Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Leadership of Cultural Diversity
Leadership of Cultural Diversity
Doctoral dissertation
Rector Magnificus
Promotor:
Prof.dr. D. L. van Knippenberg
Co-promotor:
Dr. D. A. Stam
Other members:
Prof.dr. D. van Dierendonck
Prof.dr. S. R. Giessner
Prof.dr. E. Kearney
I
Acknowledgement
First and foremost I would like to express my deeply-felt thanks to my Ph.D. ad-
visors, for supporting me during this journey. I am extremely grateful to my main super-
visor Prof. D. L. van Knippenberg whose joy and enthusiasm for his research was conta-
gious and extremely motivational for me. His selfless time and care were sometimes all
that kept me going. I could not have imagined having a better advisor and mentor for my
Ph.D. study. Also, I would like to say a very big thank you to my co-supervisor D. A.
Stam. I appreciate all his contributions of time and ideas to make my Ph.D. experience
enjoyable. I am grateful for the opportunity to learn from his knowledge and experience.
approach in general. Words cannot express how thankful I am for the constant feedback
and thoughtful guidance. It has been a privilege to work with both and the patience with
me were always appreciated. I never would have been able to get this far without the
For this dissertation I would also like to thank the members of my defense com-
mittee, for their time and insightful questions. Special thanks also goes out to everybody
Finally, I would like to thank my family for all their love and unconditional en-
couragement. My parents have been so supportive and I would not have been able to
complete a Ph.D. without them. The moral and technical support and the amazing chances
I am indebted to all my friends for never letting me doubt myself and for remind-
ing me there is a world outside of my Ph.D. Special thanks to the Anguiano’s, whose
faithful support during all stages of this Ph.D. is so appreciated. Thank you.
II
Table of content
Cultural Diversity................................................................................................................... 8
Chapter 3: Cultural team diversity and group performance: The moderating effect of leader
cultural background and tenure ....................................................................................... 29
Abstract ................................................................................................................................ 29
Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 29
Method ................................................................................................................................. 37
Measures .......................................................................................................................... 39
Results .................................................................................................................................. 40
3
Discussion ............................................................................................................................ 42
Limitations ....................................................................................................................... 45
In Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 45
Chapter 4: Cultural Dissimilarity and Psychological Safety: The Moderating Role of Leader
Interactional Fairness and Leader Group Prototypicality ............................................... 53
Abstract ................................................................................................................................ 53
Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 54
Method ................................................................................................................................. 63
Measures .............................................................................................................................. 65
Results .................................................................................................................................. 66
Discussion ............................................................................................................................ 68
Limitations ....................................................................................................................... 70
In Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 71
Theoretical implications................................................................................................... 78
4
Practical Implications....................................................................................................... 79
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 80
References ............................................................................................................................ 81
5
Table of tables
Table of figures
Figure 1: The interaction between team cultural diversity and leader cultural background ... 49
Figure 2: The interaction between team cultural diversity and leader tenure .......................... 50
Figure 3a: Interaction between team cultural diversity and leader cultural background for
leaders with low tenure ............................................................................................................ 51
Figure 3b: Interaction between team cultural diversity and leader cultural background for
leaders with high tenure ........................................................................................................... 52
Figure 5: The interaction between cultural dissimilarity (CD) and interpersonal fairness ...... 72
Figure 6: The interaction between cultural dissimilarity (CD) and leader group prototypicality
.................................................................................................................................................. 73
6
Chapter 1: Introduction & Thesis Overview
Introduction
Multinational companies more than ever face rapid and drastic changes in society which
also affect the economic and social environment. Furthermore these processes encompasses
the company itself, the community of staff members and customers. As parameters, global
megatrends dictate the direction of company development. These megatrends include globali-
zation and internationalization, the transformation in demographics and the value system, the
societal challenge of the advancement of minority groups in executive positions, and establish-
An enhanced leadership culture is one of the key instruments for coping with these
challenges over the long term, because leaders have the ability to directly influence team mem-
bers (van Knippenberg, van Ginkel, & Homan, 2013; cf. Hackman, 2002; Kozlowski & Bell,
2003). Yet, to be able to manage diverse teams in the best way and increase team performance
leaders require a good understanding of the causes of attitudes and behaviors of individuals
and teams.
more diverse especially in terms of cultural background. Cultural diversity, therefore, is a crit-
ical factor to investigate and the core of the current dissertation. Culturally diverse teams have
the potential to bring benefits to the organization, caused by the expectation that different back-
grounds may foster higher levels of performance (Ilgen et al., 2005). Culturally team diversity
in organizations results in broader knowledge, expertise, and diverse perspectives that may lead
to more creative and innovative strategies to problems, higher-quality decisions, and overall
Even though the organization may benefit from team diversity, 50 years of diversity
7
research shows that team diversity may be associated with conflict and non-optimal team per-
formance (Williams & O’Reilly, 1998; van Knippenberg & Schippers, 2007). Team diversity
in that sense can be beneficial and detrimental to the organization at the same time (Milliken
& Martins, 1996), and a key question for management is how to manage team diversity in the
best way. Therefore, defining what kind of leader characteristics drives team performance and
which leadership characteristics foster the positive outcomes of diversity in cultural diverse
teams is more and more crucial for organizations. Thus the research question of this dissertation
is:
Cultural Diversity
Cultural diversity is particular pertinent to organizations which are having and doing
business in a competitive international business environment (Jackson & Alvarez, 1992). Com-
panies have access to a pool of local and foreign workers, who bring different expertise, beliefs
and knowledge to the team (Cox & Blake, 1991; Kirkman & Shapiro, 1997), because with
2007). The term cultural diversity in this dissertation refers to diversity in nationality. The na-
tional origin is characterized by the institutional setting of the individual’s home in which they
lived mostly in their formative years (f. Hambrick et al., 1998). Therefore nationality is an
essential and central component of individuals’ identity and describes the diversification based
on country and origin, which tends to be a high salient characteristic compared to other de-
mographics (Hambrick et al., 1998). Add to the above that research found that national culture
has solid impact on feelings, acting of leaders and strategic thinking (Geletkanycz, 1997;
Schneider and DeMeyer, 1991) cultural diversity is clearly a critical factor for organizations to
8
understand and master.
Unfortunately prior research has also shown that (cultural) diversity often has negative
& O’Reilly, 1998; van Knippenberg & Schippers, 2007). Thus, in order to leverage the poten-
tial of cultural diversity it must be handled. We investigate two important instances of negative
effects of cultural diversity and discuss how these can be managed. First, in chapter 3, we take
a team level perspective and investigate how variation in nationality in teams (i.e. cultural di-
versity of teams) negatively affects team performance. Then, in chapter 4 we take an individual
level perspective and investigate how cultural differences between individuals and their fellow
team members (i.e. cultural dissimilarity) may negatively impact feelings of psychological
well as engaging team members to accomplish their goals (Yukl, 2006). Inspiration, as well as
motivation and enthusiasm is crucial for success. Therefore, gaining a better understanding of
which leadership characteristics will expand and strengthen these elements that create a spirit
of shared commitment, use abilities to generate enthusiasm and confidence as well as inspire
Managers act against the background of their company’s organization, which in turn is
determined by structure, strategy and culture factors. Alignment of these factors against each
other and a good balance between these three parameters is decisive for the success of the
organization. Therefore, leaders are faced to balance company and team objectives as well as
lead individuals who are diverse in several aspects e.g. working styles, educational and cultural
background. Both, leaders and team members have to deal with increasing complexity and fast
9
of individuals, in order to align actions. Thus, team performance is contingent upon efficient
leadership. Especially in view of the notion that leadership is the most flexible influence that
organizations can bring to bear in their attempts to manage team (cultural) diversity (van Knip-
penberg, van Ginkel, & Homan, 2013; cf. Hackman, 2002; Kozlowski & Bell, 2003).
Furthermore, it is arguable that leadership is one of the most important elements of the
acteristics are beneficial to teams, especially in cultural diverse ones is needed. Particularly,
we propose that certain leadership characteristics, like leader cultural background and tenure
(Chapter 3) and leader interpersonal fairness and leader group prototypicality (Chapter 4) can
argue that the outcome of cultural diverse teams on team performance is more positive with a
leader who is non-native to the host country than with a local leader, and that this effect would
mainly be observed for leaders with shorter tenure with the team. Stronger cultural expertise in
leading teams in a cultural diverse environment, as well as working with partners in growth
With new market challenges and globalization comes an unprecedented societal cultural
diversity – with opportunities and risks for every organization that operates in these societies.
Employees who deal with the development of innovations, products and markets, should be as
multifaceted as the future markets of the specific international target groups on which products
and services focus. This presents multinational organizations its leadership with challenges,
but also conceals great opportunities because diversity among the workforce, taking action is
the foundation of a global, targeted, and market-specific development of the future. This im-
plies that leaders will satisfy new demands for multilingualism and intercultural competence
(Bartlett and Ghoshal, 2003). In particular, their pronounced ability to integrate and adapt to
other cultures, organizations, rules, ideologies, and specialized topics will be required.
10
As a key skill of the leadership culture, change management takes on a new meaning
because change will be a continuous companion of economic activity. Talent management will
take new forms because potential labor markets and required skills are changing considerably.
Accordingly, diversity of the workforce is becoming a strategic priority for most multinational
organization. Leaders and their various teams may occasionally need more time to find a solu-
tion due to the identification and evaluation of any conflicting aspects, this development in
corporate and leadership culture will be a critical competitive advantage in the future. Moreo-
ver fostering diverse talents requires a special openness, the ability to integrate, as well as lead-
ing employees with different social and cultural backgrounds– completely new demands for
many executives.
Therefore we examined that certain leader characteristics play an important role in un-
derstanding the leadership process of cultural diverse teams and gives a better understanding
on diversity and leadership. We draw on the social identity perspective and identified both
leader interpersonal fairness and leader group prototypicality as such attenuating influences on
cultural diverse teams. It is arguable that leadership as one of the most crucial determinant of
team success or failure. Thus, we investigate in these components to gain a better understanding
lead a company into the future, as well as to preserve and expand the high level of appeal both
locally and on the international labor market. While further developing and adapting strengths,
it is necessary to build leaders’ technical quality combined with behavioral values. Leadership
behavior secure success of team and company performance especially when parameters and
requirements change in the future. Moreover, it is crucial for leaders to have strong abilities,
which take into account the transformation in a certain industry and expectations of employees.
Furthermore leaders need shape a culture that calls for and permits a high diversity of ideas,
11
viewpoints, interpretations, and solutions. This is a foundation for being able to exploit re-
make the people taking action more successful and satisfied over the long term, it will foster
diversity and versatility, will accelerate the sustainable implementation of innovative ideas and
Thesis overview
In addition to the current introductory chapter, this dissertation consists of one business
case, two empirical chapters and a final chapter where I summarize the findings and present
In order to benefit from team diversity, organizations have to actively manage diversity,
sented in chapter two as a best practice business case of a multinational company. The goals of
this chapter is to provide an overview of those areas of diversity management most in need of
Chapter three investigates in leadership and cultural diversity in teams. Little is known
about the influence of team leaders (see e.g., van Dijk, van Engen, & van Knippenberg, 2012),
but considering the large impact leaders have on team members’ performance and attitude lead-
ership may play a crucial role in leveraging the effects of cultural diversity in multinational
organizations. Specifically we look at the impact of team leader cultural background and leader
tenure on team performance in this chapter. We specifically argue that foreign leaders (as op-
posed to local leaders) are better positioned to lead culturally diverse teams because of their
cross-cultural experiences. At the same time we argue that leader tenure can also provide cross-
cultural experiences that can help local leaders bridge the gap with foreign leaders in terms of
12
effectively managing cultural diversity. Chapter three adds to the understanding of leadership
of diversity by focusing on leader’s diversity attributes, but also adds to the understanding that
diverse teams need time to learn to make use of their team diversity (Earley & Mosakowski,
2000).
Chapter four takes an individual level perspective on the issues concerned with cultural
diversity. It specifically deals with the perceived psychological safety of team members in cul-
tural diverse teams. Taking a relational demography perspective which suggests that more dis-
similar members’ are particularly at risk in terms of lower levels of psychological safety, we
studied to which extent leader characteristics may reduce these negative effects of cultural dis-
similarity on team members’ psychological safety. Specifically we argue that leader interac-
tional fairness and leader prototypicality may diminish the negative relation between cultural
dissimilarity and psychological safety because they communicate to the individual that (s)he is
valued as a group member. This contributes to the literature on leading diversity research, the
crucial moderating influence of leadership on the relation between cultural dissimilarity and
ences (as opposed to only team diversity) for leadership of cultural diversity.
The final chapter includes an overview of the findings of the empirical chapters and
13
Chapter 2: Business Case - Diversity Management at a Multinational Com-
pany
The purpose of this chapter is to provide the context of the research on leadership and
that we investigate in later chapters deals with diversity. In the last decades various develop-
ments on national and international levels have led to the fact that the topic ‘diversity’, both
from a moral as well as from an economic perspective has become indispensable. In the future
by the progressive globalization, demographic patterns and by various political and legal
frameworks. The following chapter describes significant demographic changes, as well as legal
and economic developments which shows various perspectives and approaches for diversity
Introduction
The following chapter illustrates the development of diversity management with its main action
fields and its starting points for strategy implementation, by looking at the best practices of
diversity management measures of the focal company of this dissertation, which is a globally
active aviation group comprising of more than 500 subsidiaries and affiliates. We do so with
two goals in mind. First, investigating the current practices of the company provides us with
important insights into what areas of diversity management deserve more research attention to
help the company improve its diversity management. As such this chapter drives the focus of
later chapters. Second, the current chapter provides an overview of the company and its prac-
14
The Company and its Diversity Management
Air transportation connects people around the globe and enables the positive exchange
of goods, ideas and cultures. While the core business remains air travel, the organization has
created a network of globally positioned segments rooted in numerous aspects of the aviation
industry. Other key segments are international scheduled freight transport, aircraft mainte-
nance, repair and overhaul services, information technology services and worldwide airline
catering. Around 120,000 people are employed worldwide with about 150 different nationali-
ties based in 84 countries. With around 50,000 employees working outside of the headquartered
country, the organization can be defined as a global player doing business around the world.
