a systematic problem solving approach for multinational organisations would include

Intercultural Competence in Multicultural Teams

• First Online: 19 November 2016

Cite this chapter

• Alex Matveev 2  

Part of the book series: Management for Professionals ((MANAGPROF))

5477 Accesses

1 Citations

This chapter extends the topic of intercultural competence in organizations to the context of multicultural professional work teams. Leadership of modern organizations places high value on self-managed work teams and collaboration between employees and organizations. This chapter highlights the importance of intercultural competence for multicultural teams, some challenges and advantages of multicultural teams, and explains how intercultural competence can help to develop coherent and effective culturally diverse teams.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Abersmith, P. (2001). Personal interview .

Google Scholar  

Adler, N. J. (1991). International dimensions of organizational behavior (2nd ed.). Boston: PWS-Kent.

Allen, T. (1997). Managing the flow of technology . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Bantel, K. H., & Jackson, S. E. (1989). Top management and innovations in banking: Does the composition of the top team make a difference? Strategic Management Journal, 10 , 107–124.

Article   Google Scholar  

Bantz, C. R. (1993). Cultural diversity and group cross-cultural team research. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 21 , 1–20.

Black, J. S., & Gregersen, H. B. (2000). The right way to manage expats. In J. E. Garten (Ed.), World view: Global strategies for the new economy (pp. 187–200). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Black, J. S., Morrison, A. J., & Gregersen, H. B. (1999). Global explorers: The next generation of leaders . New York: Routledge.

Boyle, B., Nicholas, S., & Mitchell, R. (2012). Sharing and developing knowledge of organization culture during international assignments. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 12 (3), 361–378.

Braiker, H. B., & Kelley, H. H. (1979). Conflict in the development of close relationships. In R. L. Burgess & T. L. Huston (Eds.), Social exchange in developing relationships (pp. 135–168). New York: Academic Press.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Broome, B. J., Nadler, L. B., & Nadler, M. K. (1985). Culture and the management of conflict situations. In W. B. Gudykunst, L. P. Stewart, & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.), Communication, culture, and organizational processes (pp. 87–113). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Carmel, E. (1999). Global software teams . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Christophel, D. M. (1996). Russian communication orientations: A cross-cultural examination. Communication Research Reports, 3 (1), 43–51.

Dalkey, N. C. (1969). The Delphi method . Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.

Delbecq, A. H., de Ven, V., & Gustafson, D. H. (1975). Group techniques for program planning: A guide to nominal group and Delphi processes . Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.

Dennis, A. R. (1996). Information exchange and use in small group decision making. Small Group Research, 27 (4), 532–550.

Deutsch, M. (1971). Toward an understanding of conflict. International Journal of Group Tensions, 1 , 42–54.

Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of social conflict . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Dunphy, D. C. (1968). Phases, roles, and myths in self-analytic groups. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 4 (2), 1965–2225.

Dwyer, P., Engardio, P., Schiller, S., & Reed, S. (1994, November 18). The new model: Tearing up today’s organizational chart. Business Week , 80–90.

Dyer, W. G. (1996). Essential conditions for building successful teams. In G. M. Parker (Ed.), Handbook of best practices for teams (Vol. 1, pp. 21–29). Amherst, MA: HRD Press.

Farrell, M. P. (1976). Patterns in the development of self-analytic groups. Journal of Applied Behavioral science, 12 , 523–542.

Ferraro, G. P. (1998). The cultural dimensions of international business (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Filin, F. P. (Ed.). (1979). Encyclopedia of the Russian language . Moscow, Russia: Russkii Yazyk.

Fisher, R. (1983). Getting to yes . New York: Penguin Books.

Gregersen, H. B., Morrison, A. J., & Black, J. S. (1998). Developing leaders for the global frontier. Sloan Management Review, 40 , 21–32.

Gudykunst, W. B. (1998a). Bridging differences: Effective intergroup communication (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Gudykunst, W. B. (1998b). Applying anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) theory to intercultural adjustment training. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 22 , 227–250.

Gudykunst, W. B., & Kim, Y. Y. (1984). Communicating with strangers: An approach to intercultural communication . Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond culture . Garden City, NY: Anchor Press.

Hall, E. T. (1983). The dance of life: The other dimension of time . New York: Doubleday.

Hamel, G., & Prahalad, K. (1994). Competing for the future . Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Handy, C. (1995). Trust and the virtual organization. Harvard Business Review, 70 (3), 40–50.

Heifetz, R., & Laurie, D. (1998). Leadership: Mobilizing adaptive work . Unpublished.

Hocker, J. L., & Wilmot, W. V. (1991). Interpersonal conflict (3rd ed.). Dubuque, IA: Brown.

Hoffman, L. R., & Maier, N. R. F. (1961). Quality and acceptance of problem solutions by members of homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62 (2), 401–407.

Hofner Saphiere, D. M. (1996). Productive behaviors of global business teams. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20 (2), 227–259.

Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture consequences: International differences in work related values . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind . London: McGraw-Hill.

Hofstede, G. (1996). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. Intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival . New York: McGraw-Hill.

Holden, N., Cooper, C., & Carr, J. (1998). Dealing with the new Russia: Management cultures in collision . New York: Wiley.

Huckman, R. S., & Pisano, G. P. (2006). The firm specificity of individual performance: Evidence from cardiac surgery. Management Science, 52 (4), 473–488.

Ilgen, D. R., LePine, J. A., & Hollenbeck, J. R. (1997). Effective decision making in multinational teams. In P. C. Earley & M. Erez (Eds.), New perspectives on international industrial/organizational psychology (pp. 377–409). San Francisco: New Lexington Press.

Ilgen, D. R., Major, D. A., Hollenbeck, J. R., & Sego, D. J. (1993). Team research in the 1990s. In M. M. Chemers & R. Ayman (Eds.), Leadership theory and research (pp. 245–270). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

Janis, I. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascos . Boston: Houghton Miffin.

Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (1999). The wisdom of teams: Creating the high-performance organization . New York: Harper Collins Publishers.

Kealey, D. J., & Protheroe, D. R. (1996). The effectiveness of cross-cultural training for expatriates: An assessment of the literature on the issue. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20 (2), 141–165.

Keyton, J. (1993). Group termination: Completing the study of group development. Small Group Research, 24 , 84–100.

Lange, D. L., & Paige, R. M. (Eds.). (2003). Culture as the core: Perspectives on culture in second language learning . Greenwich, CT: Information Age.

Lechler, T. G., & Fallah, M. H. (2008). Global innovation performance: Strategic challenges for multinational corporations. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 25 , 58–74.

Lewin, K. (1936). Principles of topological psychology . New York: McGraw-Hill.

Book   Google Scholar  

Lewis, R. D. (1998). When cultures collide: Managing successfully across cultures . London: Nicholas Brealey.

Linstone, H. A., & Turoff, M. (Eds.). (1975). The Delphi method: Techniques and applications . Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Lundgren, D., & Knight, D. (1978). Sequential stages of development in sensitivity training groups. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 14 (2), 204–222.

Maderer, D., Holtbrügge, D., & Schuster, T. (2014). Professional football squads as multicultural teams. Cultural diversity, intercultural experience, and team performance International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 14 (2), 215–238.

Marquardt, M. J., & Horvath, L. (2001). Global teams: How top multinationals span boundaries and cultures with high-speed teamwork . Palo Alto, CA: Davies-Black.

Marquardt, M. J., & Reynolds, A. (1994). The global learning organization . Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin.

Matveev, A. V., & Nelson, P. E. (2004). Cross cultural communication competence and multicultural team performance: Perceptions of American and Russian Managers. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 4 (2), 253–270.

May, R., Young, C. B., & Ledgerwood, D. (1998). Lessons from Russian human resource management experience. European Management Journal, 16 (4), 447–459.

Maznevski, M., & Peterson, M. F. (1997). Societal values, social interpretation, and multinational teams. In C. S. Granrose & S. Oskamp (Eds.), Cross-cultural work groups (pp. 61–89). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

McCroskey, J. C., & McCroskey, L. L. (1986). Predictors of willingness to communicate: Implications for screening and remediation . Paper presented at the International Communication Association Convention, Chicago, IL.

McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1990). Willingness to communicate: Differing cultural perspectives. The Southern Communication Journal, 56 , 72–77.

Mendenhall, M. E. (2001). New perspectives on expatriate adjustment and its relationship to global leadership development. In M. W. Mendenhall, M. K. Torsten, & K. S. Günter (Eds.), Developing global business leaders: Policies, processes, and innovations (pp. 1–18). Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

Miles, M. (1971). Learning to work in groups . New York: Teachers College Press.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook . London: Sage.

Miliken, F. J., & Martins, L. L. (1996). Searching for common threads: Understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 21 , 402–433.

Mitchell, J. M. (1986). International cultural relations . London: Allen & Unwin.

Mockaitis, A. I., Rose, E. L., & Zettinig, P. (2012). The power of individual cultural values in global virtual teams. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 12 (2), 193–210.

Moosmüller, A. (1995). Learning objectives in intercultural competence: Decoding German everyday knowledge from a Japanese perspective. In A. Jensen, K. Jaeger, & A. Lorentsen (Eds.), Intercultural competence (Vol. 2, pp. 191–207). Aalborg: Aalborg University Press.

Moosmüller, A., Spiess, E., & Podsiadlowski, A. (2001). International team building: Issues in developing multinational work groups. In M. W. Mendenhall, M. K. Torsten, & K. S. Günter (Eds.), Developing global business leaders: Policies, processes, and innovations (pp. 1–18). Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

Moran, R. T., & Harris, P. R. (1981). Managing cultural synergy . Houston, TX: Gulf.

Mortensen, C. D. (1991). Communication, conflict, and culture. Communication theory, 1 , 273–293.

Nelson, C. P. (2016). Personal interview .

Nemeth, C. (1986). Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological Review, 93 (1), 23–32.

Northen, H. (1969). Social work groups . New York: Columbia University Press.

O’Hara-Devereaux, M., & Johansen, R. (1994). Globalwork: Bridging distance, culture, and time . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Parker, B. (1998). Globalization and business practice: Managing across boundaries . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Podsiadlowski, A., & Spiess, E. (1996). Zur evaluation eines interkulturellen trainings in einem deutschen grossunternehmen. Zeitschrift für Personalforschung Zeitschrift fur Personalforschung, 1 , 48–66.

Ranney, J., & Deck, M. (1995). Making teams work: Lessons from the leaders in new product development. Planning Review, 23 (4), 6–13.

Ray, D., & Bronstein, H. (1995). Teaming up: Making the transition to a self-directed, team-based organization . New York: McGraw-Hill.

Rhinesmith, S. H. (1996). A manager’s guide to globalization: Six keys to success in a changing world . Chicago: Irwin.

Ricard, V. B. (1993). Developing intercultural communication skills . Malabar, FL: Krieger.

Schneider, S. C., & DeMeyer, A. (1991). Interpreting and responding to strategic issues: The impact of national culture. Strategic Management Journal, 12 , 307–320.

Schwandt, D., & Marquardt, M. (2000). Organizational learning: From world-class theories to global best practices . Boca Raton, FL: St. Lucie Press.

Shenkar, O., & Zeira, Y. (1992). Role conflict and role ambiguity of chief manager officers in international joint ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 23 , 55–75.

Shoda, Y., Mischel, W., & Wright, J. (1993). The role of situational demands and cognitive competencies in behavior organization and personality coherence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65 , 1023–1035.

Shokley-Zalaback, P. (2002). Protean places: Teams across time and space. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 30 (3), 231–250.

Shonk, J. H. (1982). Working in teams: A practical manual for improving work groups . New York: Amacom.

Smith, P. B., & Noakes, J. (1996). Cultural differences in group processes. In M. A. West (Ed.), Handbook of work group psychology (pp. 477–501). New York: Wiley.

Snell, S., Snow, C., Davidson, S., & Hambrick, D. C. (1998). Designing and supporting transitional teams: The human resource agenda. Human Resource Management, 37 (2), 147–148.

Spiess, E. (1996). Kooperatives handlen in organisationen . München, Germany: Peter Hampp Verlag.

Spiess, E. (1998). Daz konzept der empathie. In E. Spiess (Ed.), Formen der cooperation: Bedingungen und perspektiven (pp. 53–62). Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.

Spreitzer, G. M., McCall, M. W., Jr., & Mahoney, J. D. (1997). Early identification of international executive potential. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82 , 6–29.

Theodorson, G. A. (1962). The function of hostility in small groups. Journal of Social Psychology, 256 , 57–66.

Ting-Toomey, S. (1985). Toward a theory of conflict and culture. In W. B. Gudykunst, L. P. Stewart, & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.), Communication, culture, and organizational processes (pp. 71–86). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Townsend, A. M., DeMarie, S., & Hendrickson, A. R. (1998). Virtual teams: Technology and the workplace of the future. The Academy of Management Executive, 12 (3), 17–29.

Triandis, H. C., Hall, E. R., & Ewen, R. B. (1965). Member heterogeneity and dyadic creativity. Human Relations, 18 (1), 33–55.

Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63 , 384–399.

Verdi, A. F., & Wheelan, S. A. (1992). Developmental patterns in same-sex and mixed-sex groups. Small Group Research, 23 (3), 256–278.

Watson, W. E., Kumar, K., & Michaelson, L. K. (1993). Cultural diversity’s impact on interaction process and performance: Comparing homogenous and diverse task groups. Academy of Management Journal, 36 , 590–602.

Wheelan, S. A. (1990). Facilitating training groups: A guide to leadership and verbal intervention skills . New York: Praeger.

