Identity Asymmetries: An Experimental Investigation of Social Identity and Information Exchange in Multiteam Systems

Mell, Julija; DeChurch, Leslie A.; Contractor, Noshir; Leenders, R.Th.A.J.

doi:10.5465/amj.2018.0325

Cited by 35 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 111 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They must work closely with other teams to solve problems of mutual interest, without giving away important information that may help them gain an advantage over those same teams (Goodwin et al 2012). They must develop a shared sense of identity and trust as members of a multiteam collective, without compromising identity and trust within their team and in interorganizational structures, with their home organizations (Cuijpers et al 2016, Mell et al 2020. Put differently, the individuals and teams within a multiteam structure are constantly required to perform an intricate set of "boundary work" activities (Langley et al 2019) that simultaneously contain both collaborative and competitive elements.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most of this research has examined how the individuals and teams within a multiteam structure manage key boundaries to align members' efforts and enable coordinated task accomplishment or what Langley et al (2019) referred to as "collaborative boundary work." Collaborative boundary work includes initiatives designed to motivate, enable, and direct cooperative boundary relations, such as the use of contingency plans (Argyres et al 2007); a central coordinating body (Davison et al 2012, Kotha andSrikanth 2013); boundary spanners (Waring et al 2018); direct mutual adjustment (Marks et al 2005, de Vries et al 2016; and emergent norms, goals, and identities (Browning et al 1995, Mell et al 2020). However, not all boundary work is collaborative.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Managing Boundaries in Multiteam Structures: From Parochialism to Integrated Pluralism

Vries

Vegt

Bunderson

et al. 2022

Organization Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiteam structures are increasingly used to coordinate complex tasks between different groups. To realize this potential, however, the members of a multiteam structure must manage a complex set of boundary relations within, between, and beyond the various constituent teams—boundary relations that can be cooperative, competitive, or some combination of both at the same time. This multimethod study provides insight into how multiteam structures can meet this challenge. Specifically, we examined how the different organizations that utilize and support the Dutch railway system learned to manage boundaries as they transitioned from a centralized, arms-length structure to a colocated, multiteam structure for coordinating disruption responses (i.e., the Rail Operations Control Center (ROCC)). In part 1 of our study, qualitative analyses of interview, observational, and archival data suggested that learning to manage boundaries within the ROCC was not simple or linear but evolved through trial and error during various phases. Ultimately, the ROCC developed an approach we call “integrated pluralism,” establishing a dynamic balance that combines both collaborative and competitive approaches to boundary management. In this manner, the ROCC teams were able to attain integrated solutions and coordinated task accomplishment while simultaneously defending internal team operations and home organization interests. In part 2, we employed an interrupted time series analysis to demonstrate that the implementation of the ROCC resulted in significant performance improvements. Consistent with the results of part 1, we found that these improvements emerged gradually over time as teams learned to work out their boundary relations and transitioned to integrated pluralism. These findings provide new insights into how individuals and teams can work together to tackle the unique boundary management challenges presented by multiteam structures and illuminate the dynamic trial and error process by which component teams can learn to both cooperate and compete.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing Boundaries in Multiteam Structures: From Parochialism to Integrated Pluralism

Vries

Vegt

Bunderson

et al. 2022

Organization Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We present descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations in Table 1 and means with standard deviations by condition for our focal variables in Table 2. In accordance with the directional nature of our hypotheses (see Cho & Abe, 2013; Gravetter & Wallnau, 2013; Schwab, 2005), we conducted a one‐tailed significance test for Hypothesis 1 and utilized 90% confidence intervals for Hypothesis 2 (for managerial examples of one‐tailed testing, see Baer et al., 2018; Mell, DeChurch, Contractor, & Leenders, 2019; Vogel, Rodell, & Lynch, 2016).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strong body, clear mind: Physical activity diminishes the effects of supervisor interpersonal injustice

Watkins

Umphress

2020

Personnel Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We integrate exercise physiology tenets with self-regulation theory to explain how physical activity diminishes the effects of supervisor interpersonal injustice. We posit that individuals can help prevent self-regulation depletion from interpersonal injustice when they engage in physical activity. In Study 1, we manipulated physical activity and interpersonal injustice in a laboratory setting, and in Study 2, utilizing a two-week experience sampling method we examined how employees reacted differently to daily interpersonal injustice as a function of their general level of physical activity engagement. Our results demonstrate that both acute and chronic levels of physical activity attenuate the effects of supervisor interpersonal injustice episodes on self-regulation depletion, which subsequently reduces social undermining directed toward the supervisor. Our findings highlight the theoretical and practical significance of physical activity for interpersonal injustice and for organizations in general.

show abstract

“…For an MTS to reach its goals, there are both intra-team and inter-team processes that need to happen. Individual members primary foci of identification (self, component team member, MTS member, Connaughton et al, 2012) can affect sharing of information between teams (Mell et al, 2020), inter-team coordination failures (Lanaj et al, 2013), and depletion of energy and focus across the system (Porck et al, 2019), The leadership team needs to empower component teams to do their work, yet help coordinate and communicate top-down, down-up, and laterally (DeChurch and Marks, 2006;Fodor and Flestea, 2016;Rico et al, 2018).…”

Section: Learning In Multi-team Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning in multi-team systems: a qualitative study of learning triggers, readiness to learn and learning processes

Sessa¹,

Francavilla

London

et al. 2021

TPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Multi-team systems (MTSs) are expected to respond effectively to complex challenges while remaining responsive and adaptable and preserving inter-team linking mechanisms. The leadership team of an MTS is expected to configure and reconfigure component teams to meet the unique needs of each situation and perform. How do they learn to do this? This paper, using a recent MTS learning theory as a basis, aims to begin to understand how MTSs learn and stimulate ideas for future research. Design/methodology/approach The authors use two case studies to address research questions. The first case was a snapshot in time, while the second case occurred over several months. Interviews, documents and participant observation were the data sources. Findings As suggested by theory, findings support the idea that learning triggers, the timing of the triggers and readiness to learn (RtL) affect the type of learning process that emerges. The cases showed examples of adaptive and generative team learning. Strong and clear triggers, occurring during performance episodes, led to adaptive learning. When RtL was high and triggers occurred during hiatus periods, the associated learning process was generative. Originality/value Using an available theoretical model and case studies, the research describes how MTS readiness to learn and triggers for learning affect MTS learning processes and how learning outcomes became codified in the knowledge base or structure of the MTS. This provides a framework for subsequent qualitative and quantitative research.

show abstract

Identity Asymmetries: An Experimental Investigation of Social Identity and Information Exchange in Multiteam Systems

Cited by 35 publications

References 111 publications

Managing Boundaries in Multiteam Structures: From Parochialism to Integrated Pluralism

Managing Boundaries in Multiteam Structures: From Parochialism to Integrated Pluralism

Strong body, clear mind: Physical activity diminishes the effects of supervisor interpersonal injustice

Learning in multi-team systems: a qualitative study of learning triggers, readiness to learn and learning processes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About