Especially global acting companies to which a diverse workforce comes naturally know best
about challenges in international markets and special needs of the customers worldwide. Ex-
amples for globalization within the economic sector are international production, capital flow
with no regards to borders and new communication tools. Globalization requires more cooper-
ation among people from diverse cultural backgrounds and experiences. The worldwide com-
petition is high and therefore an organization requires diversity to be more creative, innovative
and efficient.
must to use the benefits of diversity. Diversity also supports in defining the wishes of interna-
tional customers in the best way, because their needs are reflected in a diverse workforce of a
multinational company. Diversity in the workplace has the potential to bring lots of advantages
advantages (William & O'Reilly, 1998). But benefiting and managing diversity in an effective
way is challenging. Thus the company has to contribute a lot. Therefore it is essential that
diversity management is included in the corporate culture and in the human resource structure.
15
Corporate HRM is managed centrally. To secure high quality and modern exposures within
each area of human resources businesses, a variety of divisions belong to the organizational
chart of the central function. Due to the complexity of the company, local human resource
departments are implemented, which have their own responsibilities and ways of implementing
Trends like demographic change, globalization and individualization inspire the mar-
kets of most multinational companies and present new challenges. The international position-
ing of a company verifies awareness towards necessary adaptions in order to stay competitive.
Political and economic actions have influences on the decision of a company to produce abroad.
A multinational company has to demonstrate the ability to adapt to such changes by positioning
its business segments in the most important markets. The ability to operate not only interna-
tionally but also profitably can be connected to the decentralized organization of the presented
company structure. Each segment knows its competitors and the current development best and
can adjust its activities to market challenges in the most efficient way. These trends also show
that it is necessary to have a holistic design and initiatives in all areas of diversity management
These facts, changing society and economy illustrate the need of diversity management
petitiveness of a global player will depend on the design of the corporate company culture and
the products, which have to meet the requirements of the markets and the society around the
world. A global acting company in the service industry is characterized by the diversity of its
groups of customers. In the following best practices and a variety of established diversity meas-
urements in order to strengthen the company culture of diversity will be described. Diversity
16
is perceived as a chance to fulfil the variegated customer needs at an optimal level and moreo-
ver attract new customers, as well as to implement a long term strategy and produce an added
The company designed a holistic diversity concept which fosters the attraction, recruit-
ment and retention of employees. Reinforcement of creativity and innovation is another goal
of the company’s diversity management. The aim of establishing a diversity management strat-
egy is to install a long term strategy in order to produce a proactive human resources manage-
ment based on general diversity management agreements. To manage all diversity topics across
the company a department within the central function of the human resources management
Strengthen visibility of the diverse workforce and give exposure to diverse talents
Spread diversity philosophy across all business segments, functions and departments,
With the implementation of the overall diversity management strategy the same dimen-
sion in every country was established, whereby the focal points could differ from region to
region to adjust the conditions there. For example one of the focal points in the United States
is the promotion of ethnic minorities. In Asia the main area is women’s empowerment and to
17
transfer managerial responsibility to local managers. In South Africa there is a focus on in-
creasing cultural diversity balance and also to support disabled people in the workforce. In
Europe the first focus is more on gender diversity in management positions followed by cultural
and demographic diversity. Every employee makes an important contribution to the company’s
success. Therefore integrating them is a key aim of the human resources policy, which is an-
Due to the fact that the company is headquartered in Europe, the corporate measures
are based on European trends and regulations. Diversity management in Europe is supported
by law, due to the Equal Treatment Directive, which is an act of the European Union (Federal
Anti- Discrimination Agency, 2000). The European Union members made the anti-discrimina-
tion rules to their national goal. The aim of the law is to support the prevention of discrimina-
tion by gender, culture, age, ethnical background, religion, disability etc. Although diversity
management illustrates an economic concept first and foremost, the equality act law gives
many organizations a cause to establish a diversity management strategy in order to meet the
goals of the law by this. Next to the political law there exist also corporate policy guidelines
like employment agreements to ensure fairness and equality at the workplace. Germany is a
country with a drastic aging population as well as on of the countries in Europe with the largest
shares of workers with a foreign nationality across Europe. Therefore Germany plays particular
attention in this chapter. Hereafter the main action fields of a multinational company are pre-
Gender diversity stands for equal opportunities of women and men at the workplace.
49.6 percent of the world population are women (Population Reference Bureau, 2015). But by
18
looking at the world labor market this result is not reflected in many countries around the world.
Gender gaps persist even in some of the most developed countries (Population Reference Bu-
reau, 2015). For example in Europe just 8.4 percent of women belong to the Board of Manage-
ment (Heidrick and Struggles, 2007). In Germany 46 percent of the employees are female (The
Federal Employment Agency, 2012). 20 percent of them are in the position with managerial
responsibility (Hoppenstedt Analyse, 2012). But just 3.4 percent women in Germany belong to
the management board (FiDAR e.V., 2012) although 50 percent of the graduates are female
(Population Reference Bureau, 2015). In addition most of the women between the age of 25
and 35 in Germany leave the labor market to focus on the family live, because the compatibility
of family and career has a lot of barriers (The Federal Employment Agency, 2011). Studies
have shown that companies profit from gender balance in the workforce and also in manage-
ment positions. One proof for this hypothesis could be the “women matter” study (Devillard,
S., Graven, W., Lawson, E., Paradise, R. & Sancier- Sultan, S., 2012) which reveal that women
in leadership positions contribute to better results of the company’s economic success. Further-
more the implementations of an efficient leadership mix may increase the overall company
performance (McKinsey, 2007; Daily and Dalton, 2003b; Population Reference Bureau, 2015;
Carter et al. 2003). To really make use of the full potential of resources available, a high rep-
resentation of women throughout the value chain may be beneficial in order to bring different
views and ideas to the table (Fondas and Sassalos, 2000) and furthermore broaden their network
Therefore one main focus of diversity management lies on the action field gender di-
versity. Furthermore one core theme within this action field is to increase the proportion of
women in general, specifically in executive positions. The goal is to fill the gender gap and to
eliminate the barriers in the women’s career path. In order to increase the percentage of females
19
in management positions targets with a certain proportion of percentage of women in manage-
ment positions throughout the organization within five years were set. In addition to that plenty
of measures were introduced to improve gender balance. For example development programs
especially for women who aspire a management position were designed and implemented.
Furthermore future female potentials will be trained in topics like networking competencies,
self-management and career aspiration trainings. Special function capability building programs
complete the concept of fostering women in leadership positions, which take local needs and
requirements into account. A further example to support the implementation of gender diversity
is the concept of mentoring, which was identified as a success factor for career development
throughout the company. Generally successful mentorship relations are started either in the
scope of a formal company program or through an individual‘s own initiative reaching out to
someone they see as a valuable guide to provide feedback and advice. The formal mentorship
program offers female employees of the next generation a special development program, which
broaden the horizon and knowledge through insights in different functions and businesses
across the globe. Mentors from varies business segments and functions act as a sparring partner.
A further component of the gender diversity action field is the offer of family-friendly
programs, which leads to rising stock prices, on average by 0.5 percent (Preecea & Filbeckb,
1999). The compatibility of family and work can be supported by e.g. offering part time jobs,
job sharing, home office and childcare facilities. Through these measures the company will not
lose the qualified women just because of the family planning. In addition to that, the company
has more employer attractiveness and will get more applicants for vacancies and enables the
firm to attract the best employees available on the market. Another opportunity to charm the
labor force is to retrieve retired employees. They have a high expertise and experience which
is essential for the company and furthermore train the next generation. The company also sup-
ports the concept leading in part-time by offering this possibility it enables future potentials a
20
better work life balance which leads to higher engagement and flexibility in times with high
Organizations also face challenges of the demographic changes like shortage of skilled
labor e.g. in Europe (European Parliament 2015). One aspect of this effect is the continuous
ing), the shortage is very serious. Already today the non-filling of vacant engineering jobs
brought about an economic damage of a seven digit euro amount (Dierig, 2009). Therefore
diversity management is seen as an instrument to counter the shortage of skilled labor (Vedder,
2011). The variety of every employee is seen as a key factor to foster a corporate culture which
invites every gender, age and ethnical/cultural backgrounds. Furthermore through the aging
population it will be more difficult to attract qualified personal in Europe and especially in
Germany. Next to preventive health management at the workplace, which functions as reten-
tion of the employability and performance ability, there is also a need for a work life balance,
lifelong learning as well as individual performance. In addition to this the company pays special
attention to the relationship between younger employees and older ones to use the generation
spanning synergies. These tasks are supported by the diversity management department.
In the struggle to recruit young workers and talent, companies have to adapt to accom-
modate the new generations. Here, with its demand for ‘life while working’ instead of ‘working
the key. More than ever before, the appeal of an employer for this generation of people born
since 1981 depends on such factors as flexible working conditions and career options, a good
21
working environment and an optimum style of leadership, as well as the granting of room for
creativity and the communication of meaningfulness. At the same time, experienced and older
suitable and attractive employment for all staff members, qualifications, models and forms of
As a global player a cultural diverse workforce and cross-cultural teams is one success
factor of achieving targets within the organization and has forced companies to develop ser-
vices worldwide. Globalization goes along with the intensification of the competitive context
between the countries, regions and the companies and facilities an increasingly interconnected
world. It also offers the chance to live in a world where cultural and regional borders are elim-
inated, but also requires profound knowledge of foreign cultures. Due to globalization the
workforce gets more cultural heterogeneous which may facilitate diverse knowledge and per-
spectives as well as new ways of solving problems. The economic interrelations lead to the fact
that managers have to act on international terrain. Managerial decisions just can be accom-
plished with an excellent knowledge of global management, international relations, and cul-
tural values in combination with the social competency to act around the world (Bartlett &
Ghoshbal, 2003). Thus, cultural diversity also ensures a better understanding of local markets
and enables multinational companies to get closer to customers and partners in the markets
Concerning to cultural diversity of the workforce there is a high potential to use this
diverse knowledge for economic success. Especially in the field of international cooperation
where it is essential to ensure the access to new markets and to develop target-group-specific
22
products on a worldwide basis. Therefore the work environment and the sales markets are turn-
ing to more internationality. To get to know and to deal with political backgrounds and cultural
values local employees are required especially in the new and emerging markets. A cultural
To benefit from cultural diversity the top priority has to be respect and appreciation for
other cultures and religions, which means more than merely tolerating diversity. Appreciation
means understanding and acceptation. With this in mind there is an international orientated
corporate culture that needs to be established because cultural diversity not only affects busi-
ness management but also diversity policies and multinational companies. The corporate cul-
ture should contribute to the commitment of employees to their company and to their goals. A
common model and understanding of leadership will give orientation, but should not lead to
deracination of cultures. As mentioned previously companies may benefit from cultural diver-
sity, which has to be shaped and used by diversity management in order to diminish negative
effects which may occur and cannot be ignored (Ely and Thomas, 2001). Multinational com-
panies are forced to be innovative and better than the competition. Therefore new and emerging
markets are entered in order to offer products abroad, addresses new customers regionally and
internationally to increase the market shares and recruit high potentials to be also successful
a sense of a diverse group of customers as well as a scope for employees. Cultural diversity
balance is one of the main focus areas worldwide, because employees and customer across the
globe are culturally diverse. Multinational companies are acting globally and the world should
be represented in the workforce of these companies in order to drive the business successfully.
Thus cultural diversity in this context is used as a competitive edge. Employees should reflected
23
in their wide variety of experiences, skills and perspectives the diversity of the customers, sup-
pliers, investors and the overall environment. In regards to the globalization, international
growth and needs in the international markets “cultural diversity” advances to the focal point.
To meet these requirements the company has to show this diversity in its different way of
working and thinking, in its social competencies, in its professional expertise and in their meth-
to raise even more the attractiveness of a company as an employer. The so called “Generation
X” and “Generation Y” are already stamped by the improved opportunities to collect experi-
ences abroad. In addition to that they were able to build contacts in other countries. These
experiences are leading to the strengthened wish of younger employees to work in a multicul-
As a first step to foster mutual understanding between the different cultures and make
use of intercultural competencies plenty of events and workshops were designed in order to
understand different cultures, customs and religions of employees who are coming from other
countries. These ‘awareness days, culture dialogues and cultural diversity at work’ initiatives,
point out the benefits of cross-cultural teams and explain how to manage this effectively. The
tions. Example given, international short term assignments are part of all graduate program
across the group. The career development within the company is facilitated by expatriation and
impartation. Insights into different cultures advances cross cultural collaboration, increases
24
Discussion and conclusion
to understand that cultural diversity is an asset. The main aim of managing cultural diversity is
to decrease intercultural conflicts and increase intercultural synergies. For successful Diversity
Management, clarity on aspiration and business case, holistic set of tailored measures and ex-
ecution as a transformational journey are key. Different arguments can support the business
case for diversity e.g. win the war for talent, improve performance and organizational health,
Leveraging diversity and fostering inclusion are beneficial for multinational companies,
and all stakeholders. As highlighted above addressing diversity successfully will lead to in-
creased effectiveness of the organization as a global organization and sustainable gain in cor-
porate reputation. In addition, diversity supports long-term business principles, that lead to a
world-class reputation as a fair partner in the field of diversity, where unique potential of each
employee is recognized, and changing needs of customers are immediately responded. The
main business goal is to maintain a workforce that reflects marketplace and fosters inclusion
of different cultural backgrounds and perspectives. Therefore the main actions fields described
above were established in order to meet business objectives. This helps to address diversity and
to increase the effectiveness of a global organization as the company fosters customer orienta-
tion and relationship cultural differences and knowledge has to be leveraged worldwide, as
well as openness to change has to be increased. Furthermore the establishment of the main
focus areas the maximum use of talent as a global company harness the full potential of the
workforce and enriches the professional expertise and personal skills of the employees as well
25
as broaden the access to labor markets which improves employer image, attract and retain best
talent.
