研究進(jìn)一步探索。本研究也試圖對(duì)行業(yè)等情境變量進(jìn)行編碼, 但是國(guó)內(nèi)外研究對(duì)行業(yè)的界定非常不同, 行業(yè)交叉現(xiàn)象非常嚴(yán)重, 且很多研究沒有報(bào)告行業(yè)類型, 最終不得不放棄對(duì)行業(yè)調(diào)節(jié)作用的檢驗(yàn)。本研究建議今后的研究在樣本描述上更加規(guī)范, 為后續(xù)的元分析提供良好的數(shù)據(jù)參考。

需要指出的是, 本研究主要關(guān)注的是團(tuán)隊(duì)人口統(tǒng)計(jì)多元化與績(jī)效之間的關(guān)系, 并沒有關(guān)注深層多元化對(duì)績(jī)效的影響, 如團(tuán)隊(duì)能力多元化、人格多元化(Barrick, Stewart, Neubert, & Mount, 1998)、情感多元化(Barsade & Gibson, 2012)與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效的關(guān)系。當(dāng)前國(guó)內(nèi)深層次多元化與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效關(guān)系的研究尚不多見, 也值得研究者進(jìn)行進(jìn)一步的探索。此外,團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化不僅僅局限于個(gè)體成員之間的差異, 也可以表現(xiàn)為團(tuán)隊(duì)斷層和團(tuán)隊(duì)子群體之間的差異(Carton & Cummings, 2012)。例如, 分離型多元化會(huì)形成基于分離的斷層, 進(jìn)而產(chǎn)生基于身份的子群體; 多樣型多元化會(huì)形成基于多樣的斷層, 進(jìn)而產(chǎn)生基于知識(shí)的子群體; 不平等型多元化會(huì)形成基于不平等的斷層, 進(jìn)而產(chǎn)生基于資源的子群體(Carton & Cummings, 2012)。因而, 未來研究者也可以關(guān)注團(tuán)隊(duì)斷層、團(tuán)隊(duì)子群體多元化對(duì)團(tuán)隊(duì)交互過程和結(jié)果的影響。

6 結(jié)論

團(tuán)隊(duì)人口統(tǒng)計(jì)特征多元化問題越來越受到理論界和實(shí)踐界的關(guān)注, 但其研究結(jié)論存在諸多不一致。鑒于此, 研究者開始嘗試對(duì)多元化進(jìn)行分類,以期解釋產(chǎn)生這些相矛盾結(jié)論的原因。本研究在借鑒 Harrison和 Klein (2007)分類方法的基礎(chǔ)上, 運(yùn)用元分析的方法檢驗(yàn)了團(tuán)隊(duì)分離型多元化、多樣型多元化與不平等型多元化對(duì)團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效的影響。結(jié)果顯示不同類型的團(tuán)隊(duì)多元化與績(jī)效關(guān)系存在較大差異, 且這些關(guān)系會(huì)受到績(jī)效類型、國(guó)家地域和團(tuán)隊(duì)類型的調(diào)節(jié)。具體表現(xiàn)為如下四個(gè)方面：(1)從主效應(yīng)來看, 團(tuán)隊(duì)多樣型多元化對(duì)績(jī)效有正向影響,而分離型多元化和不平等型多元化與績(jī)效的關(guān)系并不顯著; (2)從績(jī)效類型來看, 多樣型多元化、不平等型多元化與創(chuàng)新績(jī)效的相關(guān)性顯著高于其與一般任務(wù)績(jī)效的相關(guān)性; (3)從國(guó)家地域角度來看,東方國(guó)家的多樣型多元化表現(xiàn)出了更強(qiáng)的正面作用, 而西方國(guó)家的不平等型多元化表現(xiàn)出了更強(qiáng)的負(fù)面作用; (4)從團(tuán)隊(duì)類型角度來看, 多樣型多元化在研發(fā)團(tuán)隊(duì)和高管團(tuán)隊(duì)中的正面作用更強(qiáng)。

致謝

：感謝加拿大西安大略大學(xué)心理學(xué)系Helen Lee博士對(duì)本文英文摘要的修訂!

*表示元分析用到的文獻(xiàn)

*Ali, M., Ng, Y. L., & Kulik, C. T. (2014). Board age and gender diversity: A test of competing linear and curvilinear predictions.

Journal of Business Ethics, 125

, 497–512.*Amason, A. C., Shrader, R. C., & Tompson, G. H. (2006).Newness and novelty: Relating top management team composition to new venture performance.

Journal of Business Venturing, 21

, 125–148.*Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. (1992). Demography and design: Predictors of new product team performance.

Organization Science, 3

, 321–341.Anderson, C. A., Shibuya, A., Ihori, N., Swing, E. L., Bushman,B. J., Sakamoto, A., …Saleem, M. (2010). Violent video game effects on aggression, empathy, and prosocial behavior in eastern and western countries: A meta-analytic review.

Psychological Bulletin, 136

, 151–173.*Andrevski, G., Richard, O. C., Shaw, J. D., & Ferrier, W. J.(2014). Racial diversity and firm performance: The mediating role of competitive intensity.

Journal of Management, 40

,820–844.*Auh, S., & Menguc, B. (2006). Diversity at the executive suite: A resource-based approach to the customer orientation–organizational performance relationship.

Journal of Business Research, 59

, 564–572.*Balkundi, P., Kilduff, M., Barsness, Z. I., & Michael, J. H.(2007). Demographic antecedents and performance consequences of structural holes in work teams.

Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28

, 241–260.*Bantel, K. A. (1993). Top team, environment, and performance effects on strategic planning formality.

Group & Organization Management, 18

, 436–458.*Bantel, K. A., & Jackson, S. E. (1989). Top management and innovations in banking: Does the composition of the top team make a difference?

Strategic Management Journal,10

(S1), 107–124.*Barkema, H. G., & Shvyrkov, O. (2007). Does top management team diversity promote or hamper foreign expansion?

Strategic Management Journal, 28

, 663–680.Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., Neubert, M. J., & Mount, M. K.(1998). Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 83

, 377–391.Barsade, S. G., & Gibson, D. E. (2012). Group affect: Its influence on individual and group outcomes.

Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21

, 119–123.*Barsade, S. G., Ward, A. J., Turner, J. D. F., & Sonnenfeld, J.A. (2000). To your heart's content: A model of affective diversity in top management teams.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 45

, 802–836.*Baugh, S. G., & Graen, G. B. (1997). Effects of team gender and racial composition on perceptions of team performance in cross-functional teams.

Group & Organization Management,22

, 366–383.*Bayazit, M., & Mannix, E. A. (2003). Should i stay or should i go? Predicting team members' intent to remain in the team.

Small Group Research, 34

, 290–321.Bell, S. T., Villado, A. J., Lukasik, M. A., Belau, L., & Briggs,A. L. (2011). Getting specific about demographic diversity variable and team performance relationships: A meta-analysis.

Journal of Management, 37

, 709–743.*Boeker, W. (1997). Strategic change: The influence of managerial characteristics and organizational growth.

Academy of Management Journal, 40

, 152–170.*Boone, C., & Hendriks, W. (2009). Top management team diversity and firm performance: Moderators of functionalbackground and locus-of-control diversity.

Management Science, 55

, 165–180.*Boone, C., & van Witteloostuijn, A. (2005). Team locus-of-control composition, leadership structure, information acquisition, and financial performance: A business simulation study.

Academy of Management Journal, 48

,889–909.Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P., & Rothstein, H.R. (2011).

Introduction to meta-analysis

. Chichester,United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons.*Bunderson, J. S., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2002). Comparing alternative conceptualizations of functional diversity in management teams: Process and performance effects.

Academy of Management Journal, 45

, 875–893.*Buyl, T., Boone, C., Hendriks, W., & Matthyssens, P. (2011).Top management team functional diversity and firm performance: The moderating role of CEO characteristics.

Journal of Management Studies, 48

, 151–177.*Cady, S. H., & Valentine, J. (1999). Team innovation and perceptions of consideration what difference does diversity make?

Small Group Research, 30

, 730–750.*Cai, L., Liu, Q., & Yu, X. Y. (2013). Effects of top management team heterogeneous background and behavioural attributes on the performance of new ventures.

Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 30

, 354–366.*Cannella, A. A. Jr, Park, J. H., & Lee, H. U. (2008). Top management team functional background diversity and firm performance: Examining the roles of team member colocation and environmental uncertainty.

Academy of Management Journal, 51

, 768–784.*Carpenter, M. A. (2002). The implications of strategy and social context for the relationship between top management team heterogeneity and firm performance.

Strategic Management Journal, 23

, 275–284.Carton, A. M., & Cummings, J. N. (2012). A theory of subgroups in work teams.

Academy of Management Review,37

, 441–470.Carton, A. M., & Cummings, J. N. (2013). The impact of subgroup type and subgroup configurational properties on work team performance.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 98

,732–758.Chen, C. C., Chen, X. P., & Huang, S. S. (2013). Chinese

guanxi

: An integrative review and new directions for future research.

Management and Organization Review, 9

, 167–207.*Chen, X., Li, S. M., & Zhu, X. N. (2005). Demographic diversity and top management turnover: An investigation of China's Listed IT companies.

Management Review, 17

(8),9–16.[陳璇, 李仕明, 祝小寧. (2005). 團(tuán)隊(duì)異質(zhì)性與高層更換:我國(guó)上市IT公司的實(shí)證研究.

管理評(píng)論, 17

(8), 9–16.]*Chen, Y., He, Y. Q., & Chen, X. J. (2011). The mediating role of TMT characteristics on the relationship between diversification and firm performance.

Forecasting, 30

(1),10–17.[陳昀, 賀遠(yuǎn)瓊, 陳向軍. (2011). TMT特征對(duì)多元化與企業(yè)績(jī)效關(guān)系的調(diào)節(jié)效應(yīng)研究.

預(yù)測(cè), 30

(1), 10–17.]*Chi, N. W., Huang, Y. M., & Lin, S. C. (2009). A doubleedged sword? Exploring the curvilinear relationship between organizational tenure diversity and team innovation: The moderating role of team-oriented HR practices.

Group &Organization Management, 34

, 698–726.Connelly, B. L., Tihanyi, L., Crook, T. R., & Gangloff, K. A.(2014). Tournament theory: Thirty years of contests and competitions.

Journal of Management, 40

, 16–47.Cooper, D., Patel, P. C., & Thatcher, S. M. (2014). It depends:Environmental context and the effects of faultlines on top management team performance.

Organization Science, 25

,633–652.*Cummings, J. N. (2004). Work groups, structural diversity,and knowledge sharing in a global organization.

Management Science, 50

, 352–364.*Curseu, P. L., Raab, J., Han, J., & Loenen, A. (2012).Educational diversity and group effectiveness: A social network perspective.

