Search

Organizational resilience research has mostly investigated formal coordination during large-scale disruptions. Yet, in practice, it is the small-scale, day-to-day disruptions that affect most of the operational and financial losses in organizations. Timely resolution of day-to-day disruptions depends on effective real-time, informal coordination. Current research has provided limited evidence on effective informal coordination for resilience. Thus, we rely on the modular system design and improvisation literature to propose short- and long-term informal coordination mechanisms likely to balance the control and flexibility necessary for real-time disruption response. We apply relational event modeling across 1,177 disruptions and 184,795 communication events in a water supply company and demonstrate that long-term decentralization and loose coupling combined with short-term restructuring characterized by routine breaking and centralization help solve disruptions faster. Further, we empirically demonstrate that mechanisms forming employees' reactions to disruption occurrence do not necessarily match the mechanisms shown to help resolve them faster. In this way, we point to potential reasons behind the failures to flexibly adapt coordination when disruptions occur. This study contributes to the resilience literature by demonstrating previously unexplored mechanisms behind effective real-time informal coordination during day-to-day disruptions and provides valuable practical insights for managers in organizations dealing with frequent disruptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the role of interpersonal functional diversity (IFD) in multiteam system functioning of organizations. Topics discussed include the psychological insights of an employee helpful in understanding the consequence of IFD in multiteam, innovating by employees in an unfamiliar work domain, and the use of IFD in coordinating the employees in a mutiteam system. It mentions that IFD shapes the aspirational behavior of a multiteam to achieve the teams' goal. It mentions that broad work experiences in a multiteam discourages the aspirational bvehavior of the team workers. It mentions that study sample comprised U.S. Air Force officers attending a leadership development course.

The article examines how different factors affect the development of perceived expertise affirmation for individual team members and for teams as a whole. A multilevel model is developed and tested to provide insights into the development and effects of positive identities at work by focusing on the affirmation of expertise as a key component of the positive work identity of employees. The model also aims to delineate factors that motivate individuals in work teams and enhance understanding of how and when teams function effectively. Team-level antecedents are found to help explain how inter-team differences in perceived affirmation develop.

This study examines the influence of individual members' positive mood and perceived team feedback on their facilitation of team learning. Results showed that positive mood was positively associated with the team learning facilitation of individual members if they perceived high team feedback, but not if they perceived low team feedback. Further, team-level analyses demonstrated that members' aggregated team learning facilitation was positively related to team innovation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many knowledge workers are members of multiple teams, and researchers have examined how this affects their job satisfaction and emotional exhaustion. We suggest that progress in this research area has been hampered by a lack of clarity about what multiple team membership (MTM) is and how to conceptualize it. Prevailing conceptualizations of MTM have focused on the number of teams an individual is a member of (MTM number). We identify the number of times an individual switches between different team contexts (MTM simultaneity) as an additional MTM dimension that may better capture MTM's potential downsides. Our analysis of 1,265 knowledge workers involved in 5,274 project teams shows that MTM number and MTM simultaneity have opposing effects on job satisfaction and emotional exhaustion, especially when multiteamers are unfamiliar with the members of their teams. We also find that individuals' organizational tenure and polychronic personality are differentially related to MTM number and MTM simultaneity. The theoretical implications and results of this study can help clarify the benefits and detriments of MTM and advance the growing literature in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Teams frequently establish and maintain relationships with other teams to manage joint work and obtain external resources. Such "boundary spanning" can be beneficial or detrimental for teams. Nevertheless, prior research has largely focused on the benefits that teams draw from boundary-spanning activities without addressing potentially negative effects. To address this issue, we draw from resource allocation theory to examine when and why boundary spanning benefits and harms team performance. Specifically, we propose that when teams face strongly reduced staffing budgets, boundary spanning helps to replenish team resources, which then benefits team performance. By contrast, when teams face smaller reductions in staffing budgets, we suggest that boundary spanning diverts finite available time and attention from other crucial activities, thereby depleting team resources and hurting team performance. We test this moderated mediation relationship using time-lagged, multi-source data from a healthcare organization that had reduced staffing budgets without lowering output requirements. Corroborating our expectations, our results illustrate that reductions in team staffing budgets critically shape boundary spanning's implications for teams' resources availability and performance. Our research, thereby, adds value by offering a more complete and integrated perspective on the performance implications of boundary spanning that complements the one-sided, and overly optimistic, view within much existing research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Organizations operate in increasingly turbulent environments requiring them to stay resilient in the face of setbacks, i.e., to maintain desired levels of performance when faced with disruptions. Small-scale disruptions happen frequently in most organizations, and therefore they often co-occur or overlap in time. This creates a significant cognitive burden for the employees because they often need to resolve multiple disruptions at the same time. Despite the fact that small-scale disruptions are so common, most resilience literature to date has not recognized the implications of small-scale disruptions when they co-occur, and has not offered any organizational response strategies for dealing with this challenge. To account for this, we rely on the task-switching literature and suggest that dealing with co-occurring disruptions resembles a task-switching problem for the employees. We propose that increased disruption co-occurrence increases time to recovery from the disruptions, i.e., negatively impacts organizational resilience. Further, we propose that assuring that different groups of employees can work on different disruptions, i.e., increasing the fragmentation of the information-sharing network, dampens the positive relationship between disruption co-occurrence and time to recovery. These hypotheses were supported on a sample of 2,009 situations of co-occurring disruptions in a public water supply company. This study advances knowledge on the effects of the small-scale disruptions on organizational resilience, and suggests that network fragmentation can be a successful organizational strategy to sustain resilience under increased disruption co-occurrence. Keywords: Organizational resilience; small-scale disruptions; information-sharing network; task-switching; network fragmentation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research on hierarchy has exploded in recent years. In this work, management scholars have largely focused on high- and low- rank roles within a hierarchy and how high and low rank can drive individual, group, and organizational processes and outcomes. However, recent work has begun to move beyond the study of traditional high- versus low- rank roles in hierarchies to instead consider other consequential hierarchical roles in groups and organizations. In this symposium, we highlight this emerging area of research on alternative perspectives on hierarchical roles, bringing together a set of five cutting-edge papers. These papers all offer new perspectives on the roles of different hierarchical ranks, including developing theory on the role of various high-ranking members in alliances (first paper), unpacking the consequences of a common yet overlooked rank: the second-in-command rank (second paper), identifying how middle and low-ranking group members can emerge as informal leaders (third paper), challenging whether high ranks matter at all considering high rank does not automatically confer authority (fourth paper), and understanding the experience of rank 'losers' (fifth paper). The five papers across this symposium move beyond traditional studies of high- versus- low ranked roles in hierarchies and demonstrate that these other perspectives on hierarchical roles can also have profound influences on individual, group, and organizational processes and outcomes. Following the presentations, Dr. Drew Carton will facilitate a group discussion about these papers and future research on alternative views on hierarchical roles. Team Leadership Through an Inner Circle: How a Dominant Alliance Can Encourage Coordination and.... Presenter: Jieying Xu; ZHEJIANG U. OF FINANCE AND ECONOMICS. Presenter: Xu Huang; Hong Kong Baptist U. Presenter: Erica Xu; Hong Kong Baptist U. Presenter: Gerben S. Van Der Vegt; U. of Groningen. Presenter: Stuart Bunderson; Wash U. Do Teams Need a Second Fiddle? The Opportunities (and Perils) of the Second-in-Command Rank in a.... Presenter: Elizabeth Trinh; U. of Michigan, Ross School of Business. Presenter: Lindred L. Greer; U. of Michigan, Ross School of Business. Second in Command or Second Opinion? Testing a Dual-path Model of Informal Leader Emergence. Presenter: Edward McClain Wellman; Arizona State U. Presenter: Min Yu; Arizona State U. Presenter: Luke Hedden; Boston College. Presenter: Beth Schinoff; Boston College. How Managers Produce Authority During Backstage Repair: Evidence From Flash Teams. Presenter: Melissa Valentine; Stanford U. Presenter: Michael Bernstein; Stanford U. "I'm Kind of (Disappointed I Did Not Become) a Big Deal": Status Disappointment, Future Work.... Presenter: Eric Anicich; U. of Southern California. Presenter: Merrick Osborne; USC Marshall School of Business. Presenter: Andrea Villafuerte; USC Marshall School of Business. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Existing research suggests that boundary spanning can greatly advance team performance; yet, realizing boundary spanning's benefits is notoriously difficult. Our meta-analysis develops and empirically examines a conceptual framework of contingency factors to explain how boundary spanning is most likely to be effective for a team. Drawing from a configural perspective, we derive moderators of the team boundary spanning-team performance link based on different configuration of team boundary spanning (including the type, target, and primary carrier of boundary spanning). Synthesizing four decades of empirical research and meta-analyzing 71 primary studies (comprising 9,197 teams with more than 56,000 members), we find support for our conceptual framework in these configurational aspects to either strengthen (i.e., target of boundary spanning outside one's organization, team members as carriers of boundary spanning activities) or counteract (i.e., boundary spanning activities that are exclusionary toward external stakeholders) the positive effect of boundary spanning on team performance. These findings contribute to theory development on boundary spanning in teams by demonstrating how team boundary spanning can be implemented to be most effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Employees in knowledge-intensive organizations are often involved in more than one team at the same time. This study employs a social capital perspective to propose that an employee's multiple team membership (MTM) indirectly offers the potential for performance benefits and detriments, depending on the characteristics of his or her information-sharing network. To test our predictions, we gathered archival and social network data at a research organization in the Netherlands. We found that MTM was indirectly associated with an employee's overall job performance by increasing the size of his or her information-sharing network. As expected, however, this indirect relationship was contingent on the average strength of an employee's network ties (i.e., the frequency of the respective interactions), such that MTM only improved performance when network ties were relatively weak. The indirect relationship between MTM and individual job performance became negative, by contrast, when employees' network ties were relatively strong. Together, these findings advance our understanding of the mechanisms and contingency factors that shape the performance consequences associated with individuals' concurrent membership in multiple teams. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The trends and concepts that emerge from both theory and practice highlight the opportunities and the challenges embedded in the new ways of doing, seeing, and organizing in today's work teams. On the one hand, different streams of research have advanced our knowledge and offered diverse insights on new forms of team-based work arrangements. On the other hand, our knowledge of possible new and different team forms and processes (e.g., how to design fluid teams, assume the role of hierarchy, solve performance dilemmas, implement change, pursue stability vs. flexibility) remains relatively nascent. To advance this knowledge and provoke new directions in team and teaming research, we have invited a distinguished group of team scholars to participate in this symposium. With a broad range of research papers, including both theoretical and empirical works, across various study contexts, and using different research methodologies, we aim to encourage and solicit scholarship that addresses a set of new important research questions. A Multiteam System Model of Organizational Change Presenter: Henrik M. Bresman; INSEAD Adaptable Approaches for Studying Low-Stability Teams Presenter: Michaela Kerrissey; Harvard U. Presenter: Amy C. Edmondson; Harvard U. The Error Dilemma in Teams: Team Configuration, Information Elaboration, and Team Errors Presenter: Zhanna Novikov; Technion - Israel Institute of Technology Presenter: Eitan Naveh; Technion Israel Institute of Technology Presenter: Zhike Lei; Pepperdine U. Unpacking Vertical and Horizontal Member Differences in Teams: The Role of Hierarchy Stability Presenter: Stuart Bunderson; Washington U. in St. Louis Presenter: Steven Gray; The U. of Texas at Austin Presenter: Gerben S. Van Der Vegt; U. of Groningen [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]