To have a workforce that reflects the marketplaces thus maximizing the understanding
of and responsiveness to the changing needs of the customers is beneficial for the organization.
The goal is to have a culture that fosters the inclusion of different backgrounds and perspec-
tives, thus making the most of the unique potential of each of the employees. Additionally,
diversity supports the strategic approach of people management across the organization. An
open-minded culture will connect and unite the workforce globally and will provide additional
credibility to the employer brand. Valuing the differences of employees will lead to increased
loyalty and commitment. Moreover, focusing on the individual results of each employee will
enhance the consistency of performance management and broaden the potential pipeline.
Therefore a group-wide framework as described above was established, which ensures the ef-
The approach consists of action steps, guiding principles, and fundamentals. The action
fields build the fundamentals form for leveraging diversity and fostering inclusion. They are
important prerequisites for achieving the goals in the action fields. They show that the multi-
national company will not tolerate discrimination or harassment in the workplace based on
criteria such as age, disability, ethnic origin, gender, race, religion or sexual orientation. The
company fosters a learning culture in which feedback from all stakeholders is encouraged and
appreciated and focuses on performance and potential of employees as the only criteria for
professional development. The diversity measures set operative objectives and define action
The diversity network is facilitated on a Group-level and provides supportive tools for
the other Group Companies that coordinate their activities globally or regionally. Thus, guiding
principles require a global approach in a world-wide organization like the one we conducted
26
the survey. However, regional and local contexts with regard to diversity should be taken into
account. To initiate and drive a long-term organizational and cultural process, open communi-
cation, commitment and involvement of all managers and employees is required. Together with
local human resources functions, line managers are responsible to integrate an open mind-set
in everyday business activities. According to the group diversity framework, the responsibility
for initiating and driving the strategic change process lies within our operating entitles. Their
strategies and action plans will support the group diversity goals and shall be aligned through
a commonly defined process and key action fields mentioned above. In order to ensure sustain-
ability and ultimately increase business success, specific key areas are likely to be involved in
the change process. human resource functions will be the driving forces in this process, aligned
with and supported by communication functions. Over time, the business units will reap bene-
fits from diversity in the action fields of products and markets. The success of the implemen-
tation of diversity depends on the ability to acknowledge local context factors as well as global
linkages. In order to ensure sustainability and ultimately increase business success, Human
Resource functions will be the driving forces, aligned with and supported by communication
In the past years various developments on national and international level influenced
the topic of diversity management, both from a moral as well as from an economic point of
view. Human Resource Management will be shaped especially by the progressive globaliza-
tion, demographic patterns and of various political and legal framework. The right balance
between homogeneity and heterogeneity relates to the inner and external diversity. The imple-
mented measures of diversity management in regards to the challenges which are arising espe-
cially in the fields of gender, age and cultural diversity need to be continuously addressed and
27
A final conclusion from this context chapter pertains to the areas of diversity manage-
ment that would benefit the company mostly. First, given the impact of globalization on a mul-
tinational company’s workforce, the fact that cultural diversity is a prime drive of so many
business units across the globe, and the fact that the company has less measures and manage-
ment practices in place to deal with a culturally diverse workforce, cultural diversity seems a
primary diversity dimension to investigate further. As a consequence the next two chapters
investigate cultural differences on the group level (team cultural diversity) and the individual
level (cultural dissimilarity). Second, the measures and management practices implemented by
the company, like workshops, and events, focus on individual employees and creating aware-
ness and tolerance for cultural diversity. However, more structural measures that influence di-
versity management are lacking. Moreover, a focus on and appreciation of cultural diversity
focus on the influence of a structural factor, leadership, and how it can leverage the positive
side of diversity.
28
Chapter 3: Cultural team diversity and group performance: The moderat-
Abstract
By bringing team members with different cultural backgrounds together, the team can
benefit from this diversity and reach high levels of performance. While the argument for the
benefits of diversity might be intuitively tempting, the benefits in diversity are not easily
achieved. Diversity research has not paid attention to the role of leader demographic back-
ground in this respect. We argue that this is a nontrivial oversight because the potential positive
and negative outcomes of cultural diversity are influence by team leader cultural background
and tenure. Specifically, we predicted that the influence of team nationality diversity (a form
of cultural diversity) on team performance is more positive with a leader who is non-native to
the host country than with a local leader, and that this effect would mainly be observed for
leaders with shorter tenure with the team. Results from a survey of N = 66 teams (N = 336
individuals) from a multinational organization support these hypotheses, and inform our dis-
cussion of some of the ways forward in the study and management of culturally diverse teams.
Introduction
In the course of globalization and opening up new markets it is easy to recognize that
background. With growing internationalization and shift of businesses to new markets organi-
zations employ local and foreign workers as well as managers. Therefore cultural differences
in a team are becoming increasingly significant. In that sense multinational organizations are
forced to meet and manage the different needs of a diverse workforce. By having team mem-
bers with different backgrounds together, the team can benefit from this diversity and reach
29
levels of performance that are superior to those of individuals and less diverse teams (Ilgen,
Hollenbeck, Johnson, & Jundt, 2005). Nevertheless, 50 years of diversity research shows that
cross-cultural cooperation involves the danger of misunderstandings (Earley & Gibson, 2002)
and intergroup biases that disrupt team performance (Kooij-de Bode, van Knippenberg, & van
Ginkel, 2008, Williams & O’Reilly, 1998). Cultural background diversity may thus have pos-
itive as well as negative impacts on team performance (Nederveen Pieterse, van Knippenberg,
& van Dierendonck, 2013; van Knippenberg, De Dreu, & Homan, 2004). The benefits of cul-
tural diversity emerge when team members are encouraged to capitalie on their cross-cultural
learning opportunities (Ely & Thomas, 2001), while negative outcomes appear when intergroup
biases and interpersonal tensions stand in the way of effective collaboration (van Knippenberg
This realization that cultural diversity is a “double-edged sword” (Milliken & Martins,
1996) in its relationship with team performance puts a premium on understanding the contin-
gencies of the effects of cultural diversity on team performance (van Knippenberg & Schippers,
2007). In the present study, we contribute to the study of such contingencies by studying the
influence of one factor that is particularly tied in with team cultural diversity – team leader
cultural background. Team diversity research has paid notoriously little attention to the influ-
ence of team leaders (see e.g., van Dijk, van Engen, & van Knippenberg, 2012), and we do not
mean to suggest in any way that the influence of team leadership should be reduced to leader
cultural background. Because responses to culturally dissimilar others play such a central role
in accounts of the effects of team cultural diversity (e.g., Nederveen Pieterse et al., 2013), how-
ever, leader cultural background is an obvious and potentially important starting point for the
study of leadership of culturally diverse teams. It is worth research attention in its own right,
especially in view of the notion that leadership is the most flexible influence that organizations
30
can bring to bear in their attempts to manage team (cultural) diversity (van Knippenberg, van
Ginkel, & Homan, 2013; cf. Hackman, 2002; Kozlowski & Bell, 2003).
Attempts to understand how team cultural diversity affects team performance would
naturally arrive at the question how leader cultural background fits into this. Even in truly in-
ternational business with company presence in multiple countries around the world, the typical
situation is that the host culture/nationality in any given country is most strongly represented
in team composition (e.g., Tröster & van Knippenberg, 2012). The most basic way to think of
leader cultural background is thus in terms of whether the leader is “local” – from the host
country, and typically sharing the cultural background of the majority of members in most if
not all teams within that country – or “foreign” – from another country than the host country,
and thus holding a minority group background from the perspective of the members of most if
We propose that foreign leaders as compared with local leaders are by virtue of their
personal cross-cultural situation more attuned to cultural differences within the team and the
they are better positioned to deal with the challenges of leading a cultural diverse team – team
cultural diversity is more positively related to team performance with a foreign than with a
local leader. Are the teams of local leaders destined to underperform then? We do not believe
so and argue that in the same way that cross-cultural experiences position leaders well to lead
culturally diverse teams, over time – with greater leader team tenure – leaders may learn about
working with cultural diversity and become better positioned to lead a diverse team regardless
of their cultural background (cf. Harrison, Price, & Bell, 1998); team cultural diversity is more
positively related to team performance with higher team leader tenure. Given the processes
behind the above two effects are both related to experiences and learning to lead culturally
diverse teams, in combination, this implies a three-way interactive influence: the leadership
31
advantage of foreign leaders in terms of leading culturally diverse teams to performance is
tional business (i.e., where cultural diversity is typically introduced in the form of nationality
diversity) by developing and testing theory about the influence of team leader cultural back-
ground – a factor that is inherently tied in with the very notion of cultural diversity. It thus also
has the potential to add to our understanding of leadership of diversity more generally by show-
ing that the leader’s own standing on the diversity attribute of interest matters. Moreover, our
focus on leader team tenure is not only important in developing our analysis of the reasons
when and why foreign leaders may have an advantage over local leaders, but also adds to the
evidence that diverse teams need time to learn to work with their diversity (Earley & Mosa-
kowski, 2000) and that this notion extends to the role of team leaders.
In the specific context of our empirical study, we use the term cultural diversity as it is
implies cultural diversity in that people are influenced by their national culture, but conceptu-
ally we should recognize that cultural diversity has a broader meaning to also include within-
nationality cultural differences between different ethnic groups (e.g., Ely & Thomas, 2001).
Drawing on this broader literature on cultural diversity (i.e., encompassing nationality diversity
as well as within-nationality ethnic diversity), it is safe to conclude that there is strong and
robust evidence of cultural diversity’s capacity to affect team performance both positively and
negatively. A concise summary of this evidence can be found in the most comprehensive meta-
32
analysis of the team diversity-team performance relationship to date (van Dijk et al., 2012).
This analysis shows that observed effects of cultural diversity range from negative to positive
the relationship between cultural diversity and team performance. This emphasis on moderat-
broadly, which has highlighted the contingent nature of diversity effects (van Knippenberg &
Schippers, 2007). This research also provides a clear account of why positive and negative
effects occur, and thus a solid basis to develop moderator analyses (van Knippenberg et al.,
2004).
Negative diversity effects are attributed to social categorization processes and associ-
ated similarity/attraction processes (Williams & O’Reilly, 1998). People tend to make distinc-
tions between ingroup members similar to self and outgroup members dissimilar to self. Such
“us-them” distinctions may invite intergroup biases favoring ingroup, which express them-
selves in more tense interpersonal relationships with dissimilar others, lower willingness to
communicate and collaborate with dissimilar others, and lower cohesiveness of and identifica-
tion with diverse teams. In short, such biases may disrupt team performance. Positive diversity
effects, on the other hand, are attributed to the informational diversity associated with dissim-
ilarities between people: people with different backgrounds know different things, have differ-
ent perspectives and experiences, etc., that all may add to the pool of task-relevant information
available to the team (Williams & O’Reilly, 1998). By drawing on this informational resource
provided by diversity, more diverse teams may outperform more homogeneous teams.
Both perspectives would clearly apply to cultural diversity. Cultural differences are a
well-known source of negative stereotypes and intergroup biases (Williams & O’Reilly, 1998).
At the same time, especially in the context of international business cultural diversity may be
33
associated with valuable differences in knowledge, experience, and perspectives that may ben-
efit team performance. The challenge for multinational organizations is thus clearly there to
manage the double-edged sword of team cultural diversity (Earley & Gibson, 2002), and the
A focus on leader local or foreign cultural background follows readily in that respect.
The amount of foreign leaders in multinational organizations is growing on a steady basis (Sta-
ples, 2007). This leads to the question whether being a foreign versus a local leader is a factor
in team leaders’ ability to effectively lead diverse teams – or to cast the question differently,
whether team leader foreign versus local background may play a moderating role in the rela-
Foreigner leaders as compared with local leaders should have the advantage of being
more attuned to the cultural diverse context as a result of their own experiences as a foreigner
in the host country. They will have more cross-cultural interactions than local leaders (i.e., in
the sense that the host culture more or less by definition is the majority) and thus more
knowledge of the experience of being culturally dissimilar within the host country and with
host country responses to cultural dissimilarity than local leaders. As a result, foreign leaders
of culturally diverse teams may better understand the needs and experiences of team members
with foreign cultural backgrounds – even when not the same as their own – than local leaders.
At the same time, they will also having ample experience interacting with host culture mem-
bers, and particularly from the perspective of a culturally dissimilar person may have learned
about host culture reactions to cultural dissimilarity. These experiences may position foreign
leaders better than local leaders to guide team interaction both in interacting with local mem-
bers and in interacting with foreign members in the culturally diverse team context than local
leaders who will not only, all other things being equal, have less experience with culturally
dissimilar others and thus be less attuned to the cross-cultural setting as a result. Foreign leaders
34
may thus by virtue of their host country experience to be more aware of cross-cultural compe-
tencies (Bird et al., 2010) that result in higher leadership effectiveness and better global lead-
These skills speak to both sides of the double edged sword of (cultural) diversity. They
may be important in defusing intercultural tensions between team members that may disrupt
team performance in diverse teams and as such may diminish the potentially negative effects
of cultural diversity. At the same time, by virtue of a greater awareness of the different per-
spectives associated with cultural differences, they may also be instrumental in focusing the
team on the learning opportunities and informational benefits that cultural diversity may intro-
duce (cf. van Knippenberg et al., 2013), and thus stimulate the team to benefit from its cultural
An important implication of the logic underlying Hypothesis 1 about the advantage that
foreign leaders may have over local leaders through their greater cross-cultural experience
within the host country is that if local leaders also gain cross-cultural experiences they may
subsequently “catch up” with foreign leaders and the “foreign advantage” may disappear. The
most obvious source of cross-cultural experience for local leaders is the experience of working
with a culturally diverse team for a substantial amount of time. In other words, the analysis
underlying Hypothesis 1 suggests that leader team tenure would also play a moderating role.