Journal of Managerial Psychology, 27

,576–594.*Cur?eu, P. L., Schalk, R., & Schruijer, S. (2010). The use of cognitive mapping in eliciting and evaluating group cognitions.

Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40

, 1258–1291.*Cur?eu, P. L., & Schruijer, S. G. (2010). Does conflict shatter trust or does trust obliterate conflict? Revisiting the relationships between team diversity, conflict, and trust.

Group dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 14

, 66–79.*Daniel, S., Agarwal, R., & Stewart, K. J. (2013). The effects of diversity in global, distributed collectives: A study of open source project success.

Information Systems Research,24

, 312–333.*Díaz-García, C., González-Moreno, A., & Sáez-Martínez, F. J.(2013). Gender diversity within r & d teams: Its impact on radicalness of innovation.

Innovation: Management, Policy& Practice, 15

, 149–160.*de Poel, F. M., Stoker, J. I., & van der Zee, K. I. (2014).Leadership and organizational tenure diversity as determinants of project team effectiveness.

Group &Organization Management, 39

, 532–560.de Wit, F. R., Greer, L. L., & Jehn, K. A. (2012). The paradox of intragroup conflict: A meta-analysis.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 97

, 360–390.*Der Foo, M., Kam Wong, P., & Ong, A. (2005). Do others think you have a viable business idea? Team diversity and judges' evaluation of ideas in a business plan competition.

Journal of Business Venturing, 20

, 385–402.*Dezs?, C. L., & Ross, D. G. (2012). Does female representation in top management improve firm performance? A panel data investigation.

Strategic Management Journal, 33

,1072–1089.*Drach-Zahavy, A., & Freund, A. (2007). Team effectiveness under stress: A structural contingency approach.

Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28

, 423–450.*Drach-Zahavy, A., & Somech, A. (2001). Understanding team innovation: The role of team processes and structures.

Group dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 5

, 111–123.*Drach-Zahavy, A., & Somech, A. (2002). Team heterogeneity and its relationship with team support and team effectiveness.

Journal of Educational Administration, 40

, 44–66.*Du, X. Q. (2014). Does confucianism reduce board gender diversity? Firm-level evidence from China.

Journal of Business Ethics

, doi: 10.1007/s10551-014-2508-x.*Ely, R. J. (2004). A field study of group diversity, participation in diversity education programs, and performance.

Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25

, 755–780.*Faems, D., & Subramanian, A. M. (2013). R & d manpower and technological performance: The impact of demographic and task-related diversity.

Research Policy, 42

, 1624–1633.Greer, L. L., & van Kleef, G. A. (2010). Equality versus differentiation: The effects of power dispersion on group interaction.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 95

, 1032–1044.*Gu, J. J., & Hu, B. (2008). Relation of heterogeneity of knowledge framework and occupation background about top management team and enterprise technological innovation performance: An empirical study based on enterprise of industry cluster.

R & D Management, 20

(2), 28–33.[古家軍, 胡蓓. (2008). TMT知識(shí)結(jié)構(gòu), 職業(yè)背景的異質(zhì)性與企業(yè)技術(shù)創(chuàng)新績(jī)效關(guān)系——基于產(chǎn)業(yè)集群內(nèi)企業(yè)的實(shí)證研究.

研究與發(fā)展管理, 20

(2), 28–33.]Guillaume, Y. R., Dawson, J. F., Woods, S. A., Sacramento, C.A., & West, M. A. (2013). Getting diversity at work to work: What we know and what we still don't know.

Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 86

, 123–141.Gupta, V., Hanges, P. J., & Dorfman, P. (2002). Cultural clusters: Methodology and findings.

Journal of World Business, 37

, 11–15.Hülsheger, U. R., Anderson, N., & Salgado, J. F. (2009).Team-level predictors of innovation at work: A comprehensive meta-analysis spanning three decades of research.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 94

, 1128–1145.Halevy, N., Chou, E. Y., & Galinsky, A. D. (2011). A functional model of hierarchy: Why, how, and when vertical differentiation enhances group performance.

Organizational Psychology Review, 1

, 32–52.Hambrick, D. C. (2007). Upper echelons theory: An update.

Academy of Management Review, 32

, 334–343.*Hambrick, D. C., Cho, T. S., & Chen, M. J. (1996). The influence of top management team heterogeneity on firms'competitive moves.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 41

,659–684.*Han, J., Han, J., & Brass, D. J. (2014). Human capital diversity in the creation of social capital for team creativity.

Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35

, 54–71.Harrison, D. A., & Klein, K. J. (2007). What's the difference?Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations.

Academy of Management Review, 32

,1199–1228.*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

, 1029–1045.Harrison, D. A., & Sin, H. (2006). What is diversity and how should it be measured. In A. M. Konrad, P. Prasad, & J. K.Pringle (Eds.),

Handbook of workplace diversity

(pp.191–216). Newbury Park, USA: Sage.*Haslam, S. A., Ryan, M. K., Kulich, C., Trojanowski, G., &Atkins, C. (2010). Investing with prejudice: The relationship between women's presence on company boards and objective and subjective measures of company performance.

British Journal of Management, 21

, 484–497.*He, W. F., & Liu, Q. L. (2010). A study on the relationship between the characteristics of the background of the top managers of China's listed companies and their behavior of financial restatement.

Management World,

(7), 144–155.[何威風(fēng), 劉啟亮. (2010). 我國(guó)上市公司高管背景特征與財(cái)務(wù)重述行為研究.

