Teams and technology

The Psychology of Workplace Technology

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 99-117

  Miles, Jonathan ^a   Hollenbeck, John R ^b  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84920382200     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203735565     Document Type: Chapter

References (52)

1. Alge, B. J., Wiethoff, C., & Klein, H. J. (2003). When does the medium matter? Knowledge building experiences and opportunities in decision-making teams. Organizational Behaviors and Human Decision Processes, 91, 26-37.
2. Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. (1992). Demography and design: Predictors of new product team performance. Organization Science, 3(3), 321-341.
3. Bell, B. S., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2002). A typology of virtual teams: Implications for effective leadership. Group and Organization Management, 27(1), 14-49.
4. Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 127-149). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
5. Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23(3), 239-290.
6. Cramton, C. D. (2001). The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organization Science, 12(3), 346-371.
7. Cramton, C. D., & Hinds, P. J. (2005). Subgroup dynamics in internationally distributed teams: Ethnocentrism or cross-national learning? Research in Organizational Behavior, 26, 231-263.
8. De Dreu, C. K. W., & Weingart, L. R. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 741-749.
9. DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. S. (1994). Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science, 5(2), 121-147.
10. Devine, D. J., Clayton, L. D., Philips, J. L., Dunford, B. B., & Melner, S. B. (1999). Teams in organizations: Prevalence, characteristics, and effectiveness. Small Group Research, 30(6), 678-711.
11. Driskell, J. E., Radtke, P. H., & Salas, E. (2003). Virtual teams: Effects of technological mediation on team performance. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 7(4), 297-323.
12. Dubrovsky, V. J., Kiesler, S., & Sethna, B. N. (1991). The equalization phenomenon: Status effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision-making groups. HumanComputer Interaction, 6, 119-146.
13. Edmondson, A. C., Bohmer, R. M., & Pisano, G. P. (2001). Disrupted routines: Team learning and new technology implementation in hospitals. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 685-716.
14. Garvey, C. (2002). Steer teams with the right pay. Workforce, 47(5), 70-78.
15. Gibson, C. B., & Gibbs, J. L. (2006). Unpacking the concept of virtuality: The effects of geographic dispersion, electronic dependence, dynamic structure, and national diversity on team innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51, 451-495.
16. Griffith, T. L., & Neale, M. A. (2001). Information processing in traditional, hybrid, and virtual teams: From nascent knowledge to transactive memory. Research in Organizational Behavior, 23, 379-421.
17. Griffith, T. L., Sawyer, J. E., & Neale, M. A. (2003). Virtualness and knowledge in teams: Managing the love triangle of organizations, individuals, and information technology. MIS Quarterly, 27(2), 265-287.
18. Guzzo, R. A., & Dickson, M. W. (1996). Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and effectiveness. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 307-338.
19. Hedlund, J., Ilgen, D. R., & Hollenbeck, J. R. (1998). Decision accuracy in computermediated versus face-to-face decision-making teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76(1), 30-47.
20. 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(3), 290-307.
21. Hollenbeck, J. R., & Spitzmuller, M. (2010). Team structure: Tight versus loose coupling in task-oriented groups. Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, London: Oxford Press.
22. Hollenbeck, J. R., Beersma, B., & Schouten, M. (2012). Beyond team types and taxonomies: A dimensional scaling conceptualization for team description. Academy of Management Review, 37, 82-106.
23. Ilgen, D. R., Hollenbeck, J. R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D. (2005). Teams in organizations: From I-P-O Models to IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 517-543.
24. Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10(6), 791-815.
25. Kanawattanachai, P., & Yoo, Y. (2002). Dynamic nature of trust in virtual teams. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11, 187-213.
26. Kirkman, B. L., & Mathieu, J. E. (2005). The dimensions and antecedents of team virtuality. Journal of Management, 31(5), 700-718.
27. Klein, K. J., Ziegert, J. C., Knight, A. P., & Xiao, Y. (2006). Dynamic delegation: Shared, hierarchical, and deindividualized leadership in extreme action teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(4), 590-621.
28. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254-284.
29. Lau, D. C., & Murnighan, J. K. (1998). Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 325-340.
30. Lau, D. C., & Murnighan, J. K. (2005). Interactions within groups and subgroups: The effects of demographic faultlines. Academy of Management Journal, 48(4), 645-659.
31. Leonard-Barton, D. (1988). Implementation as mutual adaptation of technology and organization. Research Policy, 17, 251-267.
32. MacCallum, R. C., Zhang, S., Preacher, K. J., & Rucker, D. D. (2002). On the practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 19-40.
33. Majchrzak, A., Rice, R. E., Malhotra, A., King, N., & Ba, S. (2000). Technology adaptation: The case of a computer-supported inter-organizational virtual team. MIS Quarterly, 24(4), 569-600.
34. Marks, M. A., Zaccaro, S. J., & Mathieu, J. E. (2000). Performance implications of leader briefings and team-interaction training for team adaptation to novel environments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(6), 971-986.
35. Martins, L. L., Gilson, L. L., & Maynard, M. T. (2004). Virtual teams: What do we know and where do we go from here? Journal of Management, 30(6), 805-835.
36. Mathieu, J. E., Heffner, T. S., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2000). The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(2), 273-283.
37. Orton, J. D., & Weick, K. E. (1990). Loosely coupled systems: A reconceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 15(2), 203-223.
38. Paul, D. L., & McDaniel, R. R. (2004). A field study on the effect of interpersonal trust on virtual collaborative relationship performance. MIS Quarterly, 28(2), 183-227.
39. Salas, E., DiazGranados, D., Klein, C., Burke, C. S., & Stagl, K. C. (2008). Does team training improve team performance?: A meta-analysis. Human Factors, 50(6), 903-933.
40. Schmidt, J. B., Montoya-Weiss, M. M., & Massey, A. P. (2001). New product development decision-making effectiveness: Comparing individuals, face-to-face teams, and virtual teams. Decision Sciences, 32(4), 575-600.
41. Shin, Y. (2004). A person-environment fit model for virtual organizations. Journal of Management, 30(5), 725-743.
42. Siegel, J., Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, K., & McGuire, T. W. (1986). Group processes in computermediated communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 157-187.
43. Stillman, J. (2008, September 8). Managers fret as virtual teams grow with globalization. Retrieved from www.bnet.com/blog/bnet1/managers-fret-as-virtual-teams-grow-with-globalization/582
44. Straus, S. G., & McGrath, J. E. (1994). Does the medium matter? The interaction of task type and technology on group performance and member reactions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(1), 87-97.
45. Sundstrom, E., De Meuse, K. P., & Futrell, D. (1990). Work teams: Applications and effectiveness. American Psychologist, 45(2), 120-133.
46. Thompson, L. F., & Coovert, M. D. (2002). Stepping up to the challenge: A critical examination of face-to-face and computer-mediated team decision making. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6(1), 52-64.
47. Thompson, L. F., & Coovert, M. D. (2003). Teamwork online: The effects of computer conferencing on perceived confusion, satisfaction and postdiscussion accuracy. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 7(2), 135-151.
48. Tyre, M. J., & Orlikowski, W. J. (1994). Windows of opportunity: Temporal patterns of technological adaptation in organizations. Organization Science, 5(1), 98-118.
49. Van der Kleij, R., Schraagen, G. M., Werkhoven, P., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2009). How conversations change over time in face-to-face and video-mediated communication. Small Group Research, 40(4), 355-381.
50. Warkentin, M. E., Sayeed, L., & Hightower, R. (1997). Virtual teams versus face-to-face teams: An exploratory study of a web-based conference system. Decision Sciences, 28(4), 975-996.
51. Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1), 1-19.
52. Wilson, J. M., Straus, S. G., & McEvily, B. (2006). All in due time: The development of trust in computer-mediated and face-to-face teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99, 16-33.