Wheelan, S. A. (1996). Effects of gender composition and group status differences on member perception of group developmental patterns, effectiveness, and productivity. Sex Roles, 34 (9/10), 665–686.

Wheelan, S. A. (1999). Creating effective teams: A guide for members and leaders . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Wheelan, S. A. (2004). Workplace teams. In J. L. DeLucia-Waack, D. A. Gerrity, C. R. Kalodner, & M. T. Riva (Eds.), Handbook of group work (pp. 401–413). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Wheelan, S. (2005a). Faculty groups: From frustration to collaboration . Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.

Wheelan, S. A. (2005b). Group processes: A developmental perspective . Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Wheelan, S. A. (2010). Att skapa effective & välmåebde team Ledarskapcenttrum . A talk in Umeå, Sweden. Retrieved from http://vimeo.com/9853941

Wheelan, S., & Brewer Danganan, N. (2003). The relationship between the internal dynamics of student affairs leadership teams and campus leaders’ perceptions of the effectiveness of student affairs divisions. National Association of Student Personnel Administrators Journal, 40 (3), 93–112.

Wheelan, S. A., & Burchill, C. (1999). Take teamwork to new heights. Nursing Management, 30 (4), 28–32.

Wheelan, S. A., Burchill, C., & Tilin, F. (2003). The link between teamwork and patients’ outcomes in intensive care units. American Journal of Critical Care, 12 , 527–534.

Wheelan, S. A., Davidson, B., & Tilin, F. (2003). Group development across time: Reality or illusion? Small Group Research, 34 (2), 223–245.

Wheelan, S. A., & Furbur, S. (2006). Facilitating team development: Communication, and productivity. In L. Frey (Ed.), Facilitating group communication in context: Innovations and applications with natural groups, 2 (pp. 155–176). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Wheelan, S. A., & Kesselring, J. (2003). The link between faculty group development and the performance of elementary students on standardized tests. Journal of Educational Research, 98 , 323–330.

Wheelan, S. A., & Lisk, A. (2000). Cohort group effectiveness and the educational achievement of adult undergraduate students. Small Group Research, 31 (6), 724–738.

Wheelan, S. A., & McKeage, R. (1993). Developmental patterns in small and large groups. Small Group Research, 24 (1), 60–83.

Wheelan, S. A., & Tilin, F. (1999). The relationship between faculty group effectiveness and school productivity. Small Group Research, 30 (1), 59–81.

Wheelan, S. A., & Williams, T. (2003). Mapping dynamic interaction patterns in work groups. Small Group Research, 34 , 443–467.

Wood, J. T. (1998). Communication mosaics: A new introduction to the field of communication . Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Young, D. (1998, September). Global efficiency: Team heat. CIO Magazine . Retrieved from http://www.cio.com/archive/090198_team-content.html

Zahra, S. A., Ireland, R. D., & Hitt, M. A. (2000). International expansion by new venture firms: International diversity, mode of market entry, technological learning, and performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 43 (5), 925–950.

Zhou, L. (2007). The effects of entrepreneurial proclivity and foreign market knowledge on early internationalization. Journal of World Business, 42 , 281–293.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

New York, USA

Alex Matveev

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Further Reading

Marquardt, M. J., & Horvath, L. (2001). Global teams: How top multinationals span boundaries and cultures with high-speed teamwork . Palo Alto, CA: Davies-Black Publishing.

Matveev, A. V., & Nelson, P. E. (2004). Cross-cultural communication competence and multicultural team performance: Perceptions of American and Russian managers. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 4 (2), 253–270.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Matveev, A. (2017). Intercultural Competence in Multicultural Teams. In: Intercultural Competence in Organizations. Management for Professionals. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45701-7_4

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45701-7_4

Published : 19 November 2016

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-45700-0

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-45701-7

eBook Packages : Business and Management Business and Management (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Cultural diversity drives innovation: empowering teams for success

International Journal of Innovation Science

ISSN : 1757-2223

Article publication date: 22 September 2020

Issue publication date: 1 October 2020

Though there is broad agreement on the beneficial impact of diversity in management and leadership roles, much of the innovative capacity of an organization is realized at the unit level in working teams. Recent research points to cultural diversity having an especially significant impact on innovation team performance. The reports also highlight the need for the optimal team operating principles to derive maximum benefit. To prepare such innovation teams for success, it is valuable to understand the dynamics of team diversity at the project level and the underlying barriers and opportunities presented.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper reviews the literature and case studies on cultural inputs to ideation and innovation, assessing team diversity through readily available instruments and the deployment of the science of team science (SciTS) principles in innovation teams.

The key learnings include the importance of establishing communication standards, SciTS principles, team assessment of thinking styles and the utility of cultural awareness instruments.

Practical implications

Diversity provides a creative advantage for innovation teams. However, team dynamics play an important role in maximizing these advantages, and cross-cultural competence of team members is required. Deployment of appropriate assessment tools and team methodologies enhances the likelihood of successful outcomes including in remote team settings.

Originality/value

Literature from diverse functional areas is summarized including the science of team science, organizational management, diversity and inclusion methodologies and ethnocultural dynamics. It provides pointers for the optimal formation and operating principles with highly culturally diverse teams.

• Implementation
• Team science

Jones, G. , Chirino Chace, B. and Wright, J. (2020), "Cultural diversity drives innovation: empowering teams for success", International Journal of Innovation Science , Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 323-343. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-04-2020-0042

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2020, Graham Jones, Bernardita Chirino Chace and Justin Wright.

Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

Introduction

Numerous studies confirm the positive impact of diversity at board level, executive leadership and managerial roles in organizations. In the case of innovation, in addition to strategic leadership, one must of course consider the innovation process itself, which typically involves ideators and entrepreneurs from varied backgrounds who work in smaller teams driven by strategic goals ( Nelson, 1991 ). Diversity of thought and approach are naturally assumed to be beneficial to the innovation process, which by its very nature thrives on creative tension and alternating viewpoints. Despite the potential to have a major influence on productivity and impact, relatively few dedicated studies have been reported on the links between diversity and innovation ( Joecks et al. , 2013 ). Factors to consider include, gender, cultural, ethnic, country of origin, geographic location and disciplinary diversity. Studies on gender diversity have modeled the performance impact of uniform, skewed, tilted and balanced groups, often assessed using the Blau index ( Blau, 1977 ). Although not specifically addressing innovative potential, there is overwhelming evidence that gender heterogeneous teams produce higher quality technical and scientific outputs ( Campbell et al. , 2013 ) but concerted engagement is also needed to realize these benefits fully within organizations ( Zheng, 2013 ). One study by the Boston Consulting Group modeled the impact of six components of diversity on innovation team performance (BCG, 2018). Conducted through a survey of >1,700 employees in 8 countries (Austria, Brazil, China, France, Germany, India, Switzerland and the USA) the study examined perceptions of diversity components at management level (gender, age, the nation of origin, career path, industry background and education). Two features are noteworthy. First, a statistically significant correlation was observed between innovation performance and the diversity of management teams across all six diversity indicators (approximately 20% improvement in innovation revenues). Second, the most pronounced impact driver was the nation of origin of team members ( Table 1 ).

If substantiated, this has potentially far-reaching consequences in the pharmaceutical industry where numerous multinational corporations are headquartered around the globe, and routinely assemble and engage teams (both physically and remotely) from vast and highly diverse populations. The revelation even prompted the quote “for management teams there are few slam dunks in the business world – this is one of them” (BCG, 2018). The cultural dimensions uncovered in this survey have been the subject of other research. In an unrelated study, conducted through a survey of 500 corporate executives one in two respondents believed there exists a positive correlation between cultural diversity and innovation drivers ( Bertelsmann, 2018 ). Despite this admission, some 42% of respondents indicated that their organizations did not focus on hiring diverse workforces. The study goes on to conclude that the more varied an innovation team is in terms of country of origin the greater the impact. The authors ascribe this to employees with diverse backgrounds having specific cultural knowledge, which can be deployed to assess and solve problems in different ways, and they may also have a higher tolerance for taking risks. Caution is also signaled in that different cultural methods of interpretation and values can present challenges in team settings, as there exists the potential for misunderstanding among members. This underscores the importance of studying team dynamics to maximize potential and fully exploit the value of team diversity ( vide infra ). Accordingly, the impetus for assembling this review was to highlight studies, which assess the origins and impact of cultural diversity on innovation team performance, readily available instruments, which assess cultural contributions and tools which can be deployed to optimize team dynamics. Our focus area is on innovation teams and it is of course recognized that corporate innovation is guided by business drivers which may determine the composition, scope and success factors of any given team ( Nelson, 1991 ). Nonetheless, given the significance and implications of the subject matter across various industries (BCG, 2018) it is instructive to examine even in the most general sense.

Power distance index (PDI):

“The extent to which people expect and agree that power should be shared unequally.”

A higher degree signifies hierarchy is clearly established, a lower degree that people question authority.

Individualism vs collectivism (IDV):

“Degree to which society rewards individual versus collective action.”

Higher degrees, individualistic societies, emphasize the “I” versus the “we.”

Uncertainty avoidance (UAI):

“A society’s tolerance for ambiguity.”

A higher degree suggests societies, which opt for stiff codes of behavior, guidelines and laws.

Masculinity vs femininity (MAS):

“Societal preference for achievement, heroism, assertiveness and material rewards for success.”

Its counterpart values cooperation, modesty, caring for the weak and quality of life.

Long-term orientation vs short-term orientation (LTO-STO):

“A societies’ connection of the past with the current and future actions/challenges.”

In high preference, LTO traditions are honored, whereas in STO adaptation is viewed as a necessity.

Indulgence vs restraint (IND):

“Degree of freedom societal norms afford to citizens in fulfilling their human desires.”

In its counterpart, society controls gratification and regulates by means of strict social nor.

Specimen dimensions data are presented for the six most populous nations in the world, plus Switzerland, highlighting the wide scoring ranges typically observed ( Figure 1 ). Implicit within the data are myriad dynamic factors including religious preferences, governmental structures, historical backgrounds, philosophical beliefs, coupled with socio-economic drivers e.g. education, health, poverty, incarceration rates, etc. Obviously, due caution and judgment need to be exercised when viewing such data, as individual choices, behaviors and attitudes that are contrary to those implied by the indices will be expected and stereotypes should be avoided. Additionally, great regional differences can exist within individual countries (e.g. the USA and Switzerland) and even cities (urban v suburban). It is also recognized that nations continually evolve – the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia into culturally distinct countries being a case in point. Moreover, individuals who live in different countries during their formative years would be expected to be influenced by the multiple environments and a single point of reference could be entirely misleading.

There is a negative relationship between power distance and innovation.

There is a negative relationship between uncertainty avoidance and innovation.

There is a positive relationship between individualism and innovation.

There is a negative relationship between masculinity and innovation.

Significantly, H1, H2 and H4 were supported by data regarding patenting intensity. In the case of H3 , though partially supported by data the authors concluded that the impact of family collectivism versus corporate collectivism complicated data sets, precluding a definitive outcome ( Kaasa and Vadi, 2010 ). The authors advance that a reliable link between cultural dimensions and patenting intensity does exist. Obviously, caution needs to be exercised using patents as a surrogate for innovation activity as decisions to pursue are complex undertakings, requiring significant capital investment, often describing inventions a long way prior to market introduction and which in some cases are used defensively ( Martínez-Piva, 2009 ). Nonetheless, they are generally accepted as one of several measures of performance at the so-called “fuzzy front end” of innovation or FFEI ( Gassmann and Schweitzer, 2014 ). Additional studies have examined the impact of culture on innovation ( Herbig and Dunphy, 1998 ), including national ( Shane, 1993 ) and multi-nation studies ( Dakhli and de Clercq, 2004 ), downward trends in cultural differences in Europe ( Gooderham and Nordhaug, 2002 ) and the impact of national networks ( Ahuja, 2000 ). Related work has mapped national culture correlations to two individual components of innovation, namely, the initiation and implementation phases ( Nakata and Sivakumar, 1996 ). For example, the contribution of individualism (ranked high in the USA) to the first, initiation stage of innovation can be understood (ideation and concept testing), as equally can be the value of collectivism (ranked high in Japan) to the second, implementation phase of innovation (product development and launch) which requires concerted, group effort. These studies are insightful, and, coupled with comparative re-assessments between Eastern and Western cultures ( Wu, 2006 ), have allowed researchers to correlate observed contributions to innovation with national propensities ( Smale, 2016 ).

Though understanding the drivers and proclivities of individual contributors is instructive, an obvious challenge lies in managing the dynamics of innovation teams to establish the most creative and productive environment. Studies suggest that published outputs from diverse teams are cited more frequently than from those with less heterogeneity, and the notion that ethnic diversity reflects idea diversity has been advanced ( Freeman and Huang, 2014 ). It has also been suggested that the management of teams with high cultural diversity may warrant special considerations within organizations ( Mannix and Neale, 2005 ). Accordingly, when capitalizing on opportunities imbued by cultural diversity in innovation teams, attention to cultural competence of assembled teams (cultural intelligence (CQ)) should also be studied, alongside traditional evaluative (EQ and IQ) measures.