管理世界,

(7), 144–155.]*He, X. G., & Shen, Y. (2008). The growth of entrepreneurial companies: Empirical study based on capitals of entrepreneur team.

Management World,

(1), 82–95.[賀小剛, 沈瑜. (2008). 創(chuàng)業(yè)型企業(yè)的成長(zhǎng): 基于企業(yè)家團(tuán)隊(duì)資本的實(shí)證研究.

管理世界,

(1), 82–95.]*Henneke, D., & Lüthje, C. (2007). Interdisciplinary heterogeneity as a catalyst for product innovativeness of entrepreneurial teams.

Creativity and Innovation Management,16

, 121–132.*Hoch, J. E. (2014). Shared leadership, diversity, and information sharing in teams.

Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29

,541–564.*Hoch, J. E., Pearce, C. L., & Welzel, L. (2010). Is the most effective team leadership shared? The impact of shared leadership, age diversity, and coordination on team performance.

Journal of Personnel Psychology, 9

, 105–116.Hofstede, G. (1984). Cultural dimensions in management and planning.

Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 1

, 81–99.Horwitz, S. K., & Horwitz, I. B. (2007). The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: A meta-analytic review of team demography.

Journal of Management, 33

, 987-1015.*Huang, H. C., Lai, M. C., Kao, M. C., & Chen, Y. C. (2012).Target costing, business model innovation, and firm performance: An empirical analysis of Chinese firms.

Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 29

, 322–335.*Huang, Y., Yang, N. D., & Zhang, C. L. (2011). Influence of the top management team heterogeneity and the firm performance: To focus on ownership concentration.

Management Review, 23

(11), 120–125.[黃越, 楊乃定, 張宸璐. (2011). 高層管理團(tuán)隊(duì)異質(zhì)性對(duì)企業(yè)績(jī)效的影響研究——以股權(quán)集中度為調(diào)節(jié)變量.

管理評(píng)論, 23

(11), 120–125.]Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (2004).

Methods of meta-analysis:Correcting error and bias in research findings

. Newbury Park, USA: Sage.*Jackson, S. E., & Joshi, A. (2004). Diversity in social context:A multi-attribute, multilevel analysis of team diversity and sales performance.

Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25

,675–702.*Jehn, K. A., & Bezrukova, K. (2004). A field study of group diversity, workgroup context, and performance.

Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25

, 703–729.Johnson, S. G., Schnatterly, K., & Hill, A. D. (2013). Board composition beyond independence social capital, human capital, and demographics.

Journal of Management, 39

,232–262.Joshi, A., & Roh, H. (2009). The role of context in work team diversity research: A meta-analytic review.

Academy of Management Journal, 52

, 599–627.*Kearney, E., & Gebert, D. (2009). Managing diversity and enhancing team outcomes: The promise of transformational leadership.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 94

, 77–89.*Kearney, E., Gebert, D., & Voelpel, S. C. (2009). When and how diversity benefits teams: The importance of team members' need for cognition.

Academy of Management Journal, 52

, 581–598.*Keller, R. T. (1994). Technology-information processing fit and the performance of r & d project groups: A test of contingency theory.

Academy of Management Journal, 37

,167–179.*Keller, R. T. (2001). Cross-functional project groups in research and new product development: Diversity,communications, job stress, and outcomes.

Academy of Management Journal, 44

, 547–555.*Kilduff, M., Angelmar, R., & Mehra, A. (2000). Top management-team diversity and firm performance:Examining the role of cognitions.

Organization Science, 11

,21–34.Kim, T. Y., Wang, C. W., Kondo, M., & Kim, T. H. (2007).Conflict management styles: The differences among the Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans.

International Journal of Conflict Management, 18

, 23–41.*Kirkman, B. L., Tesluk, P. E., & Rosen, B. (2004). The impact of demographic heterogeneity and team leader-team member demographic fit on team empowerment and effectiveness.

Group & Organization Management, 29

,334–368.*Kunze, F., Boehm, S., & Bruch, H. (2013). Organizational performance consequences of age diversity: Inspecting the role of diversity-friendly HR policies and top managers'negative age stereotypes.

Journal of Management Studies,50

, 413–442.*Lee, C., & Farh, J. L. (2004). Joint effects of group efficacy and gender diversity on group cohesion and performance.

Applied Psychology, 53

, 136–154.*Lee, H. U., & Park, J. H. (2006). Top team diversity,internationalization and the mediating effect of international alliances.

British Journal of Management, 17

, 195–213.*Li, H. J., & Xing, X. D. (2007). TMT and CES: An empirical analysis based on the integration of theories.

Science of Science and Management of S. & T., 28

(9), 139–144.[李華晶, 邢曉東. (2007). 高管團(tuán)隊(duì)與公司創(chuàng)業(yè)戰(zhàn)略: 基于高階理論和代理理論融合的實(shí)證研究.

科學(xué)學(xué)與科學(xué)技術(shù)管理, 28

(9), 139–144.]*Li, J., & Hambrick, D. C. (2005). Factional groups: A new vantage on demographic faultlines, conflict, and disintegration in work teams.

Academy of Management Journal, 48

,794–813.*Li, W. N., Li, D. Y., Meng, D. Y., & Han, X. (2014). An empirical study on TMT heterogeneity and firm performance in Chinese manufacturing companies with declined performance.

Chinese Journal of Management, 11

, 819–827.[李衛(wèi)寧, 李丹陽, 孟德穎, 韓旭. (2014). 績(jī)效下滑制造企業(yè) TMT 異質(zhì)性與企業(yè)績(jī)效關(guān)系的實(shí)證研究.

