Setting the programmatic agenda: A comprehensive bibliometric overview of team mechanism research

Lu, Li; Norder, Kurt; Sawhney, Aman; Emich, Kyle J.

doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.09.002

Cited by 2 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 78 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ilgen et al, 2005;Marks et al, 2001;Mathieu et al, 2008;Rapp et al, 2021). "Team mechanisms" is a higher-level umbrella term that has been used to capture teamwork activities involving team members' collective and/or interactive thoughts, emotions and behaviors (Lu et al, 2023;Mathieu et al, 2019;Salas et al, 2017). According to the "A-B-C" classification, team mechanisms have been categorized into three broad states: affective or motivational states (A), behaviors (B) and cognitions or perceptions (C) (DeChurch and Mesmer-Magnus, 2010;Ilgen et al, 2005;Kozlowski and Ilgen, 2006;Mathieu et al, 2019;Rapp et al, 2021;Salas et al, 2017).…”

Section: Service Teamworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Further research has advanced the original formulation of the A-B-C classification (Mohammed et al, 2021;Rapp et al, 2021). Recently, Lu et al (2023) conducted an in-depth analysis of team mechanisms and, based on empirical insights, proposed a more comprehensive, adapted A-B-C-M-P framework of team mechanisms, capturing affective (A), behaviors (B), cognitions (C), motivation (M) and perceptions (P). Table 2 provides the definitions as well as examples of each category of team mechanisms.…”

Section: Service Teamworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The effective management of knowledge within teams allow members to collectively understand core tasks, solve challenges and come up with new ideas (Kozlowski and Ilgen, 2006;Mohammed et al, 2021). Thus, allowing for teams to better understand and cater to the needs of customers and attract high levels of service quality and output (Brueller and Carmeli, 2011) Cognitive processes Traditionally included under team cognition, perceptual teamwork dynamics is different in that it does not encompass knowledge structure or transfer within teams (Lu et al, 2023). Rather team perceptions involve the collective recognition, organization and interpretation of stimuli, which provides shared meanings to team members' team experiences (Robbins.…”

Section: Service Teamworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…, 2021). “Team mechanisms” is a higher-level umbrella term that has been used to capture teamwork activities involving team members' collective and/or interactive thoughts, emotions and behaviors (Lu et al. , 2023; Mathieu et al.…”

Section: An Integrative Conceptual Framework Of Service Teamworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such a synthesizing effort allows us to take a more balanced view in terms of how the teamwork mechanism can be operationalized. More specifically, we do this by drawing on an integrative conceptual framework, that is, Lu et al. ’s (2023) recent A-B-C-M-P theoretical framework (see also Delice et al.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A meta-analysis of the relationship between service teamwork mechanisms and customer service outcomes

Yue,

Zettna,

Cheng

et al. 2023

JOSM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeIn many contemporary service organizations, service teams or service units are the main engines used to deliver key services to customers, client or patients. However, it remains unclear how teamwork mechanisms (i.e. the ways team members work together) influence customer service outcomes, and whether these relationships vary across different service contexts. To advance knowledge on the nature of teamwork in service teams and to set an agenda for further work in this area, there is a need to integrate and synthesize findings across the diverse literature on service teamwork. This paper aims to discuss the aforementioned objectives.Design/methodology/approachUsing a meta-analytic approach, the authors analyzed a substantial pool of relevant effect sizes (a total of 372 effect sizes from 82 studies, with 14,291 service teams/units) to examine the effects of affective, behavioral, cognitive, motivational as well as perceptual teamwork mechanisms on customer service outcomes. The authors also investigated two key service context variables (service climate and service type) as boundary conditions on these effects.FindingsThe authors found that cognitive teamwork mechanisms were more strongly positively associated with customer evaluative outcomes than other mechanisms, whereas motivational and perceptual teamwork mechanisms had stronger associations with financial outcomes. Further, four of the five teamwork mechanisms demonstrated stronger correlations under a high service climate. The strength of the correlations between the teamwork mechanisms and customer service outcomes also exhibited different patterns when considered for different service types.Research limitations/implicationsAs with all meta-analysis, the quality of the primary studies influences the quality of the insights obtained from summarized effects. As most studies are cross-sectional design, the relationships examined in this paper cannot be interpreted causally. The authors cannot rule out the possibility of reverse causality, for example, reciprocal effects of customer service outcomes on teamwork dynamics due to the reciprocal feedback loop between customers and service providers.Practical implicationsThe results hold important practical implications for enhancing customer evaluation and financial performance. First, the overall findings point to the need for employers to emphasize on certain types of teamwork training in order to encourage employee collaboration within service teams. For instance, service organizations could plan team building activities for service teams to promote trust, strengthen interpersonal bonds and improve problem-solving.Originality/valueThe results of this study provide an integration of previous research on service teamwork and fill two important gaps in the knowledge: (1) which aspect of teamwork is more important in determining customer service outcomes? And (2) does the effect of teamwork on customer service outcomes differ across different service contexts?

show abstract

Section: Service Teamworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Service Teamworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Service Teamworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: An Integrative Conceptual Framework Of Service Teamworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A meta-analysis of the relationship between service teamwork mechanisms and customer service outcomes

Yue,

Zettna,

Cheng

et al. 2023

JOSM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Beyond Diversity and Homogeneity: Conceptualizing Compatibility in Cognition

Wang,

Cronin,

Mannix

2024

Group & Organization Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the oft touted benefits of having differences in how people think about a task, teams often are not able to capitalize on their heterogeneity. The problem, we demonstrate, is that representational gaps—fundamental incompatibilities in the way that team members conceptualize the problem and solution space—degrade the knowledge synthesis capabilities of teams. We show that rGaps degrade team processes and thus have a unique effect on performance above and beyond mere differences in cognition. In two laboratory studies, we find that representational gaps hurt verbal and nonverbal communication and increased relationship conflict. Relationship conflict, in turn, mediated the negative relationship between rGaps and performance. We discuss possible interventions when rGaps are present.

show abstract

Setting the programmatic agenda: A comprehensive bibliometric overview of team mechanism research

Cited by 2 publications

References 78 publications

A meta-analysis of the relationship between service teamwork mechanisms and customer service outcomes

A meta-analysis of the relationship between service teamwork mechanisms and customer service outcomes

Beyond Diversity and Homogeneity: Conceptualizing Compatibility in Cognition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About