Vlerick Leuven Gent Working Paper Series 2007/03 ... - Vlerick Public

In the next sections, we elaborate the indirect route by proposing three group process
variables that will significantly influence the task performance of boards: cohesiveness,
debate and conflict norms. Moreover, we capture them in a set of propositions.
Cohesiveness and debate as intervening variables
Despite of certain distinctive characteristics, boards of directors are, like top
management teams, confronted with complex ambiguous tasks. Much of the work that boards
of directors must do in order to produce effective outcomes involves cooperative decisionmaking
and joint efforts. Board members are required to work together by mutual interaction,
sharing information, resources and decisions. In this respect, the board of directors is
considered to be a collegial body and only if board members coalesced into a group collective
judgment can emerge (Charan, 1998). However, it is only the last decade that scholars began
suggesting that the board should transform itself from a loose aggregation of individuals into
an effective team (for example, Nadler, 2006 and 2004; Carter and Lorsch, 2004; Conger
et.al., 2001). For boards of directors becoming a team, who operates collegial, we argue that a
minimum degree of cohesion among the board members is required. Our view that cohesion
aids collaboration and communication among board members, and as such influences
performance outcomes, is also suggested and reinforced by research on other teams.
Organizational demography literature has emphasised cohesiveness as a potential intervening
construct and it is one of the most extensively studied variables in group settings
(Bettenhausen, 1991; Williams and O’Reilly, 1998). Group cohesiveness is defined as “the
degree to which the members of the group are attracted to each other and are motivated to
stay in the group” (Shaw 1976:197). The concept is affective in nature and is characterised by
a sense of connectedness. In particular, cohesiveness is considered to play a vital role in any
exchange relationship (Austin, 1997) and it can be argued that it also has relevance in the
context of boards of directors. To the extent board members like each other and like the
group, they can be expected to interact and integrate more easily. Moreover, qualitative
research on boards of directors (e.g. Van den Berghe and Levrau, 2004; Finkelstein and
Mooney (2003)) has revealed that directors value the chemistry of the board and the team
spirit of their colleagues as important elements of board effectiveness. Ideas as “team spirit”
and “teamwork” have been linked to the concept of cohesiveness (Seashore, 1977). Lastly, the
board model put forward by Forbes and Milliken (1999) has also suggested that cohesiveness
may exert an influence on the task performance of boards of directors.
14