Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T04:53:49.916Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Teams Have Changed: Catching Up to the Future

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

Ruth Wageman ,
Heidi Gardner  and
Mark Mortensen
Ruth Wageman*
Affiliation:
Harvard University
Heidi Gardner
Affiliation:
Harvard University
Mark Mortensen
Affiliation:
INSEAD
*
E-mail: [email protected], Address: Department of Psychology, Harvard University, 33 Kirkland St., Cambridge, MA 02138
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , March 2012 , pp. 48 - 52
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cohen, S. G., & Ledford, G. E. Jr. (1994). The effectiveness of self-managing teams: A quasi-experiment. Human Relations, 47, 13–43. Google Scholar
Cohen, S. G., Ledford, G. E. Jr., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1996). A predictive model of self-managing work team effectiveness. Human Relations, 49, 643–676. Google Scholar
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32, 554–571. Google Scholar
De Rue, D. S., Hollenbeck, J., Ilgen, D., & Feltz, D. (2010). Efficacy dispersion in teams: Moving beyond agreement and aggregation. Personnel Psychology, 63, 1–40. Google Scholar
Dirks, K. (forthcoming). Beyond shared perceptions of trust and monitoring in teams: Implications of asymmetry and dissensus. Journal of Applied Psychology.Google Scholar
Hinds, P. J., & Mortensen, M. (2005). Understanding conflict in geographically distributed teams: The moderating effects of shared identity, shared context, and spontaneous communication. Organization Science, 16, 290–307. Google Scholar
Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10, 791–815. Google Scholar
Jehn, K. A., Rispins, S., & Thatcher, S. M. B. (2010). The effects of conflict asymmetry on work group and individual outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 596–619. Google Scholar
Kirkman, B. L., & Rosen, B. (1999). Beyond self-management: Antecedents and consequences of team empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 58–74. Google Scholar
Sproull, L. S., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 1492–1512. Google Scholar
Straus, S., & McGrath, J. (1994). Does the medium matter? The interaction of task type and technology on group performance and member reactions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 87–97.Google Scholar
Tannenbaum, S. I., Mathieu, J. E., Salas, E., & Cohen, D. (2012). Teams are changing: Are research and practice evolving fast enough? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 2–24. Google Scholar
Wall, T. D., Kemp, N. J., Jackson, P. R., & Clegg, C. W. (1986). Outcomes of autonomous workgroups: A long-term field experiment. Academy of Management Journal, 29, 280–304. Google Scholar