scholarly journals Managing Groups and Teams

Author(s):  
Ecler Ercole Jaqua ◽  
Terry Jaqua
Keyword(s):  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer E Dannals ◽  
Emily Reit ◽  
Dale T. Miller

Social norm perception is ubiquitous in small groups and teams, but how individuals approach this process is not well understood. When individuals wish to perceive descriptive social norms in a group or team, whose ad- vice and behavior do they prefer to rely on? Four lab studies and one Teld survey demonstrate that when in- dividuals seek information about a team’s social norms they prefer to receive advice from lower-ranking indi- viduals (Studies 1–4) and give greater weight to the observed behavior of lower-ranking individuals (Study 5). Results from correlation (Study 3) and moderation (Study 4) approaches suggest this preference stems from the assumption that lower-ranking team members are more attentive to and aware of the descriptive social norms of their team. Alternative mechanisms (e.g., perceived similarity to lower-ranking team members, greater honesty of lower-ranking team members) were also examined, but no support for these was found.


2016 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark P. Healey

AbstractIt may be true that “groups need selves,” as Baumeister et al. contend. However, certain types of selfhood and too much selfhood can both be detrimental to group functioning. I draw on theory and research on dual selves in work groups and teams to outline boundary conditions to the hypothesis that emphasizing individual selves yields positive effects for groups.


2016 ◽  
pp. 153-177
Author(s):  
Christine Cross ◽  
Caroline Murphy
Keyword(s):  

2010 ◽  
pp. 1323-1336
Author(s):  
Wafa Alsakini ◽  
Juhani Kiiras ◽  
Pekka Huovinen

Networking is the organizational form of the information age. Network organizations signify a form of collaboration designed to facilitate economic exchange and to provide an environment for interaction between people (social exchange). Economic actors are likely to sacrifice some of their own preferences in the pursuit of collective goals (Fleisch & Österle, 2000; Franke, 2001). Network organizations are characterized by (1) a purpose and shared goals unifying members, (2) independent members benefiting from being part of a whole, (3) voluntary links between members, (4) multiple leaders providing greater resilience, and (5) many levels integrating organizations, units, and people. From an intra-organizational perspective, networks are the collections of individuals and sub-units within one and the same organizational boundaries. From an interorganizational perspective, networks are the collections of more or less independent individual economic actors such as, companies, institutions, and research organizations (Franke, 2001). Three network types involve (1) internal networks as the loose associations of autonomous groups and teams, (2) stable networks where focal firms engage in long-term relationships with external suppliers or partners, and (3) dynamic networks as the temporary alliances of independent firms with key skills usually organized around a leading or brokering firm based on the exploitation of market opportunities.


1996 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
pp. 644-660 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Nan Restine

This article explores groups and teams from a sociological perspective with specific focus on the structure of activity, the nature of interaction and interdependence, and coordination. The emphasis is on distinguishing groups and teams, describing selected team sports configurations and school corollaries, and discussing dimensions of contrast and implications for leadership.


2020 ◽  
Vol 66 (6) ◽  
pp. 2752-2761 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward H. Chang ◽  
Erika L. Kirgios ◽  
Aneesh Rai ◽  
Katherine L. Milkman

We highlight a feature of personnel selection decisions that can influence the gender diversity of groups and teams. Specifically, we show that people are less likely to choose candidates whose gender would increase group diversity when making personnel selections in isolation (i.e., when they are responsible for selecting a single group member) than when making collections of choices (i.e., when they are responsible for selecting multiple group members). We call this the isolated choice effect. Across six preregistered experiments (n = 3,509), we demonstrate that the isolated choice effect has important consequences for group diversity. When making sets of hiring and selection decisions (as opposed to making a single hire), people construct more gender-diverse groups. Mediation and moderation studies suggest that people do not attend as much to diversity when making isolated selection choices, which drives this effect. This paper was accepted by Yuval Rottenstreich, decision analysis.


2021 ◽  
pp. 129-155
Author(s):  
Eric F. Rietzschel ◽  
Diana Rus ◽  
and Barbara Wisse

2015 ◽  
pp. 244-276
Author(s):  
Maureen Guirdham
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document