Emergent states in virtual teams: A complex adaptive systems perspective

Journal of Information Technology

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 249-261

  Curşeu, Petru Lucian ^a  

^a TILBURG UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Cohesion; Complex adaptive systems; Team cognition; Trust; Virtual teams

Indexed keywords

EID: 33751542513     PISSN: 02683962     EISSN: 14664437     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.jit.2000077     Document Type: Article

References (118)

1. Aiello, M. and Kolb, K.J. (1995). Electronic Performance Monitoring and Social Context; Impact on productivity and stress, Journal of Applied Psychology 80: 339-353.
2. Alavi, M. and Tiwana, A. (2002). Knowledge Integration in Virtual Teams: The potential role of KMS, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 53(12): 1029-1037.
3. Anderson, P. (1999). Complexity Theory and Organization Science, Organization Science 10(3): 216-232.
4. Andriani, P. and McKelvey, B. (2005). Beyond Averages: Extending organization science to extreme events and power laws. Paper Presented at the 21st EGOS Colloquium 'Unlocking Organizations', Berlin, Germany, June 30-July 2, 2005.
5. Arnot, D. and Pervan, G. (2005). A Critical Analysis of Decision Support Systems Research, Journal of Information Technology 20: 67-87.
6. Arrow, H., McGrath, J.E. and Berdahl, J.L. (2000). Small Groups as Complex Systems. Formation, Coordination, Development, and Adaptation, London: Sage.
7. Ashby, W.R. (1962). Principles of the Self-Organization System, Reprinted in Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 2004 6(1-2): 102-126.
8. Baets, W., Olderboom, E. and Van Starkenburg, T. (2005). Emergence of Peace and Conflict: An experiment with agent based simulations. Paper Presented at the 21st EGOS Colloquium 'Unlocking Organizations', Berlin, Germany, June 30-July 2, 2005.
9. Barton, S. (1994). Chaos, Self-Organization, and Psychology, American Psychologist 49: 5-14.
10. Beal, D., Cohen, R.R., Burke, M.J. and McLendon, C.L. (2003). Cohesion and Performance in Groups: A meta-analytic clarification of construct relations, Journal of Applied Psychology 88(6): 989-1004.
11. Breu, K. and Hemingway, C.J. (2004). Making Organizations Virtual: The hidden cost of distributed teams, Journal of Information Technology 19: 191-202.
12. Carley, K.M. (2002). Intraorganizational Complexity and Computation, in A.C. Baum (ed.) The Blackwell Companion to Organizations, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 208-232.
13. Castelfranchi, C. and Tan, Y. (2002). The Role of Trust and Deception in Virtual Societies, International Journal of Electronic Commerce 6(3): 55-70.
14. Casti, L. (1992). Recent Developments and Future Perspectives in Dynamical Systems Theory, SEAM Review 24: 302-331.
15. Ciborra, C.U. and Andreu, R. (2001). Sharing Knowledge Across Boundaries, Journal of Information Technology 16: 73-81.
16. Cilliers, P. (1998). Complexity and Postmodernism: Understanding Complex Systems, London: Rutledge.
17. Cooke, N.J., Salas, E., Kiekel, P.A. and Bell, B. (2004). Advances in Measuring Team Cognition, in E. Salas and S.M. Fiore (eds.) Team Cognition. Understanding the Factors that Drive Process and Performance, Washington: American Psychological Association, pp. 83-106.
18. Coppola, N.W., Hiltz, S.R. and Rotter, N.G. (2004). Building Trust in Virtual Teams, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 47(2): 95-104.
19. Corea, S. (2006). Information Technology and the Modalisation of Organisational Behaviour: A theoretical framework, Journal of Information Technology 21: 86-98.
20. Coutu, D.L. (1998). Trust in Virtual Teams, Harvard Business Review 76: 20-21.
21. Curşeu, P.L. (2003). Formal Group Decision-Making. A Social Cognitive Approach, Cluj-Napoca: ASCR Press.
22. Curşeu, P.L and Rus, D. (2005). The Cognitive Complexity of Groups, A Critical Look at Team Cognition Research, Cognition, Brain, Behavior (Cognitie, Creier, Comportament) 9(4): 681-710.
23. Curşeu, P.L., Schalk, M.J.D. and Wessel, I. (in press). How Do Virtual Teams Process Information? A Literature Review and Implications for Management, Journal of Managerial Psychology, forthcoming.
24. Daft, R.L. and Lengel, R.H. (1984). Information Richness: A new approach to managerial behavior and organization design, Research in Organizational Behavior 6: 191-233.
25. Dennis, A.R., Wixom, B.H. and Vandenberg, R.J. (2001). Understanding Fit and Approximation Effects in Group Support Systems Via Meta-Analysis, MIS Quarterly 25: 167-193.
26. De Rosa, D., Hantula, D.A., Kock, N. and D'Arcy, J. (2004). Trust and Leadership in Virtual Teamwork: A media-naturalness perspective, Human Resource Management 43(2&3): 219-232.
27. Dooley, K. (1996). A nominal Definition of Complex Adaptive Systems, The Chaos Network 8(1): 2-3.
28. Dooley, K. (1997). A Complex Adaptive Systems Model of Organization Change, Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Science 1(1): 69-97.
29. Ebel, H., Davidsen, I. and Bornholdt, S. (2003). Dynamics of Social Network, Complexity 8(2); 24-27.
30. Eisenhardt, K.M. and Bhatia, M.M. (2002). Organizational Complexity and Computation, in A.C. Baum (ed.) The Blackwell Companion to Organizations, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 442-466.
31. Evans, C.R. and Dion, K.L. (1989). Group Cohesion and Performance: A metanalysis, Small Groups Research 22: 175-186.
32. Falcone, R. and Castelfranchi, C. (2001). The Socio-Cognitive Dynamics of Trust: Does trust create trust?, in R. Falcone, M. Singh and Y. Tan (eds.) Trust in Cyber-societies: Integrating the Human and Artificial Perspectives, Berlin: Springer, pp 55-72.
33. Festinger, L. (1950). Informal Social Communication, Psychological Review 57: 271-282.
34. Finnegan, P. and O'Mahony, L. (1996). Group Problem Solving and Decision Making: An investigation of the processes and the supporting technology, Journal of Information Technology 11: 211-221.
35. Friedkin, N.B. (2004). Social Cohesion, Annual Review of Sociology 30:409-425.
36. Furst, S.A., Blackburn, R.S. and Rosen, B. (1999). Virtual Team Effectiveness: A proposed research agenda, Information Systems Journal 9; 249-269.
37. Gell-Mann, M. (1994). The Quark and the Jaguar. Adventures in Simple and Complex, New York: W.H. Freeman.
38. Gladstein, D.L. (1984). Groups in Context: A model of task group effectiveness, Administrative Science Quarterly 29: 499-517.
39. Goldstein, J. (1999). Emergence as a Construct: History and issues, Emergence 1(1): 49-72.
40. Goldstein, J. (2000). Emergence: A concept amid a thicket of conceptual snares, Emergence 2(1): 5-22.
41. Gonzalez, M.G., Burke, M.J., Santuzzi, A.M. and Bradley, J. (2003). The Impact of Group Process Variables on the Effectiveness of Distance Collaboration Groups, Computers in Human Behaviors 19: 629-648.
42. Hackman, J.R. (1987). The Design of Work Teams, in J.W. Lorsch (ed.) Handbook of Organizational Behavior, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, pp. 315-342.
43. Hendriks, P.H.J. (2001). Many Rivers to Cross: From ICT to knowledge management systems, Journal of Information Technology 16: 57-72.
44. Hertel, G., Geister, S. and Konradt, U. (2005). Managing Virtual Teams: A review of current empirical research, Human Resource Management Review 15: 69-95.
45. Hiltz, S.R., Johnson, K. and Turoff, M. (1986). Experiments in Group Decision Making: Communication processes and outcome in face-to-face versus computerized conferences, Human Communication Research 13: 225-252.
46. Hinds, P.J. and Bailey, D.E. (2003). Out of Sight Out of Sync: Understandingconflict in distributed teams, Organization Science 14(6): 615-632.
47. Hinds, P.J. and Mortensen, M. (2005). Understanding Conflict in Geographically Distributed Teams: The moderating effects of shared identity, shared context, and spontaneous communication, Organization Science 16(3); 290-307.