Cross-cultural competence in innovation teams

Assembling teams who hail from a multitude of diverse cultural backgrounds is a routine occurrence in modern multinational corporations, and especially prevalent in the global pharmaceutical sector. Accordingly, a degree of cross-cultural awareness and competence could be considered a natural advantage to a team member. In addition to working within the team, cross-cultural competence could also be valuable for interactions external to the organization e.g. customers, suppliers, regulators and patients in the myriad markets the team is engaged in ( Ramalu et al. , 2010 ). For these reasons, it is logical that an assembled team considers the cultural awareness and competence (CQ) of its members ( Ang and van Dyne, 2008 ). Such insights could be reasoned to help the team establish itself and function more effectively, and would have added value within innovation teams. Creative tensions are expected and encouraged in such environments, and CQ competence could reduce the likelihood of any ad hominem behaviors by reducing potential misunderstandings and miscommunications which have cultural origins. These cultural touchpoints can range from subtle, interpersonal nuances through to organizational edicts and operating models and team members with experience would be able to mentor and socialize new colleagues. For example, when communicating decisions stemming from teams and units, in certain countries (e.g. India and Japan) they are sometimes pre-socialized in smaller groups to secure buy-in prior to formal announcements, whereas in others (e.g. the USA) external advisors are often engaged to make recommendations which are subsequently announced ( Gibson and Gibbs, 2006 ). Navigating these norms requires due diligence and skill, best gained from exposure to the cultural elements in person or through structured training. Even at the most basic level, conversational styles need to be mindful of cultural norms ( Ang and Van Dyne, 2008 ). For example, in some countries pauses in conversations are deliberate, injected to allow the parties to reflect upon and honor what was just said. Conversely, some cultures seem to promote the rapid exchange of conversational points as a sign of productivity and alignment (the USA is a good example). Accordingly, one needs to be mindful not to unintentionally show disrespect to a person based on the cadence of a conversation ( Fussell and Setlock, 2012 ). As diligent employees will no doubt be mindful of these issues in a global corporation, they can become of special significance for the effective functioning of culturally diverse teams. Another example can be observed in the way different cultures use facial expressions to communicate ( Barrett et al. , 2019 ). While in certain western countries an exaggerated smile may be offered to an individual to express welcoming and project a degree of confidence, in other countries it can be deemed inappropriate ( Coles et al. , 2019 ). Japanese business culture values humility and suppression of emotions to convey trust, and fewer emotions are communicated using the mouth (Stanford, 2016). Smiling at a stranger in other countries can be interpreted as a sign of stupidity, insanity, insincerity or even dishonesty ( Krys et al. , 2016 ). Likewise, the application of direct eye contact can be interpreted as a sign of confidence and respect in some countries whereas in others it can signal disrespect and insubordination, requiring cultural context and awareness ( Uono and Hietanen, 2015 ). In-depth studies have been conducted on the perceptions of facial expressions, including the so-called “Duchenne” smile and apparent disconnects between people’s self-reported degree of happiness and smile tendency ( Gunnery and Hall, 2014 ). It has also been determined that of a possible total of 16,384 possible facial configurations, only 35 are used to transmit emotive information across cultures and within these 8 are dominant in most cultures ( Srinivasan and Martínez, 2018 ). Correlations with the Hofstede cultural dimensions have also been explored. In countries with low scores on the uncertainty avoidance dimension (UAI) non smiling individuals were deemed as more intelligent ( Hareli and Hess, 2010 ), and second, in countries with high corruption indicators, smiling correlated with reduced levels of trust ( Ozono, 2010 ). Another crucial factor for team members relates to communication style ( Figure 2 ). Under the principles outlined by Hall ( Hall, 1977 ), individuals can be categorized as either direct or indirect communicators and there are cultural underpinnings for each ( Gudykunst and Ting-Toomey, 1988 ). Under this framework, direct communicators are seen to operate with a low situational context, with a high emphasis on actual words being spoken irrespective of any possible nuances ( Hall, 1977 ).

Conversely, an indirect communicator will place a high degree of context to the conditions under which words are spoken including tone, body language and what is not said in addition to spoken word ( Clyne et al. , 2009 ). Though most people function as a blend of the two, extreme differences between the two approaches can naturally lead to conflict or misunderstanding in team settings, e.g. where an email communication might be interpreted as blunt or obtuse by one member or straight to the point/not beating about the bush by others ( Management, 2014 ). The more culturally diverse the team, the more important it becomes to understand each member preferred communication styles, to the point of which guidelines may become appropriate ( Mayer and Bello, 2012 ). In an attempt to codify/quantitate our capacity to function effectively in culturally diverse settings, a cultural intelligence index or CQ has been developed ( Van Dyne et al. , 2012 ).

The cultural intelligence four-factor model

Metacognitive CQ, which represents a person’s consciousness and awareness of cultural cues during interactions with people from other cultural backgrounds. It has also been described as representing the processes we use to acquire and understand cultural knowledge.

Acquired through a combination of education and personal experience, cognitive CQ represents our level of competence of the conventions, practices and norms used in different cultural settings. This can include social systems and structures of other cultures and their value systems.

Motivational CQ assesses the level of interest and energy directed toward learning and functioning in situations characterized by cultural differences people with high motivational CQ express confidence in their personal cross-cultural effectiveness.

Behavioral CQ measures peoples’ ability to exhibit appropriate verbal and nonverbal behavior when interacting with people from different cultures. This may include, for example, the use of culturally appropriate words, tones, gestures and facial expressions.

Significantly within the context of this paper, a study of 73 teams with over 327 members revealed that high levels of CQ within multi-cultural teams had a positive benefits, equipping the teams to overcome numerous obstacles and potential barriers ( Moon, 2013 ). A number of scales and assessment modalities have been developed to gauge CQ competence, including the Intercultural Adjustment Potential Scale (ICAPS) ( Matsumoto et al. , 2001 ), the Cultural Intelligence Scale (CQS) and the Intercultural Developmental Inventory (IDI) ( Matsumoto and Hwang, 2013 ). While the IDI is often deployed for individuals engaging on overseas assignments and the ICAPS for individuals in global leadership roles ( Rose et al. , 2010 ), the CQS is seen as a useful assessment for multicultural teams and has been studied globally with different audiences ( Ng et al. , 2009 ). Pioneered by the Cultural Intelligence Center in the USA, the assessment focuses on specific capabilities, namely, CQ drive (motivation), knowledge (cognition), strategy (metacognition) and action (behavior) ( Figure 3 ; SHRM, 2015 ).

Respondents receive an integrated assessment including the four key dimensions, and also personal orientation on a total of 10 culture value dimensions, which are compared against tendencies within the 10 largest cultural cluster groupings recognized globally as illustrated in Table 2 ( Jung, 1933 ; Pittenger, 1993 ). Outputs from the assessment consist of a scoring regimen (0–100 scale) for each of CQ drive, knowledge, strategy and action with 3 or 4 sub-categories in each grouping. A reference scale is provided against worldwide norms for each category and sub-category, recorded as low (bottom 25%), moderate (middle 50%) and high (top 25%). The assessment comes with a workbook allowing respondents to develop and deploy strategies and tactics to address low scoring areas.

The roots of the culture value dimensions used in the CQS assessment instrument have origins in other models, including the PDI, IDV, UAI and LTO indices advanced in the Hofstede analyzes. Though necessarily inexact based on personal circumstances, environment and beliefs, the value dimensions have been mapped against the major cultural clusters into high, medium and low tendencies based on analysis of published studies ( Ng et al. , 2009 ; SHRM, 2015 ). The mere suggestion of potential differences across the dimensions and the purported range of preferences serves to raise awareness of cross-cultural complexities which can factor into team dynamics and signals the importance of CQ knowledge ( Figure 4 ).

The relative contributions of the four CQ dimensions to work-related functions have been investigated and highlight distinct relationships between components. Through consistent patterns, metacognitive CQ and behavioral CQ predict task performance, metacognitive CQ and cognitive CQ predict both cultural judgment and decision-making ability and motivational CQ plus behavioral CQ predict cultural adaptation. Accordingly, CQS assessment would seem particularly useful for members of newly formed culturally diverse teams, and for individuals relocating to a new (cultural) environment ( Ang et al. , 2007 ). More recent studies have attempted to correlate relationships between CQ and individual personality traits ( Lievens et al. , 2003 ). The prevailing taxonomy on human personality is commonly referred to as the “Big Five” model ( Murugesan and Jayavelu, 2017 ).

The big five model of personality

Extraversion (sociable, assertive, ambitious).

Agreeableness (friendly, trusting, cooperative).

Conscientiousness (responsible, organized, dependable).

Emotional stability (control, calm, secure).

Openness to experience (imaginative, inquiring, artistic).

As the Big Five model has been validated across cultures, there is a natural interest in associations between individual factors and the “four factors” of CQ dimensionality. Based on a number of studies in different settings, relationships have been correlated which allow connections between personality and cultural competence to be made ( Ang et al. , 2006 ). Such has far-reaching consequences, given the expanding diversity and mobility of the global workforce and may have special connotations within innovation teams ( Elenkov and Manev , 2008, 2009 ). Research has also been conducted to validate the correlations by studying team coaches ( Devin, 2017 ).

Conscientiousness and metacognitive CQ.

Agreeableness and emotional stability with behavioral CQ.

Extraversion with cognitive, motivational and behavioral CQ.

Openness with all four factors of CQ.

Assessing the composition of teams

The majority of projects conducted in the pharmaceutical industry are through divisional channels with personnel who were hired based on specific skill sets. Teams within these sub-organizations (often called line functions) will be pre-formed and ready to deploy or will assemble then disassemble as needed as projects are identified. Considerable effort has been devoted to our understanding of team dynamics and the contributions of individual members through the assessment of personality traits and modes of engagement. The origins of personality typing date back to the Greco-Roman era with the description of the “four temperaments” by Hippocrates (c.460–c.370 BC). According to this proto-psychological theorem, four medical determinants (sanguine, choleric, melancholic and phlegmatic temperaments) were assigned as personalities based on the relative prevalence of bodily fluids and the possibility of mixed categories advanced were personality types overlapped ( Merenda, 1987 ). Some 2,300 years later, application of personality classification and typing became of prime importance in the post-industrialized business world where tasks began to involve diverse teams of workers. One of the most widely used assessment tools is the Myers-Briggs type indicator (MBTI) which is designed to highlight specific personality factors, which may influence behavior in a team ( Jung, 1933 ). Based on the theories of Swiss psychologist Carl Jung the instrument provides an assessment of individuals’ preferred stances within team environments, with binary categorization in terms of attitudes ( I ntrovert/ E xtrovert), lifestyle ( J udging/ P erceiving) and functions ( S ensing/ I ntuition and T hinking/ F eeling) ( Pittenger, 1993 ). The various combinations of tetrads (16 total) are assigned monikers which serve as terms of reference for the individual and team members who will interact with the person ( Table 3 ). Of interest to innovation communities, it is suggested that Apple CEO Steve Jobs was an ENTJ (“Field Marshall”), Albert Einstein INTP (“Architect”) and Thomas Edison an ENTP (“Inventor”).

In terms of diversity elements, based on an analysis in >30 countries all of the type preferences (E/I, S/N, T/F and J/P) have been observed in each culture studied, however, distribution of the 16 types differ across cultures but retain patterns within these cultures. Across all cultures, (X)STJ is the predominant triad and men in each culture typically respond for T (c.f. F) at rates ranging from 10–25% higher than for female respondents ( Seegmiller and Epperson, 1987 ). Jung’s work also extended to the related DISC assessment tool, which scrutinizes four areas of behavior, namely, D ominance (in approach to problem-solving), I nfluence (approach to people), S teadiness (pace and attitude to change) and C ompliance (procedures, standards) ( Jones and Hartley, 2013 ).

Another popular assessment tool is the team roles system introduced by Belbin (2010) . The instrument is derived from analysis of clusters of behaviors and skills that are required to produce team results and is embodied in a total of nine teams “roles” which stem from three centricities, namely, thinking, action and people-oriented ( Table 4 ).

Belbin role assessment allows team members to identify their preferred roles in a team and also uncover inherent strengths, which they may be unaware of. Though no concrete correlations between the MBTI and Belbin system are evident, the use of the former to gain insight to personality factors and the latter for behavioral pointers has been advocated for effective team building ( Higgs, 1996 ). Although the Belbin and MBTI assessments provide useful pointers for the assembly and successful working of cross-functional teams, for innovation-centric programs the Four Sight Thinking Profile has gained popularity. Its basis is that four fundamental forms of thinking roles are used in creative processes (clarification, ideation, development and implementation) and the relative preferences for each allow categorization for team building ( Bratsberg, 2012 ). Team members develop a chart, plotting high and low preferences for each of the four categories, providing a holistic view on preferences and proclivities that the individual and team can use ( Figure 5 ). For individuals with a single high preference (against statistical means), they are assigned a designation from one of the four categories. Individuals with two or three high preferences are designated into sub-categories and were equivalent in all four categories, as an integrator ( Figure 6 ).

Similarly to other evaluative instruments, the Four Sight program provides participants guidance on the best mode of interaction with colleagues in each of the 15 possible categories, which can be pivotal for team building. For example, it is suggested that ideators who are often regarded as “spontaneous,” “imaginative” and “adventurous” should be afforded “constant stimulation,” “variety and change” and “scope to dream” by other teams members. Equally importantly, the instrument points to areas where ideators may cause friction for the team e.g. by drawing attention to themselves, being impatient or too abstract, allowing them to modify their approach. The utility of the instrument for innovation teams is underscored by the fact that two of the preferences (ideator, implementer) map directly to the two phases of innovation (initiation, implementation). In terms of relationships with other assessment tools, the communicating author recorded high preference as a driver under Four Sight, typed as ENTJ ( Field Marshall ) with Myers-Briggs and shaper with Belbin, suggesting action-oriented roles in all three.

