Beyond Rank Attainment: Examining the Nature and Function of Dominance and Prestige in Teams
Abstract
Social hierarchies are fundamental to human societies, shaping group dynamics and outcomes. Ongoing debates attempt to understand their functional and dysfunctional consequences. While the conflict account of hierarchy emphasizes the potentially detrimental conflict-inducing effects of hierarchies, the functionalist account proposes that hierarchies create contexts conducive to coordination. This study investigates if team-level dominance and prestige processes might account for these diverging consequences of hierarchy with dominance fueling conflict-prone environments and prestige nurturing coordination processes. Additionally, it examines whether the inherently competitive nature of team-level dominance yields more favorable outcomes in highly competitive, zero-sum, contexts.
Across two studies, I investigated the nature and consequences of dominance and prestige processes on team functioning employing novel methodologies and conceptualizations to shed light on their mechanisms. Crucially, this research investigates dominance and prestige processes at the team-level, avoiding the limitations of individual-level perspectives. The research goes beyond mean-level investigations by also considering the influence of differentiation within teams in dominance and prestige alongside fluctuations in team-level dominance and prestige over time.
Study 1 investigated the dynamics of team dominance and prestige within work teams by utilizing three years of longitudinal data situated within an ecologically valid context. Results demonstrated that group dominance positively related to conflict measures, highlighting its detrimental influences. Conversely, prestige was positively related to beneficial team dynamics including team potency and coordination. Furthermore, dominance and prestige differentiation had both positive and negative influences.
Study 2 explored these relationships in a more controlled laboratory setting using distinct methodologies, types of participants, and team contexts. Additionally, I investigated if zero-sum contexts moderated the relationships dominance had with team functioning variables. The results from Study 2 suggested that dominance was the primary driver of team conflict, whereas prestige was the primary driver of team potency. However, prestige’s beneficial influence on coordination and conflict measures only manifested in the more competitive context. This suggests that something in more competitive environments might activate the beneficial influence of prestige.
These findings provide insights into the nature and interplay between dominance, prestige, and team functioning. This research validates the group-centered approach and goes beyond solely relying on mean-level conceptualizations.