Compare methods
Review your selected methods side by side; rows that differ are highlighted.
| Team Faultline Measurement× | Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix× | |
|---|---|---|
| Field | Organizational Behavior | Organizational Behavior |
| Family | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Year of origin≠ | 1998 | 1959 |
| Originator≠ | Dora C. Lau & J. Keith Murnighan; Sherry Thatcher, Karen Jehn & Elaine Zanutto | Donald T. Campbell & Donald W. Fiske; Keith F. Widaman |
| Type≠ | Compositional diversity measurement pipeline for work groups | Construct-validation matrix and covariance-structure modeling pipeline |
| Seminal source≠ | 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 ↗ | Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81-105. DOI ↗ |
| Aliases≠ | Group Faultlines, Diversity Faultlines, Faultline Strength, Fau Measure | MTMM, Multitrait-Multimethod Analysis, Campbell-Fiske Matrix, CFA-MTMM |
| Related | 3 | 3 |
| Summary≠ | 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. | The multitrait-multimethod matrix is the classic framework for establishing construct validity by measuring several traits with several methods and examining the resulting pattern of correlations. Donald Campbell and Donald Fiske introduced it in 1959, arguing that validating a construct requires showing both convergent validity — different methods of measuring the same trait agree — and discriminant validity — measures of different traits diverge even when they share a method. The matrix lays out every correlation among trait-method combinations so that these patterns can be read off systematically, while also exposing method variance, the tendency of measures sharing a method to correlate for the wrong reasons. Campbell and Fiske's original criteria were inspectional rules of thumb; Keith Widaman's 1985 work recast the matrix as a family of nested confirmatory factor models, providing formal significance tests for convergent validity, discriminant validity, and method variance. The MTMM matrix remains a foundational tool for asking whether a measure captures the construct it claims to. |
| ScholarGateDataset ↗ |
|
|