While MBTI, Belbin and Four Sight represent assessment tools useful for team assembly and functioning, some other more reflective team profiles have also been advanced including the 9 innovation team personality types articulated by the Mayo Clinic Center for Innovation ( Figure 7 ) ( Van Wulfen, 2009 ). It is easy to recognize and identify with some of these characters, and many will map onto Belbin and MBTI profiles readily. In a similar vein and with a degree of comedic interpretation (inspired by characters in a children’s book series), in their award-winning innovation text The Corporate Startup , Viki, Toma and Gons identify eight innovation characters/caricatures which allow people to relate to Viki et al. (2017) . Though certain team members may naturally exude one such persona it is also an interesting proposition to have team members deliberately adopt one for the purposes of role-play discussion or order that all viewpoints represented by the characters are articulated and appreciated.

No discussion of team roles would be complete without mention of de Bono’s six hats ( Table 5 ). The so-called six thinking hats model is a tool to promote parallel then lateral thinking in groups and teams. Each imaginary hat ascribes a designated mindset of an individual, and discussions are choreographed by the wearer of the blue hat, who is the group/team controller ( Kivunja, 2015 ). On socializing the particular topic for discussion, the white hat bearer seeks to clarify information, the red hat bearer delivers an emotional response, the yellow hat bearer positive elements, the black hat bearer cautions and concerns and the green hat bearer creative opportunities. This can be an effective tool for entire teams to adopt a single hat/thinking mode (with the exception of blue which is singular) to align on parallel thinking and then be assigned assorted hats for lateral thinking. The added benefit of this approach is that if conducted with random assignments, individuals may be forced to act outside their comfort zones, promoting personal growth and empathy for team members with differing natural preferences.

The science of developing diverse innovation teams: the science of team science

Forming : The team is established using either a top-down or bottom-up approach.

Storming: Team members establish roles and responsibilities. This can often be the onset of turf battles as persons from diverse backgrounds exchange views through a combination of dialog and debate. If the pressure to reach consensus prematurely is avoided, this phase can be particularly creative as the full team is more likely to input.

Norming: Team members begin to work together effectively and efficiently, start to develop trust and comfort with one another and learn they can rely on each other.

Performing: The team works together seamlessly, focuses on a shared goal and efficiently resolves issues or problems that emerge.

Teams may come to a natural end. The team’s dissolution should be celebrated and the accomplishments recognized and rewarded.

The team may take on a new project with a new goal, applying its ability to work together to solve a new problem.

Absence of trust.

Fear of conflict.

Lack of commitment.

Avoidance of accountability.

Inattention to results.

Within these, fear of conflict is often seen as the most pervasive and insurmountable issue. On any challenging project, the team will be continually exchanging viewpoints from differing perspectives and vulnerability and trust are key issues that need to be addressed. Individuals have widely differing approaches to conflict resolution, and the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument was developed to help team members identify their most natural style. The five styles categorized are, namely, competing, accommodating, avoiding, collaborating and compromising ( Thomas and Kilmann, 1974 ). Another key success factor for teams is to understand and navigate the boundaries of dialog and debating schemas ( Table 6 ). As articulated by Berman, very different drivers are associated with each and recognizing these behaviors upfront can allow a team to steer clear of potential conflict forming activities ( Berman et al. , 1997 ). Collectively, these SciTS learnings have been found to be equally applicable from fundamental through to translational research and have become recommended reading for any cross-functional and/or diverse team ( NIH, 2010 ).

Equipping innovation teams for success

The process of innovation has been described using a variety of terms, but within the context of the pharmaceutical industry, we refer to the ideation, design, initiation and subsequent implementation of novel scientific and technological approaches for the development of new products. Innovation within the industry is typically confined to a restricted number of products, which vary from company to company based on expertise, therapeutic areas and collaborative agreements and the products themselves can be either branded or generic. In the strictest sense, it has been argued that the business does not routinely engage in white space or open innovation and instead largely innovate in areas of competence and familiarity ( Nelson, 1991 ). However, from time to time there are groundbreaking advances that open new avenues in health-care and disrupt the industry e.g. life-saving gene therapies, CAR-T immunotherapies and drug-free all digital therapies which were introduced in the past few years alone. What is well understood within organizations, however, is that competition is ever-present and the discovery, production and management of new medications represents a global challenge that requires continuous forms of innovation throughout the organization. For this reason, organizations study the structure, formation, operation and performance of teams very closely to derive maximum benefit. Measuring the outputs of innovation within a team can sometimes be challenging given the incubation period for marketed products can often exceed a decade, by which time a team’s composition will have changed many times. Another more focused approach to innovation within the industry can be to deliberately establish designated innovation teams assigned to tackle specific problems rapidly. In this case, there is a degree of control that can be exerted in the selection of the team, and it is commonly recognized that the diversity of the team (across multiple dimensions) leads to myriad benefits. Fortunately, the modern global pharmaceutical industry is blessed with a highly diverse workforce, making individual team diversity a routine expectation. Our interest and motivation behind the writing of this review are to begin to understand how aspects of team diversity benefit innovation teams. In this context we refer to teams, which have been assembled to execute on a project within a fixed time period, and where the expected outputs will include generation of new knowledge, reducing to practice a new process or product or development of proprietary principles. In each case, a metric could be a generation of a patentable idea, trade secret or publishable concept related to a product intended to enter the marketplace. The recent reports on the correlation between a team’s cultural diversity and higher innovation performance (BCG, 2018; Bertelsmann, 2018 ; Kaasa and Vadi, 2010 ) are intriguing and are readily relatable. Teams composed of members from diverse backgrounds may approach problems from different perspectives and have different tolerances for risk-taking, both of which are essential attributes needed in creative, innovative teams. A corollary exists, however, in that the more diverse the team, the more potential for culturally inspired misunderstandings to occur, which may be exacerbated under conditions where creative tensions are heightened and time constraints are omnipresent. Accordingly, it is likely that a study of dynamics and operating principles can benefit the entire team, and thus forms a substantial component of this review. Equally importantly, many scientists and engineers will be unaware of the cultural origins of different decision-making processes or communication preferences which over time might be detrimental to the team. For teams established over a long period, it could be expected that members learn each other’s preferences, proclivities and idiosyncrasies which attenuates the potential for conflict. In contrast, a freshly formed culturally diverse (innovation) team might need to adapt very quickly, underscoring the need for active assessment and coaching during the onboarding process.

Many of the excellent tools and approaches described herein can provide key learnings for teams and offer unique perspectives tailored to individual circumstances. Through a series of systematic evaluations of the tools and instruments described herein, our internal innovation program selected the CQS assessment, FourSight preference and SciTS framework for deployment in innovation teams ( Jones et al. , 2020 ). They are being made available to all newly formed teams, actively supported by coaches who are versed in deploying their learnings in mentoring activities and initial results are encouraging ( Jones et al. , 2020 ). The formation and normalizing of an innovation team represent two important phases in its development, but it is also imperative that the team’s operating principles are appropriate. For any innovation team, openness, trust, candor and psychological safety are pre-requisites for success and to monitor the health of the team an anonymous/confidential scorecard tool is advocated ( Figure 8 ). Adapted from SciTS principles, this is used to record progress or signal advanced warnings at specific intervals during the project, allowing intervention by the assigned coach if necessary ( Jones et al. , 2020 ). Aggregate analyzes from these surveys (issued with regular frequency) are shared with teams with emphasis placed on driving to full inclusivity for all team members. We believe with these guidance teams have the maximum chances of success and a framework is in place to monitor impact over extended periods and multiple cycles. We intend to report the long term findings and implications from these studies in due course ( Jones et al. , 2020 ).

Conclusions and implications

A considerable body of literature supports the notion that cultural diversity in teams correlates with improved innovation performance. Creative tensions in these teams need to be managed appropriately and numerous excellent instruments and strategies are available to leaders. Ideally, these should include cultural assessment (awareness and competence), team dynamics (individual and team integration) and inclusive and transparent operating principles grounded in team science methodology. Systematic analysis using appropriately powered studies and controls will ultimately help quantitate the impact of various components in innovation teams and across programs, although initial observations from our internal innovation program are encouraging ( Jones et al. , 2020 ). Such learnings could then be used to inform and guide team development and ultimately allow correlation of diversity elements with predictive outcome metrics. The high levels of cultural diversity in the global pharmaceutical industry make it ideally suited to study these key topics. Another principle to study is whether the behaviors learned in diverse innovation teams are then transferred to new teams that the individuals participate in. Equally interesting is to study whether diverse, established teams diminish their innovative capacity over time due to a normalization process. This could lead to the concept of regular rotations through different teams helping maximize the impact and learnings. With the steady globalization of industries and the increasingly diverse workforce, studies of this nature can play an important role in the success of innovation programs. Scientists, engineers and technologists may seldom read the social science or management literature, but the availability of intuitive tools and instruments to empower their teams to success will ensure continual progress is made. Finally, successful adaptation to remote working conditions mandated by social distancing requires consideration of intra- and inter-team dynamics and the learnings can provide additional benefit for innovation teams operating virtually for extended periods.

Cultural Dimension maps for the six most populous nations plus Switzerland

Cultural Relationships to Communication Preferences proposed by Hall ( 1977 )

Components of the CQS Profile developed by the Cultural Intelligence Center

A total of 10 culture value dimensions used in CQS assessment

Specimen Four Sight thinking preferences plot

The 15 Four Sight Thinking Profiles

Hypothetical Team Characters from the Mayo Clinic CFI (left) and The Corporate Startup (right)

Team Performance and Inclusivity Tracking Tool

% Leadership team appointments needed to effect a 1% increase in innovation revenue

The 10 largest cultural groupings globally

The 16 Myers-Briggs type indicators

The nine Belbin team roles

The six hats of de Bono

The dialog and debating schemas articulated by Berman (Berman et al. , 1977)

Ahuja , G. ( 2000 ), “ Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: a longitudinal study ”, Administrative Science Quarterly , Vol. 45 No. 3 , pp. 425 - 455 .

Ang , S. and Van Dyne , L. ( 2008 ), “ Handbook of Cultural Intelligence: Theory, Measures and Applications , ”, Armonk .

Ang , S. , Van Dyne , L. and Koh , C. ( 2006 ), “ Personality correlates of the four-factor model of cultural intelligence ”, Group and Organization Management , Vol. 31 , pp. 100 - 123 .

Ang , S. , Van Dyne , L. , Koh , C. , Ng , K.Y. , Templer , K.J. , Tay , C. and Chandrasekar , N.A. ( 2007 ), “ Cultural intelligence: its measurement and effects on cultural judgment and decision making, cultural adaptation and task performance ”, Management and Organization Review , Vol. 3 No. 3 , pp. 335 - 371 .

Barrett , L.F. , Adolphs , R. , Marsella , S. , Martinez , A.M. and Pollak , S.D. ( 2019 ), “ Emotional expressions reconsidered: challenges to inferring emotion from human facial movements ”, Psychological Science in the Public Interest , Vol. 20 No. 1 , pp. 1 - 68 .

Belbin ( 2010 ), Roles at Work, Meredith Belbin , 2nd ed. , Imprint Routledge , London , doi: 10.4324/9780080963242 .

Berman , S. , Burt , L. , Mayo-Smith , D. , Stowell , L. and Thompson , G. ( 1997 ), Dialogue: turning Controversy into Community , Educators for Social Responsibility , Cambridge, MA .

Bertelsmann. ( 2018 ) “ Cultural diversity has a positive impact on innovation ”, Bertelsmann Stiftung , available at: www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/en/our-projects/living-diversity/project-news/cultural-diversity-has-a-positive-impact-on-innovation/

Bezrukova , K. ( 2013 ), “ Understanding and addressing faultlines ”, Presented at the National Research Council’s Workshop on Science Team Dynamics and Effectiveness , Washington, DC , available at: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/documents/webpage/dbasse_083763.pdf .

Blau , A. ( 1977 ), Inequality and Heterogeneity: A Primitive Theory of Social Structure , Free Press , New York, NY .

Bratsberg , H.M. ( 2012 ), “ Empathy maps of the four sight preferences ”, Creative Studies Graduate Student Master's Projects. Paper 176 , available at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d4e9/e13a43847ce1ecebec806206f2d8fe676dad.pdf

Bücker , J. , Furrer , O. and Lin , Y. ( 2015 ), “ Measuring cultural intelligence (CQ): a new test of the CQ scale ”, International Journal of Cross Cultural Management , Vol. 15 No. 3 , pp. 259 - 284 .

Campbell , L.G. , Mehtani , S. , Dozier , M.E. and Rinehart , J. ( 2013 ), “ Gender-heterogeneous working groups produce higher quality science ”, PLoS One , Vol. 8 No. 10 , pp. e79147 .

Carton , A.M. and Cummings , J.N. ( 2013 ), “ The impact of subgroup type and subgroup configurational properties on work team performance ”, Journal of Applied Psychology , Vol. 98 No. 5 , pp. 732 - 758 , doi: 10.1037/a0033593 .

Clyne , M. , Norrby , C. and Warren , J. ( 2009 ), Language and Human Relations: Styles of Address in Contemporary Language , Cambridge University Press .

Coles , N.A. , Larsen , J.T. and Lench , H.C. ( 2019 ), “ A Meta-analysis of the facial feedback literature: effects of facial feedback on emotional experience are small and variable ”, Psychological Bulletin , Vol. 145 No. 6 , doi: 10.1037/bul0000194 .

Dakhli , M. and de Clercq , D. ( 2004 ), “ Human capital, social capital, and innovation: a multi-country study ”, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development , Vol. 16 No. 2 , pp. 107 - 128 .

