Differences in the way we decide: The effect of decision style diversity on process conﬂict in design teams Dinora R. Fitzgerald ⁎, Susan Mohammed, Gül Okudan Kremer The Pennsylvania State University, United States abstract article info Article history: Received 21 August 2015 Received in revised form 15 August 2016 Accepted 21 August 2016 Available online xxxx Extending the decision style literature to the team-level of analysis, this study examined the effects of decision making style diversity on a how members handled disagreements regarding the logistics of task accomplishment (process conﬂict). Majority rule moderated the relationship between decision making style diversity and process conﬂict, but rational and spontaneous styles exhibited distinct interactive effects. Higher decision style diversity was associated with greater process conﬂict when reliance on majority rule was high for the spontaneous style but when reliance on majority rule was low for the rational style. Majority rule also positively affected process conﬂict. Our results show promise for continued investigation of the compositional effects of decision style at the team-level. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Decision making styles Teams Diversity Majority rule Process conﬂict 1. Introduction People differ in how they make decisions. Some are quick, and others are slow. Some are more cognitive, and others are more affective. Given these differences, what happens when individuals with diverse decision styles comprise the same team and are tasked with making collective decisions regarding what to do and how to do it? Do differences in de- cision styles contribute to dysfunctional conﬂict? What factors inﬂuence whether decision style diversity will result in more positive or negative team functioning? The purpose of this study is to address these ques- tions by examining the moderating role of decision rule (majority rule) on the relationship between decision making style diversity (DMSD) and process conﬂict (disagreements regarding how tasks should be accomplished). The present study makes several contributions to the decision mak- ing, team diversity, and conﬂict literatures. First, we draw attention to a previously unexplored form of diversity operating in teams: decision making styles. Because most group tasks require that members come to agreement, DMSD is likely to emerge as a salient individual difference operating in teams. At the individual-level, the importance of decision styles has been demonstrated by their association with a variety of work and health outcomes (e.g., Curseu & Schruijer, 2012; Russ, McNeilly, & Comer, 1996). However their compositional impact at the team-level has been ignored, despite their potential relevance. As such, we answer the call of diversity scholars to expand beyond tradi- tionally studied categories (e.g., demographics, Big Five Personality traits) to explore task-based differences that hold promise for inﬂuenc- ing team outcomes (van Knippenberg & Schippers, 2007). Second, integrating the decision making and team conﬂict litera- tures, we focus on process conﬂict as an outcome of DMSD. Whereas dif- ferences in opinions about task content (task conﬂict) and tension in interpersonal dynamics (relationship conﬂict) have received the most attention in the team literature, considerably less is known about the antecedents and outcomes of process conﬂict (de Wit, Greer, & Jehn, 2012). However, research addressing the factors that contribute to process conﬂict is especially important because disagreements concerning the delegation of tasks has been found to have long-lasting negative effects on team outcomes such as performance (de Wit et al., 2012). We therefore extend beyond traditionally studied demographic and functional differences as predictors of conﬂict (Korsgaard, Jeong, Mahony, & Pitariu, 2008) to examine DMSD as an antecedent of process conﬂict. Third, our results specify the conditions under which DMSD heightens process conﬂict by examining majority rule as a moderator. As such, we answer calls for future research to adopt a contingency per- spective by examining the moderating factors that inﬂuence decision styles (Appelt, Milch, Handgraaft & Weber, 2011; Mohammed & Schwall, 2009). 2. Theory and hypotheses 2.1. Decision making styles Decision making styles are deﬁned as “the individual's characteristic mode of perceiving and responding to decision making tasks” (Harren, Personality and Individual Differences 104 (2017) 339–344 ⁎ Corresponding author. E-mail address: drfgerald@gmail.com (D.R. Fitzgerald). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.08.030 0191-8869/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid