Homogenous vs. Heterogeneous team

Homogenous team is one in which the group members have a similar shared value and attributes. On the other hand heterogeneous team is one in which the group members have a diverse orientation. There are advantages and disadvantages of both teams that I will outline in the next section.

Advantages
Heterogeneous

- Diverse thinking
- perform better on complex tasks
- more creativity

Homogenous

- Less conflict
-better coordination
- advantage of cohesion
- high satisfaction
- better performance on cooperative tasks

Heterogeneous

- Agreements are difficult
- more conflict
- coordination is problematic
Disadvantages
Homogenous

- Groupthink
- decisions that do not respond to changes and contingencies
- no innovative ideas

The cohesion among homogenous group may translate into high productivity and goal accomplishment. They would all be thinking the same way so conflict would not be an issue for such a team. Heterogeneous team would be the best bet for strategic planning and research where creativity and diverse thinking is a necessity. Which type of team do you prefer working with if you had a choice?

Homogeneous Vs. Heterogeneous Teams
By Louise Jones, eHow Contributor
The makeup of a team, including the mix of cultures and personalities, can make or break its effective output and viability. A homogeneous team would include people who are as similar as possible, with similar points of view, learning abilities and life experiences. Heterogeneous teams include a mixture of races, genders, cultures and ages that provides a wider range of life experiences and opinions. Studies in education, psychology, sociology and business reach conflicting conclusions about whether homogeneous or heterogeneous team composition provides stronger results, which is unsurprising given the vast number of studies and variables to discuss.

1. Homogeneous Team Benefits * Homogeneous teams --- teams made up of people from the same race, gender, social background and age --- often provide equal access and participation of members, as there is less chance for exclusion. Members of a homogeneous team will have an easier time of comprehending each other's verbal and nonverbal communications and will have more shared experiences in common. The similarities can, to some extent, avoid misunderstandings, prejudices and, arguably, speed up work processes and the completion of tasks, although this is not always the case as personality conflicts can occur within homogeneous teams as easily as within heterogeneous teams. There is evidence, such as within educational programs for gifted students, that homogenizing groups on the basis of intelligence provides a good environment for high achievers to progress at a faster pace than is possible in mixed ability groups.

Homogeneous Team Disadvantages * Many studies, for example "Cognitive effects of racial diversity" by Samuel R. Sommers, et al, in "The Journal of Experimental Social Psychology," show that the lack of diversification in a homogeneous group stifles creativity and information processing. It is, perhaps rightly so, very difficult to form homogeneous teams without causing feelings of exclusion to minorities, be those racial or gender. 2. Heterogeneous Team Benefits * Having a mixture of cultures, abilities and life experiences can create a stronger dynamic within a group. Individuals can be "experts" in roles; leader, innovator, communicator, peacekeeper and so on. This can be an organic development or roles can be provided on formation of the group. Studies, such as "Cognitive effects of racial diversity" (see Section 2) suggest a higher degree of creativity and information processing in heterogeneous teams.

Heterogeneous Team Disadvantages * With groups that have mixed learning styles and abilities, group members can find it difficult to communicate and understand others' ideas and information. Having a minority of any sort, whether it is a particular gender, race or age group, can lead to feelings of isolation and so loss of confidence or status within the group. Members with different learning speeds and styles can find themselves left behind if communication methods settled upon suit the majority of the group, but not the whole.

Considerations * The suitability of homogenizing groups depends very much on the purpose of the team. A team intended to promote cutting edge developments will benefit from grouping high intelligence individuals, so being homogenized by intelligence, but it would also benefit from a mix of cultures and life experiences. Having methodologies for communication and working processes in place early on in the team's formation can mitigate many problems in both homogeneous and heterogeneous teams.

Team Incentives and Worker Heterogeneity: An Empirical Analysis of the Impact of Teams on Productivity and Participation

Barton H. Hamilton, Jack A. Nickerson, and Hideo
Owan

Washington University in St. Louis

Worker heterogeneity could shape team productivity by facilitating mutual learning or by influencing the group production norm. Mutual learning suggests that more able workers (e.g., those that are more productive under individual piece rates) may be able to teach the less able workers to be more productive, thereby enhancing team productivity.
Kandel and Lazear (1992) suggest that free-riding may be mitigated by peer pressure to achieve a group norm. Such norms may arise, we argue, from intrateam bargaining in which worker heterogeneity affects group norms through different threat points among workers.

In both cases, the effects of worker heterogeneity on productivity critically depend on worker participation in teams, a decision that has not been considered in the literature. Workers might join teams on their own accord for three reasons. First, low-ability workers could expect that teaming up with higher-ability workers would raise their pay. However, since high-ability workers would think the opposite way, this creates an adverse selection problem. Second, teamwork may call on additional worker abilities (e.g., teamwork may benefit from “collaborative” skills involving communication and leadership in addition to “technical” abilities used in piece rate production) that expand production possibilities, thereby increasing surplus and incentives for cooperation. Finally, teamwork may offer compensating differentials due to the no pecuniary benefits of less boring work, more social interaction, and income smoothing (Rosen 1986).