Devin , H. ( 2017 ), “ Investigating the relationship between big five personality traits and cultural intelligence on football coaches ”, Human and Social Studies , Vol. 6 No. 3 , pp. 116 - 131 .

Elenkov , D.S. and Pimentel , J.R.C. ( 2008 ), “ Social intelligence, emotional intelligence, and cultural intelligence: an integrative perspective ”, In Ang , S. and Van Dyne , L. (Eds) Handbook of Cultural Intelligence , M.E. Sharpe , Armonk, New York, NY , pp. 289 - 305 .

Elenkov , D.S. and Manev , I.M. ( 2009 ), “ Senior expatriate leadership’s effects on innovation and the role of cultural intelligence ”, Journal of World Business , Vol. 44 No. 4 , pp. 357 - 369 .

Freeman , R.B. and Huang , W. ( 2015 ), “ Collaborating with people like me: Ethnic coauthorship within the United States ”, Journal of Labor Economics , Vol. 33 (Suppl. 1), pp. S289 - S318 .

Freeman , R.B. and Huang , W. ( 2014 ), “ Collaborating with people like me: Ethnic Co-Authorship within the U.S ”, NBER Working Paper No. 19905 , National Bureau of Economic Research , Cambridge, MA , available at: www.nber.org/papers/w19905

Fussell , S.R. and Setlock , L.D. ( 2012 ), “ Multicultural teams ”, In Bainbridge , W.S. (ed.), Leadership in Science and Technology: A Reference Handbook , Vol. 1 , Sage , Thousand Oaks, CA , pp. 255 - 263 .

Gassmann , O. and Schweitzer , F. ( 2014 ), “ Managing the unmanageable: the fuzzy front end of innovation ”, In: Gassmann , O , Schweitzer , F (eds) Managing of the Fuzzy Front End of Innovation , Springer , Heidelberg, New York, NY , pp. 3 - 14 .

Gibson , C.B. and Gibbs , J.L. ( 2006 ), “ Unpacking the concept of virtuality: the effects of geographic dispersion, electronic dependence, dynamic structure, and national diversity on team innovation ”, Administrative Science Quarterly , Vol. 51 No. 3 , pp. 451 - 495 , available at: www.crito.uci.edu/papers/2006/VirtualInnovation.pdf

Gooderham , P. and Nordhaug , O. ( 2002 ), “ Are cultural differences in Europe on the decline? ”, European Business Forum , Vol. 8 , pp. 48 - 53 .

Gudykunst , W.B. and Ting-Toomey , S. ( 1988 ), Culture and Interpersonal Communication , SAGE Publications .

Gunnery , S.D. and Hall , J.A. ( 2014 ), “ The duchenne smile and persuasion ”, Journal of Nonverbal Behavior , Vol. 38 No. 2 , pp. 181 - 194 .

Hall , E.T. ( 1977 ), Beyond Culture , Anchor Press/Doubleday , Garden City, N.Y .

Hall , K.L. , Vogel , A.L. , Huang , G.C. , Serrano , K.J. , Rice , E.L. , Tsakraklides , S.P. and Fiore , S.M. ( 2018 ), “ The science of team science: a review of the empirical evidence and research gaps on collaboration in science ”, American Psychologist , Vol. 73 No. 4 , pp. 532 - 548 .

Hampden-Turner , C. and Trompenaars , F. ( 2006 ), “ Cultural intelligence: is such a capacity credible? ”, Group and Organization Management , Vol. 31 No. 1 , pp. 56 - 63 .

Hareli , S. and Hess , U. ( 2010 ), “ What emotional reactions can tell us about the nature of others: an appraisal perspective on person perception ”, Cognition and Emotion , Vol. 24 No. 1 , pp. 128 - 140 .

Herbig , P. and Dunphy , S. ( 1998 ), “ Culture and innovation ”, Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal , Vol. 5 No. 4 , pp. 13 - 21 .

Higgs , M. ( 1996 ), “ Overcoming the problems of cultural differences to establish success for international management teams ”, Team Performance Management: An International Journal , Vol. 2 No. 1 , pp. 36 - 43 .

Hofstede , G. ( 2010 ), “ The GLOBE debate: back to relevance ”, Journal of International Business Studies , Vol. 41 No. 8 , pp. 1339 - 1346 .

Horwitz , S.K. and Horwitz , I.W. ( 2007 ), “ The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: a Meta-analytic review of team demography ”, Journal of Management , Vol. 33 No. 6 , pp. 987 - 1015 .

Jackson , S.E. , May , K.E. and Whitney , K. ( 1995 ), “ Understanding the dynamics of diversity in decision-making teams ”, In Guzzo , R.A. and Salas , E. (Eds), Team Decision-Making Effectiveness in Organizations , Jossey-Bass , San Francisco , pp. 204 - 261 .

Joecks , J. , Pull , K. and Vetter , K. ( 2013 ), “ Gender diversity in the boardroom and firm performance: what exactly constitutes a “critical mass? ”, Journal of Business Ethics , Vol. 118 No. 1 , pp. 61 - 72 .

Jones , C.S. and Hartley , N.T. ( 2013 ), “ Comparing correlations between four-quadrant and five-factor personality assessments ”, American Journal of Business Education , Vol. 6 No. 4 , pp. 459 - 470 .

Jones , G.B. , Chirino-Chace , B. and Wright , J.M. ( 2020 ), “ Cultural diversity drives innovation: modeling in the global pharmaceutical industry ”, International Journal Innovation and Science , Vol. 12 .

Judge , T.A. , Heller , D. and Mount , M.K. ( 2002 ), “ Five-factor model of personality and job satisfaction: a meta-analysis ”, Journal of Applied Psychology , Vol. 87 No. 3 , pp. 530 - 541 .

Jung , C.G. ( 1933 ), Psychological Types , Harcourt, Brace , New York, NY .

Kaasa , A. and Vadi , M. ( 2010 ), “ How does culture contribute to innovation? Evidence from european countries ”, Economics of Innovation and New Technology , Vol. 19 No. 7 , pp. 583 - 604 , doi: 10.1080/10438590902987222 .

Kivunja , C. ( 2015 ), “ Using De Bono’s six thinking hats model to teach critical thinking and problem solving skills essential for success in the 21st century economy ”, Creative Education , Vol. 6 No. 3 , pp. 380 - 391 , doi: 10.4236/ce.2015.63037 .

Koehne , G. , Shih , P.C. and Olson , J.S. ( 2012 ), “ Remote and alone: Coping with being the remote member on the team ”, In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work , ACM , New York, NY , pp. 1257 - 1266 .

Krys , K. , Melanie Vauclair , C. and Capaldi , C.A. ( 2016 ), “ Be careful where you smile: culture shapes judgments of intelligence and honesty of smiling individuals ”, Journal of Nonverbal Behavior , Vol. 40 No. 2 , pp. 101 - 116 .

Lencioni , P. ( 2002 ), The Five Dysfunctions of a Team , Jossey-Bass , San Francisco .

Lievens , F. , Harris , M.M. , Van Keer , E. and Bisqueret , C. ( 2003 ), “ Predicting cross-cultural training performance: the validity of personality, cognitive ability, and dimensions measured by an assessment center and a behavior description interview ”, Journal of Applied Psychology , Vol. 88 No. 3 , pp. 476 - 489 .

Lorenzo , R. Voigt , N. Tsusaka , M. Krentz , M. and Abouzahr , K. ( 2018 ), “ How diverse leadership teams boost innovation ”, Boston Consulting Group , available at: www.bcg.com/publications/2018/how-diverse-leadership-teams-boost-innovation.aspx .

McSweeney , B. ( 2002 ), “ Hofstede’s model of national cultural differences and their consequences: a triumph of faith – a failure of analysis ”, Human Relations , Vol. 55 No. 1 , pp. 89 - 118 .

Management ( 2014 ), available at: www.management-issues.com/opinion/6948/cultural-misunderstandings-and-the-elephant-in-the-room/

Mannix , E. and Neale , M.A. ( 2005 ), “ What differences make a difference? The promise and reality of diverse teams in organizations ”, Psychological Science in the Public Interest , Vol. 6 No. 2 , pp. 31 - 55 .

Martínez-Piva , J.M. (ed) ( 2009 ), “ Knowledge generation and protection: intellectual property, innovation and economic development ”, Springer , New York, NY .

Matsumoto , D. and Hwang , H.C. ( 2013 ), “ Assessing cross-cultural competence: a review of available tests ”, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology , Vol. 44 No. 6 , pp. 849 - 873 .

Matsumoto , D. , LeRoux , J. , Ratzlaff , C. , Tatani , H. , Uchida , H. , Kim , C. and Araki , S. ( 2001 ), “ Development and validation of a measure of intercultural adjustment potential in Japanese sojourners: the intercultural adjustment potential scale (ICAPS) ”, International Journal of Intercultural Relations , Vol. 25 No. 5 , pp. 483 - 510 .

Mayer , M. and Bello , Y. ( 2012 ), “ Leading cross cultural teams in today's global marketplace ”, PMI Global Congress 2012—EMEA , Project Management Institute , Marseilles, France. Newtown Square, PA .

Merenda , P.F. ( 1987 ), “ Toward a Four-Factor theory of temperament and/or personality ”, Journal of Personality Assessment , Vol. 51 No. 3 , pp. 367 - 374 .

Moon , T. ( 2013 ), “ The effect of cultural intelligence on performance in multicultural teams ”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology , Vol. 43 No. 12 , pp. 2141 - 2425 .

Murugesan , R. and Jayavelu , R. ( 2017 ), “ The influence of big five personality traits and self-efficacy on entrepreneurial intention: the role of gender ”, Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies , Vol. 3 No. 1 , pp. 41 - 61 , doi: 10.1177/2393957516684569 .

Nakata , C. and Sivakumar , K. ( 1996 ), “ National culture and new product development: an integrative review ”, Journal of Product Innovation and Management , Vol. 13 , pp. 462 - 463 .

National Research Council ( 2015 ), Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science. Committee on the Science of Team Science , The National Academies Press , doi: 10.17226/19007 .

Nelson , R.R. ( 1991 ), “ Why do firms differ, and how does it matter? ”, Strategic Management Journal , Vol. 12 No. S2 , pp. 61 - 74 .

Ng , K.-Y. , Van Dyne , L. and Ang , S. ( 2009 ), “ From experience to experiential learning: Cultural intelligence as a learning capability for global leader development ”, Academy of Management Learning and Education , Vol. 8 , pp. 511 - 526 . Vol,

NIH ( 2010 ), Collaboration and Team Science: A Field Guide , Bennett , L.M. , Gadlin , H. and Levine-Finley , S. (eds), National Institutes of Health publication

O’Leary , M.B. and Cummings , J.N. ( 2007 ), “ The spatial, temporal, and configurational characteristics of geographic dispersion in teams ”, MIS Quarterly , Vol. 31 No. 3 , pp. 433 - 452 .

Ozono , H. ( 2010 ), “ What’s in a smile? Cultural differences in the effects of smiling on judgments of trustworthiness ”, Letters on Evolutionary Behavioral Science , Vol. 1 No. 1 , pp. 15 - 18 .

Pittenger , D.J. ( 1993 ), “ Utility of the Myers-Briggs type indicator ”, Review of Educational Research , Vol. 63 No. 4 , pp. 467 - 488 .

Ramalu , S.S. , Rose , R.C. , Kumar , N. and Uli , J. ( 2010 ), “ Doing business in global arena: an examination of the relationship between cultural intelligence and cross-cultural adjustment ”, Asian Academy of Management Journal , Vol. 15 , pp. 79 - 97 .

Rose , R.C. , Ramalu , S.S. , Uli , J. and Kumar , N. ( 2010 ), “ Expatriate performance in international assignments: the role of cultural intelligence as dynamic intercultural competency ”, International Journal of Business and Management , Vol. 5 No. 8 , pp. 76 - 85 .

Seegmiller , R.A. and Epperson , D.L. ( 1987 ), “ Distinguishing Thinking-Feeling preferences through the content analysis of natural language ”, Journal of Personality Assessment , Vol. 51 No. 1 , pp. 42 - 52 .

Shane , S. ( 1993 ), “ Cultural influences on national rates of innovation ”, Journal of Business Venturing , Vol. 8 No. 1 , pp. 59 - 73 .

SHRM ( 2015 ), “ Cultural intelligence: the essential intelligence for the 21st century ”, available at: https://culturalq.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/SHRM-report.pdf

Smale , T. ( 2016 ), “ Why national culture should be at the heart of innovation management ”, Technology Innovation Management Review , Vol. 6 No. 4 , pp. 18 - 25 .

Srinivasan , R. and Martínez , A.M. ( 2018 ), “ Cross-Cultural and Cultural-Specific production and perception of facial expressions of emotion in the wild ”, ArXiv, abs/1808.04399 .

Stanford , ( 2016 ), available at: https://news.stanford.edu/news/2016/february/smiles-jeanne-tsai-021516.html .

Thomas , K.W. and Kilmann , R.H. ( 1974 ), Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument , Xicom, a subsidiary of CPP , Mountain View, CA .

Tuckman , B.W. and Jensen , M.A. ( 1977 ), “ Stages of small-group development revisited ”, Group and Organization Studies , Vol. 2 No. 4 , pp. 419 - 427 .

Uono , S. and Hietanen , J.K. ( 2015 ), “ Eye contact perception in the west and east: a cross-cultural study ”, PLoS One , Vol. 10 No. 2 , pp. e0118094 .