35
The notion that over time people may learn to better deal with (cultural) diversity is consistent
with other theory in diversity research Harrison et al., (1998). Argued that while initial re-
sponses to cultural differences may be based on cultural stereotypes and biases that can stand
in the way of effective communication and collaboration, over time individuals may learn to
look beyond the differences that are the basis for their stereotyped perceptions and learn to
more effectively work together (cf. Chatman & Flynn, 2001; Earley & Mosakowski, 2000),
Hambrick et al. (1998) likewise noted that with higher tenure teams may form more trust and
understanding for differences in values and beliefs within the team and have better cooperation
and performance as a result. In other words time may diminish the negative effects of cultural
Leader team tenure may thus both have the advantage of greater learning from experience
for the team leader and the advantage of greater learning for team members. Team leader’s and
team members’ learning to deal with diversity likely goes hand in hand to mutually influence
each other (van Knippenberg et al., 2013). Leader tenure with the team may thus be associated
with a greater ability to prevent potential disruptive effects of cultural diversity and to stimulate
Hypothesis 2: Team cultural diversity is more positively related to team performance the
The analysis underlying Hypothesis 2 does not only suggest that culturally diverse
teams benefit from leaders with longer tenure with their team, it also implies that the advantage
of foreign over local leaders posited in Hypothesis 1 would primarily obtain for leaders with
36
shorter tenure – a three-way interaction of cultural diversity, leader cultural background, and
leader tenure.
Foreign leaders in the early phases of tenure with the team have the advantage of greater
and more salient experiences with cross-cultural interaction within the host country context
than local leaders. As a result, foreign leaders in a sense stand less to gain in this respect through
extended experience – longer tenure – with their team than local leaders. Put differently,
through experience working with their team, local leaders can “catch up” with foreign leaders
in terms of being attuned to and experienced with working in a cross-cultural context. The
consequence of this is that culturally diverse teams can perform more effectively independent
of the cultural background of their leader with longer tenure, whereas foreign leaders have an
advantage over local leaders of culturally diverse teams with shorter tenure:
Method
Our empirical work is based on a survey drawn from a globally active European avia-
tion group comprising more than 500 subsidiaries and affiliates worldwide. The company in
the aviation sector operates in five business areas: passenger transportation; logistics; Mainte-
nance, Repair and Overhaul (MRO); catering; and IT services. Global partnerships and bilateral
joint ventures strengthen their business model internationally and enable the company to par-
ticipate in global growth beyond their home markets. The firm employs people from about 150
countries and is represented in almost every county worldwide through their service businesses,
especially in Asia and South America through increasing opportunities through global growth
37
in fleet numbers. A combination of hub-based and point-to-point products creates omnidirec-
The airline industry is subjected to a lot of fluctuations in dynamic times and changing
markets. Business processes, coordination at interfaces, and the decision-making per se are
getting faster and more complex. Therefore creating effective teams with strong cultural ex-
pertise in working with partners in growth markets at short will be important in relation to
tives to describe the study and its benefits. The initiative was also posted at the intranet and
Surveys were sent to 68 teams, including all 68 managers and all 277 team members
based at 37 different departments in 19 countries. Teams were working in all kind of profes-
sional groups, such as in ground operations, sales, product and marketing, and human re-
sources. In total, we got responses from 66 teams (97 percent). From these teams we got re-
sponses from all 336 employees (66 managers and 270 team members) of these teams (i.e., the
response rate of the 66 participating teams was 100 %). Participants had 27 different national-
ities and 175 of the respondents were male and 161 female. On average the age of the partici-
pants was 40.28 (SD = 9.89) ranging from 21 years to 64 years. Mean job tenure was 13.07
years (SD = 9.56) with the minimum of 1 year and the maximum of 42 years. All team members
and their leaders had full-time jobs. Average team size was 4.20 (range 2 to 10). The average
of the period the team members and leaders were working together was 6.73 year (SD = 6.01)
38
Paper-based and online surveys in English and German were distributed to managers
and team members who were invited to fill out the questionnaire. The survey was anonymous.
Team members were requested to enter their demographic details on which team diversity var-
iables were based. Team leaders were asked to fill out a separate questionnaire on which to
evaluate team performance. Twenty-one, twelve, and nine percent of respondents were based
in the United States, Russia, and Germany, respectively. Six percent were based in India and
Indonesia. Three percent were located in Hungary, Greece, South Africa, Spain, Israel, Equa-
torial Guinea, United Kingdom, Nigeria, Vietnam, Eritrea, Lebanon, and Belgium.
Measures
with 9 items based on Hackman (1987). The scale for team performance focus consists seven
items plus two items about the overall performance. The questions captured the conception of
team effectiveness as being able to meet task challenges, completing work on time, being able
to generally perform well, and effort of the teams. Sample questions are ”The team often fails
to fulfil their tasks on time” and “This team is good in coming up with ways to complete their
tasks”. The response scale that ranged from 1 (“strongly disagree) to 5 (“strongly agree”). Re-
Leader Team Tenure. Survey participants were asked to state the length of working in
the team with the present team composition including the team leader, stated in years and
month.
Team Cultural Diversity. Participants were asked to indicate their cultural background.
The diversity literature advices the Blau’s index of heterogeneity (Blau, 1977) for calculation
diversity of categorical variables (Harrison & Klein, 2007): 1- ∑ (Pi) ², where Pi is the propor-
tion of a team’s members in the ith category. Sixty-six percent of the teams were homogeneous,
39
9% were half from one culture and half from another, 3% had two team members from one
culture, one from another, and one member from yet another, whereas 22% were completely
heterogeneous.
a dummy variable that indicates whether the leader’s nationality is the same as the host coun-
try’s (1 = a local leader) or if the manager comes from another country as the team is based (0
= a foreign leader).
Controls. Because team size ranged from 2 to 10 team members team size was explored
as one of the control variables. We also controlled for host country using three dummies rep-
resenting the three countries with the largest representation with the survey – the USA, Russia,
and Germany.
Results
Means, standard deviations, and correlations between the variables used for this study
Test of Hypotheses
Regression analysis were used to test the hypotheses using standardized variables (Ai-
ken & West, 1991). In the first step the regression model included the control variables. In the
second step we entered leader cultural background and centralized scores for leader tenure and
team cultural diversity. The second step had a significant added value over step 1. The effect
of team cultural diversity was a statistically significant. In the third step we added the interac-
40
tions between leader cultural background and team cultural diversity, leader cultural back-
ground and leader tenure, as well the interaction between team cultural diversity and leader
tenure.
While the interaction between leader tenure and leader cultural background was not a
significant predictor, the interaction between leader cultural background and team cultural di-
versity was significant as was the interaction between leader tenure and team cultural diversity
(see Table 2). To understand the nature of the interaction between leader cultural background
and team cultural diversity we performed simple slopes analysis (Aiken & West, 1991). Cul-
tural diversity was positively related to team performance when the leader was foreign, b = .62,
t = 3.04, p < .01, whereas cultural diversity and team performance were unrelated when the
leader was local, b = .08, t = .83, ns. (see Figure 1), thus supporting Hypothesis 1. To under-
stand the nature of the interaction between leader tenure and team cultural diversity we per-
formed simple slopes analysis (Aiken & West, 1991). Cultural diversity was positively related
to team performance when the leader had high tenure, b = .34, t = 2.34, p = .02, whereas cultural
diversity and team performance were unrelated when the leader had low tenure, b = .10, t =
In a final step the three-way interaction term of leader cultural background and team
cultural diversity and leader tenure was inserted. As expected (Hypothesis 3) the interaction
was significant (see Table 2). To establish the nature of this interaction, we conducted simple
slope analysis (Preacher et al., 2006). Cultural diversity was positively related to performance
when the leader was local and had worked in the team a long time, b = .42, t = 3.27, p < .01 as
well as when the leader was foreign and had worked in the team only shortly, b = .41, t = 2.84,
p < .001. However, cultural diversity and performance were unrelated when the leader was
local and had worked in the team only shortly, b = -.00, t = .06, ns. (see Figure 3a and 3b). This
41
Discussion
team performance would naturally arrive at the consideration of the cultural background of
team leaders. We propose that in international business foreign leaders have an advantage over
local leaders through their greater awareness of and experience with the challenges of cross-
cultural collaboration within the host culture – an advantage that would mainly hold with
shorter tenure because with longer tenure local leaders may develop the cross-cultural aspects
of their leadership through experience with their team. Our empirical analysis confirmed the
two-way and three-way interaction hypotheses derived from this analysis to underscore the
joint role of leader cultural background and leader team tenure in the performance effects of
Our analysis revolves around the notion that leadership of culturally diverse teams’
benefits from an awareness with and experience with the challenges of cross-cultural team-
work. Findings for the separate and joint effects of leader cultural background and leader team
tenure corroborate this analysis. One way to develop these insights further is to link them to
the recently proposed notion of diversity mindsets. Diversity mindsets were proposed by van
van Knippenberg et al. (2013) to capture an understanding of the team and teamwork (i.e., team
cognition; Salas & Fiore, 2004) that understands team diversity as an informational resource
to benefit from through a process of information exchange and integration. An interesting and
relevant question is whether the effects of leader cultural background and leader team tenure
can be understood through such diversity mindsets: do the initial advantage of foreign over
42
local leaders, and the “equalizing” effect of team tenure draw their influence from their rela-
tionships with diversity mindsets? Whereas clearly this is a question for future research to ad-
dress, there seems to be a clear case that the awareness of and experience with cross-cultural
challenges that we see as a key factor underlying the effects of both leader background and
leader tenure could result in the development of effective diversity mindsets. Indeed, this no-
tion resonates well with van Knippenberg et al. (2013) emphasis on the importance of learning
Future research would also do well to explore the international business context as a
potential boundary condition or moderating influence for the observed effects. In international
business the challenges of cross-cultural collaboration are inevitably more salient than in com-
panies operating only at a national or more local level, and the potential benefits of nationality
diversity when working in an international context will also be more readily apparent. This
may mean that it is more salient to leaders and team members that mastering cross-cultural
challenges is important than in national contexts. The consequence of this may be that leaders
and team members are more attuned to learning to work effectively cross-culturally, and that
it therefore presumably is also easier for leaders to guide teams in constructive ways to work
with their cultural diversity (cf. van Knippenberg et al., 2013). In national context where cul-
tural diversity may take the form of within-nationality ethnic-cultural diversity more than na-
tionality diversity, the awareness of the benefits and challenges of cultural diversity may be
lower, and as a result the focus on learning from cross-cultural experiences to master the chal-
lenges and reap the benefits of cultural diversity may also be lower. Future research could
therefore meaningfully explore whether the current findings perhaps extend only in weaker
form to national contexts, and whether additional influences are required to gain the same fa-
43
In a sense related to the previous observation is the fact that evidence of the positive
effects of tenure/time for team diversity is mixed: some studies find the positive influence pro-
posed by Harrison et al. (1998) that we build on in the present study, but others find no influ-
ence of tenure/time or even negative effects (for a review, see van Knippenberg & Schippers,
2007). A moderating influence here (cf. van Knippenberg et al.’s, 2004, account of these time
effects) could be the extent to which the context predisposes individuals – leaders and team
members alike – to learn to work effectively cross-culturally, like we argue the international
business context would be likely to do (and possibly more likely than many national contexts).
Here too then lies a valuable challenge for future research to explore the boundary conditions
The notion underlying our analysis of leader cultural background and tenure effects is
that of the advantage of cross-cultural experience and awareness. A clear and potentially im-
portant implication of our analysis thus is that other ways in which leaders may gain such
awareness and experience – time abroad, early cross-cultural work experience, leadership de-
velopment programs targeted at building such awareness and experience – may have similar
positive influences on leadership of culturally diverse teams. Importantly these may also reduce
the “foreign advantage”. Exploring these possibilities in future research would not only ad-
vance our understanding of these processes but also yield highly actionable knowledge for
Two obvious and straightforward implications for international business from the cur-
rent findings are that in meeting the challenges of cultural diversity, companies operating in-
ternationally may benefit from “foreign” leaders and extended team tenure (i.e., displaying
some patience for teams to develop to a point of effective collaboration and being restrained in
44
making frequent changes to teams and working with ad hoc teams). More tentatively, we may
also propose that should future research be able to establish more firmly that the current effects
can be attributed to experiential learning (cf. the notion of diversity mindset development),
leadership training and development efforts may focus on creating and guiding such opportu-
nities for experiential learning. Also, future research may explore the extent to which such
cross-cultural insights can also be transferred from foreign to local leaders by engaging foreign
Limitations
No study is without limitations, and the current study is no exception. A first and obvi-
ous limitation is that the current study is cross-sectional and cannot speak to matters of causality
– field experimental evidence would be needed to address this issue. A second limitation is that
our conceptual analysis understands the effects of leader cultural background and leader tenure
through their presumed linkages with awareness of and experience with cross-cultural chal-
lenge while we did not actually measure this awareness or experience. The conclusion thus has
to be that our findings are consistent with an interpretation in terms of this awareness and ex-
perience, but do not establish this linkage directly. Future research assessing such psychologi-
cal and behavioral correlates of leader background and tenure would thus be important to de-
In Conclusion
Cultural diversity poses a challenge because it can both be a disruptive influence and
an influence to the good. The current study adds to our understanding of the contingences of
45
these positive and negative influences by introducing a focus on team leader characteristics in
terms of cultural background and tenure – characteristics that presumably speak to the im-
portance of cross-cultural awareness and experience. Whereas clearly the current study cannot
say the final word on these issues, it should provide a good jumping-off point for the further
development of this analysis that also has the advantage of yielding highly actionable
knowledge.
