Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T05:40:07.189Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A pandemic is dynamic: Viewing COVID-19 through an adaptation lens

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 May 2021

Sjir Uitdewilligen ,
Ramón Rico ,
Marie Thommes  and
Mary J. Waller
Sjir Uitdewilligen*
Affiliation:
Maastricht University, The Netherlands
Ramón Rico
Affiliation:
Department of Business Administration, University Carlos III de Madrid, Madrid Department of Management and Organisations, University of Western Australia
Marie Thommes
Affiliation:
Maastricht University, The Netherlands
Mary J. Waller
Affiliation:
Neeley School of Business, College of Business, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
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 14 , Special Issue 1-2: Special Pandemic Issue , June 2021 , pp. 61 - 65
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology.

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.)

Footnotes

Research was sponsored by the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) and was accomplished under Grant Number W911NF-16-1-0545. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) or the U.S. Government.

References

Baard, S. K., Rench, T. A., & Kozlowski, S. W. (2014). Performance adaptation: A theoretical integration and review. Journal of Management, 40, 48–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Salas, E., Pierce, L., & Kendall, D. (2006). Understanding team adaptation: A conceptual analysis and model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1189–1207. https://doi.apa.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1189 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Christian, J. S., Christian, M. S., Pearsall, M. J., & Long, E. C. (2017). Team adaptation in context: An integrated conceptual model and meta-analytic review. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 140, 62–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeRue, D. S. (2011). Adaptive leadership theory: Leading and following as a complex adaptive process. Research in Organizational Behavior, 31, 125–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2011.09.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21, 1105–1121.3.0.CO;2-E>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. R., & Lounsbury, M. (2011). Institutional complexity and organizational responses. Academy of Management Annals, 5, 317–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hale, D., Ployhart, R. E., & Shepherd, W. (2016). A two-phase longitudinal model of a turnover event: Disruption, recovery rates, and moderators of collective performance. Academy of Management Journal, 59, 906–929. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0546 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hærem, T., Pentland, B. T., & Miller, K. D. (2015). Task complexity: Extending a core concept. Academy of Management Review, 40, 446–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lang, J. W. B., & Bliese, P. D. (2009). General mental ability and two types of adaptation to unforeseen change: Applying discontinuous growth models to the task-change paradigm. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 411–428. https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/5815056 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maynard, M. T., Kennedy, D. M., & Sommer, S. A. (2015). Team adaptation: A fifteen-year synthesis (1998–2013) and framework for how this literature needs to “adapt” going forward. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24, 652–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgeson, F. P. (2005). The external leadership of self-managing teams: Intervening in the context of novel and disruptive events. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(3), 497–508. https://doi.apa.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.3.497 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgeson, F. P., Mitchell, T. R., & Liu, D. (2015). Event system theory: An event-oriented approach to the organizational sciences. Academy of Management Review, 40(4), 515–537. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2012.0099 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okhuysen, G. A., & Waller, M. J. (2002). Focusing on midpoint transitions: An analysis of boundary conditions. Academy of Management Journal, 45(5), 1056–1065. https://doi.org/10.5465/3069330 Google Scholar
Ployhart, R. E., & Bliese, P. D. (2006). Individual ADAPTability (IADAPT) theory: Conceptualizing the antecedents, consequences, and measurement of individual differences in adaptability. In Burke, S., Pierce, L., & Salas, E. (Eds.), Understanding adaptability: A prerequisite for effective performance within complex environments (pp. 3–39). Elsevier Science.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rico, R., Bachrach, D. G., Sánchez-Manzanares, M., & Collins, B. J. (2011). The interactive effects of person-focused citizenship behaviour, task interdependence, and virtuality on team performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20, 700–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rico, R., Gibson, C. B., Sanchez-Manzanares, M., & Clark, M. A. (2019). Building team effectiveness through adaptation: Team knowledge and implicit and explicit coordination. Organizational Psychology Review, 9, 71–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudolph, C. W., Allan, B., Clark, M., Hertel, G., Hirschi, A., Kunze, F., Shockley, K., Shoss, M., Sonnentag, S., & Zacher, H. (2021). Pandemics: Implications for research and practice in industrial and organizational psychology. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 14(1), 1–35.Google Scholar
Uhl-Bien, M., Riggio, R. E., Lowe, K. B., & Carsten, M. K. (2014). Followership theory: A review and research agenda. Leadership Quarterly, 25, 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voss, G. B., Sirdeshmukh, D., & Voss, Z. G. (2008). The effects of slack resources and environmental threat on product exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 51, 147–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, P. (2020). Canada and COVID-19: Learning from SARS. Lancet, 395(10228), 936–937.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Sage.Google Scholar
Zellmer-Bruhn, M. E. (2003). Interruptive events and team knowledge acquisition. Management Science, 49, 514–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar