Although the effects of diversity on team performance have received considerable attention in recent years (e.g., Chatman & Flynn, 2001; Jehn, Northcraft, & Neale, 1999; Watson, Kumar, & Michaelsen, 1993), the results of this body of organizational research are at best mixed (Williams & O'Reilly, 1998).  In contemplating what could account for the apparent lack of coherence in findings, two shortcomings of this research have been noted.  The variance in how researchers define and measure diversity is problematic (Nkomo, 1995).  Furthermore, few researchers have incorporated subjective variables that link diversity to team performance in their studies, in effect creating a black box that has yet to be explored (Lawrence, 1997).  In my presentation, I will discuss how we may be able to achieve more commonality in our definition and measurement of diversity by incorporating perceived similarity, a subjective variable, in our research.  I will also present a theoretical model that illustrates how diversity and perceived similarity could be linked to team performance, providing a plausible explanation for the apparent lack of coherence in research findings about the effects of diversity on team performance.
 

Much marketing and diffusion literature exhibits a pro-innovation bias, working from the assumption that
most technology products are recognized as desirable by all but the technologically incompetent. However,
recent work in marketing is beginning to explore the paradoxical feelings-positive and negative-that many
consumers hold about technology simultaneously (Mick and Fournier 1998; Parasuraman and Colby 2001).
Based on coping literature from marketing (Mick and Fournier 1998) and psychology (e.g, Folkman and
Lazarus 1985), we propose hypotheses regarding consumers' coping strategies for dealing with the 
paradoxical feelings they have regarding technology. We use Parasuraman and Colby's (2001)
Technology Readiness Index which reflects these paradoxes in the combination of high and low scores on
the contributors (optimism and innovativeness) and inhibitors (discomfort and insecurity) of technology
readiness that one consumer can hold. We then examine the types of confrontative and avoidance coping
strategies that different segments of customers use and discuss implications for technology adoption and
technology managers of these findings.
 * Coauthored with A. Parasuraman, U of Miami & Charles L. Colby, Rockbridge Associates