管理學(xué)報(bào),11

, 819–827.]*Li, W. N., & Wu, D. (2014). Study on the relationship between demographic characteristics of new CEO and improvement of corporate performance: TMT heterogeneity moderation effect.

Chinese Journal of Management, 11

,1158–1167.[李衛(wèi)寧, 吳荻. (2014). 基于 TMT 年齡和任期異質(zhì)性調(diào)節(jié)效應(yīng)的新任 CEO 顯性特征與經(jīng)營(yíng)績(jī)效關(guān)系研究.

管理學(xué)報(bào), 11

, 1158–1167.]*Lin, X. M., Bai, X. W., & Lin, L. (2014). Effects of similarity and accuracy indices of shared mental models on team creativity.

Acta Psychologica Sinica, 46

, 1734–1747.[林曉敏, 白新文, 林琳. (2014). 團(tuán)隊(duì)心智模型相似性與正確性對(duì)團(tuán)隊(duì)創(chuàng)造力的影響.

心理學(xué)報(bào), 46

, 1734–1747.]*Lin, X. M., Lin, L., Wang, Y. L., & Bai, X. W. (2014).Empowering leadership and team performance: The transative memory system as a medium variable.

Management Review,26

(1), 78–87.[林曉敏, 林琳, 王永麗, 白新文. (2014). 授權(quán)型領(lǐng)導(dǎo)與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效: 交互記憶系統(tǒng)的中介作用.

管理評(píng)論, 26

(1), 78–87.]*Lovelace, K., Shapiro, D. L., & Weingart, L. R. (2001).Maximizing cross-functional new product teams'innovativeness and constraint adherence: A conflict communications perspective.

Academy of Management Journal, 44

, 779–793.*Ma, F. P., & Guo, X. C. (2010). A study on the correlation between heterogeneity of TMT and technological innovation performance: The moderating role of behavioral integration of TMT.

Science of Science and Management of S. & T., 31

(12), 186–191.[馬富萍, 郭曉川. (2010). 高管團(tuán)隊(duì)異質(zhì)性與技術(shù)創(chuàng)新績(jī)效的關(guān)系研究——以高管團(tuán)隊(duì)行為整合為調(diào)節(jié)變量.

科學(xué)學(xué)與科學(xué)技術(shù)管理, 31

(12), 186–191.]*Ma, L., Wu, J. N., & Shi, Z. Y. (2012). Determinants of science project performance: An empirical analysis of general programs of the DHS in NSFC.

Science of Science and Management of S. & T., 33

(7), 12–20.[馬亮, 吳建南, 時(shí)仲毅. (2012). 科研項(xiàng)目績(jī)效的影響因素:醫(yī)學(xué)科學(xué)基金面上項(xiàng)目的實(shí)證分析.

科學(xué)學(xué)與科學(xué)技術(shù)管理, 33

(7), 12–20.]*MacCurtain, S., Flood, P. C., Ramamoorthy, N., West, M. A.,& Dawson, J. F. (2010). The top management team,reflexivity, knowledge sharing and new product performance: A study of the irish software industry.

Creativity and Innovation Management, 19

, 219–232.Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status.

The Academy of Management Annals, 2

, 351–398.*Mayo, M., Pastor, J. C., & Meindl, J. R. (1996). The effects of group heterogeneity on the self-perceived efficacy of group leaders.

The Leadership Quarterly, 7

, 265–284.*Michel, J. G., & Hambrick, D. C. (1992). Diversification posture and top management team characteristics.

Academy of Management Journal, 35

, 9–37.*Mohammed, S., & Angell, L. C. (2004). Surface- and deep-level diversity in workgroups: Examining the moderating effects of team orientation and team process on relationship conflict.

Journal of Organizational Behavior,25

, 1015–1039.*Nederveen Pieterse, A., Van Knippenberg, D., & van Ginkel,W. P. (2011). Diversity in goal orientation, team reflexivity,and team performance.

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 114

, 153–164.*Niu, F., Zhang, Y. L., & Yang, J. (2011). Heterogeneity of entrepreneurial team and new ventures’ performance: The moderating role of team leaders’ optimism.

Management Review, 23

(11), 110–119.[牛芳, 張玉利, 楊俊. (2011). 創(chuàng)業(yè)團(tuán)隊(duì)異質(zhì)性與新企業(yè)績(jī)效:領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者樂觀心理的調(diào)節(jié)作用.

管理評(píng)論, 23

(11), 110–119.]O'Neill, T. A., Allen, N. J., & Hastings, S. E. (2013).Examining the “pros” and “cons” of team conflict: A team-level meta-analysis of task, relationship, and process conflict.

Human Performance, 26

, 236–260.*Olson, B. J., Parayitam, S., & Twigg, N. W. (2006).Mediating role of strategic choice between top management team diversity and firm performance: Upper echelons theory revisited.

Journal of Business & Management, 12

,111–126.*Orlitzky, M., & Benjamin, J. D. (2003). The effects of sex composition on small-group performance in a business school case competition.

Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2

, 128–138.*Pegels, C. C., Song, Y. I., & Yang, B. (2000). Management heterogeneity, competitive interaction groups, and firm performance.

Strategic Management Journal, 21

, 911–923.*Pelled, L. H., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Xin, K. R. (1999).Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict, and performance.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 44

, 1–28.*Perry-Smith, J. E., & Shalley, C. E. (2014). A social composition view of team creativity: The role of member nationality-heterogeneous ties outside of the team.

