Having diversity of thought among the leadership team is usually regarded as a positive, Houston researchers found that conflict can cause more harm than good. Photo via Getty Images

For the past 40 years, management researchers have assumed that diversity of opinion about company strategy, even when it causes conflict among senior managers, leads to higher-quality strategic decisions and improved firm performance.

It turns out there isn’t evidence to support that belief.

Rice Business Professor Daan Van Knippenberg has spent his career studying topics related to team performance, decision making, diversity and conflict. When a research team led by Codou Samba, an assistant professor at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, approached him with an offer to test longstanding assumptions about conflict related to company strategy in senior management teams, he jumped at the opportunity.

In his experience, the business case for diversity is strong, but it comes with caveats. “Diversity of perspectives can lead to better solutions to complex problems, but only when team members are open-minded enough to listen carefully to each other and really integrate another point of view into their decision-making process,” he says. This does not seem to apply to differences in opinion about what company strategy should be.

When managers dig in their heels and refuse to consider and integrate other perspectives, that two-way door of communication slams shut and conflict ensues. “The popular idea that conflict is actually good for firms went against all my knowledge,” says Van Knippenberg. “It’s annoying that this idea has floated around in my field for so long when the evidence really points the other way.”

The team led by Samba, which also included C. Chet Miller, a professor at the University of Houston, conducted a quantitative summary and integration of 78 papers that provide data about strategic dissent — a term used to describe diverging opinions about strategic goals and objectives on senior management teams — and its influence on strategic decision making and firm performance.

Every paper that made a prediction about strategic dissent (only a few did not) posited that strategic dissent leads to better outcomes for firms.

In their paper, “The impact of strategic dissent on organizational outcomes: A meta-analytic integration,” the research team used a deep well of empirical data to demonstrate that the opposite is true. Turning common wisdom on its head, they found that strategic dissent among senior managers actually leads to lower-quality decisions and impaired firm performance.

The authors identify two major reasons for the negative impact of strategic dissent on firm outcomes.

First, strategic dissent causes relational breakdown among senior managers. “If managers walk away from a team meeting thinking they just had a conflict instead of a productive discussion, the outcome is rarely positive,” says Van Knippenberg. The two sides retreat into their respective corners, believing the other side to be wrong and closing their minds to further information.

Second, strategic dissent leads to less relevant information being exchanged among managers. Inevitably, this blockage impairs the decision-making process. If a marketing director and an operations director are at odds, for example, they are less likely to share the marketing- or operations-specific information that is needed to make an optimal team decision.

Teams can benefit from diversity of thought, but it is not always clear what conditions need to be in place for that to happen on senior management teams that disagree about the firm’s strategic direction. CEOs — the leaders of senior management teams — would do well to realize that it takes an effortful investment to foster open-minded discussions of diverging views on the organization’s strategy, to create an environment that encourages members to express dissenting perspectives while absorbing the perspectives of others, and to prevent vested interest and power dynamics from determining the outcomes of such discussions.

------

This article originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom and was based on research from Daan Van Knippenberg, the Houston Endowed Professor of Management at the Jones Graduate School of Business at Rice University, C. Chet Miller, the C.T. Bauer Professor of Organizational Studies at C. T. Bauer College of Business at the University of Houston, and Codou Samba, an assistant professor at Haslam College of Business at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

German biotech co. to relocate to Houston thanks to $4.75M CPRIT grant

money moves

Armed with a $4.75 million grant from the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas, a German biotech company will relocate to Houston to work on developing a cancer medicine that fights solid tumors.

Eisbach Bio is conducting a clinical trial of its EIS-12656 therapy at Houston’s MD Anderson Cancer Center. In September, the company announced its first patient had undergone EIS-12656 treatment. EIS-12656 works by suppressing cancer-related genome reorganization generated by DNA.

The funding from the cancer institute will support the second phase of the EIS-12656 trial, focusing on homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) tumors.

“HRD occurs when a cell loses its ability to repair double-strand DNA breaks, leading to genomic alterations and instability that can contribute to cancerous tumor growth,” says the institute.

HRD is a biomarker found in most advanced stages of ovarian cancer, according to Medical News Today. DNA constantly undergoes damage and repairs. One of the repair routes is the

homologous recombination repair (HRR) system.

Genetic mutations, specifically those in the BCRA1 and BCRA1 genes, cause an estimated 10 percent of cases of ovarian cancer, says Medical News Today.

The Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) says the Eisbach Bio funding will bolster the company’s “transformative approach to HRD tumor therapy, positioning Texas as a hub for innovative cancer treatments while expanding clinical options for HRD patients.”

The cancer institute also handed out grants to recruit several researchers to Houston:

  • $2 million to recruit Norihiro Goto from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to MD Anderson.
  • $2 million to recruit Xufeng Chen from New York University to MD Anderson.
  • $2 million to recruit Xiangdong Lv from MD Anderson to the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston.

In addition, the institute awarded:

  • $9,513,569 to Houston-based Marker Therapeutics for a first-phase study to develop T cell-based immunotherapy for treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer.
  • $2,499,990 to Lewis Foxhall of MD Anderson for a colorectal cancer screening program.
  • $1,499,997 to Abigail Zamorano of the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston for a cervical cancer screening program.
  • $1,497,342 to Jennifer Minnix of MD Anderson for a lung cancer screening program in Northeast Texas.
  • $449,929 to Roger Zoorob of the Baylor College of Medicine for early prevention of lung cancer.

On November 20, the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute granted funding of $89 million to an array of people and organizations involved in cancer prevention and research.

West Coast innovation organization unveils new location in Houston suburb to boost Texas tech ecosystem

plugging in

Leading innovation platform Plug and Play announced the opening of its new flagship Houston-area location in Sugar Land, which is its fourth location in Texas.

Plug and Play has accelerated over 2,700 startups globally last year with corporate partners that include Dell Technologies, Daikin, Microsoft, LG Chem, Shell, and Mercedes. The company’s portfolio includes PayPal, Dropbox, LendingClub, and Course Hero, with 8 percent of the portfolio valued at over $100 million.

The deal, which facilitated by the Sugar Land Office of Economic Development and Tourism, will bring a new office for the organization to Sugar Land Town Square with leasing and hiring between December and January. The official launch is slated for the first quarter of 2025, and will feature 15 startups announced on Selection Day.

"By expanding to Sugar Land, we’re creating a space where startups can access resources, build partnerships, and scale rapidly,” VP Growth Strategy at Plug and Play Sherif Saadawi says in a news release. “This location will help fuel Texas' innovation ecosystem, providing entrepreneurs with the tools and networks they need to drive real-world impact and contribute to the state’s technological and economic growth."

Plug and Play plans to hire four full-time equivalent employees and accelerate two startup batches per year. The focus will be on “smart cities,” which include energy, health, transportation, and mobility sectors. One Sugar Land City representative will serve as a board member.

“We are excited to welcome Plug and Play to Sugar Land,” Mayor of Sugar Land Joe Zimmerma adds. “This investment will help us connect with corporate contacts and experts in startups and businesses that would take us many years to reach on our own. It allows us to create a presence, attract investments and jobs to the city, and hopefully become a base of operations for some of these high-growth companies.”

The organization originally entered the Houston market in 2019 and now has locations in Bryan/College Station, Frisco, and Cedar Park in Texas.