Van Dyne , L. , Ang , S. , Ng , K.-Y. , Rockstuhl , T. , Tan , M.L. and Koh , C. ( 2012 ), “ Sub-dimensions of the four factor model of cultural intelligence: expanding the conceptualization and measurement of cultural intelligence ”, Social and Personality Psychology Compass , Vol. 6 No. 4 , pp. 295 - 313 .

Van Wulfen , G. ( 2009 ), “ The perfect innovation team”, from innovation: putting ideas into action (best practices report) ”, APQC , Houston , available at: https://innovationmanagement.se/2013/07/10/the-perfect-innovation-team/

Viki , T. , Toma , D. and Gons , E. ( 2017 ), “ The corporate startup how established companies can develop successful innovation ecosystems ”, Vakmedianet .

Villago , S.T. , Lukasik , A.J. , Belau , M.A. and Briggs , A.L. ( 2011 ), “ Getting specific about demographic diversity variable and team performance relationships: a metaanalysis ”, Journal of Management , Vol. 37 No. 3 , pp. 709 - 743 .

Wu , M.-Y. ( 2006 ), “ Hofstede’s cultural dimensions 30 years later: a study of Taiwan and the United States ”, Intercultural Communications Studies XV , Vol. 1 , pp. 33 - 42 .

Zheng , L. ( 2013 ), “ How to show white men that diversity and inclusion efforts need them ”, Harvard Business Review .

Further reading

De Abreu Dos Reis , C.R. , Sastre Castillo , M.Á. and Roig Dobón , S. ( 2007 ), “ Diversity and business performance: 50 years of research ”, Service Business , Vol. 1 , p. 257 .

Novartis ( 2020 ), available at: www.fastcompany.com/company/novartis .

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Elena Rodriguez, Anastacia Awad, Ivonna Demme, Nancy Long, Christian Pihlgren, Unmesh Deodhar, Rahul Sharma and Clara Fernandez de Castro for inputs on the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Related articles, we’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

CSense Management Solutions Pvt Ltd

Search search, systematic problem-solving.

What is Problem-solving?

Before we understand problem-solving, let us first calibrate ourselves on ‘what is called a problem?’

When there is a gap between our expectations and reality, we feel unhappy – which is a Problem . This is how a deviation from the specification, a failure to meet timelines, etc., become our problems. A problem could be defined as “the gap between our expectations and actual state or observation”.

From the gap analogy, we also understand that as the gap increases, our suffering intensifies.

Problem-solving

A fundamental part of every manager’s role is problem-solving. So, being a confident problem solver is really important to your success.

Much of that confidence comes from having a good process to use when approaching a problem. With one, you can solve problems quickly and effectively. Without one, your solutions may be ineffective, or you’ll get stuck and do nothing, sometimes with painful consequences.

Managing the problem (correction) instead of solving it (with corrective action) creates firefighting in our daily work. To solve a problem permanently, we need to understand and act on its root cause. We will also follow the steps of identifying root causes and prevent their recurrence in this workshop.

CSense IC 3 Approach

• Identification
• Containment Action
• Investigation
• Cause Analysis
• Improvement

Applications of methodology

The methodology is simple and applicable to most of the problems faced by the industries. Hence, it is widely accepted and recommended by companies. This also forms a framework for Auto industries’ 8D Problem Solving, Pharma industries’ USFDA recommended 7 step approach and Six Sigma’s DMAIC approach.

Training Contents

• Overview of Problem-solving
• Need for Problem-Solving
• Managing a Problem Vs Problem Solving
• Definitions – Correction, Corrective Action & Preventive Action

Step by Step Approach to Problem-Solving

1. identification.

• Use of 5W2H questions

2. Containment Action

• Assessing the problem and its risk
• Forming Effective Teams
• CFT & CHT
• Damage control – Interim Actions
• Communication plan

3. Investigation

• Data / Evidence Collection

4. Cause Analysis

• Brainstorming for Problem-solving
• Fishbone Analysis
• Is – Is Not Analysis
• Process Mapping
• Data and Statistical Analysis
• Data collection
• Graphical Tools
• Why-Why Analysis
• Validation of Root causes
• Statistical Analysis

5. Improvement

• Permanent Corrective Action
• Solution Generation
• Pilot Implementation
• Solution Action Plan
• Preventing Recurrence
• Control Plan
• Verification of Status
• Verification of Effectiveness
• Training & Documentation

Training Duration

• Two days – 16 hours

About the Course

The Problem-Solving workshop caters to leaders and managers who are interested in solving the recurring problems and want to bring in the culture and team-based approach of systematic problem solving to every level of people in the organisation. We deal with the most relevant tools in the step-by-step approach. We can take up the actual cases of recurring problems in the company as an example and study for the workshop. The course covers essential problem-solving tools like problem definition, containment action, root cause analysis with QC tools, root cause validation using statistical tools, corrective action, preventive action, escape points, Poka-yoke and more.

Course Objectives

At the end of the course, participants will be able to understand and appreciate

• Cost of Poor Quality
• The need for Systematic problem-solving
• Various approaches to problem-solving
• Difference between correction, corrective action and preventive action
• Team approach enhance effective solutions and learning
• Risk assessment and containment actions
• Root cause analysis
• Statistical tools
• Arriving at an effective action plan
• Preventing the defects

Target Audience

• Managers responsible for process improvements
• Quality Managers, Internal and External Auditors
• Shop floor managers and supervisors
• Production and Maintenance Managers
• Product Design Engineers
• Research Engineers & Scientists

Workshop Methodology

CSense Workshop approach is based on scientifically proven methodologies of Learning, which includes Learning by

• Listening – Classroom sessions & Audio-Visuals
• by Teaching
• Examples & Exercises at the end of each step
• We will provide the required Templates and formats for each tool
• During the course, we will form 3 to 4 cross-functional teams
• We will help each team choose a specific problem (either an open Non-conformance or a recently closed out non-conformance)
• We encourage the teams to choose different types of problems like Audit observations, internal failures/rejections, customer complaints, machine breakdown or accidents.
• Then we will guide the participants to work on their assigned problem with the new approach – application & documentation.
• Faculty will help the teams to apply the learning on the problems and explain the practical doubts.
• After each step, teams will present their work.

Min 12 and Max 20 Participants per batch

Customisation

We can customise the deliverable as per client’s requirements.

Certification

• Certification Criteria: 90% attendance in Training Sessions, participation in activities and 70% Score in written test
• The test will be conducted on 2 nd day of training
• Laptop/desktop with provision to install software packages for participants to be arranged by the client.

Additional Support

Continued coaching and hand-holding support could be provided by CSense after the workshop for successful project completion, as an optional engagement.

Login and registration

• Forgot Username?
• Forgot Password?

Comparison of problem-solving methods and techniques

Problem-solving is an essential skill in everyday life, in the professional world, and even in scientific research. However, with the multitude of approaches, methods, and techniques available, it can be challenging to navigate. Each problem is unique and may require a different approach. We will attempt to clarify the landscape of these approaches and methods by explaining their primary differences and when to use them, all summarized in the image above.

1 Comprehensive Problem-Solving approaches

This category encompasses complete and structured methods for tackling problem-solving in a systematic way. These approaches are designed to guide individuals or teams throughout the problem-solving process, providing clear and ordered steps to follow.

The DMAIC approach is a structured problem-solving method, divided into five main steps:

• Define : Identify the problem, set objectives, and define the scope of analysis.
• Measure : Gather data to assess the current performance of the process and measure variability.
• Analyze : Dive deep into the data to identify the root causes of the problem.
• Improve : Develop and implement solutions to eliminate the identified problem causes.
• Control : Establish control mechanisms to monitor results and maintain long-term improvements.

Distinctiveness from other comprehensive problem-solving approaches:

The DMAIC approach stems from the Six-Sigma philosophy and places a greater emphasis than other global methods on quantified data, through measurement, and quantitative statistical analyses.

Preferred application

DMAIC is suitable for any type of recurring problem-solving, from medium to high complexity, occurring in an organization's processes or operations. Especially for problems that require quantitative data analyses.

1.2 8D Method

The 8D method is a structured problem-solving approach which stands for "eight disciplines" summarized as follows:

• Form a multidisciplinary team : Create a problem-solving team composed of people with diverse skills.
• Define the problem : Clearly identify the problem, its scope, and the resolution objectives.
• Implement immediate measures : If necessary, take emergency actions to contain the problem.
• Identify causes : Pinpoint the root causes of the problem.
• Develop corrective actions : Design corrective actions to eliminate the immediate causes.
• Implement corrective actions : Execute the corrective actions and monitor their effectiveness.
• Prevent recurrence : Validate that corrective actions are effective and prevent the problem's recurrence.
• Acknowledge the involved individuals : Document the resolution process and recognize the team's contributions.

It explicitly introduces a step to implement immediate actions before identifying the root causes.

Even though the method applies to recurring problem-solving, from medium to high complexity, it tends to be mainly used for medium complexity problems that require urgent actions.

1.3 The A3 method

The A3 method originates from the Toyota Production System (TPS). At Toyota, the A3 paper format was adopted to document, visualize, and share problems, analyses, and solutions concisely. This format has become a principle for reporting, and particularly applied in problem solving. It is more a principle than a method. The steps in the A3 method are not specified, but often follow the example below:

• Describe the current situation
• Define the objective
• Identify the root causes
• Define the corrective actions
• Define the implementation plan
• Track the results
• Learn from the experience

It emphasizes clarity of communication through a simple, visual document containing concise information.

Although the method applies to recurring problem-solving, from medium to high complexity, it tends to be primarily used for medium complexity problems.

1.4 The Change or Transformation project

The Transformation, or Change approach, is a comprehensive method for solving complex problems related to an organization and its operational methods (organization, governance, management methods, processes, staff skills, and motivations...). It involves conducting an in-depth diagnostic of the organization to identify its strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, then using this information to draft a transformation or improvement plan which will involve a significant part of change management. This approach relies on a holistic analysis of the current company situation, followed by designing and implementing a project aiming to achieve specific change or improvement goals. 

There isn't truly a Change/Transformation approach that has established its "brand", acronyms, and standard structure like DMAIC, 8D, etc. However, all Transformation projects apply similar approaches, and they are frequent enough that this approach deserves to be on our list. It places a more particular emphasis on organizational, managerial, and human aspects, even though process improvement is also part of its scope.

This method mainly applies to solving recurring problems of high complexity of organizational and human nature (organization, governance, management, skills, and motivation...) especially across multiple departments or services of the organization.

1.5 The PDCA method

The PDCA (Plan, Do, Check, Act) is a continuous improvement cycle used to solve problems, enhance processes, and achieve goals. Here's a brief description of each step:

• Plan: Identify the problem or the objective, set goals, design an action plan, and choose methods to achieve them.
• Do: Implement the action plan by executing the planned activities.
• Check: Evaluate the results obtained against the set objectives, by collecting data and checking performance.
• Act: Take measures to adjust, correct, and improve the plan based on the results of the evaluation. Repeat the cycle to continue improvement.

Distinguishing feature compared to other global problem-solving approaches:

PDCA is more of a continuous improvement principle based on a cycle that continually repeats to solve problems, enhance processes, or achieve objectives. It is more generic and can be applied to various situations.

PDCA is often used for incremental improvements and regular adjustments in a process or activity. It is less used to solve complex, identified, or chronic problems and to bring about significant improvements.

The Kaizen event, often referred to as "Kaizen Blitz" or simply "Kaizen," stemming from Toyota's production philosophy, is a targeted and intensive approach aimed at rapidly improving a process, product, or service within an organization.

It typically lasts from a few days to a week, brings together a multidisciplinary team, and follows a procedure of analysis, ideation, rapid implementation, and review.

Although Kaizen covers the entire problem-solving process, it is more focused, both in terms of duration (a few days) and scope compared to broader approaches.

It is particularly suitable for low or medium complexity problems, aiming to achieve immediate and visible improvements, often focused on process efficiency and waste reduction, within a continuous improvement context.

1.7 Conclusion on global problem-solving approaches

Except for Kaizen, which is more targeted than the others, the differences lie mainly in certain aspects more or less highlighted by one method or another.

The effectiveness of the method used will probably depend more on the way (rigor, demand, flexibility, commitment of individuals, etc.) it is implemented than the method itself.

2 Specific methods used within the problem-solving process

2.1 5w2h method.

The method is a management and organization tool used to ask essential questions in order to gather specific and relevant information on a given subject. The letters 5W2H represent the initials of each question  as follows:

• What? : This question aims to clearly define the object or subject under examination. It's the first step to ensure everyone understands what's being discussed.
• Who? : This pertains to determining who is involved or affected by the subject. This could include individuals, teams, departments, or other stakeholders.
• Where? : This question seeks to identify places or locations related to the subject. This could mean physical locations, specific departments in an organization, or even geographical areas.
• When? : It's essential to determine the timeline or time frame associated with the subject. This can include deadlines, due dates, specific moments, and so on.
• Why? : The "Why?" question seeks to comprehend the motivations, reasons, or objectives behind the subject. It helps explore the reasons leading to a particular situation or decision.
• How? : This question delves into the methods, processes, or means used concerning the subject. It aids in understanding the steps or actions required to achieve a goal.
• How much? : This involves quantifying elements related to the subject. This can comprise figures, measurements, financial resources, quantities, and more.

The most appropriate use of the 5W2H method is typically in the Problem Definition phase for the following reasons:

• Clarifying the subject: The "What?" question helps to precisely define what the project is about, avoiding ambiguity.
• Identifying stakeholders: By answering the "Who?" question, the team can determine who's involved in the process or problem to be solved, which is vital for stakeholder management.
• Location: The "Where?" question helps identify the physical places or areas of the organization affected by the project.
• Scheduling: By answering the "When?" question, timelines and deadlines for the project can be set.
• Understanding methods and resources: The "How?" and "How much?" questions help understand existing processes, available resources, and measurements related to the problem.
• Understanding motivations: Finally, the "Why?" question can assist in grasping why the problem is crucial to solve.

