Alle Publikationen
- <<
- <
- 1
2018
-
(2018): The interplay of rules, asymmetries in language fluency, and team dynamics in culturally diverse teams. In: Cross Cultural & Strategic Management 25 (1), S. 157-182. DOI: 10.1108/CCSM-08-2016-0157
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/CCSM-08-2016-0157 Abstract: Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore how newly formed culturally diverse project teams develop and implement rules, and how these processes may be affected by language-fluency asymmetries. Design/methodology/approach: Using a case-study research design, the authors investigated three multicultural project teams within a management integration program in a multinational company in France. Their complete data set includes 37.5 hours of observations and 49 hours of semi-structured interviews. Findings: Findings revealed that subgroups formed on the basis of language-fluency and this affected the development and implementation of rules. While rule-setting mechanisms emerged across teams, they varied in form. On the one hand, tightly structured rules emerged and rules were rigidly applied when there were greater language inequalities. In contrast, implicit behavior controls guided interactions when language-fluency subgroupings were less salient. The findings also revealed that the alignment of other individual attributes with language fluency reinforced subgroup divisions, further impacting the rule development and implementation processes. Practical implications: Understanding rule development and implementation in culturally diverse teams and how these processes are impacted by language disparities enables managers to help members develop more successful behavioral patterns by keeping language-fluency (and other) attributes in mind. Originality/value: The study extends and complements previous team research by providing in-depth insights into the process of rule development and implementation. It demonstrates the impact of language-fluency asymmetries and subgroup dynamics on these processes. The authors propose a model to capture the processes by which culturally diverse teams create rules, and how the rule-setting mechanisms might be moderated by faultlines such as language-based disparities. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all r ights re served) zitiert von 1
2016
-
(2016): Cooperating without Co-laboring. In: Administrative Science Quarterly 62 (1), S. 179-214. DOI: 10.1177/0001839216655090
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839216655090 Abstract: I examine how different distributions of ownership and governance rights in firms affect the optimal organization of cross-functional project teams for knowledge-intensive work. I analyze multi-method data from two competing automated manufacturing equipment engineering firms with contrasting formal power structures, one a worker cooperative with ownership and governance rights distributed across occupations and the other a conventional firm with ownership and governance rights concentrated in the hands of several senior workers in one occupational group. Contrary to prior research, my findings suggest that when collective tasks are uncertain and complex, the benefits of cross-functional interactions depend on organizations’ formal power structure: cross-functional interactions improve teams’ productivity in the context of concentrated ownership and governance rights but not when ownership and governance rights are widely distributed among workers. Fieldwork at the tw o firms revealed three mechanisms by which dispersed formal power decreases the productivity benefits of cross-functional interaction: it reduces status distinctions among team members, increasing the labor hours required to resolve conflicts; boosts participation in oversight and coordination processes outside teams so that workers have more access to information and less need for cross-functional interactions; and increases the distribution of knowledge-management technology, which increases workers’ autonomy and reduces the value of cross-functional interactions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
2011
-
(2011) : Motive fairen und nicht-solidarischen Verhaltens: Korruption: Forschungsstand, Prävention, Probleme: Lengerich, Germany: Pabst Science Publishers
Abstract: Ausgehend von der Feststellung, dass sich die Psychologie bisher wenig mit dem Thema "Korruption" auseinandergesetzt hat, werden mogliche psychologische Beitrage zu einer Korruptionsforschung besprochen. Dabei werden psychologische Theorien und Forschungsergebnisse zu "Gerechtigkeit und Fairness" (Organisationsgerechtigkeit als theoretische Basis; distributive Gerechtigkeit bzw. Fairness; prozedurale Fairness; Interaktionsfairness) sowie zu "Fairness und Teameffizienz" dargestellt. Im Rahmen des zuletzt genannten Punktes wird uber eine Studie berichtet, in der das Gerechtigkeitserleben bei der Teamarbeit untersucht wurde. Es zeigte sich unter anderem, dass die Grundeinstellung zu einer Aufgabe ausschlaggebend dafur ist, inwieweit jemand eine Teamarbeit akzeptiert und effizient im Team arbeitet. Die realen vorhandenen Arbeitsbedingungen, sowie die Art und Weise der Aufgabenverteilung (Losverfahren) beeinflussen die Teameffizienz nicht. Fairness und "Social Loafing" sind dagegen starke Pradiktoren fur Teameffizienz. Je weniger Fairness vorhanden ist, desto weniger erfolgreich ist ein Team.
2010
-
(2010): Equality versus differentiation. The effects of power dispersion on group interaction. In: The Journal of applied psychology 95 (6), S. 1032-1044. DOI: 10.1037/a0020373
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020373 Abstract: Power is an inherent characteristic of social interaction, yet research has yet to fully explain what power and power dispersion may mean for conflict resolution in work groups. We found in a field study of 42 organizational work groups and a laboratory study of 40 negotiating dyads that the effects of power dispersion on conflict resolution are contingent on the level of interactants' power, thereby explaining contradictory theory and findings on power dispersion. We found that when members have low power, power dispersion is positively related to conflict resolution, but when members have high power, power dispersion is negatively related to conflict resolution (i.e., power equality is better). These findings can be explained by the mediating role of intragroup power struggles. Together, these findings suggest that power hierarchies function as a heuristic solution for conflict and contribute to adaptive social dynamics in groups with low, but not high, levels of power. zitiert von 106
Keywords: Arbeits - und Organisationspsychologie, Conflict Resolution, Einzelstudie / spezifisch, Female, group dynamics, Group Processes, Gruppenverhalten, Humans, Interaktionsforschung, Interpersonal Control Medical Subject Headings (MeSH): Adult, Male, Negotiating, POWER, Power (Psychology), social interaction, Work Teams, Workplace
- <<
- <
- 1