48. Hislop, D. (2002). Mission Impossible? Communicating and Sharing Knowledge via Technology, Journal of Information Technology 17: 165-177.
49. Holland, J.H. (1995). Hidden Order, How Adaptation Builds Complexity, Reading: Addison-Wesley.
50. Holland, J.H. (1998). Emergence: From Chaos to Order, Reading: Addison-Wesley.
51. Hollingshead, A.B. (1996). Information Suppression and Status Persistence in Group Decision Making, Human Communication Research 23: 193-219.
52. Hollingshead, A.B., McGrath, J.E. and O'Connor, K.M. (1993). Group Task Performance and Communication Technology: A longitudinal study of computer mediated versus face-to-face work groups, Small Groups Research 24: 307-333.
53. Hopfield, J.J. (1982). Neural Networks and Physical Systems with Emergent Collective Computational Abilities, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA Biological Sciences 79(8): 2554-2558.
54. Huysman, M. and Wulf, V. (2005). IT Support Knowledge Sharing in Communities, Towards a Social Capital Analysis, Journal of Information Technology 20: 1-12.
55. Iacono, C.S. and Weisband, S.P. (1997). Developing Trust in Virtual Teams, in Proceedings of the Thirtieth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos: IEEE Computer Society Press.
56. Ilgen, D.R., Hollenbeck, J.R., Johnson, M. and Jundt, D. (2005). Teams in Organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models, Annual Review of Psychology 56: 517-543.
57. Janis, I.L. (1972). Victims of Groupthink, Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
58. Jarvenpaa, S.L. and Leidner, D.E. (1999). Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams, Organization Science 10(6): 791-865.
59. Jarvenpaa, S.L., Shaw, T.R. and Staples, D.S. (2004). Toward Contextualized Theories of Trust: The role of trust in global virtual teams, Information Systems Research 15(3): 250-267.
60. Jarvenpaa, S.L., Knoll, K. and Leidner, D.E. (1998). Is Anybody Out There? Antecedents of Trust in Global Virtual Teams, Journal of Management Information Systems 14(4): 29-64.
61. Jehn, K.A. (1995). A Multimethod Examination Examination of the Benefits and Detriments of Intragroup Conflict, Administrative Science Quarterly 40: 256-282.
62. Jehn, K.A., Northcraft, G.B. and Neale, M.A. (1999). Why Differences Make a Difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in work groups, Administrative Science Quarterly 44: 741-763.
63. Jeyaraj, A., Rottman, J.W. and Lacity, M.C. (2006). A Review of the Predictors, Linkages, and Biases in IT Innovation Adoption Research, Journal of Information Technology 21: 1-23.
64. Kanawattanachai, P. and Yoo, Y. (2002). Dynamic Nature of Trust in Virtual Teams, Journal of Strategic Information Systems 11: 187-213.
65. Kauffman, S.A. (1993). The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution, New York: Oxford University Press.
66. Kirkman, B.L., Rosen, B., Tesluk, P.E. and Gibson, C.B. (2004). The Impact of Team Empowerment on Virtual Team Performance: The moderating role of face-to-face interaction, Academy of Management Journal 47: 175-192.
67. Klimoski, R. and Mohammed, S. (1994). Team Mental Model: Construct or methaphor? Journal of Management 20(2): 403-437.
68. Levitt, R.E., Cohen, G.P., Kunz, J.C., Nass, C.I., Christiansen, T. and Jin, Y. (1994). The 'Virtual Design Team': Simulating how organization structure and information processing tools affect team performance, in K.M. Carley and M.J. Prietula (eds.) Computational Organization Theory, Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 1-18.
69. Lipnack, J. and Stamps, J. (1997). Virtual Teams, Reaching Across Space, Time and Organizations with Technology, New York: John Wiley and Sons.
70. Maguire, S., McKelvey, B., Mirabeau, L. and Oztas, N. (2006). Complexity Science and Organization Studies, in S.R. Clegg, C. Hardy, T. Lawrence and W. Nord (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Organization Studies (2nd edn) London: Sage, pp. 165-214.
71. Malhorta, A., Majchrzak, A., Carman, R. and Lott, V. (2001). Radical Innovation Without Collocation: A case study at Boeing-Rocketdyne, MIS Quarterly 25(2): 229-249.
