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

Houston scores $120M in new cancer research and prevention grants

cancer funding

The Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas has granted more than $120 million to Houston organizations and companies as part of 73 new awards issued statewide.

The funds are part of nearly $154 million approved by the CPRIT's governing board earlier this month, bringing the organization's total investment in cancer prevention and research to more than $4 billion since its inception.

“Today marks an important milestone for CPRIT and for every Texan affected by cancer,” CEO Kristen Doyle said in a news release. “Texas has invested $4 billion in the fight against one of the world’s greatest public health challenges. Over 16 years, that support has helped Texas lead the search for breakthrough treatments, develop new cancer-fighting drugs and devices, and—most importantly—save tens of thousands of lives through early cancer detection and prevention. Every Texan should know this effort matters, and we’re not finished yet. Together, we will conquer cancer.”

A portion of the funding will go toward recruiting leading cancer researchers to Houston. CPRIT granted $5 million to bring John Quackenbush to Baylor College of Medicine. Quackenbush comes from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and is an expert in computational and systems biology. His research focuses on complex genomic data to understand cancer and develop targeted therapies.

The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center also received $3 million to recruit Irfan Asangani, an associate professor at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine. His research focuses on how chromatin structure and epigenetic regulation drive the development and progression of cancer, especially prostate cancer.

Other funds will go towards research on a rare, aggressive kidney cancer that impacts children and young adults; screening programs for breast and cervical cancer; and diagnostic technology.

In total, cancer grants were given to:

  • The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center: $29.02 million
  • Baylor College of Medicine: $15.04 million
  • The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston: $9.37 million
  • Texas A&M University System Health Science Center: $1.2 million
  • University of Houston: $900,000

Additional Houston-based companies landed grants, including:

  • Crossbridge Bio Inc.: $15.01 million
  • OncoMAGNETx Inc.: $13.97 million
  • Immunogenesis Inc.: $10.85 million
  • Diakonos Oncology Corporation: $7.16 million
  • Iterion Therapeutics Inc.: $7.13 million
  • NovaScan Inc.: $3.7 million
  • EMPIRI Inc.: $2.59 million
  • Air Surgical Inc.: $2.58 million
  • Light and Salt Association: $2.45 million

See the full list of awards here.

U.S. News names 5 Houston suburbs as the best places to retire in 2026

Retirement Report

Houston-area suburbs should be on the lookout for an influx of retirees in 2026. A new study by U.S. News and World Report has declared The Woodlands and Spring as the fourth and fifth best cities to retire in America, with three other local cities making the top 25.

The annual report, called "250 Best Places to Retire in the U.S. in 2026" initially compared 850 U.S. cities, and narrowed the list down to a final 250 cities (up from 150 previously). Each locale was analyzed across six indexes: quality of life for individuals reaching retirement age, value (housing affordability and cost of living), health care quality, tax-friendliness for retirees, senior population and migration rates, and the strength of each city's job market.

Midland, Michigan was crowned the No. 1 best place to retire in 2026. The remaining cities that round out the top five are Weirton, West Virginia (No. 2) and Homosassa Springs, Florida (No. 3).

According to U.S. News, about 15 percent of The Woodlands' population is over the age of 65. The median household income in this suburb is $139,696, far above the national average median household income of $79,466.

Though The Woodlands has a higher cost of living than many other places in the country, the report maintains that the city "offers a higher value of living compared to similarly sized cities."

"If you want to buy a house in The Woodlands, the median home value is $474,279," the city's profile on U.S. News says. "And if you're a renter, you can expect the median rent here to be $1,449." For comparison, the report says the national average home value is $370,489.

Spring ranked as the fifth best place to retire in 2026, boasting a population of more than 68,000 residents, 11 percent of whom are seniors. This suburb is located less than 10 miles south of The Woodlands, while still being far enough away from Houston (about 25 miles) for seniors to escape big city life for the comfort of a smaller community.

"Retirees are prioritizing quality of life over affordability for the first time since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic," said U.S. News contributing editor Tim Smart in a press release.

The median home value in Spring is lower than the national average, at $251,247, making it one of the more affordable places to buy a home in the Houston area. Renters can expect to pay a median $1,326 in monthly rent, the report added.

Elsewhere in Houston, Pearland ranked as the 17th best place to retire for 2026, followed by Conroe (No. 20) and League City (No. 25).

Other Texas cities that ranked among the top 50 best places to retire nationwide include Victoria (No. 12), San Angelo (No. 28), and Flower Mound (No. 37).

The top 10 best U.S. cities to retire in 2026 are:

  • No. 1 – Midland, Michigan
  • No. 2 – Weirton, West Virginia
  • No. 3 – Homosassa Springs, Florida
  • No. 4 – The Woodlands, Texas
  • No. 5 – Spring, Texas
  • No. 6 – Rancho Rio, New Mexico
  • No. 7 – Spring Hill, Florida
  • No. 8 – Altoona, Pennsylvania
  • No. 9 – Palm Coast, Florida
  • No. 10 – Lynchburg, Virginia
---

This article originally appeared on CultureMap.com.

Micro-nuclear reactor to launch at Texas A&M innovation campus in 2026

nuclear pilot

The Texas A&M University System and Last Energy plan to launch a micro-nuclear reactor pilot project next summer at the Texas A&M-RELLIS technology and innovation campus in Bryan.

Washington, D.C.-based Last Energy will build a 5-megawatt reactor that’s a scaled-down version of its 20-megawatt reactor. The micro-reactor initially will aim to demonstrate safety and stability, and test the ability to generate electricity for the grid.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) fast-tracked the project under its New Reactor Pilot Program. The project will mark Last Energy’s first installation of a nuclear reactor in the U.S.

Private funds are paying for the project, which Robert Albritton, chairman of the Texas A&M system’s board of regents, said is “an example of what’s possible when we try to meet the needs of the state and tap into the latest technologies.”

Glenn Hegar, chancellor of the Texas A&M system, said the 5-megawatt reactor is the kind of project the system had in mind when it built the 2,400-acre Texas A&M-RELLIS campus.

The project is “bold, it’s forward-looking, and it brings together private innovation and public research to solve today’s energy challenges,” Hegar said.

As it gears up to build the reactor, Last Energy has secured a land lease at Texas A&M-RELLIS, obtained uranium fuel, and signed an agreement with DOE. Founder and CEO Bret Kugelmass said the project will usher in “the next atomic era.”

In February, John Sharp, chancellor of Texas A&M’s flagship campus, said the university had offered land at Texas A&M-RELLIS to four companies to build small modular nuclear reactors. Power generated by reactors at Texas A&M-RELLIS may someday be supplied to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) grid.

Also in February, Last Energy announced plans to develop 30 micro-nuclear reactors at a 200-acre site about halfway between Lubbock and Fort Worth.

---

This article originally appeared on our sister site, EnergyCapitalHTX.com.