46
Table 1: Descriptive statistics, and Intercorrelations for Study Variablesa
Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
6. Leader Cultural Background 0.56 0.50 -.18 .09 .28* -.17 .05 -
7. Team Cultural Diversity 0.19 0.28 .35* .14 -.21 -.44 -.25* -.027* -
8. Leader Tenure 5.27 4.07 .07 .22 -.14 .13 .19 .15 .00 -
a
N = 66 teams
*
p < .05
**
p < .01
47
Table 2: Results of Hierarchical Regression Analysis
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4
variables b ß t p b ß t p b ß t p b ß t p
Team Size -.00 -.01 -.10 .91 -.029 -.11 -.84 .40 -.03 -.13 -.99 .33 -.043 -.16 -1.27 .21
Dummy variable (a) -.54 -.30 -2.42 .02 -.31 -.18 -1.39 .17 -.37 -.20 -1.73 .09 -.40 -.22 -1.92 .06
Dummy variable (b) .08 .06 .47 .64 .20 .16 1.20 .24 .17 .14 1.08 .28 .21 .17 1.42 .16
Dummy variable (c) .19 .12 .99 .32 .40 .25 2.01 .05 .49 .31 2.61 .01 .53 .34 2.94 .00
Leader Cultural Background (LCB) -.00 -.00 -.03 .97 -.05 -.05 -.40 .69 -.07 -.07 -.59 .56
Leader Team Tenure (LTT) .02 .04 .33 .74 -.40 -.07 -.41 .68 -.02 -.04 -.22 .82
Team Cultural Diversity (TCD) .21 .40 3.04 .00 .39 .75 4.25 .00 .36 .70 4.12 .00
LCB X TCD -.34 -.46 -2.77 .01 -.36 -.48 -3.00 .00
LCB X LTT .13 .20 1.09 .28 .15 .22 1.25 .21
LTT X TCD .19 .29 2.42 .02 .05 .08 .54 .59
TCD X LTT X LCB .37 .34 2.48 .016
R2/ R2adjusted .12/.06 .25/.16 .38/.26 .44/.33
48
Figure 1: The interaction between team cultural diversity and leader cultural background
49
Figure 2: The interaction between team cultural diversity and leader tenure
50
Figure 3a: Interaction between team cultural diversity and leader cultural background for lead-
ers with high tenure
51
Figure 4b: Interaction between team cultural diversity and leader cultural background for lead-
ers with low tenure
52
Chapter 4: Cultural Dissimilarity and Psychological Safety: The Moderat-
ity
Abstract
Culturally diverse teams are typically characterized by some members being more cul-
turally dissimilar to the team than others. Research in relational demography suggests that those
more dissimilar members’ are particularly at risk in terms of lower levels of psychological
safety – arguably reflecting their social integration and their propensity to fully engage behav-
iorally with the team. We examined to which extent leader characteristics may attenuate the
Taking a social identity perspective, we identify both leader interpersonal fairness and leader
in N = 66 teams, we found that cultural dissimilarity was neither negatively nor positively
related to psychological safety, and that the relationship between cultural dissimilarity and psy-
chological safety is positively impacted by higher leader interpersonal fairness and higher
53
Introduction
ton & Toossi, 2001) and will continue to grow (Buttner, Lowe, & Billings-Harris, 2009).
Driven by globalization, team cultural diversity and its potential benefits have become increas-
ingly important for multinational companies (Earley & Gibson, 2002). Team cultural diversity
also poses a challenge, however, in terms of creating a setting with high psychological safety
for all members. Typically, some members of culturally (nationally) diverse teams are more
culturally dissimilar to the rest of the team than others, and research in relational demography
(Chattopadhyay, Tluchowska, & George, 2004b; Guillaume et al., 2012) suggests that this
greater dissimilarity may be associated with lower levels of psychological safety – the percep-
tion that one can freely and without social repercussions speak one’s mind and contribute to
the team as one believes is best (Edmondson, 1999). Because psychological safety can be taken
to reflect members’ social integration within the team and their propensity to fully engage be-
haviorally with the team in terms of contributing without self-censorship, the fact that culturally
dissimilar members’ psychological safety may be at risk thus arguably is a key issue in bene-
fiting from the team’s full range of cultural diversity in its opportunities to learn, be innovative,
and make high-quality decisions (cf. Earley & Gibson, 2002). In other words, one of the key
factors that allows for the beneficial effects of cultural differences to materialize, psychological
safety, is itself undermined by cultural dissimilarity. Finding ways to diminish the negative
relation between cultural dissimilarity and psychological safety is therefore a priority in re-
In managing teams, and thus also in the challenge of cultural dissimilarity and psycho-
logical safety, leadership is probably the most direct and most flexible influence organizations
can bring to bear (cf. Tröster & van Knippenberg, 2012; van Knippenberg, van Ginkel, &
54
Homan, 2013). Accordingly, in the present study we ask the question how team leadership may
safety. To do so, we work from a social identity perspective (Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Tajfel &
larity in organizations – has advanced a social identity perspective to understand that (cultural)
dissimilarity may reduce indicators of psychological and social integration in teams because
they reduce the sense that one has a shared social identity with the rest of the team (Chat-
tophadyay et al., 2004). Building from this analysis to maintain conceptual coherence in our
analysis of the role of leadership in this respect, we identify leader interpersonal fairness (Tyler
& Blader, 2000) and leader group prototypicality (Hogg, 2001) as influences that may attenuate
the social identity concerns invited by cultural dissimilarity and thus reduce its negative impact
on psychological safety.
in the team and consequently diminishes the negative effects of cultural dissimilarity on psy-
chological safety. Leader prototypically suggests that leaders are to be trusted due to their rep-
resentativeness of the team’s identity and thus also diminishes the negative effects of cultural
The challenges of benefiting from team cultural diversity rather than suffering its poten-
tially disruptive consequences have long been recognized (van Knippenberg & Schippers,
2007; Williams & O’Reilly, 1998). There is also growing recognition of the fact that these
challenges concern some team members – the more culturally dissimilar ones – more than oth-
ers (Guillaume et al., 2012). The present study adds to our understanding of this latter phenom-
enon by asking the conceptually as well as practically relevant question how leadership (and
especially those elements of leadership pertaining to social identity) may impact these pro-
cesses – an issue that has so far been largely unexplored (Tröster & van Knippenberg, 2012)
55
even when there is a clear argument that leadership may be a particularly relevant influence
here in terms of managing the challenges of cultural dissimilarity in teams. In doing so, this
study thus hopes to contribute to a more programmatic effort to develop our understanding of
share information, freely discuss concerns and doubts as well as value each other’s competen-
cies (Edmondson, 1999). Psychological safety implies that employees feel free to take inter-
personal risks and show the true self without being afraid of negative consequences and that
team members or managers will not embarrass or abuse them (Roussin & Weber, 2012; Kahn,
1990). Workplace environments which are psychologically safe are characterized by high trust,
which strengthen employees in the belief of having the freedom to ask questions, receive and
get feedback, and in which individual’s feel self-reliant to present their thoughts and are not
afraid of failure or do not fear any negative impacts (King et al., 2005). Moreover, dialogue on
dealing with errors is crucial for organizational success and shared reflection is an element of
a culture of trust and respect for each other. Vice versa this means that members within teams
of little psychological safety keep quiet and do not express any suggestions and doubts, because
they are afraid to speak up and even feel restricted to ask for feedback or support (Kark &
Carmeli, 2009).
of behaviors that are beneficial for core processes in today’s organizations – learning, problem-
56
solving, decision making, and creativity and innovation (Edmondson, 1999). This may be es-
for the ability to learn across cultural differences, deal with ambiguity, and adaptively solve
problems. These are all aspects that benefit from psychologically safe teams where members
feel they can share their doubts, express their opinion freely, share knowledge in order to learn
from each other, and ask for each other’s support. People in teams also have a tendency towards
“self-censorship”, however, keeping knowledge to themselves (Stasser & Titus, 1987), being
hesitant to voice disagreement with emerging consensus in the team (van Ginkel & van Knip-
penberg, 2008), and being reluctant to admit ignorance or ask for support (Lee, 1997). Con-
veying willingness to change and maintain creativity during constant transformation is another
key element multinational companies are asking for. Psychological safety stimulates this pro-
cess and motivates employees to confident problem solving (Schein & Bennis, 1965). Moreo-
ver it is a catalyst for individual outcomes desired by a multinational company such as engage-
ment, creativity, loyalty and encouraging learning behaviors (Carmeli et al., 2009; Kark &
Carmeli, 2009).
Especially in a team where some members are more culturally dissimilar to the rest of
the team than others, differences in cultural background may impact organizational experiences
and individual actions (King et al., 2005; McKay et al., 2007; Simons, Friedman, Liu, &
McLean Parks, 2007). Psychological safety may counteract some potential negative effects of
cultural diverse teams (Gibson & Gibbs, 2006). Yet, even when the team is experienced as a
safe environment by some, it may not be experienced that way by others, and minorities in
particular are at risk in this respect (McKay et al., 2007). In multinational teams, a focus on
cultural (national) dissimilarity and psychological safety thus concerns a real challenge to mul-
tinational organizations.
57
Research in relational demography (i.e., demographic dissimilarity) has shown that a so-
cial identity perspective provides a useful lens to understand why cultural dissimilarity may
& George, 2004; Tsui, Egan, & O’Reilly, 1992). Social identity theory (Hogg & Terry, 2000;
Tajfel & Turner, 1986) describes how people distinguish similar, in-group, others from dissim-
ilar, out-group, others, and display intergroup biases along those lines. Others seen as in-group
are more liked and trusted than others seen as out-group, and invite more communication and
cooperation (Brewer, 1979; Tajfel & Turner, 1986). Such processes are particularly likely to
occur for dissimilarities that are readily visible and associated with stereotypic beliefs that ren-
der them subjectively meaningful (Turner et al., 1987). Cultural differences in that sense are
particularly likely to invite such intergroup biases (e.g., Harrison, Price, & Bell, 1998). Because
culture is a salient feature, social categorization based on this feature is obvious component to
distinguish people from others (Chatman et al., 1998; Chattopadhyay, George, & Lawrence,
In culturally diverse teams, intergroup biases invited by cultural differences may pose a
challenge to the potential benefits of cultural diversity (van Knippenberg, De Dreu, & Homan,
2004). Lower trust inspired by cultural differences may set the stage for lower psychological
safety, and experiences with others’ dissimilarity-inspired lack of openness to one’s contribu-
tions may reinforce lower psychological safety – ideas and suggestions of culturally dissimilar
others may not arouse attention or taken seriously. This lower psychological safety is likely to
not be an experience equally shared by all team members, however. In multinational teams,
there typically is a majority culture: The host culture, the culture of the country in which the
team is located, is typically where the majority of team members originate (e.g., Tröster & van
Knippenberg, 2012). Team members that belong to the majority thus experience less cultural
dissimilarity to the team than team members with a minority cultural background. This not only
58
means that the more dissimilar members are more likely to experience lower psychological
safety by virtue of their dissimilarity per se – minority status also tends to make such dissimi-
larity more salient to both minority and majority (McKay et al., 2007), rendering cultural mi-
norities even more likely targets of intergroup biased experiences that put psychological safety
under pressure (cf. Avery & McKay, 2010). In short, greater cultural dissimilarity is likely to
be associated with lower psychological safety, and this is a relationship expressed at the level
of the individual team member, not an experience “homogeneously” shared by majority and
safety begs the question which influences may attenuate or ideally eliminate this negative re-
lationship to make the team a psychologically safe environment for all members regardless of
their cultural background. In the present study we address this issue from the perspective of
leadership. Leadership arguably is the most flexible and direct influence organizations can
bring to bear on team management, and should therefore also be of particular interest in man-
aging diverse teams (cf. van Knippenberg, van Ginkel, & Homan, 2013). In this respect, a
social identity analysis of leadership influences points to two aspects of leadership that would
have independent influences on addressing the situation of culturally dissimilar team members
and is understood to capture the extent to which the leader treats subordinates with dignity and
59
respect (Colquitt, 2001; Greenberg, 1993; cf. interactional fairness; Bies & Moag, 1986). In-
terpersonal fairness is one aspect of justice that is positioned as complementary to and different
from the other types of fairness: distributive, procedural, and informational fairness (Colquitt,
2001). Contrary to these types of judgments of formal procedure, interpersonal fairness focuses
on the nature of interpersonal treatment (Rupp & Cropanzano, 2002). This fairness of interper-
sonal treatment in particular has been linked to social identity dynamics (Tyler & Blader, 2000
– note that Tyler and Blader discussed interpersonal fairness as one of the two elements of
procedural fairness – more formal aspects of treatment being the other – but that their analysis
Tyler and Blader outline how interpersonal fairness conveys to individuals that they are
a respected member of the team, and thus speaks to a core concerns from a social identity
perspective – do I truly belong here and am I truly accepted as a group member? We propose
that these considerations directly speak to the issue of psychological safety – are my contribu-
tions appreciated and respected? Absent such indications of inclusion in the team conveyed by
leader interpersonal fairness individuals may thus experience lower psychological safety. This
is consistent with evidence that individuals who feel treated fairly have more trust in their
leader (Ambrose & Schminke, 2003) and are more open to receive constructive feedback
(Leung, Wang, & Smith, 2001). It is also consistent with the finding that fair treatment fosters
better communication between team members (Bond et al., 2004; Sias & Jablin, 1995). Most
directly, it follows evidence that the feeling of being respected feeds not only into the percep-
tion of being accepted as a team member but also into the perception that one’s contributions
are valued by other team members (cf. Ellemers, Sleebos, Stam, & De Gilder, 2013).
turally dissimilar team members. More culturally similar members are more likely to see their
group belongingness confirmed by their similarity to a majority of the team (i.e., the basic tenet
60
of the social identity approach to relational demography) than more dissimilar members. In that
sense, their group belongingness is more secured and thus less of a concern for which interper-
sonal fairness would make a difference. For culturally more dissimilar members in contrast,
their sense of inclusion in the team and their associated psychological safety is much more on
the line. We propose that leader interpersonal fairness and its message that one is a valued
group member and contributor despite one’s cultural background therefore is particularly im-
put, that interpersonal fairness is important in attenuating the negative influence of dissimilarity
on psychological safety.