72. Marks, M.A., Mathieu, J.E. and Zaccaro, S.J. (2001). A Temporally Based Framework and Taxonomy of Team Processes, Academy of Management Review 26(3): 356-376.
73. Martins, L.L., Gilson, L.L. and Maynard, M.T. (2004). Virtual Teams: What do we know and where do we go from here? Journal of Management 30:805-835.
74. Maruping, L.M. and Agarwal, R. (2004). Managing Team Interpersonal Processes Through Technology: A task-technology fit perspective, Journal of Applied Psychology 89(6): 975-990.
75. Mathieu, I.E., Heffner, T.S., Goodwin, G.F., Salas, E. and Cannon-Bowers, A. (2000). The Influence of Shared Mental Models on Team Process and Performance, Journal of Applied Psychology 85(2): 273-283.
76. Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H. and Schoorman, F.D. (1995). An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust, Academy of Management Review 20(3): 709-734.
77. McGrath, J.E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and Performance, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
78. McGrath, J.E., Arrow, H. and Berdahl, J.L. (2000). The Study of Groups: Past present and future, Personality and Social Psychology Review 4(1): 95-105.
79. McKelvey, B. (1999a). Complexity Theory in Organization Science: Seizing the promise or becoming a fad? Emergence 1(1): 5-32.
80. McKelvey, B. (1999b). Avoiding Complexity Catastrophe in Coevolutionary Pockets, Strategies for rugged landscapes. Organization Science 10(3): 294-321.
81. Mihata, K. (1997). The Persistence of Emergence, in A.E. Raymond, S. Horsfall and M. E. Lee (eds.) Chaos, Complexity and Sociology: Myths, Models and Theories, Thousand Oaks: Sage, pp. 30-38.
82. Mohammed, S., Klimoski, R. and Rentsch, J.R. (2000). The Measurement of Team Mental Models: We have no shared schema, Organizational Research Methods 3(2): 123-165.
83. Montoya-Weiss, M., Massey, A. and Song, M. (2001). Getting it Together: Temporal coordination and conflict management in global virtual teams, Academy of Management Journal 44: 1251-1262.
84. Moody, J. and White, D.R. (2003). Structural Cohesion and Embeddedness: A hierarchical concept of social groups, American Sociological Review 68: 103-127.
85. Mullen, B. and Cooper, C. (1994). The Relation Between Group Cohesiveness and Performance: An integration, Psychological Bulletin 115: 210-227.
86. Nowak, A. and Vallacher, R.R. (1998). Toward a Computational Social Psychology: Cellular automata and neural network models of interpersonal dynamics, in S.J. Read and L.C. Miller (eds.) Connectionist Models of Social Reasoning and Social Behavior, Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum & Assoc, pp. 277-311.
87. O'Hara-Devereaux, M. and Johansen, R. (1994). Global Work: Bridging Distance, Culture, and Time, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
88. Pauleen, D.J. and Yoong, P. (2001). Relationship Building and the use of IGT in Boundary Crossing Virtual Teams: A facilitator's perspective, Journal of Information Technology 16: 205-220.
89. Powell, T. and Dent-Mitcallef, A. (1997). Information Technology as Competitive Advantage: The role of human, business and technology resources, Strategic Management Journal 18(5): 375-406.
90. Prietula, K. and Carley, K.M. (2000). Boundedly Rational and Emotional Agents: Cooperation, trust and rumor, in C. Castelfranchi and Y. Tan (eds.) Trust and Deception in Virtual Societies, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 169-194.
91. Prietula, M.J., Carley, K.M. and Gasser, L. (1998). Simulating Organizations. Computational Models of Institutions and Groups, Menlo Park: AAAI Press/MIT Press
92. Prietula, K. and Carley, K.M. (1999). Exploring the Effects of Agent Trust and Benevolence in a Simulated Organizational Task, Applied Artificial Intelligence 13(3): 321-338.
93. Ramchurn, S.D., Huynh, D. and Jennings, N.R. (2004). Trust in Multi-Agent Systems, The Knowledge Engineering Review 19(1): 1-25.
94. Reagans, R., Zuckerman, E. and McEvily, B. (2004). How to Make a Team: Social networks vs demography as criteria for designing effective teams, Administrative Science Quarterly 49: 101-133.