2.2 Ishikawa method for identifying root causes

The Ishikawa diagram , also known as the fishbone diagram, is a problem-solving technique used to identify and analyze the root causes of a specific issue. It was developed by Japanese statistician Kaoru Ishikawa. Here's how it works:

• Problem identification: The team clearly identifies the problem or adverse effect that needs resolving. This issue is typically written at the far right of a fish-shaped diagram.
• Diagram creation: A fish-shaped diagram is drawn with a horizontal line representing the problem to solve. This line resembles a fish's spine.
• Cause categories: On the diagram, "spines" are drawn perpendicular to the central spine of the fish. These represent different cause categories that might contribute to the problem. Common categories include the "5 M's" (Material, Manpower, Methods, Environment, Machines) or the "4 P's" (Product, Processes, People, Partners).
• Identifying potential causes: The team then contemplates potential causes for each category and notes them along the corresponding spines. These causes are often identified through brainstorming sessions.
• Analyze and identify root causes: Once all potential causes are recognized, the team analyzes each to determine if it's genuinely linked to the problem and if there are deeper underlying reasons, in order to pinpoint the root causes. Techniques like Pareto charts, data analysis, or the "5 whys" can be employed to identify and prioritize causes based on their significance.

One can argue that the essence of the Ishikawa method lies mainly within stages 1 to 4, up to the identification of potential causes.

Step 5 is more an extension of the Ishikawa method involving the use of other data analysis methods, such as Pareto charts, statistical analyses, or other in-depth investigative techniques.

The Ishikawa method is suitable for two phases of the problem-solving process:

• Problem Definition: The "core" of the Ishikawa method is apt as it allows for the identification of potential causes to clarify the problem's scope and the extent of subsequent analyses. Indeed, the analysis and identification of root causes stage is lengthier and more resource-intensive and will thus be more suitable for the next phase.
• Identifying causes: Both the core of the method and its extension to other methods are used here. The strength of the Ishikawa method is its ability to identify and structure analysis axes using complementary approaches. It's also common to undertake the "core" of the method in the problem definition phase and continue it in this stage (after validating the continuation of the problem-solving process).

2.3 Process mapping and critique

If problem solving is oriented towards improving a process, then the method of process mapping is suitable. This method aims to understand, analyze, and improve a process by visualizing it in detail and identifying optimization opportunities. Within this framework, this method can be applied at two stages of the problem-solving process:

• Problem definition: At this stage, a high-level map will be preferred, for example, a simplified flow diagram, such as a SIPOC . This is generally sufficient to identify the main opportunities to explore later and to clarify the problem definition.
• Cause identification: In this case, and especially for complex problems or significant processes, a detailed mapping that includes all steps, subprocesses, tasks, and interactions will be favored. This can be complemented by a SIPOC map if major issues are identified concerning the documents used (inputs, outputs) and the providers or customers of these documents.

2.4 Structured questionnaires

Questionnaires are generally categorized under general techniques of the following chapter. However, since we are referring here to two very specific types of questionnaires designed for problem-solving, we place them in this category.

• Scoping - Survey: A structured but simple questionnaire (some open questions and performance perception scores) is answered by a selection of organization leaders (scoping) or by a large number of employees (survey).
• Assessment against a benchmark: A very precise questionnaire answered by a selection of leaders or experts to assess how certain practices are conducted and if they match the state of the art (the benchmark).

These two types of questionnaires are used in two different phases:

• Scoping - survey is appropriate in the problem definition phase
• Assessment against a benchmark is used in the root cause identification phase

2.5 Benefit/Ease Matrix

The Benefit/Ease matrix is a tool that allows for the evaluation and ranking of potential actions based on two key criteria:

• Benefit: Benefits, whether qualitative or quantitative, expected from the implementation of each action.
• Ease: This represents the ease with which the proposed actions can be implemented or carried out. Ease depends on various factors such as available resources, required skills, legal constraints, or local conditions.

3 General techniques used in problem-solving

This category includes methods that are not specifically designed for use in problem-solving, but can be. They can also be more of techniques or principles rather than actual methods. Therefore, they can be integrated or used with more specific methods. For example, the "5 whys" can be used in the Ishikawa method to delve deeper into the causes indicated on each fishbone.

3.1 Brainstorming

Brainstorming is a technique for generating ideas creatively and collaboratively. It aims to gather a group of people to explore ideas, solutions, or concepts by encouraging free thought, creativity, and diversity of perspectives.

It is mainly used in the phases of:

• Problem definition: Brainstorming can be used to gather initial ideas about areas that deserve particular attention, identify problems or opportunities requiring improvement.
• Action definition: Brainstorming is particularly useful in this phase as it promotes the generation of a wide range of potential solutions to identified problems. It allows the team to think creatively about process changes, improvements, and innovations that could effectively solve the problems.

3.2 The 5 whys

The "5 Whys" is more of a technique than a method. It involves repeatedly asking the question "Why?" typically until the root cause of a problem is reached. The goal is to move beyond the obvious symptoms of a problem to identify underlying factors contributing to its occurrence.

3.3 Affinity diagram

The affinity diagram method, also known as the KJ method, is a group management technique used to organize and group ideas, information, or problems into logical categories. It consists of collecting items related to a subject, displaying them randomly, and then grouping them based on similarities or relations.

3.4 Quantitative data analysis

Data analysis is an essential element of problem-solving. However, the level of analysis, especially when it comes to quantitative analysis, varies greatly. Thus, we propose a categorization of analysis methods by complexity level to better indicate which analyses to use and when.

3.4.1 Categorization of analyses

Here is a categorization from the simplest to the most complex, with illustrations for each type, for quantitative analyses:

• Basic statistics (mean, median, mode, variance, standard deviation)
• Graphs (bar charts, histograms, pie charts)
• Pareto charts
• Scatter plots
• Correlation analyses
• Hypothesis tests (t-test, ANOVA)
• Confidence intervals
• Linear and logistic regression
• Decision trees and random forests
• Simple simulation
• Optimization (linear programming, network optimization)
• Neural networks
• Clustering (like K-means)
• Deep learning techniques

3.4.2 When to use them during problem-solving?

It depends both on the stage and on the complexity of identifying the real root causes, especially through a quantitative analysis.

• Problem definition phase: Generally, descriptive analyses are sufficient at this stage.
• Cause identification phase: Descriptive analyses are naturally used. Exploratory analyses, and even inferential/predictive analyses, are often used for specific causes. For instance, when calculating the capability of a process and verifying that it meets requirements (such as the defect rate, non-quality rate, etc.). This is even the basis of the approach and the term "six sigma", which requires less than 3.4 defects per million. For very specific and complex problems, advanced methods (simulations, AI) may be used.
• Action definition phase: The main data analysis performed here is estimating the impacts of the actions, which is usually a descriptive analysis. However, it may happen that you simulate and compare several scenarios by performing sensitivity analyses, exploratory, or even predictive types. It is also likely that with the maturation of AI-based techniques, these tools will be used more and more to make action recommendations.

3.5 The Business Case

In the context of problem-solving, the "Business Case" identifies the gains, costs, investments, and financial risks associated with solving the problem. It supports several actions, such as deciding to continue the problem-solving process, prioritizing causes and actions, or tracking results:

• Problem definition: At this stage, the Business Case is used to decide whether to proceed with the analysis and action definition phases. The Business Case is generally vague at this stage due to a lack of many data.
• Cause identification: An estimated quantitative impact of the different causes can help focus on the causes generating the greatest financial losses.
• Action definition: The Business Case is established at the end of the phase to decide whether or not to implement the actions. This time it is more precise because all the necessary data could be collected in the previous phases.
• Measuring results: The Business Case is then used to verify that the impact of the solutions not only brings operational benefits but also translates into the organization's accounts.

The Business Case is used more the more complex the problem is, and therefore costly to solve. It will then be necessary to justify the investment in human and financial resources to solve the problem. It will be used less for simple problems, or in a very simplified way, for example, when the "Kaizen" method is used.

You may also access our unique directory of management best practices by function and industry

When you subscribe to the blog, we will send you an e-mail when there are new updates on the site so you wouldn't miss them.

Related Posts

A3 is a principle, not a problem-solving method !!

The pdca cycle or deming wheel: how and why to use it, the 5 whys method: how and when to use it, 5w2h or 5w1h methods: how and when to use them, 8d method (8 disciplines), ishikawa diagram and root cause analysis, continuous improvement process : a challenge for significant benefits, dmaic process: a methodology to implement six sigma, what is an operational audit of the organisation, improvement and innovation excellence.

How it works

For Business

Join Mind Tools

Self-Assessment • 20 min read

How Good Is Your Problem Solving?

Use a systematic approach..

By the Mind Tools Content Team

Good problem solving skills are fundamentally important if you're going to be successful in your career.

But problems are something that we don't particularly like.

They're time-consuming.

They muscle their way into already packed schedules.

They force us to think about an uncertain future.

And they never seem to go away!

That's why, when faced with problems, most of us try to eliminate them as quickly as possible. But have you ever chosen the easiest or most obvious solution – and then realized that you have entirely missed a much better solution? Or have you found yourself fixing just the symptoms of a problem, only for the situation to get much worse?

To be an effective problem-solver, you need to be systematic and logical in your approach. This quiz helps you assess your current approach to problem solving. By improving this, you'll make better overall decisions. And as you increase your confidence with solving problems, you'll be less likely to rush to the first solution – which may not necessarily be the best one.

Once you've completed the quiz, we'll direct you to tools and resources that can help you make the most of your problem-solving skills.

How Good Are You at Solving Problems?

Instructions.

For each statement, click the button in the column that best describes you. Please answer questions as you actually are (rather than how you think you should be), and don't worry if some questions seem to score in the 'wrong direction'. When you are finished, please click the 'Calculate My Total' button at the bottom of the test.

Answering these questions should have helped you recognize the key steps associated with effective problem solving.

This quiz is based on Dr Min Basadur's Simplexity Thinking problem-solving model. This eight-step process follows the circular pattern shown below, within which current problems are solved and new problems are identified on an ongoing basis. This assessment has not been validated and is intended for illustrative purposes only.

Below, we outline the tools and strategies you can use for each stage of the problem-solving process. Enjoy exploring these stages!

Step 1: Find the Problem (Questions 7, 12)

Some problems are very obvious, however others are not so easily identified. As part of an effective problem-solving process, you need to look actively for problems – even when things seem to be running fine. Proactive problem solving helps you avoid emergencies and allows you to be calm and in control when issues arise.

These techniques can help you do this:

PEST Analysis helps you pick up changes to your environment that you should be paying attention to. Make sure too that you're watching changes in customer needs and market dynamics, and that you're monitoring trends that are relevant to your industry.

Risk Analysis helps you identify significant business risks.

Failure Modes and Effects Analysis helps you identify possible points of failure in your business process, so that you can fix these before problems arise.

After Action Reviews help you scan recent performance to identify things that can be done better in the future.

Where you have several problems to solve, our articles on Prioritization and Pareto Analysis help you think about which ones you should focus on first.

Step 2: Find the Facts (Questions 10, 14)

After identifying a potential problem, you need information. What factors contribute to the problem? Who is involved with it? What solutions have been tried before? What do others think about the problem?

If you move forward to find a solution too quickly, you risk relying on imperfect information that's based on assumptions and limited perspectives, so make sure that you research the problem thoroughly.

Step 3: Define the Problem (Questions 3, 9)

Now that you understand the problem, define it clearly and completely. Writing a clear problem definition forces you to establish specific boundaries for the problem. This keeps the scope from growing too large, and it helps you stay focused on the main issues.

A great tool to use at this stage is CATWOE . With this process, you analyze potential problems by looking at them from six perspectives, those of its Customers; Actors (people within the organization); the Transformation, or business process; the World-view, or top-down view of what's going on; the Owner; and the wider organizational Environment. By looking at a situation from these perspectives, you can open your mind and come to a much sharper and more comprehensive definition of the problem.

Cause and Effect Analysis is another good tool to use here, as it helps you think about the many different factors that can contribute to a problem. This helps you separate the symptoms of a problem from its fundamental causes.

Step 4: Find Ideas (Questions 4, 13)

With a clear problem definition, start generating ideas for a solution. The key here is to be flexible in the way you approach a problem. You want to be able to see it from as many perspectives as possible. Looking for patterns or common elements in different parts of the problem can sometimes help. You can also use metaphors and analogies to help analyze the problem, discover similarities to other issues, and think of solutions based on those similarities.

Traditional brainstorming and reverse brainstorming are very useful here. By taking the time to generate a range of creative solutions to the problem, you'll significantly increase the likelihood that you'll find the best possible solution, not just a semi-adequate one. Where appropriate, involve people with different viewpoints to expand the volume of ideas generated.

Tip: Don't evaluate your ideas until step 5. If you do, this will limit your creativity at too early a stage.

Step 5: Select and Evaluate (Questions 6, 15)

After finding ideas, you'll have many options that must be evaluated. It's tempting at this stage to charge in and start discarding ideas immediately. However, if you do this without first determining the criteria for a good solution, you risk rejecting an alternative that has real potential.

Decide what elements are needed for a realistic and practical solution, and think about the criteria you'll use to choose between potential solutions.

Paired Comparison Analysis , Decision Matrix Analysis and Risk Analysis are useful techniques here, as are many of the specialist resources available within our Decision-Making section . Enjoy exploring these!

