Gå til indholdScholarGate
BibliotekMit bibliotekSkrivebordReview StudioAssistent
Log ind
Team Faultline Measurement/Bevis
Metodebevisregistrering

Team Faultline Measurement

Team faultline measurement quantifies the hypothetical dividing lines that can split a work group into relatively homogeneous subgroups based on the alignment of several member attributes at once. Dora Lau and Keith Murnighan introduced the faultline concept in 1998, arguing that what matters is not how diverse a group is on any single attribute but how strongly multiple attributes line up to create a clean cleavage — for example, when all the older members are also the men and the engineers, while all the younger members are the women and the marketers. Thatcher, Jehn, and Zanutto operationalized the idea in 2003 with the Fau index of faultline strength and a companion measure of faultline distance, and tested their effects on conflict and performance. Later work by Meyer and Glenz compared the proliferating measures and proposed an average-silhouette-width approach that can handle more than two subgroups. The method turns an intuition about subgroup splits into a reproducible number that can be entered into models of team process and outcomes.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Kilderegistrering

Citater kopieret ordret fra metodens kilderegistrering. Ingen påstandsniveauverifikation er udledt heraf.

Team Faultline Measurement (Hypothetical Dividing Lines in Work Group Composition)
Taksonomisk metoderegistrering · process-pipeline / organizational-behavior
  • Lau, D. C., & Murnighan, J. K. (1998). Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 325-340. · DOI 10.5465/amr.1998.533229
  • Thatcher, S. M. B., Jehn, K. A., & Zanutto, E. (2003). Cracks in diversity research: The effects of diversity faultlines on conflict and performance. Group Decision and Negotiation, 12(3), 217-241. · DOI 10.1023/A:1023325406946
  • Meyer, B., & Glenz, A. (2013). Team faultline measures: A computational comparison and a new approach to multiple subgroups. Organizational Research Methods, 16(3), 393-424. · DOI 10.1177/1094428113484970
Åbn fuld metode

Kuraterede påstande

Påstande gemt i bevis-loggen, hver med sin egen vurdering.

Ingen kuraterede påstande endnu

Denne visning opfinder ikke en påstandsvurdering, når loggen ingen har.

Relaterede metoder

Genereret fra metodegrafen og vist som maskinelt foreslåede relationer — ingen bevispåstand er udledt.

Same method familyMultitrait-Multimethod Matrixmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyOrganizational Network Analysismachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Used in the same domainPsychological Empowerment Scalemachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Bevisstatus

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Bibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.

Kilder

3 registrerede citater, kopieret fra metodens kilderegistrering.

Handlinger

Åbn metodeside
ScholarGate

Et indholdsfokuseret opslagsbibliotek over forskningsmetoder — hvad hver metode er, hvordan den fungerer, og hvor den kommer fra.

Åbne data (CC-BY)

Opdag

  • Bibliotek
  • Søg i metoder…
  • Gennemse efter fagområde
  • Fagområder
  • Rejse
  • Sammenlign
  • Hvilken metode?

Reference

  • Fagområder
  • Atlas
  • Ordliste
  • Metodologi
  • Filosofi

Arbejdsområde

  • Mit bibliotek
  • Skrivebord
  • Chat

Virksomhed

  • Om
  • Priser
  • Kontakt
  • Foreslå en metode

Posterne er sammenstillet fra publicerede kilder til reference. Det er dit eget ansvar at kontrollere, at oplysningerne er korrekte og egnede til din anvendelse.

© 2026 ScholarGate · Et opslagsbibliotek over forskningsmetoder
  • Privatliv
  • Cookies
  • Vilkår
  • Slet konto