Design teams are commonly formed in engineering courses based on the assumption that diversity leads to more innovative solutions. However, the literature indicates that this assumption is conditional, based on factors such as team effectiveness, individual participation in team decisions, team size, and individuals’ experience level. This also depends on if diversity is defined by age, race, gender, function, or some combination of these factors. The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship of team diversity, as a function of gender and ethnicity, to team effectiveness, which we argue is a precursor to team innovation. In this study we use a pre-established peer evaluation system, used in a first year engineering course to measure the team effectiveness ratings of 58 three- or four-person teams. We also recorded discussions of two dyads when solving a design problem. ANOVA analysis is used with race and gender as independent variables and team effectiveness as the dependent variable. There was no significant difference between mixed-gender and all-male teams (F(1, 56)=.78, p=.38). However, discourse analysis of two dyads showed that the mixed-gender dyad had more conflicts and had a less structured design process compared to the all-male dyad. The ethnicity data will also be reported in the full paper. Using the results of this study, we will make recommendations on the formation of novice design teams to optimize their effectiveness.

1. EL Does Diversity in Novice Teams Lead to Higher Team Effectiveness? Ruth Wertz, Nicholas Fila, Jing Chen, and Şenay Purzer ADVANCE Gender & STEM Research Symposium Purdue University February 18, 2011

2. Overview of Study EL Current Study Gender Race Team Effectiveness Diversity Innovation Interdependence Potency Goal Orientation FUTURE WORK Non-Conformity Aptitude Quality Individual creativity

3. Motivation Team diversity, and the urgency for innovative solutions are a reality of design and engineering in the 21st century.1 A common assumption is that heterogeneous work teams will produce more (quantity) and better (quality) innovative outcomes than homogeneous teams. Student (novice) teams are often formed under this assumption, but we do not know if this is actually true. EL 1. Vest, C. M. (2008). Context Challenge for Twenty-First Century Engineering Education. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 235-236.

4. Intro to the Literature EL Group dynamics have a significant impact on innovative behavior Minority dissent related to innovative behavior only when team participation in decision-making is high2 Found three-way interaction between team diversity, perceived task interdependence, and perceived goal interdependence on innovative outcomes3 Team process moderates of the effect of multidisciplinarity on quality of innovation4 De Dreu, C. K. W., & West, M. A. (2001). Minority dissent and team innovation: The importance of participation in decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(6), 1191-1201. 3. Van derVegt, G., & Janssen, O. (2003). Joint Impact of Interdependence and Group Diversity on Innovation. [Feature]. Journal of Management, 29(5), 729-751. 4. Fay, D., Borrill, C., Amir, Z., Haward, R., & West, M. A. (2006). Getting the most out of multidisciplary teams: A multi-sample study of team innovation in health care. Journal of Organizational Pyschology, 79(4), 553-567.

5. Purpose of Our Study We know that there are significant differences in the design behaviors in novice versus expert teams.5 We have found no diversity -to-innovation studies that take effects of novice behaviors into account. Using the literature as a guide, the purpose of this study is to explore the relationship of diversity and team effectiveness in a first-year engineering course. EL 5. For example: Atman, C. J., Adams, R. S., Cardella, M. E., Turns, J., Mosborg, S., & Saleem, J. (2007). Engineering design processes: A comparison of students and expert practitioners. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(4), 359-379.

6. Research Questions Does diversity in novice teams lead to higher team effectiveness? Diversity Dimensions Gender Race Team Effectiveness6 Interdependence Potency Goal-setting How do diverse teams interact? EL 7. Imbrie, P.K., Maller, S.J., and Immekus, J.C. (2005) Assessing Team Effectiveness, Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Portland, Oregon

7. Research Setting Classroom Setting (Quantitative) ENGR 195 (Ideas and Innovation – Part 1) Fall 2009 1295 total students Students grouped in permanent teams of three or four Research Setting (Qualitative) Engineering Learning Observatory (ELO) Fall 2009 8 students paired into 4 dyads for a 1-hr verbal protocol EL

8. Demographics EL Note: Dyads were racially homogeneous with two all male and two mixed gender teams

9. Methods - Quantitive EL Data Collection Collected peer evaluation surveys after completion of an eight-week team project Teams with incomplete data or less than four members were not included in analysis N1 = 261 teams (1044 students) with complete gender data N2 = 121 teams (484 students) with complete racial data Team effectiveness scores were taken from peer evaluation tool.6,7 6. Imbrie, P.K., Maller, S.J., and Immekus, J.C. (2005) Assessing Team Effectiveness, Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Portland, Oregon 7. Wang, J., Imbrie, P.K., “Assessing Team Effectiveness: Comparing Peer-evaluations to a Team Effectiveness Instrument” Proceedings of the 2009 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Austin, TX

10. Methods- Quantitative Data Analysis Dependent Variable: Team Effectiveness Score Individual scores based on three criteria Interdependence, potency, and goal-setting Team scores were arithmetic mean of individual scores Independent Variable: Diversity Indices Dimensions: Gender and race Categories: Homogenous and heterogeneous teams Statistical Analysis Independent samples t-test EL

11. Results EL Mean Team Effectiveness Score by Diversity Dimension * indicates statistical significance at the p = 0.01 level Gender Diversity t(259) = -2.76, p < 0.01 Team effectiveness was higher in gender heterogeneous teams Racial Diversity t(123) = .592, p = 0.56 Racial diversity had no impact on team effectiveness

12. Methods - Qualitative Collection and Analysis Recorded video and audio of 4 dyads completing hour-long design problem Verbal protocol analysis Micro-coding of observable social activities Collaboration, argumentation, domination, and confusion. Observations All-male groups were more collaborative than mixed-gender groups. Groups did not differ in argumentation. EL

13. Example All-Male Discourse EL

14. Example Mixed-Gender Discourse EL

15. Conclusions Teams with at least one female member were more effective than all-male teams. Racially heterogeneous teams were no more effective than racially homogenous teams. Limited to available and easily measured data Team effectiveness based on self-reported data EL

16. Future Work Consider more unique dimensions of diversity Individual creativity Socio-economic status Ethnicity/cultural identity Aptitude Expert/novice Relationship of diversity to innovation! Quality (feasibility, sustainability, meets design criteria) Creativity (non-conformity, novelty) EL

17. “Studying diversity requires simplification of unmanageable complexities. This is an interesting challenge and a tremendous opportunity for researchers; there are still many unanswered questions.”8 EL QUESTIONS? 8. Cady, S. H., & Valentine, J. (1999). Team Innovation and Perceptions of Consideration: What Difference Does Diversity Make? Small Group Research, 30(6), 730-750. doi: 10.1177/104649649903000604

18. EL Thank You! Ruth Wertz: rwertz@purdue.edu Nicholas Fila: nfila@purdue.edu Jing Chen: chen208@purdue.edu ŞenayPurzer: spurzer@purdue.edu