Hypothesis 2: Leader interpersonal fairness reduces the negative effect of cultural dis-
Leader group prototypicality refers to the extent to which the leader is perceived to be
representative of the group identity (Hogg, 2001). The concept derives from the more general
notion of group prototypes – mental representations of social categories that capture the ideal-
type of the category – those attributes that characterize the group and distinguish the group
from other groups (Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher & Wetherell, 1987). For social groups, group
prototypes also capture what is group-normative – group values, beliefs, and attitudes, and their
implications for what would be deemed appropriate and inappropriate behavior. Group mem-
bers that are perceived to resemble the group prototype thus gain influence from this associa-
tion because they are perceived as representing what the group stands for in terms of values,
beliefs, attitudes, and behavior. Moreover, the group prototype also captures group interests,
ambitions, and goals, and more group prototypical individuals are thus perceived to have the
61
group’s best interest more in mind. Applied to the leadership role, this means that leaders have
a stronger basis for leadership effectiveness the more they are perceived to be group prototyp-
ical (Hogg, 2001; van Knippenberg & Hogg, 2003; van Knippenberg, 2011).
trust in the leader – specifically the leader’s best intentions for the group (Giessner & van
Knippenberg, 2008; van Knippenberg & Hogg, 2003). Trust in the leader can be seen as an
important precursor to psychological safety, because leaders in particular play a key role in
establishing psychological safety – or the absence thereof (Edmondson, 1999; Nembhard &
Edmondson, 2006). That is, to the extent that one feels psychologically safe with the leader, it
is also more likely that one would feel psychologically safe in the team because the leader is
such a central person in the team. As for the leader interpersonal fairness, here too we may
propose that this linkage of leader group prototypicality and psychological safety will be more
important for more culturally dissimilar team members. The more individuals are culturally
dissimilar to the team, the more their psychological safety is on the line and not addressed by
cultural similarity-based connectedness to other team members and the more they may be sen-
sitive to other sources of psychological safety, like leader prototypicality. Accordingly, leader
psychological safety.
Hypothesis 3: Leader group prototypicality reduces the negative effect of cultural dis-
62
Method
We conducted this study in one of the five business areas (passenger transportation; lo-
gistics; Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul (MRO); catering; and IT services) of a large multi-
national aviation group containing more than 500 subsidiaries and affiliates globally headquar-
tered in Europe. The company employs over 120,000 employees in over 150 countries. As one
of the world’s biggest aviation group, the aims is to strengthen its position as first choice for
customers, employees, investors and partners. Therefore global partnerships with other airlines
may intensify the completeness set of joint ventures in big non-home markets.
lot of changes in dynamic times and a competitive market. Therefore a clear sense of interna-
tionalization and the markets in which the business unit operates is crucial. Knowledge and
understanding of appropriate practices and procedures with respect to the customers, suppliers,
competitors and the regulatory environment will be important. Building high performing teams
with robust cultural expertise in working with diverse stakeholders globally will be relevant in
relation to international competition. As a result knowing how leadership impacts the experi-
ence of culturally-nationality dissimilar team members arguably speaks to a key success factor
to the organization.
The sample for this study is drawn from the same 68 teams as the sample for Chapter 2,
and overlaps in the measurement of cultural/national background on which both the cultural
diversity measure in Chapter 2 and the cultural dissimilarity in this chapter is based. It does not
overlap in any other of the substantive variables. Even so, in our analysis, we control for the
leader characteristics that are the focus of the study to establish that the current hypothesis tests
63
are independent of the influences observed at the team level of analysis in Chapter 2.
We received responses from 66 different teams (97 percent). The survey was sent to 68
teams, including 68 managers and 270 team members based at 37 different departments in 19
countries. From all 336 employees (66 managers and 270 team members) of these teams (i.e.,
the response rate of the 66 participating teams was 100 %) returned the survey. Respondents
had 27 different nationalities and 175 of the respondents were male and 161 female. The em-
ployees were on average 40.28 years old (SD = 9.89) ranging from 21 years to 64 years. Mean
job tenure was 13.07 years (SD = 9.56) with the minimum of 1 year and the maximum of 42
years. All team members and their leaders were full-time employed. Average team size was
4.20 (range 2 to 10). The average of the period the team members and leaders were working
together was 6.73 year (SD = 6.01) with a range from 1 year to 36 years.
to define the study and its benefits. The initiative was also published at the intranet and was
promoted by executives in their global group calls to bring together a great mixture of nation-
alities across the group. We collected data from teams who were employed in various profes-
sional groups, like in ground operations, sales, product and marketing, and human resources.
Managers and employees received a paper-based or online survey in English and German based
on their local IT set-up. The survey was conducted, according to data privacy regulations, anon-
ymous. Survey respondents were requested to indicate their demographic details on which team
diversity variables were shown. Twenty-one, twelve, and nine percent of respondents were
based in the United States, Russia, and Germany, respectively. Six percent were based in India
and Indonesia. Three percent were located in Hungary, Greece, South Africa, Spain, Israel,
Equatorial Guinea, United Kingdom, Nigeria, Vietnam, Eritrea, Lebanon, and Belgium.
64
Measures
member and all other individuals in the team. In this survey we computed the cultural dissim-
among all the cultural backgrounds in the team. We calculated cultural dissimilarity scores as
the difference between team members by using the following formula (Tsui et al., 1992): the
square root of the counted number of team members with a different nationality in a team,
divided by the total number of respondents in a team size. The larger number of the relational
measure meant that the team member is more nationally dissimilar to the other team members
in the team. The scores ranged from 0 to 0.95, with a mean of 0.26.
Psychological safety. We used the survey scales from Edmondson (1999) to assess psy-
chological safety with seven items on a 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) response
scale. Items were e.g. “If you make a mistake on this team, it is often held against you” (reverse
Leader group prototypicality. Participants responded to the six items: “My team leader
is a good example of the kind of people that are members of my team.”; “My team leader
represents what is characteristic about the team,” and “My team leader has a lot in
common with the members of the team”; “My team leader is very similar to the members of
my team”; “My team leader resembles the members of my team” and “My team leader embod-
ies the norms and values of my team”. The items are based on the works of Platow and van
Knippenberg (2001) and van Knippenberg (2005). Leader prototypicality was measured on a
Colquitt (2001) based on items from Bies and Moag (1986) and describes to which extend of
65
dignity and respect individuals are treated. The items were: “Has (he/she) treated you in a polite
manner?”: Has (he/she) treated you with dignity?”; Has (he/she) treated you with respect?” and
“Has (he/she) refrained from improper remarks or comments?”. Interpersonal fairness was as-
Controls. To capture leader cultural background we applied a dummy variable that im-
plies whether the manager’s cultural background is the same as the host country’s (1 = a local
leader) or if the leader’s origin is from another country as the team is based (0 = a foreign
leader). Because tenure of the leader might affect ratings, because team members become more
self-assured as they know their manager better (cf. Vecchio & Bullis, 2001), we included leader
team tenure. Therefore survey participants indicated the length of working in the team with the
present team composition. We also controlled for team size, because it ranged from 2 to 10
team members in one team. In addition we used dichotomous dummy variables and controlled
for host country using the three countries with the largest representation with the survey – the
USA, Russia, and Germany. Finally, we asked team member to state if they are from the host
Results
the nested data structure (Sacco, Scheu, Ryan, & Schmitt, 2003). Our theory nests team mem-
bers’ cultural dissimilarity, perceptions of leader interpersonal fairness and leader group pro-
totypicality, and psychological safety within cultural diverse teams. Therefore we performed
multilevel analysis to account for the hierarchical structure of our data set (Snijders & Bosker,
1999). We used the Mixed Models command in SPSS 22.0 to fit linear mixed models with
66
Hypothesis testing
The results of the hypothesis tests are shown in table 4, including estimates, standard
errors of estimates, t-values, and p-values, as well as descriptive statistics in table 3. It appears
that cultural dissimilarity has neither a positive nor a negative effect on psychological safety
that is statistically significant. However, the interaction effect of leader interactional fairness
and cultural dissimilarity on psychological safety is significant (B=.20, p<.01). Using HLM
probing (Preacher et al, 2006) we found that the relation between cultural dissimilarity and
psychological safety becomes more positive the higher the score of leader interactional fair-
ness. The relation is significant and negative if leader interactional fairness scores lower than
2.1 standard deviations below the mean, is non-significant if leader interactional fairness scores
between -2.1 and +1.7 standard deviations from the mean, but the relation becomes positive
and significant when leader interactional fairness scores more than 1.7 standard deviations
ical safety is significant (B=.31 , p<.01). Using HLM probing (Preacher et al, 2006) we found
that the relation between cultural dissimilarity and psychological safety becomes more positive
the higher the score of leader prototypicality. The relation is significant and negative if leader
prototypicality scores lower than 1.08 standard deviations below the mean, is non-significant
if leader prototypicality scores between -1.08 and +.87 standard deviations from the mean, but
the relation becomes positive and significant when leader prototypicality scores more than .87
standard deviations above the mean. Figure 6 shows the interaction effect comprehensively.
Concluding we did not find support for Hypothesis 1 stating that cultural dissimilarity
has a negative effect on psychological safety. However, in line with our Hypothesis 2 we can
conclude that interpersonal fairness positively moderates the effect of cultural dissimilarity on
67
psychological safety. Furthermore we found support for our Hypothesis 3. Prototypicality pos-
itively moderates the effect of cultural dissimilarity on psychological safety. All in all we do
not find support for our hypothesis that cultural dissimilarity is negatively related to psycho-
logical safety (Hypothesis 1) but we find support for the idea that psychological safety is mod-
erated by interpersonal fairness (Hypothesis 2) and leader group prototypically (Hypothesis 3).
Discussion
promise. Psychological safety might be the key psychological variable in meeting this chal-
lenge and realizing the promise of cultural diversity. A social identity analysis of cultural dis-
similarity in teams suggests that the psychological safety of especially those members that are
most dissimilar to the team in cultural background is on the line, and in the present study we
considered the role of leadership in addressing this issue. We predicted and found that the re-
lationship between cultural dissimilarity and psychological safety becomes more positive with
Our study contributes to the further development of the social identity perspective in
relational demography (e.g., Chattopadhyay et al., 2004) by outlining how this social identity
analysis can be extended to incorporate leadership. At the same time, we should note that the
effects of leadership are not of the greatest size (although they are statistically significant and,
we believe, practically relevant). Rather than discard the focus on leadership as yielding to
small effects, we would argue that the issue perhaps is that the current focus on leader inter-
personal fairness and leader group prototypicality speaks to psychological safety vis-à-vis the
68
leader more than to psychological safety within the team as a whole. Even when psychological
safety vis-à-vis the leader arguably is more important than vis-à-vis any other individual mem-
ber of the team (cf. Edmondson, 1999), psychological safety vis-à-vis the team at large clearly
is a substantive issue. Therefore, the most important extension of the current leadership analy-
sis arguably is an analysis that would take on how leadership may also build psychological
safety vis-à-vis fellow team members. In this respect, there may be promise in van Knippenberg
et al.’s (2013) conceptual analysis of the role of leadership in building diversity mindsets (men-
tal representations of team diversity) that guide teams to benefit from their diversity. Van Knip-
penberg et al. argue that leadership to build such mindsets would guide teams to learn from and
create synergy in interaction with dissimilar others. Arguably, such leadership would also in-
vite psychological safety vis-à-vis the team to complement the current analysis of what might
The other main line of research to extend and develop the current analysis would be to
study how leadership that safeguards the psychological safety of culturally dissimilar team
members would through this influence on psychological safety affect behavioral outcomes.
Following the logic outlined in the current analysis it would make sense to study how (leader-
ship) influences that are associated especially with psychological safety for culturally more
dissimilar team members can bring about positive behavioral effects in terms of culturally dis-
similar members’ contributions to team process and performance as well as in terms of im-
portant individual outcomes like better social integration into the team for culturally dissimilar
members.
As our discussion of theoretical implications, we would be careful not to reach too bold
conclusions about application given that our findings are based on a single study. Even so, it is
69
noteworthy that interpersonal fairness can be trained in leadership development (Greenberg,
2002). The ability to convey one’s group prototypicality presumably can also be developed,
but here research and practice are clearly more underdeveloped as to how to accomplish this
That said, however, we would also expect (as outlined above) that such leadership ef-
forts need to be complemented by efforts to build psychological safety vis-à-vis the team. Con-
clusions regarding implications for practice would to some extent have to await research spe-
cific to cultural diversity but Garvin, Edmondson, & Gino (2008) note ways in which leaders
can achieve this more generally. Several of the building blocks for application thus are already
there, even when we would favor awaiting the results of more direct tests of these ideas until
Limitations
Our study has limitations, which we need to note. First, the current study is cross-sec-
tional and cannot speak to matters of causality. Therefore, even though our theory strongly
favors the causal chain we described and tested in the current study, additional (field) experi-
mental evidence would be necessary to address this issue. The second limitation of our study
refers to our research setting as well. Data from a single multinational company was collected.
and team compositions should be researched. Third, we studied cultural dissimilarity as one
salient component of relational demography. We did so based on the premise that especially
cultural dissimilarity is highly salient and relevant in the context we described: multinational
70
firms. However other components such as gender or age could be further potential salient de-
mographic attributes to which our findings might pertain. Future research may further research
these components.
In Conclusion
diverse, with having team members in minorities and majorities, companies could benefit from
this diverse workforce. Especially in the context of multinational companies knowledge from
employees with a different cultural background is essential for this complex environment. The
current study underlines the importance of leadership and its impact on psychological safety
even when it also holds a clear invitation to develop this analysis further.