Organization Science, 25

, 1434–1452.*Peters, L., & Karren, R. J. (2009). An examination of the roles of trust and functional diversity on virtual team performance ratings.

Group & Organization Management,34

, 479–504.*Polzer, J. T., Milton, L. P., & Swarm, W. B. (2002).Capitalizing on diversity: Interpersonal congruence in small work groups.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 47

, 296–324.*Post, C. (2012). Deep-level team composition and innovation:The mediating roles of psychological safety and cooperative learning.

Group & Organization Management, 37

, 555–588.*Qian, C. L., Cao, Q., & Takeuchi, R. (2013). Top management team functional diversity and organizational innovation in China: The moderating effects of environment.

Strategic Management Journal, 34

, 110–120.*Raver, J. L., & Gelfand, M. J. (2005). Beyond the individual victim: Linking sexual harassment, team processes, and team performance.

Academy of Management Journal, 48

,387–400.*Reagans, R., & Zuckerman, E. W. (2001). Networks,diversity, and productivity: The social capital of corporate r&d teams.

Organization Science, 12

, 502–517.*Ren, B., Wei, L. Q., & Zhou, S. X. (2011). TMT diversity and organizational innovation: The role of network ties and collaborative decision making.

Chinese Journal of Management, 8

, 1630–1637.[任兵, 魏立群, 周思賢. (2011). 高層管理團(tuán)隊(duì)多樣性與組織創(chuàng)新: 外部社會(huì)網(wǎng)絡(luò)與內(nèi)部決策模式的作用.

管理學(xué)報(bào), 8

, 1630–1637.]*Ren, T., & Wang, Z. (2010). Female participation in TMT and firm performance: Evidence from Chinese private enterprises.

Nankai Business Review, 13

(5), 81–91.[任颋, 王崢. (2010). 女性參與高管團(tuán)隊(duì)對(duì)企業(yè)績(jī)效的影響:基于中國(guó)民營(yíng)企業(yè)的實(shí)證研究.

南開管理評(píng)論, 13

(5),81–91.]*Richard, O. C., Kirby, S. L., & Chadwick, K. (2013). The impact of racial and gender diversity in management on financial performance: How participative strategy making features can unleash a diversity advantage.

The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24

,2571–2582.*Richard, O. C., & Shelor, R. M. (2002). Linking top management team age heterogeneity to firm performance:Juxtaposing two mid-range theories.

TheInternational Journal of Human Resource Management, 13

, 958–974.*Rico, R., Molleman, E., Sánchez-Manzanares, M., & van der Vegt, G. S. (2007). The effects of diversity faultlines and team task autonomy on decision quality and social integration.

Journal of Management, 33

, 111–132.*Rodriguez, R. A. (1998). Challenging demographic reductionism a pilot study investigating diversity in group composition.

Small Group Research, 29

, 744–759.*Ruiz-Jiménez, J. M., del Mar Fuentes-Fuentes, M., &Ruiz-Arroyo, M. (2014). Knowledge combination capability and innovation: The effects of gender diversity on top management teams in technology-based firms.

Journal of Business Ethics

, doi: 10.1007/s10551-014-2462-7.*Schippers, M. C., den Hartog, D. N., Koopman, P. L., &Wienk, J. A. (2003). Diversity and team outcomes: The moderating effects of outcome interdependence and group longevity and the mediating effect of reflexivity.

Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24

, 779–802.*Shin, S. J., Kim, T. Y., Lee, J. Y., & Bian, L. (2012).Cognitive team diversity and individual team member creativity: A cross-level interaction.

Academy of Management Journal, 55

, 197–212.*Shin, S. J., & Zhou, J. (2007). When is educational specialization heterogeneity related to creativity in research and development teams? Transformational leadership as a moderator.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 92

, 1709–1721.*Simons, T., Pelled, L. H., & Smith, K. A. (1999). Making use of difference: Diversity, debate, and decision comprehensiveness in top management teams.

Academy of Management Journal, 42

, 662–673.*Smith, A., Houghton, S. M., Hood, J. N., & Ryman, J. A.(2006). Power relationships among top managers: Does top management team power distribution matter for organizational performance?

Journal of Business Research, 59

, 622–629.*Smith, K. G., Smith, K. A., Olian, J. D., Sims Jr, H. P.,O'Bannon, D. P., & Scully, J. A. (1994). Top management team demography and process: The role of social integration and communication.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 39

, 412–438.Solanas, A., Selvam, R. M., Navarro, J., & Leiva, D. (2012).Some common indices of group diversity: Upper boundaries.

Psychological Reports, 111

, 777–796.*Somech, A. (2006). The effects of leadership style and team process on performance and innovation in functionally heterogeneous teams.

Journal of Management, 32

, 132–157.*Stewart, M. M., & Johnson, O. E. (2009). Leader-member exchange as a moderator of the relationship between work group diversity and team performance.

Group &Organization Management, 34

, 507–535.*Sun, H. F., Yao, Z. H., & Yan, M. S. (2006). The effect of demographic traits of TMT on performance of textile and IT corporations.

Nankai Business Review, 9

(6), 61–67.[孫海法, 姚振華, 嚴(yán)茂勝. (2006). 高管團(tuán)隊(duì)人口統(tǒng)計(jì)特征對(duì)紡織和信息技術(shù)公司經(jīng)營(yíng)績(jī)效的影響.