Step 6: Plan (Questions 1, 16)

You might think that choosing a solution is the end of a problem-solving process. In fact, it's simply the start of the next phase in problem solving: implementation. This involves lots of planning and preparation. If you haven't already developed a full Risk Analysis in the evaluation phase, do so now. It's important to know what to be prepared for as you begin to roll out your proposed solution.

The type of planning that you need to do depends on the size of the implementation project that you need to set up. For small projects, all you'll often need are Action Plans that outline who will do what, when, and how. Larger projects need more sophisticated approaches – you'll find out more about these in the article What is Project Management? And for projects that affect many other people, you'll need to think about Change Management as well.

Here, it can be useful to conduct an Impact Analysis to help you identify potential resistance as well as alert you to problems you may not have anticipated. Force Field Analysis will also help you uncover the various pressures for and against your proposed solution. Once you've done the detailed planning, it can also be useful at this stage to make a final Go/No-Go Decision , making sure that it's actually worth going ahead with the selected option.

Step 7: Sell the Idea (Questions 5, 8)

As part of the planning process, you must convince other stakeholders that your solution is the best one. You'll likely meet with resistance, so before you try to “sell” your idea, make sure you've considered all the consequences.

As you begin communicating your plan, listen to what people say, and make changes as necessary. The better the overall solution meets everyone's needs, the greater its positive impact will be! For more tips on selling your idea, read our article on Creating a Value Proposition and use our Sell Your Idea Skillbook.

Step 8: Act (Questions 2, 11)

Finally, once you've convinced your key stakeholders that your proposed solution is worth running with, you can move on to the implementation stage. This is the exciting and rewarding part of problem solving, which makes the whole process seem worthwhile.

This action stage is an end, but it's also a beginning: once you've completed your implementation, it's time to move into the next cycle of problem solving by returning to the scanning stage. By doing this, you'll continue improving your organization as you move into the future.

Problem solving is an exceptionally important workplace skill.

Being a competent and confident problem solver will create many opportunities for you. By using a well-developed model like Simplexity Thinking for solving problems, you can approach the process systematically, and be comfortable that the decisions you make are solid.

Given the unpredictable nature of problems, it's very reassuring to know that, by following a structured plan, you've done everything you can to resolve the problem to the best of your ability.

This assessment has not been validated and is intended for illustrative purposes only. It is just one of many Mind Tool quizzes that can help you to evaluate your abilities in a wide range of important career skills.

If you want to reproduce this quiz, you can purchase downloadable copies in our Store .

You've accessed 1 of your 2 free resources.

Get unlimited access

Discover more content

Problem Solving

4 Logical Fallacies

Avoid Common Types of Faulty Reasoning

Add comment

Comments (2)

Afkar Hashmi

😇 This tool is very useful for me.

over 1 year

Very impactful

Get 30% off your first year of Mind Tools

Great teams begin with empowered leaders. Our tools and resources offer the support to let you flourish into leadership. Join today!

Sign-up to our newsletter

Subscribing to the Mind Tools newsletter will keep you up-to-date with our latest updates and newest resources.

Subscribe now

Business Skills

Personal Development

Leadership and Management

Member Extras

Most Popular

Latest Updates

Negotiating With Confrontational Customers

Managing Your Emotions at Work

Mind Tools Store

About Mind Tools Content

Discover something new today

Coaching for team performance.

Improving Productivity by Improving Relationships

Empathy at Work

Developing Skills to Understand Other People

How Emotionally Intelligent Are You?

Boosting Your People Skills

Self-Assessment

What's Your Leadership Style?

Learn About the Strengths and Weaknesses of the Way You Like to Lead

Recommended for you

Sharing creativity around.

A Group Exercise That Encourages Creativity Through Interpretation

Business Operations and Process Management

Strategy Tools

Customer Service

Business Ethics and Values

Handling Information and Data

Project Management

Knowledge Management

Self-Development and Goal Setting

Time Management

Presentation Skills

Learning Skills

Career Skills

Communication Skills

Negotiation, Persuasion and Influence

Working With Others

Difficult Conversations

Creativity Tools

Self-Management

Work-Life Balance

Stress Management and Wellbeing

Coaching and Mentoring

Change Management

Team Management

Managing Conflict

Delegation and Empowerment

Performance Management

Leadership Skills

Developing Your Team

Talent Management

Decision Making

Member Podcast

The Systematic Problem-Solving (SPS) Method:

Make better decisions tom g. stevens phd.

Solving problems is important in every area of human thinking. Learning general problem-solving skills can therefore help you improve your ability to cope with every area of your life. All disciplines of philosophy, business, science, and humanities have developed their own approach to solving problems. Remarkably, the problem-solving models developed by each of these areas are strikingly similar. I describe a simple problem-solving process that you can use to solve almost all problems.

Stages of the problem-solving process. The famous psychologist, Dr. Carl Rogers, was one of the first to help us understand how important self-exploration and problem-solving are for overcoming all types of personal, psychological, and daily-living problems. (1);

Consciously going through each of these four stages when solving any complex problem can be very useful. Following are the five stages of the problem-solving method.

STAGE 1: EXPLORATION OF THE PROBLEM

STAGE 2: EXPLORING ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS (Routes to Happiness);

STAGE 3: CHOOSING THE BEST ALTERNATIVE

STAGE 4: PLANNING AND ACTION

STAGE 5: EXPERIMENTING AND GATHERING FEEDBACK

During this stage, we gather all of the information we can about both external aspects of the problem and internal aspects. Good information gathering is not an easy process. Scientists spend their whole lives trying to learn about some very small piece of the world. The type of information-gathering process we use will depend upon the type of problem we are trying to solve. For information about the world the following are powerful skills to use.

•  Library reference skills
•  Observational skills
•  Informational interviewing skills
•  Critical thinking skills
•  Scientific method skills
•  Data analysis and statistical skills

Learning how to become an expert at identifying problems and finding causes is essential to become an expert in any field. The above skills are useful in solving many types of problems--even intra-personal ones. However, the focus of this book is how to be happy; and the key to happiness almost always involves not just external causes but internal ones as well.

It is usually much easier for most of us to observe an external event than an internal one. We have our external sensory organs to see and hear external events, but not internal ones. How do we observe that which we cannot see? We can learn to be better observers of our emotions, self-talk, and images.

The self-exploration process described above provides enough information to make you an expert at self-exploration. That is one of the most essential parts of developing your own inner therapist.

STAGE 2: EXPLORING ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS OR ROUTES TO HAPPINESS

Gather all the best information you can about possible solutions. Use brainstorming techniques, observe and consult with people who have overcome similar problems, read relevant material, consult experts, and recall your own relevant past experience. Look at both internal and external solutions.

Once you learn so many different routes to happiness, then you will be truly free to choose to be happy in almost any situation you face in life. The actual choice is made in stage 3 of the /problem-solving process. The appendix contains a very useful decision-making model for helping you make complex choices such as choosing a career or relationship. The following is a simple approach to making a decision between alternatives. (See Carkhuff Decision-Making Model, below, for a method for making complex decisions--for career or life planning.);

(1); List all the alternatives you are considering

(2); List all of the values or criteria that will be affected by the decision

(3); Evaluate each alternative by each criteria or value

(4); Choose the alternative which you predict will satisfy the criteria the best and lead to your greatest overall happiness

STAGE 4:  PLANNING AND ACTION (Experimenting);

Many decisions are made, but never implemented. See that you follow-up with good planning. Once you have made your choice, you can use some of the planning methods suggested in the O-PATSM method from chapter 11 to make sure that you follow through with your decision.

This is the stage of acting on your decision. Many people fear making mistakes and failure as if these were some terrible sins that they should never commit. That view of life of life makes every decision and action seem very serious and they often become very timid people who lack creativity and are plagued by guilt and fear of failure. Instead we can view every action as an experiment. If one of our overall goals in life is learning and growth, then we can never fail to learn. All people who have accomplished great happiness for themselves and contributed to others have shared the courage to act on their beliefs.

STAGE 5: GATHERING FEEDBACK

Many people hate to be evaluated and dread finding out the results of what they have done out of fear that the feedback will be negative. These fears can be serious impediments to the growth that can only happen through getting open, accurate feedback.

However, once learning and growth are important goals, then getting feedback becomes highly desirable. How else can we learn? Even negative outcomes can provide valuable information. Of course, almost everyone would rather have outcomes that maximize happiness; but when we don't, we can at least try to maximize our learning. Learning can help maximize happiness in the future.

We can also make the mistakes of dwelling on past mistakes that goes beyond constructive learning and reasonable reparations to victims and of punishing ourselves unnecessarily. Normally, there is no value to punishment--once a lesson has been learned. (2); Keep clear at all times that this problem-solving process is only a tool to serve the overall life goals of increased health, growth, and happiness.

CARKHUFF DECISION-MAKING MODEL:   This particular decision-making model is based upon one by Dr. Robert Carkhuff and follows the general guidelines of a considerable amount of research on how people can make more effective decisions. It can also be used for any other type of decision--from buying a new car to choosing a mate.

EXAMPLE OF USING THE DECISION-MAKING MODEL

The decision-making model will be illustrated in a way which you can use aa an analogy for making your own career decision. In this example, Henry is trying to decide whether to major in psychology or in computer science. Thus he has narrowed his alternatives to the following two:

1); majoring in psychology with a career goal of either going into high school counseling or teaching or 2); majoring in computer science with a possible goal of working as a computer programmer.

These are represented along the top axis of the following matrix.

  ** is the WINNER-it has the most points of the two alternatives

STEPS TO USING THE DECISION-MAKING MODEL--(use above example);

STEP 1-- LIST YOUR CAREER ALTERNATIVES. This is your refined list of alternatives of which majors or occupations you are trying to decide between. Remember, that you can list as many as you want. You can list unusual combinations of simpler alternatives. For Henry those narrowed alternatives were psychology and computer science.

STEP 2--CAREER SELECTION CRITERIA. Review your Career Selection Criteria list and write all the important career selection criteria in the far left column. Note that repeating the same idea or leaving out an important idea can affect the decision outcome.

STEP 3-- CRITERIA WEIGHTS. Evaluate the relative importance to you of each of your Career Selection Criteria on a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being the most important);. Write your answer in the column next to the selection criteria.

STEP 4--ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION SCALE. Each alternative is to be evaluated from the point of view of each selection criterion. You need to think about what this means for each selection criterion. For example Henry determined that for the selection criteria of income , a "minimally acceptable" income would be $25,000 starting with prospects of making up to $50,000 eventually. An outstanding salary would be starting at about $40, 000 with prospects of making up to $100,000.

+5 = Maximum evaluation--outstanding (example: income begin $40,000 go to $100,000 +4, +3, +2, +1 = intermediate values

0 = Minimally acceptable value. (example: income = begin $20,000 go to $45,000);

-1, -2, -3, -4 = intermediate values

-5 = Minimum evaluation--worst possible (example: income < $10,000

STEP 5--EVALUATE EACH ALTERNATIVE BY EACH SELECTION CRITERION. Use the evaluation scale from step 3 to evaluate each alternative from the point of view of each Career Selection Criterion. Give it rating from -5 to +5. In the example above, both alternatives were evaluated on the criterion of "income": Henry gave the psychology income an evaluation of "+2" and computer science income an evaluation of " +4."

STEP 6--MULTIPLY THE CRITERIA WEIGHTS TIMES THE EVALUATIONS. In the example above for the selection criterion of "income," Henry multiplied the criterion weight of "9" times the evaluation of " +2" for "PSYCH" to get a result of "18." That is its SCORE OR POINTS for psychology on the criterion of income. Put it inside of the parentheses. This score of 18 is an overall prediction much Henry's income in psychology will contribute to his overall happiness. Since he had a score of 36 in computer science, he his predicting that he will be much happier with his income in that field.

STEP 7--FIND THE OVERALL SUM OF THE SCORES FOR EACH ALTERNATIVE. Add together the numbers inside the parentheses for each alternative. In the example above, the overall sum for the "PSYCH" alternative is "405."

STEP 8--COMPARE THE ALTERNATIVES WITH EACH OTHER AND WITH THE "IDEAL." The "ideal" is the maximum possible number of points. Once you have determined all the totals and compared them to each other, try to figure out why one alternative came out ahead of another--where it got its points. Play with the points until you think the points match your true feelings and values.

* The alternative with the most points is the one you are predicting will make you the happiest person.

1. 1 Some might argue that Freud was the first. He clearly did describe many helpful techniques. I think that some of his free association techniques are still very useful for helping to find underlying beliefs, images, or cognitive systems which are related to the problem. However, Rogers was the one that more clearly described the stages of self-exploration and problem-solving and the conditions of unconditional positive regard, empathetic understanding, and genuineness on the part of the therapist which seem to be important to the therapeutic process or to any person attempting to feel better.

Robert Carkhuff (one of Roger's pupils); has developed a structured training system for helping people learn these skills. Robert Cash, a personal friend, has further elaborated these skills in his own courses and introduced me to this process. There is a good deal of research supporting the effectiveness of these techniques.

2. 2 This statement does not address the use of punishment as a deterrent to prevent some persons from profiting from their dysfunctional behaviors. For example if behaviors such as murder, robbery, or selling drugs are not given sufficient punishment, some people will engage in these behaviors. A person whose ultimate concern is money and pleasure may deal drugs to make money with little regard to how it affects others. Increasing the cost for a person with those beliefs can reduce the chances they will sell drugs.

Self-Help and other resources on this website (and site map)

Copyright 2021 Tom G. Stevens PhD