Top Management-Team Diversity and Firm Performance: Examining the Role of Cognitions

By Martin Kilduff, R. Angelmar, Ajay Mehra. 2000

704 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Gender Studies, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5ae369599999c8a5393921a7880c029a95d42e16

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Gender Studies

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

Citations in the corpus

Attention as the Mediator Between Top Management Team Characteristics and Strategic Change: The Case of Airline Deregulation (2006, background): “…researchers have long included TMT heterogeneity—the degree of diversity among executives’ experience manifested in tenure, functional background, and so forth—within their analytic scope (e.g., Murray 1989), the implications of heterogeneity are still unclear (summarized in Kilduff et al. 2000).”
Board diversity and firm performance: evidence from the U.K. SMEs (2017, background): “However, Kilduff, Angelmar, and Mehra (2000) found a positive association between age heterogeneity and firm performance, where they used simulation data collected from 159 managers attending an executive education programme at a European management institute and divided them into 35 teams.”
Age Structure of the Workforce and Firm Performance (2008, neutral): “Kilduff et al. (2000) confirm this result using data of 159 managers playing a business game.”
Cognitive diversity and team creativity: Effects of team intrinsic motivation and transformational leadership (2016, background): “However, several scholars have pointed out that the assumption may not always hold in reality (Kilduff et al., 2000; Lawrence, 1997), such that surface-level diversity may not always bring in complementary knowledge and perspectives to the team.”
Towards Understanding Who Makes Corporate Venture Capital Investments and Why (2011, positive): “This reduces superstitious learning and stimulates deeper understanding of cause-effect relationships (Levitt & March, 1988), fosters healthy skepticism in decision-making (Janis, 1972), improves group decision quality (Kilduff et al., 2000), and promotes novel insights and solutions (Page, 2007).”
Joint Impact of Interdependence and Group Diversity on Innovation (2003, background): “…that demographic characteristics do not covary perfectly with these underlying psychological attributes (Bantel & Jackson, 1989; Hambrick & Mason, 1984), and that the link between demographic and cognitive diversity may be more complex than generally assumed (Kilduff et al., 2000; Lawrence, 1997).”