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

Innovation Labs @ TMC set to launch for early-stage life science startups

moving in

The Texas Medical Center will launch its new Innovation Labs @ TMC in January 2026 to better support life science startups working within the innovation hub.

The 34,000-square-foot space, located in the TMC Innovation Factory at 2450 Holcombe Blvd., will feature labs and life science offices and will be managed by TMC. The space was previously occupied by Johnson & Johnson's JLABS @TMC, a representative from TMC tells InnovationMap. JLABS will officially vacate the space in January.

TMC shares that the expansion will allow it to "open its doors to a wider range of life science visionaries," including those in the TMC BioBridge program and Innovation Factory residents. It will also allow TMC to better integrate with the Innovation Factory's offerings, such as the TMC Health Tech accelerator, TMC Center for Device Innovation and TMC Venture Fund.

“We have witnessed an incredible demand for life science space, not only at the TMC Innovation Factory, but also on the TMC Helix Park research campus,” William McKeon, president and CEO of the TMC, said in a news release. “Innovation Labs @ TMC enables us to meet this rising demand and continue reshaping how early-stage life science companies grow, connect, and thrive.”

“By bringing together top talent, cutting-edge research, and industry access in one central hub, we can continue to advance Houston’s life science ecosystem," he continued.

The TMC Innovation Factory has hosted 450 early-stage ventures since it launched in 2015. JLABS first opened in the space in 2016 with the goal of helping health care startups commercialize.

13 Houston businesses appear on Time's best midsize companies of 2025

new report

A Houston-based engineering firm KBR tops the list of Texas businesses that appear on Time magazine and Statista’s new ranking of the country’s best midsize companies.

KBR holds down the No. 30 spot, earning a score of 91.53 out of 100. Time and Statista ranked companies based on employee satisfaction, revenue growth, and transparency about sustainability. All 500 companies on the list have annual revenue from $100 million to $10 billion.

According to the Great Place to Work organization, 87 percent of KBR employees rate the company as a great employer.

“At KBR, we do work that matters,” the company says on the Great Place to Work website. “From climate change to space exploration, from energy transition to national security, we are helping solve the great challenges of our time through the high-end, differentiated solutions we provide. In doing so, we’re striving to create a better, safer, more sustainable world.”

KBR recorded revenue of $7.7 billion in 2024, up 11 percent from the previous year.

The other 12 Houston-based companies that landed on the Time/Statista list are:

  • No. 141 Houston-based MRC Global. Score: 85.84
  • No. 168 Houston-based Comfort Systems USA. Score: 84.72
  • No. 175 Houston-based Crown Castle. Score: 84.51
  • No. 176 Houston-based National Oilwell Varco. Score: 84.50
  • No. 234 Houston-based Kirby. Score: 82.48
  • No. 266 Houston-based Nabor Industries. Score: 81.59
  • No. 296 Houston-based Archrock. Score: 80.17
  • No. 327 Houston-based Superior Energy Services. Score: 79.38
  • No. 332 Kingwood-based Insperity. Score: 79.15
  • No. 359 Houston-based CenterPoint Energy. Score: 78.02
  • No. 461 Houston-based Oceaneering. Score: 73.87
  • No. 485 Houston-based Skyward Specialty Insurance. Score: 73.15

Additional Texas companies on the list include:

  • No. 95 Austin-based Natera. Score: 87.26
  • No. 199 Plano-based Tyler Technologies. Score: 86.49
  • No. 139 McKinney-based Globe Life. Score: 85.88
  • No. 140 Dallas-based Trinity Industries. Score: 85.87
  • No. 149 Southlake-based Sabre. Score: 85.58
  • No. 223 Dallas-based Brinker International. Score: 82.87
  • No. 226 Irving-based Darling Ingredients. Score: 82.86
  • No. 256 Dallas-based Copart. Score: 81.78
  • No. 276 Coppell-based Brink’s. Score: 80.90
  • No. 279 Dallas-based Topgolf. Score: 80.79
  • No. 294 Richardson-based Lennox. Score: 80.22
  • No. 308 Dallas-based Primoris Services. Score: 79.96
  • No. 322 Dallas-based Wingstop Restaurants. Score: 79.49
  • No. 335 Fort Worth-based Omnicell. Score: 78.95
  • No. 337 Plano-based Cinemark. Score: 78.91
  • No. 345 Dallas-based Dave & Buster’s. Score: 78.64
  • No. 349 Dallas-based ATI. Score: 78.44
  • No. 385 Frisco-based Addus HomeCare. Score: 76.86
  • No. 414 New Braunfels-based Rush Enterprises. Score: 75.75
  • No. 431 Dallas-based Comerica Bank. Score: 75.20
  • No. 439 Austin-based Q2 Software. Score: 74.85
  • No. 458 San Antonio-based Frost Bank. Score: 73.94
  • No. 475 Fort Worth-based FirstCash. Score: 73.39
  • No. 498 Irving-based Nexstar Broadcasting Group. Score: 72.71

Texas ranks as No. 1 most financially distressed state, says new report

Money Woes

Experiencing financial strife is a nightmare of many Americans, but it appears to be a looming reality for Texans, according to a just-released WalletHub study. It names Texas the No. 1 most "financially distressed" state in America.

To determine the states with the most financially distressed residents, WalletHub compared all 50 states across nine metrics in six major categories, such as average credit scores, the share of people with "accounts in distress" (meaning an account that's in forbearance or has deferred payments), the one-year change in bankruptcy filings from March 2024, and search interest indexes for "debt" and "loans."

Joining Texas among the top five most distressed states are Florida (No. 2), Louisiana (No. 3), Nevada (No. 4), and South Carolina (No. 5).

Texas' new ranking as the most financially distressed state in 2025 may be unexpected, WalletHub says, considering the state has a "bigger GDP than most countries" and still has one of the top 10 best economies in the nation (even though that ranking is also lower than it was in previous years).

Even so, Texas residents are stretching themselves very thin financially this year. Texans had the ninth lowest average credit scores nationwide during the first quarter of 2025, the study found, and Texans had the sixth-highest increase in non-business-related bankruptcy filings over the last year, toppling 22 percent.

"Texas also had the third-highest number of accounts in forbearance or with deferred payments per person, and the seventh-highest share of people with these distressed accounts, at 7.1 percent," the report said.

This is where Texas ranked across the study's six key dimensions, where No. 1 means "most distressed:"

  • No. 5 – "Loans" search interest index rank
  • No. 6 – Change in bankruptcy filings from March 2024 to March 2025 rank
  • No. 7 – Average number of accounts in distress rank
  • No. 8 – People with accounts in distress rank
  • No. 13 – Credit score rank and “debt” search interest index rank
Examining these financial factors on the state level is important for understanding how Americans are faring with economic issues like inflation, unemployment rates, or natural disasters, according to WalletHub analyst Chip Lupo.


"When you combine data about people delaying payments with other metrics like bankruptcy filings and credit score changes, it paints a good picture of the overall economic trends of a state," Lupo said.

On the other side of the spectrum, states like Hawaii (No. 50), Vermont (No. 49), and Alaska (No. 48) are the least financially distressed states in America.

The top 10 states with the most people in financial distress in 2025 are:

  • No. 1 – Texas
  • No. 2 – Florida
  • No. 3 – Louisiana
  • No. 4 – Nevada
  • No. 5 – South Carolina
  • No. 6 – Oklahoma
  • No. 7 – North Carolina
  • No. 8 – Mississippi
  • No. 9 – Kentucky
  • No. 10 – Alabama
---

A version of this article originally appeared on CultureMap.com.