南開管理評(píng)論,9

(6), 61–67.]Thatcher, S. M. B., & Patel, P. C. (2011). Demographic faultlines: A meta-analysis of the literature.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 96

, 1119–1139.Thatcher, S. M. B., & Patel, P. C. (2012). Group faultlines: A review, integration, and guide to future research.

Journal of Management, 38

, 969–1009.*Tihanyi, L., Ellstrand, A. E., Daily, C. M., & Dalton, D. R.(2000). Composition of the top management team and firm international diversification.

Journal of Management, 26

,1157–1177.*Timmerman, T. A. (2000). Racial diversity, age diversity,interdependence, and team performance.

Small Group Research, 31

, 592–606.Trevor, C. O., Reilly, G., & Gerhart, B. (2012). Reconsidering pay dispersion's effect on the performance of interdependent work: Reconciling sorting and pay inequality.

Academy of Management Journal, 55

, 585–610.*Umans, T., Collin, S. O., & Tagesson, T. (2008). Ethnic and gender diversity, process and performance in groups of business students in sweden.

Intercultural Education, 19

,243–254.*van Der Vegt, G. S., & Bunderson, J. S. (2005). Learning and performance in multidisciplinary teams: The importance of collective team identification.

Academy of Management Journal, 48

, 532–547.*van der Vegt, G. S., Bunderson, S., & Kuipers, B. (2010).Why turnover matters in self-managing work teams:Learning, social integration, and task flexibility.

Journal of Management, 36

, 1168–1191.van Dijk, H., & van Engen, M. L. (2013). A status perspective on the consequences of work group diversity.

Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 86

, 223–241.van Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M. C. (2007). Work group diversity.

Annual Review of Psychology, 58

, 515–541.*Vodosek, M. (2007). Intragroup conflict as a mediator between cultural diversity and work group outcomes.

International Journal of Conflict Management, 18

, 345–375.*Wagner, W. G., Pfeffer, J., & O'Reilly III, C. A. (1984).Organizational demography and turnover in top-management group.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 29

, 74–92.*Wang, D. Y., & Liu, J. H. (2011). The relationship between TMT characteristics and technological innovation.

Science Research Management, 32

(7), 45–52.[王德應(yīng), 劉漸和. (2011). TMT特征與企業(yè)技術(shù)創(chuàng)新關(guān)系研究.

科研管理, 32

(7), 45–52.]Wang, G. F, Jing, R. T., & Klossek, A. (2007). Antecedents and management of conflict: Resolution styles of Chinese top managers in multiple rounds of cognitive and affective conflict.

International Journal of Conflict Management, 18

,74–97.*Wang, X. L., Ma, L., & Wang, Y. L. (2013). The impact of TMT functional background on firm performance: Evidence from IT public listed companies in China.

Nankai Business Review, 16

(4), 80–93.[王雪莉, 馬琳, 王艷麗. (2013). 高管團(tuán)隊(duì)職能背景對(duì)企業(yè)績(jī)效的影響: 以中國(guó)信息技術(shù)行業(yè)上市公司為例.

南開管理評(píng)論, 16

(4), 80–93.]*Wegge, J., Roth, C., Neubach, B., Schmidt, K. H., & Kanfer,R. (2008). Age and gender diversity as determinants of performance and health in a public organization: The role of task complexity and group size.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 93

, 1301–1313.*Wei, L. Q., & Lau, C. M. (2012). Effective teamwork at the top: The evidence from China.

The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23

, 1853–1870.*Wei, L. Q., & Wang, Z. H. (2002). Empirical study on the relationship between characteristics of TMTs and firm performance of Chinese businesses.

Nankai Business Review,5

(4), 16–22.[魏立群, 王智慧. (2002). 我國(guó)上市公司高管特征與企業(yè)績(jī)效的實(shí)證研究.

南開管理評(píng)論, 5

(4), 16–22.]*Wei, L. Q., & Wu, L. Z. (2013). What a diverse top management team means: Testing an integrated model.

Journal of Management Studies, 50

, 389–412.*Wei, X. K. (2006). Relationships between top management team characteristics and firm R&D investment.

Studies in Science of Science, 24

(S2), 553–557.[韋小柯. (2006). 高層管理團(tuán)隊(duì)特征與企業(yè) R&D投入關(guān)系研究.

科學(xué)學(xué)研究, 24

(S2), 553–557.]*Wei, X. H., & Liu, Y. M. (2014). A mediated moderation analysis of the relations among past performance, team efficacy and team conflict.

Science of Science and Management of S. & T., 35

(9), 152–160.[衛(wèi)旭華, 劉詠梅. (2014). 團(tuán)隊(duì)過往績(jī)效、效能感與沖突關(guān)系研究.

科學(xué)學(xué)與科學(xué)技術(shù)管理, 35

(9), 152–160.]*Welbourne, T. M., Cycyota, C. S., & Ferrante, C. J. (2007).Wall street reaction to women in ipos an examination of gender diversity in top management teams.

Group &Organization Management, 32

, 524–547.*Wiersema, M. F., & Bird, A. (1993). Organizational demography in Japanese firms: Group heterogeneity,individual dissimilarity, and top management team turnover.

Academy of Management Journal, 36

, 996–1025.Williams, K. Y., & O'Reilly, C. A. (1998). Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research.

Research in Organizational Behavior, 20

, 77–140.

*Wu, B., & Huang, M. F. (2011). Firm performance, human

resources' characteristics of senior managers and control right allocation: Evidence from small and medium board's venture enterprises in China.