95. Rentsch, J.R. and Woehr, D.J. (2004). Quantifying Congruence in Cognition: Social relations modeling and team member schema similarity, in E. Salas and S.M. Fiore (eds.) Team Cognition. Understanding the Factors that Drive Processes and Performance, Washington: American Psychological Association, pp. 11-31.
96. Salas, E. and Fiore, S.M. (2004). Team Cognition. Understanding the Factors that Drive Processes and Performance, Washington: American Psychological Association.
97. Schultze, U. and Orlikowski, W.J. (2001). Metaphors of Virtuality: Shaping an emergent reality', Information and Organization 11(1): 45-77.
98. Schultze, U. and Orlikowski, W.J. (2004). A Practice Perspective on Technology-Mediated Network Relations: The use of internet-based self-serve technologies, Information Systems Research 15(1): 87-106.
99. Shiode, N. and Batty, M. (2006). Power Law Distributions in Real and Virtual Worlds. [WWW document]http://www.isoc.org/inet2000/cdproceedings/2a/ 2a.html(accessed 1st April 2006).
100. Simons, T.L. and Peterson, S.R. (2000). Task Conflict and Relationship Conflict in Top Management Teams: The pivotal role of intragroup trust, Journal of Applied Psychology 85: 102-111.
101. Smith, T. and Stevens, G.T. (1996). Emergence, Self-Organization and Social Interaction: Arousal dependent structure in social systems, Sociological Theory 14(2): 131-153.
102. Stasser, G. and Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of Unshared Information in Group Decision Making: Biased information sampling during discussion, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 48: 1467-1478.
103. Stasser, G. and Titus, W. (1987). Effects of Information Load and Percentage of Shared Information on the Dissemination of Information During the Group Discussions, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53: 81-93.
104. Stocker, R., Green, D.G. and Newth, D. (2001). Consensus and Cohesion in Simulated Social Networks, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 4(4) <
105. Stocker, R., Cornforth, D. and Bossomaier, T.R.J. (2002). Networks Structures and Agreement in Social Network Simulations, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 5(4) <
106. Storkey, A.J. and Valabregue, R. (1999). The Basins of Attraction of a New Hopfleld Learning Rule, Neural Networks 12: 869-876.
107. Suchan, J. and Hayzak, G. (2001). The Communication Characteristics of Virtual Teams. A Case Study, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 44: 174-186.
108. Townsend, A.M., DeMarie, S.M. and Hendrickson, A.R. (1998). Virtual Teams: Technology and the workplace of the future, Academy of Management Executive 12: 17-29.
109. Valacich, J.S., Dennis, A.R. and Nunamaker Jr, J.F. (1992). Group Size and Anonymity Effects on Computer-Mediated Idea Generation, Small Group Research 23: 49-73.
110. Valacich, J.S. and Schwenk, C. (1995). Devil's Advocacy and Dialectical Inquiry Effects on Face-to-Face and Computer-Mediated Group Decision Making, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 63: 158-173.
111. Warkentin, M.E. and Beranek, P.M. (1999). Training to Improve Virtual Team Communication, Information Systems Journal 9; 271-289.
112. Warkentin, M.E., Sayeed, L. and Hightower, R. (1997). Virtual Teams Versus Face-to-Face Teams: An exploratory study of a web-based conference system, Decision Sciences 28: 975-996.
113. West, B.J. and Deering, B. (1995). Six Degrees: The Science of a Connected Age, London: Heinemann.
114. Wolf, de T. and Holvoet, T. (2005). Emergence and Self-Organization: Different concepts but promising when combined, in S. Brueckner, G. Di Marzo Seruguendo, A. Karageorgos and R. Nagpal (eds.) ESOA 2004: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 1-15.
115. Yoo, Y. and Alavi, M. (2001). Media and Group Cohesion: Relative influences on social presence, task participation, and group consensus, MIS Quarterly 25(3): 371-390.
116. Zigurs, I. (2003). Leadership in Virtual Teams: Oxymoron or opportunity? Organizational Dynamics 31(4): 339-351.
117. Zigurs, I. and Buckland, B.K. (1998). A Theory of Task/Technology Fit and Group Support Systems Effectiveness, MIS Quarterly 22: 313-333.
118. Zipf, G.K. (1949). Human Behavior and the Principles of Least Effort, Cambridge: Addison Wesley.