1st March 2016

Topic : Extroverts and the Complexities of Team Dynamics

After having read the full article by Francesca Gino, the distinction in
clear extroverts and introverts and how successful team cooperation
differs depending on personalities.
While introverts make 1/3 to of the population, in the workplace
extroverts have a clear preference. This is directly linked to how
extrovert people handle employees effectively and create a
successful work ambience. However, it is crucial to mention that
extroverts are compatible with employees that are introverts and
dislike speaking out loud and exposing publicly what they think.
Therefore, it is right to say that an extrovert leader would work
effectively in a high power distance culture such as France or Mexico.
Whilst, in a culture where employees establish a close bond with their
leaders and are not afraid of speaking for themselves such as
Australia, and extrovert is likely to feel threatened as when their
employees speak out they steal the spotlight, challenging leaders
dominance, authority and status.
In contrast to this, there are cases in whereby the leader is
categorized as an introvert and therefore would work successfully the
other way round. Employees having this kind of leader should not be
afraid of speaking out, as it is likely that their introvert boss will feel
as Gino says confortable with this and they would have further
opportunity for their ideas to be valued and accepted.
The concept explained above is known as the dominance
complementarity a pattern that shows how groups are more
cohesive and effective when a balance exists between dominant
and submissive members in a team.
The theory previously mentioned has been proven by Gino and 2
other colleagues. Together they studied the pattern taking a U.S
Pizza- delivery chain as an example, the study consisted of the study
of profitability of 57 different stores, assessing each stores leaders
level of extroversion. The trend that was found was confirmed as
extroverted leadership was linked to significantly higher store profits
when employees were passive and significantly lower store profits
when they were proactive. In stories with passive employees led by
extroverts achieved 16% higher profits in comparison with those led
by introverts. Another piece of data collected was that 14% lower
profits had those stores led by extroverts with proactive employees.
Another interesting point developed was, meetings can be maximised
with involvement from every team member including introverts of
course.
Organizations such as Amazon have already tried methods that
encourage members to get involved in the discussion of a meeting.

What they do is begin a meeting in total silence whilst the group

takes time (20-30 min) to read a 6-page memo about the meetings
agenda. This way, everyone has general knowledge of what is going
to be further discussed and input is encouraged. Also, details such as
PowerPoint presentations are banned in order to completely focus on
the discourse of the meeting, avoiding any form of distraction.
To conclude, it is now evident that extrovert leadership is an
advantage and works with passive groups but a disadvantage with
proactive ones. Therefore a balance is essential to avoid low profits or
any economic repercussion.
Also, in order to encourage introvert people to get involved in
meetings, the way a meeting is structured should be re thought and
methods such as the Amazon one are key for communication from all
bands in a meeting to take place.