71
Figure 5: The interaction between cultural dissimilarity (CD) and interpersonal fairness
72
Figure 6: The interaction between cultural dissimilarity (CD) and leader group prototypicality
73
Table 3: Descriptive statistics and Intercorrelations for Study Variablesa,
Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1. Dummy variable a 0.09 0.29 -
2. Dummy variable b 0.30 0.46 -0.20** -
3. Dummy variable c 0.13 0.33 -0.12 -.248** -
4. Size 5.03 0.33 -0.06 0.41** -0.09 -
5. Cultural dissimilarity (CD) 0.26 2.27 -0.25** -0.08 -0.30** 0.14* -
6. Host 0.19 0.33 -0.08 -0.19** -0.18** -0.14* 0.73** -
7. Psychological Safety 3.53 0.39 -0.01 0.01 0.10 0.03 -0.05 -0.10 -
8. Leader Cultural Background 0.58 0.77 0.27** -0.15* 0.01 0.04 -0.34** -0.24** 0.04 -
9. Leader Tenure 5.70 0.49 -0.12* -0.04 0.22* 0.26** 0.01 -0.09 0.13* 0.28** -
10. Interpersonal Fairness 3.75 4.32 0.23** 0.04 0.08 0.06 -0.52** -0.41** 0.25** 0.57** 0.14* -
11. Leader Group Prototypicality 3.41 0.33 -0.02 0.06 -0.21** -0.13* 0.01 0.02 0.07 .010 -0.00 .072 -
a
N = 270 employees
*
p < .05
**
p < .01
74
Table 4: Interaction effects on psychological safety
Variables Coefficients Standard error t p-value
Control variables
Size 0.03 0.11 0.24 0.95
Leader tenure 0.00 0.11 0.01 1.00
Dummy variable a -0.30 0.12 -0.26 0.91
Dummy variable b 0.74 0.11 0.68 0.65
Dummy variable c 0.12 0.10 1.12 0.95
Host 0.12 0.08 1.45 0.65
Leader Cultural Diversity 0.02 0.11 0.14 0.90
Main effects
Cultural Dissimilarity (CD) 0.04 0.13 0.29 0.91
Fairness 0.16 0.06 2.51 0.02
Leader group prototypicality (LGP) 0.02 0.51 0.32 0.75
a
N = 270 employees
*
p < .05
**
p < .01
Note: Standardized coefficients are reported
75
Chapter 5: General Discussion
Kozlowski; Schmidt; Milner, & Wichman, 2004; Ilgen, 1999; LePine, 2003). Therefore, deter-
mining what drives team performance and how to lead a diverse team in the best way is more
and more important for organizations. An important reason to do so is the assumption that
cultural diverse teams have the potential to bring benefits to the organization, caused by the
expectation that different backgrounds may foster higher levels of performance (Ilgen et al.,
2005). Cultural diversity in teams is very relevant in this respect because of the fact that through
globalization and internationalization organizations are becoming more and more diverse es-
pecially in terms of cultural background, which leads to a higher rate of local and foreign em-
ployees as well as managers who are employed by the company. Furthermore certain leadership
characteristics may impact cultural diverse teams and individual behaviors and attribute to dif-
ferent extents depending if the team member belongs to a minority or majority group. The
present dissertation, thus, focused on uncovering the leadership characteristics and leader di-
versity attributes that may support team performance and individual behaviors. In the following
76
Summary of the Main Findings
The first empirical study (Chapter 3) examined the hypothesis that team cultural diver-
sity is more positively related to team performance with a foreign team leader than with a local
team leader. I also examined the hypothesis that the relationship of cultural diversity is more
positively related to team performance with higher leader tenure. Based on leadership and
diversity research we further add to the understanding that team leader characteristics in terms
of cultural background and tenure can influence team performance negatively and positively.
As predicted we found that the relationship of cultural team diversity to team performance was
moderated by both leader cultural background and tenure. Team performance was found to be
higher with a foreign leader than with a local leader for cultural diverse teams. Furthermore,
for local team leaders we found a positive relationship on team performance, when the leader
has a high team tenure, whereas low tenure for local leaders was unrelated to team performance
The second study (Chapter 4) focused on the moderating role of leader interactional
fairness and leader group prototypicality on cultural dissimilarity and psychological safety in
cultural diverse teams. Research in relational demography and leadership has shown that leader
characteristics should help teams not only to diminish the negative effects of cultural dissimi-
larity, but also to benefit from it. We expected that cultural dissimilarity was negatively related
to psychological safety. We suggested that certain leadership characteristics reduces the nega-
tive effect of cultural dissimilarity of other team members on psychological safety. We found
support for our predictions, which we tested in our study with 66 teams in a multinational
company and used leader interactional fairness and leader group prototypicality as moderators.
We identified both leader interactional fairness and leader group prototypicality as attenuating
77
influences especially for those members that are more dissimilar to the team in cultural back-
ground, in line with the social identity perspective. Furthermore, we found that cultural dissim-
ilarity was negatively related to psychological safety, and that higher leader interactional fair-
ness and higher leader group prototypicality was able to counteract the negative effects of re-
lational demography.
Theoretical implications
In the following I will concentrate on the joint contributions of our findings in order to
Past leadership research has examined that leadership plays an important role in man-
aging team diversity (Homan & Jehn, 2010; van Knippenberg, van Ginkel, & Homan, 2013;
cf. Hackman, 2002; Kozlowski & Bell, 2003). However, theoretical work in team diversity has
paid minor attention to the influence of team leaders (see e.g., van Dijk, van Engen, & van
Knippenberg, 2012). Therefore, our empirical work adds to our understanding of leadership of
Second, the results of our empirical studies in chapter 3 and 4 emphasize the crucial
role of leadership in cultural diverse workforce settings. We found that certain leader charac-
teristics and attributes such as leader cultural background, tenure play an essential role for team
performance. Moreover that leader fairness and leader group prototypicality influence psycho-
logical safety in cultural diverse teams. In line with research on the crucial role of leadership
styles in diverse teams (Kearney & Gebert, 2009), our research is an important addition to our
knowledge by asking the question how team leadership may attenuate the potentially negative
impact of cultural dissimilarity. Furthermore, that the relationship between leadership and team
performance in cultural diverse teams is influenced by leader cultural background and leader
tenure.
78
Finally, the results of our empirical work proceed within the frame of an organizational
setting in a multinational company. Therefore our findings demonstrates that leadership of cul-
tural diverse teams matters for the organization, moreover that diversity and leadership are
Practical Implications
Our results propose that leader fairness and leader group prototycicality impacts psy-
chological safety in cultural diverse teams, especially dissimilar members because individuals
have a tendency to categorize and their group belongingness is less secured. Thus, leaders and
team members need to be aware of that fact and adapt their behaviors and apply their leadership
characteristics respectively.
Diversity management has been added as a substance action field in the daily business
the workforce in an international environment. This study has illustrated that employees work-
ing in a multinational company with a cultural diverse workforce face various cultural chal-
lenges in the workplace, which have to be managed in the best way and it is important to re-
member the significant business benefits of cultural diversity. In that sense, it might be advis-
able for organizations to hire leaders with certain leadership characteristics or develop them in
order to attenuate the negative influence of cultural dissimilarity and minimize issues. Further-
more cultural diversity needs a global mindset to understand, know how to act in a global mar-
ket and to recognize differences as well as to understand them as a benefit. For increasing the
positive outcomes of cultural diversity it may be valuable to establish such a culture as a mul-
tinational company. Moreover, organizations may be well advised to offer their managers and
79
Our study showed that diversity management helps to establish a meritocracy including
sourcing talent pool by widening the pool for selection. To benefit from a diverse workforce
companies have to establish but also manage diversity – otherwise it can harm performance by
creating division. Our study showed that team performance is increasing especially with a for-
eign leader and high leader tenure. This shows that foreign leaders foster competencies to de-
velop business which may be needed especially in foreign markets e.g. driving diversity. Lead-
ership has to demonstrate the capacity to interact appropriately in variety of business and social
situations. Furthermore adopt behaviors and business approaches and professional habits from
different people and cultures or adapts to them as well as knows how diverse people will re-
spond to own actions. To lead a cultural diverse team requires to study diverse people and
cultures to find ways to blend in, seeks out other views as well as to reverse decisions inappro-
Conclusion
increasing, our study on how to manage cultural diversity effectively and of what impacts team
performance adds to the literature. Even though diversity research illustrates that the positive
outcomes of cultural diversity are not easily achieved, very little is known about leadership of
cultural diverse teams. The present dissertation tests hypotheses about the role of leadership
and shows that to diminish the negative effects of cultural diversity in teams we need to take
80
References
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions.
London: Sage.
Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2003). Organization structure as a moderator of the rela-
tionship between procedural justice, interactional justice, POS and supervisory trust.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 295-305.
Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity and the organization. Academy of Manage-
ment Review, 14, 20–39.
Avery, D. R., & McKay, P. F. (2010). Doing diversity right: An empirically based approach to
effective diversity management. In G. Hodgkinson & J.K. Ford (Eds), International Re-
view of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, (Vol.25, pp. 227–252). West Sussex,
England: Wiley.
Barlett, C. A. & Ghoshal, S. (2003). What Is a Global Manager, Harvard Business Review,
81(8), 101-108.
Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. F. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In
R. J. Lewicki, B. H. Sheppard, & M. H. Bazerman (Eds.), Research on negotiations in
organizations (Vol. 1, pp. 43–55). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Bird et al., (2010). The Political Representation of Immigrants and Minorities. New York:
Routledge.
Blau, P. M. (1977). Inequality and Heterogeneity. New York: The Free Press.
Bond, M. H., Leung, K., et al. (2004). Culture-level dimensions of social axioms and their
correlaters across 41 cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35, 548-570.
Buttner, E. H., Lowe, K. B., & Billings-Harris, L. (2009). Attracting and retaining minority
faculty in business schools: Is it supply and demand or cultural change? International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 20, 771–789.
Caldwell, C. (2013). Tomorrow’s Global Leaders. People & Strategy, 36 (3), 48-53.
Campbell, K. & Minguez-Vera, A. (2008). Gender Diversity in the Boardroom and Firm Fi-
nancial Performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(3), 435–451
Carmeli, A., Brueller, D., & Dutton, J. (2009). Learning behaviors in the workplace: The role
of high quality interpersonal relationships and psychological safety. Systems Research
and Behavioral Science, 26, 81–98. doi:10.1002/sres.932.
Carter, D.A.‚ Simkins, B.J. & Simpson‚ W.G. (2003). Corporate Governance‚ Board Diversity‚
and Firm Value. The Financial Review‚ 38, 33–53
81
Chatman, J., Polzer, J., Barsade, S., & Neale, M. (1998). Being different yet feeling similar:
The influence of demographic composition and organizational culture on work processes
and outcomes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 749-780.
Chatman, J.A., & Flynn, F.J. (2001). The influence of demographic heterogeneity on the
emergence and consequences of cooperative norms in work teams. Academy of
Management Journal, 44 (5): 956-974.
Chattopadhyay, P. (1999). Beyond direct and symmetrical effects: The influence of demo-
graphic dissimilarity on organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management
Journal, 42(3), 273–287.
Chattopadhyay, P., George, E., & Lawrence, S. (2004). Why does dissimilarity matter? Ex-
ploring self-categorization, self-enhancement and uncertainty reduction. Journal of Ap-
plied Psychology, 89, 892-900.
Chattopadhyay, P., Tluchowska, M., & George, E. (2004b). Identifying the ingroup: A closer
look at the influence of PPL_JIBS_JIBS201215 Multinational management teams Chris-
tian Tro¨ster and Daan van Knippenberg 19 Journal of International Business Studies
emographic dissimilarity on employee social identity. Academy of Management Review,
29(2), 180–202.
Cox, T.J. & Blake, S. (1991). Managing Cultural Diversity: Implications for Organizational
Competitiveness, The Executive, 5 (3), 45–56
Daily, C. M. & Dalton, D. R. (2003b). Women in the boardroom: Abusiness imperative. Jour-
nal of Business Strategy, 24, 8–10.
DeShon, R. P., Kozlowski, S. W. J., Schmidt, A. M., Milner, K. R. & Wiechmann, D. (2004).
Multiple goal feedback effects on the regulation of individual and team performance in
training. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1035-1056.
Devillard, S., Graven, W., Lawson, E., Paradise, R. & Sancier- Sultan, S. (2012). Making the
Breakthrough: Woman Matter 2012. McKinsey & Company, Woman Matter, 5.
Dierig, C. (2009). ZIM vom Wirtschaftsministerium, in: Die Welt, 30.04.2009, Nr. 100
Earley, P.C. & Mosakowski, E. (2000). Creating hybrid team cultures: An empirical test of
transnational team functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 43(1), 26-49.
Early, P.C., & Gibson, C.B. (2002). Multinational work teams: A new perspective. Mahwah,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Adminis-
trative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383.
82
Ellemers, N., Sleebos, E., Stam, D., & Gilder, D. (2013). Feeling included and valued: How
perceived respect affects positive team identity and willingness to invest in the team.
British Journal of Management, 24(1), 21-37.
Ely, R. J. & Thomas, D. A. (2001). Cultural diversity at work: The effects of diversity perspec-
tives on work group prcesses and outcomes. Administrative Science Quaterly, 46, 229-
273.
European Parliament (2015). Labour Market Shortages in the European Union, Study for the
EMPL Committee
Federal Anti- Discrimination Agency, (2000). Council Directive 2000/43/EC, Official Journal
of the European Cummunities http://www.antidiskriminierungsstelle.de/EN/TheAct/EU-
Directive/eu-directive_node.html
FiDAR e.V., (2012). Frauen in die Aufsichtsräte. Retreived August 18, 2012 from:
http://www.fidar.de/fidar-forum.html
Fondas, N. & Sassalos, S. (2000). A different voice in the boardroom: How the presence of
women directors affects board influence over management. Global Focus, 12, 13–22.
Fullerton, Jr, H. N., & Toossi, M. (2001). Labor force projections to 2010: Steady growth and
changing composition. Monthly Labor Review, 124, 21–38.
Garvin, D. A., Edmondson, A. C. & Gino, F. (2008). "Is Yours a Learning Organization?"
Harvard Business Review 86, no. 3, 109–116.
Geletkanycz, MA. (1997). The salience of ‘culture’s consequences’: the effects of cultural val-
ues on executive commitment to the status quo. Strategic Management Journal 18(8),
615–634.
Gibson, CB. & Gibbs, JL. (2006). Unpacking the concept of virtuality: The effects of geo-
graphic dispersion, electronic dependence, dynamic structure, and national diversity on
team innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 51(3), 451–495.
Giessner, S.R. & van Knippenberg, D. (2008). "License to fail": Goal definition, leader group
prototypicality, and perceptions of leadership effectiveness after leader failure. Organi-
zational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 105 (1), 14-35.
Greenberg, J. (1993). The social side of fairness: Interpersonal and informational classes of
organizational justice. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: Approaching
fairness in human resource management (pp. 79–103). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Greenberg, J. (2002). Who stole the money, and when? Individual and situational determinants
of employee theft. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 985–
1003.
Guillaume, Y. R. F., Brodbeck, F. C., & Riketta, M. (2012). Surface- and deep-level dissimi-
larity effects on social integration and individual effectiveness related outcomes in work
83
groups: A meta-analytic integration. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psy-
chology. 85, 80–115.
Hackman, J.R. (1987). The design of work teams. In J.W. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of
organizational behavior: 315-342. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentic-Hall.
Hackman, J. R. (2002). Leading teams: Setting the stage for great performances. Boston, MA:
Harvard Business School Press.
Hambrick, D.C. et al. (1998). When groups consist of multiple nationalities: Towards a new
understanding of the implications, Organization Studies, 19(2), 181-205.
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,
4, 1199-1228.
Harrison, D.A., Price K.H., and Bell, M.P. (1998). Beyond relational demography: Time and
the effects of surface-and deep-level diversity on work group cohesion, Academy of Man-
agement Journal, 41(1).
Heidrick, & Struggles, (2007). Corporate governance in Europe: Raising the Bar. Heidrick, &
Struggles, Paris, France.
Herring, C., (2009). Does Diversity Pay?: Race, Gender, and the Business Case for Diversity.
American Sociological Review.
Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. J. (2000). Social identity and self-categorization process in organi-
zational contexts. Academy of Management Review, 25, 121–140.
Homan, A. C., Greer, L. L., Jehn, K. A. & Koning, L. (2010). Believing shapes seeing: The
impact of diversity beliefs on the construal of group composition. Group Processes and
Intergroup Relations, 13, 477-493.
Hoppenstedt, (2012). Schwarze, B., Frey, A., Lelutiu, A., Behrens, H., Anthes, L., Wieland,
C.: Frauen im Management. Hoppenstedt-Studie 2012: http://www.hoppenstedt-
fim.de/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Hoppenstedt-Studie_FIM_03_2012.pdf, aufgerufen
am 01.07.2013, 11:29 Uhr
Ilgen, D.R. Hollenbeck, J.R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D.(2005). Teams in organizations: From
I-P-O models to IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 517-544. (2005).
84
Steidlmeier (eds.), Business and Society: Advanced Readings. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall, 1995.
Kark, R., & Carmeli, A. (2009). Alive and creating: The mediating role of vitality and aliveness
in the relationship between psychological safety and creative work involvement. Journal
of Organizational Behavior, 30, 785–804. doi:10.1002/job.571.
Kearney, E. & Gebert, D. (2009). Managing diversity and enhancing team outcomes: the prom-
ise of transformational leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1), 77.
King, E. D., George, J. M., & Hebl, M. R. (2005). Linking personality to helping behaviors at
work: An interactional perspective. Journal of Personality, 73, 585–607.
Kirkman, B. L. & Shapiro, D. L. (1997). The impact of cultural values on employee resistance
to teams: Toward a model of globalized self-managing work team effectiveness.
Academy of Management Review, 22, 730–7.
Kohn, S. & Breising, Th. (1999). Teilzeitarbeit für Führungskräfte? Erkenntnisse aus einer
Fallstudie. Arbeit, 2, Jg. 8, 162-178
Kooij-De Bode, H. J. M., van Knippenberg, D., & van Ginkel, W. P. (2008). Ethnic diversity
and distributed information in group decision making: The importance of information
elaboration. Group Dynamics, 12, 307-320.
Kooij - de Bode, H. J. M., van Knippenberg, D., & van Ginkel, W. P. (2010). Good effects of
bad feelings: Negative affectivity and group decision making. British Journal of
Management, 21 (2), 375-392.
Lee, L.; (1997). Similarity- based approaches to natural language processing. PhD disserta-
tion, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
LePine, J.A. (2003). Team adaptation and post-change performance: Effects of team compos-
tion in terms of member’s cognitive ability and personality. Journal of Applied Psychol-
ogy, 88, 27-39.
Leung, K.; Wang, Z.M., & Smith, P.B. (2001). Job attitudes and organizational justice in joint
venture hotels in China: The role of expatriate managers. International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 12, 926-945.
85
McKay, P. F., Avery, D. R., Tonidandel, S., Morris, M. A., Hernandez, M., & Hebl, M. (2007).
Racial differences in employee retention: Are diversity climate perceptions the key? Per-
sonnel Psychology, 60, 35–62. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00064.
McKinsey & Company, (2007). Gender diversity, a corporate performance driver, Woman
Matter.
Milliken, F. J. & Martins, L. L. (1996). Searching for common threads: Understanding the
multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups. Academy of Management Review,
21, 402-433.
Nederveen Pieterse, A., van Knippenberg, D. & Van Dierendonck, D. (2013). Cultural diver-
sity and team performance: The role of team member goal orientation. Academy of Man-
agement Journal, 56 (3), 782-804. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0992
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 (2), 153-164.
Nembhard, I., & Edmondson, A. (2006). Making it safe: The effects of leader inclusiveness
and professional status on psychological safety and improvement efforts in health care
teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 941-966.
Platow, M.J. & van Knippenberg, D. (2001). A social identity analysis of leadership endorse-
ment: The effects of leader ingroup prototypicality and distributive intergroup fairness.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1508-1519
Population Reference Bureau, (2015). World Population Data Sheet, with a special focus on
women’s empowerment, from: http://www.prb.org/pdf15/2015-world-population-data-
sheet_eng.pdf
Preacher, K. J., Curran, P. J., & Bauer, D. J. (2006). Computational tools for probing interaction
effects in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. Jour-
nal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31, 437-448.
Preecea & Filbeckb, (1999). Family friendly firms: does it pay to care? Financial Services
Review 8, 47-60.
Roussin, C. J., & Webber, S. S. (2012). Impact of organizational identification and psycholog-
ical safety on initial perceptions of coworker trustworthiness. Journal of Business and
Psychology, 27, 317–329.
Rupp, D. E., & Cropanzano, R. (2002). The mediating effects of social exchange relationships
in predicting workplace outcomes from multifoci organizational justice. Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 925-946.
Sacco, J. M., Scheu, C. R., Ryan, A. M., & Schmitt, N. (2003). An investigation of sex and
similarity effects in interviews: A multilevel approach to relational demography. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 852–865.
86
Salas, E., & Fiore, S. M. (eds). (2004). Team cognition:Understanding the factors that drive
process and performance. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Schein, E. H, & Bennis, W. (1965). Personal and organizational change through group meth-
ods. New York, NY: Wiley.
Schneider SC, De Meyer, A. (1991). Interpreting and responding to strategic issues: the impact
of national culture. Strategic Management Journal 12(4), 307–320.
Simons, T., Friedman, R. A., Liu, L. A., & McLean Parks, J. (2007). Racial differences in
sensitivity to behavioral integrity: Attitudinal consequences, in-group effects, and
“trickle down” among black and non-black employees. Journal of Applied Psychology,
92, 650–665.
Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and
advanced multilevel modeling. London: Sage.
Staples, C.L., (2007). Globalization in the world’s largest TNCs 1993-2005. Corporate Gov-
ernance: An international Review 15.2, 311-321.
Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1987). Effects of information load and percentage of shared infor-
mation on the dissemination of unshared information during group discussion. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 81–93.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S.
Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (Vol. 2, pp. 7–24).
Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
The Federal Employment Agency – Bundesagentur für Arbeit (2011a), Perspektive 2025:
Fachkräfte für Deutschland, Nuremberg.
The Federal Employment Agency – Bundesagentur für Arbeit (2012). date of reference: June
30, 2012 (http://www.arbeitsagentur.de).
Tröster, C. & van Knippenberg, D. (2012). Leader openness, nationality dissimilarity, and
voice in multinational management teams. Journal of International Business Studies, 43
(6), 591-613.
Tsui, A. S., Egan, T. D., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1992). Being different: Relational demography and
organizational attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 549–579.
Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscov-
ering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2000). Cooperation in groups: Procedural justice, social identity,
and behavioral engagement. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
87
van Dijk, H., Engen, M.L. & van Knippenberg, D. (2012). Defying conventional wisdom: A
meta-analytical examination of the differences between demographic and job-related di-
versity relationships with performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 119 (1), 38-53.
van Ginkel, W.P. & van Knippenberg, D. (2008). Group information elaboration and group
decision making: the role of shared task representations. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 105 (1), 82-97.
van Knippenberg, D. (2000). Work motivation and performance: A social identity perspective.
Applied psychology, 49, 357–371. doi:10.1111/1464-0597.00020.
van Knippenberg, D. (2011). Embodying who we are: Leader group prototypicality and lead-
ership effectiveness. The Leadership Quarterly, 22 (6), 1078-1091.
van Knippenberg, B., & van Knippenberg, D. (2005). Leader self-sacrifice and leadership ef-
fectiveness: The moderating role of leader prototypicality. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 90, 25–37.
van Knippenberg, D., de Dreu, C.K.W. & Homan, A. C. (2004). Work group diversity and
group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 89 (6), 1008-1022.
van Knippenberg, D. & Hogg, M.A. (2003). A social identity model of leadership effectiveness
in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25, 243-295.
van Knippenberg, D., Homan, A.C. & van Ginkel, W.P. (2013). Diversity cognition and cli-
mates. In Q. Robinson (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of diversity and work (pp. 220-238).
New York: Oxford University Press.
van Knippenberg, D. & Schippers, M. C. (2007). Work group diversity. Annual Review of Psy-
chology, 58, 515-541.
Vedder, G. (2011). Die Grundlagen von Diversity Management. In: Vedder G, Göbel E, Krause
F (Hrsg) Fallstudien zum Diversity Management. Hampp, München, S. 1–17.
Yukl, G. A. (2006). Leadership in Organizations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
88
Summary (English)
The aim of this dissertation is to understand how to manage cultural diverse teams in
the best way and increase team performance in multinational organizations. Therefore, defining
what kind of leader characteristics drives team performance and what leadership characteristics
foster the positive outcomes of diversity in cultural diverse teams is the focus of the current
dissertation. Despite the fact that some important research in leadership and cultural diversity
in teams has been done, little is known about the influence of team leaders.
more diverse especially in terms of cultural background. Cultural diversity, therefore, is a crit-
ical factor for multinational organizations. Thus, we highlight the current key diversity initia-
The two empirical chapters in the dissertation adds to the understanding of leadership
discuss how these can be managed. Firstly, we take a team level perspective and focus on how
variation in nationality in teams (i.e. cultural diversity of teams) negatively affects team per-
formance. Specifically we look at the impact of team leader cultural background and leader
tenure on team performance. Furthermore we take an individual level perspective and investi-
gate how cultural differences between individuals and their fellow team members (i.e. cultural
specifically deals with the perceived psychological safety of team members in cultural diverse
teams. In some the dissertation outlines the importance of effective leadership of cultural di-
versity and point to beneficial implications for diversity management within multinational or-
ganizations.
89
Summary (Dutch)
Deze dissertatie heeft als doel inzicht te krijgen cultureel diverse team het best kunnen
verbeteren. Daarom is het definiëren van de kenmerken van leiderschapdie team prestaties
versterken en de positieve resultaten van cultureel diverse teams bevorderen de focus van dit
proefschrift. Ondanks het feit dat er belangrijk onderzoek in leiderschap en culturele diversiteit
vooral met betrekking tot de culturele achtergrond. Culturele diversiteit is daarom een kritische
factor voor multinationale organisaties wat de reden is waarom we aandacht besteden aan de
proefschrift dragen bij aan het begrip van leiding van culturele diversiteit. We onderzoeken
gevallen van negatieve effecten van culturele diversiteit en bespreken hoe deze kunnen worden
gemanaged. Ten eerste nemen we het perspectief van een team en focuseren ons op hoe variatie
in nationaliteit in teams (dwz. culturele diversiteit van teams) een negatieve invloed hebben op
de prestaties van het team. We kijken hier naar de impact van de culturele achtergrond van de
teamleider en hoe lang de leider in dienst is op prestaties van het team. Daarnaast nemen we
hun collega-teamleden (dwz. culturele ongelijkheid) een negatieve invloed kunnen hebben op
het gevoel van psychologische zekerheid van personen. Het gaat dan in het bijzonder om de
Samengevat schetst het proefschrift het belang van het effectief leiden van culturele diversiteit
90
About the author
Katja Raithel graduated with a M.Sc. degree in Sport Science at the German Sport Uni-
versity Cologne in 2010. She also holds a postgraduate master degree in Global Management
from the Antwerp Management School, University of Antwerp. During her studies on the topic
of Healthcare & Social Psychology, Katja took on a degree candidate position at an interna-
tional company in the department of Human Resources. Thereafter, she started her professional
career working in the airline industry and started her Ph.D. dissertation supervised by Prof. D.
L. van Knippenberg, focusing on leadership and cultural diversity. She is particularly interested
in understanding how leadership in the organizational environment can impact the outcomes
of cultural diversity. After several years in the airline industry, Katja started working as a Key
Account Manager for Diversity & Talent Management at an international company in the in-
surance industry. Katja is a frequent guest lecturer on the topics of leadership, diversity and
91