Search results

The overall purpose of this paper is to explain theoretically the autonomy phenomenon of teams working within the auto manufacturing context and its implications for the technical and social aspects of group work.

Three auto component companies were studied. The procedures of a qualitative methodology were followed, adopting naturalistic observation techniques of work teams, and unstructured and semi‐structured interviews conducted with operators, supervisors and middle managers. To analyse and interpret the qualitative data obtained, the grounded theory technique was used.

In this paper 33 concepts were obtained, which resulted from the constant comparative method applied to data. The relationships between those concepts allowed the construction of a theoretical model that is settled in the “bridge” concept. This “bridge” is a metaphor that translates the process which binds operational work group goals to the needs of external clients. This process is supported by social aspects – team decision making, participation, mutual helpfulness, and social and emotional relationships, and by technical aspects – operations and information. The bridge has four pillars that are critical to the effective functioning of self‐directed teams: team facilitation, hierarchical relationships established within the teams, quality of manufactured components, and productivity achieved.

The present investigation was carried out in a specific industry, which does not allow for the generalization of the model to other industries. Furthermore, it may be questioned whether the same results be obtained if the operators of the teams observed were interviewed, not individually, but in a group situation. Other kinds of research design and other industries organized on the basis of autonomous work groups must be studied, applying the grounded theory technique, in order to compare diverse theoretical models.

The organization of the industrial automotive production based on self‐directed teams, which know the needs of external customers and to whom a high level of participation in operational decisions was given, can generate a substantial increase of working groups' efficiency and an increase in job satisfaction.

The study of teams in the automotive components industry – in a southern country of Europe – and the consequent elaboration of a specific theoretical model draws attention to the need for social research that takes into account the fact that realities are constructed by the actors who interact in a certain context. No theoretical model can ever encompass the reality of all contexts.

The purpose of this article is to show how work-teams are represented and work in non-profit organizations. From a theoretical point of view, the concepts of macro-team and micro-team, as well as their dynamics rooted in the entrepreneurial world have been discussed.

Seven socially enterprising organizations have been studied through semi-structured individual and collective interviews with managers, technicians with and without supervisory functions and workers. Data discussed here underwent an inductive analysis based on the procedures of grounded theory.

Data analysis supported the outlining of the interviewees’ representations of their belonging to the macro-team and of the working of micro-teams. There seem to be no significant differences between the way teams work in these organizations and in profit-making organizations. However, in the organizations we have analyzed, autonomous planning of activities as a mechanism of work organization and assertiveness as a fundamental communication tool between members stand out.

This research did not include the systematic observation of work teams in the field. As such, reliability may be somehow compromised due to the use of the individual and group interview as the single data collection technique.

The outline of representations that we have designed points to a set of dimensions that shows, with some reliability, how to build a sense of belonging to the macro-team among the workers of this type of organization. It also clarifies the difference between behaviors that foster effective and ineffective micro-teams. This allows action over the latter to potentiate the first and eventually eliminate the second.

Considering the scarce research about team-work in non-profit organizations, this study offers a groundbreaking reflection. Further ahead, one may establish a set of differences and similarities between effective macro and micro-teams in different economic sectors. This way, this study may contribute to more encompassing organizational theories focused on the representations about and the functioning of macro and micro-teams.

We present a critical literature review debating Brazilian research on social and environmental accounting (SEA). The aim of this study is to understand the role of politics in the construction of hegemonies in SEA research in Brazil. In particular, we examine the role of hegemony in relation to the co-option of SEA literature and sustainability in the Brazilian context by the logic of development for economic growth in emerging economies. The methodological approach adopts a post-structural perspective that reflects Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse theory. The study employs a hermeneutical, rhetorical approach to understand and classify 352 Brazilian research articles on SEA. We employ Brown and Fraser’s (2006) categorizations of SEA literature to help in our analysis: the business case, the stakeholder–accountability approach, and the critical case. We argue that the business case is prominent in Brazilian studies. Second-stage analysis suggests that the major themes under discussion include measurement, consulting, and descriptive approach. We argue that these themes illustrate the degree of influence of the hegemonic politics relevant to emerging economics, as these themes predominantly concern economic growth and a capitalist context. This paper discusses trends and practices in the Brazilian literature on SEA and argues that the focus means that SEA avoids critical debates of the role of capitalist logics in an emerging economy concerning sustainability. We urge the Brazilian academy to understand the implications of its reifying agenda and engage, counter-hegemonically, in a social and political agenda beyond the hegemonic support of a particular set of capitalist interests.