China Soft Science,

(4), 161–174.[吳斌, 黃明峰. (2011). 企業(yè)績(jī)效, 高管人力資本特征與控制權(quán)配置——基于我國(guó)中小企業(yè)板風(fēng)險(xiǎn)企業(yè)的經(jīng)驗(yàn)數(shù)據(jù).

中國(guó)軟科學(xué),

(4), 161–174.]*Xiao, T., Liu, H., & Ye, F. (2013). An empirical study on relation between TMT heterogeneity and business model innovation performance: Evidence from listed service firms.

China Soft Science,

(8), 125–135.[肖挺, 劉華, 葉芃. (2013). 高管團(tuán)隊(duì)異質(zhì)性與商業(yè)模式創(chuàng)新績(jī)效關(guān)系的實(shí)證研究: 以服務(wù)行業(yè)上市公司為例.

中國(guó)軟科學(xué),

(8), 125–135.]*Xue, H. Z. (2011). Founding team, formal structure, and new ventures performance.

Journal of Management Science,24

(1), 1–10.[薛紅志. (2011). 創(chuàng)業(yè)團(tuán)隊(duì), 正式結(jié)構(gòu)與新企業(yè)績(jī)效.

管理科學(xué), 24

(1), 1–10.]*Xue, Y. Z., & Li, G. D. (2009). Empirical study on internationalization strategy implementation and top management composition.

Chinese Journal of Management,6

, 1478–1485.[薛有志, 李國(guó)棟. (2009). 國(guó)際化戰(zhàn)略實(shí)施與高層管理團(tuán)隊(duì)構(gòu)成實(shí)證研究.

管理學(xué)報(bào), 6

, 1478–1485.]*Yang, J., Tian, L., Zhang, Y. L., & Wang, W. Y. (2010).Innovation or imitation: The role of entrepreneurial teams'experience heterogeneity and conflicts.

Management World,

(3), 84–96.[楊俊, 田莉, 張玉利, 王偉毅. (2010). 創(chuàng)新還是模仿: 創(chuàng)業(yè)團(tuán)隊(duì)經(jīng)驗(yàn)異質(zhì)性與沖突特征的角色.

管理世界,

(3), 84–96.]*Yap, C. M., Chai, K. H., & Lemaire, P. (2005). An empirical study on functional diversity and innovation in SMEs.

Creativity and Innovation Management, 14

, 176–190.*Zeng, P., & Wu, Q. H. (2012). The impact of female executives participation on technological innovation: Evidence from Chinese GEM companies.

Studies in Science of Science,30

(5), 773–781.[曾萍, 鄔綺虹. (2012). 女性高管參與對(duì)企業(yè)技術(shù)創(chuàng)新的影響——基于創(chuàng)業(yè)板企業(yè)的實(shí)證研究.

科學(xué)學(xué)研究, 30

(5),773–781.]*Zhang,G., & Xiong, L. (2009). Member diversity and team performance: The transactive memory system as a medium variable.

Science Research Management, 30

(1), 71–80.[張鋼, 熊立. (2009). 成員異質(zhì)性與團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效: 以交互記憶系統(tǒng)為中介變量.

科研管理, 30

(1), 71–80.]*Zhang, L., Ji, W., Tao, J. L., & Wang, Q. (2011). Who shall leave? How CEO preference and power affect executive turnover in Chinese listed companies.

Corporate Governance:An International Review, 19

, 547–561.*Zhang, L., & Liu, H. (2009). The effect of the dissimilarities in population characteristics in the vrtical leadership in top management teams on top management leaving office.

Management World,

(4), 108–118.[張龍, 劉洪. (2009). 高管團(tuán)隊(duì)中垂直對(duì)人口特征差異對(duì)高管離職的影響.

管理世界,

(4), 108–118.]*Zhang, P. (2006). Research on top management team heterogeneity and firm performance.

Management Review,18

(5), 54–61.[張平. (2006). 高層管理團(tuán)隊(duì)異質(zhì)性與企業(yè)績(jī)效關(guān)系研究.

管理評(píng)論, 18

(5), 54–61.]*Zhang, Y., & Hou, L. (2012). The romance of working together:Benefits of gender diversity on group performance in China.

Human Relations, 65

, 1487–1508.*Zhang, Y., & Zhang, Z. (2012). The influence of gender diversity on group performance and creativity.

Science Research Management, 33

(3), 81–88.[張燕, 章振. (2012). 性別多樣性對(duì)團(tuán)隊(duì)績(jī)效和創(chuàng)造力影響的研究.

科研管理, 33

(3), 81–88.]*Zhou, J., & Li, X. Q. (2012). Empirical study on the effect of cognitive heterogeneity of board on firm innovation strategy.

Journal of Management Science, 25

(6), 1–12.[周建, 李小青. (2012). 董事會(huì)認(rèn)知異質(zhì)性對(duì)企業(yè)創(chuàng)新戰(zhàn)略影響的實(shí)證研究.

管理科學(xué), 25

(6), 1–12.]*Zona, F. (2014). Board leadership structure and diversity over CEO time in office: A test of the evolutionary perspective on italian firms.

European Management Journal, 32

, 672–681.*Zoogah, D. B., Vora, D., Richard, O., & Peng, M. W. (2011).Strategic alliance team diversity, coordination, and effectiveness.

The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22

, 510–529.

附錄 元分析中所涉及的期刊及其論文數(shù)