Search results

Based on the Social Exchange Theory (SET), the paper attempts to extend the research on the relationship between green self-managed teams and firm performance by exploring the serial mediation of extra-role green behavior and environmental performance. Furthermore, via moderated mediation, the study inspected the differences in relationships among these variables for manufacturing and service organizations.

Data of 407 respondents from 122 manufacturing and service organizations (having green self-managed teams) operating in India were collected using purposive sampling. Various statistical techniques like confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), correlations, multiple regressions and bootstrapping were employed.

The results indicated that extra-role green behavior and environmental performance served as serial mediators. Additionally, the nature of the organizations significantly moderated several indirect relationships, with one pathway found to be insignificant.

The study may be limited by the fact that the data were collected at a single moment in time rather than using a longitudinal design.

The study guides service organizations to attract environmentally conscious employees by promoting green self-managed teams and manufacturing organizations to enrich their operations and service delivery through such teams.

The study uniquely examines how green self-managed teams addressing environmental issues contribute to improved firm performance through mutual exchanges. It also advances existing literature by conducting a comparative analysis across manufacturing and service organizations in an emerging Indian market.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between self‐leadership behaviors in a self‐managed work team environment and relevant organizational variables, i.e. supervisory trust, decision‐making, feedback and team goal setting.

Data were collected on‐site over a period of three days from employees working in a non‐union paper mill located in a small rural community in the northwestern region of the USA. The survey was completed by 141 employees, representing a 99 per cent response rate. Self‐leadership, supervisory trust, decision‐making, feedback and team goal setting were measured using different scales.

The results indicated that supervisors, who give feedback, and who are perceived as trusting, and encouraging innovative behaviors contribute to the development of self‐leadership behaviors of rehearsal, self‐goal setting, self‐criticism, self‐reinforcement, self‐expectation and self‐observation. In addition, providing team training, fostering communication within the team, and allowing the team members to make work related decisions also enhance the movement toward self‐management.

The study relied on self‐report data, thereby allowing for the possibility of same source bias. However this is a common problem with cross‐sectional designs.

The paper is of value in pointing out that a different approach to leadership is required in a self‐managed work team environment, and by suggesting that building trust, fostering communication within the team, giving feedback and encouraging goal setting, innovative behaviors, and decision‐making can contribute to the development of self‐leadership behaviors important to the success and effectiveness of self‐managed work teams. Organizations should therefore through training programs encourage the development of these behaviors.

Emerging in the literature on organizational design is the question of the efficacy of self‐managed work groups. From task‐forces and matrix prescriptions of the 1970s, imperatives towards de‐centralization, networked capabilities and self‐managed teams seem to be part of the IT‐driven prescriptions emanating from contemporary re‐structuring and social re‐engineering of workplaces. This article explores some interesting dysfunctionality dynamics of corporate “citizenship” behaviour in de‐centralized contexts and suggests the necessity to study, in some further depth, the unquestioned virtues of self‐regulated and de‐centralized teams. As the article implies, cultural engineering, leadership dynamics and complex motivation/citizenship behaviour within such organized settings also require critical re‐examination.

The purpose of this viewpoint is to argue a case for self‐managed learning in organizations.

The piece is based on research carried out by Strategic Developments International on organizational learning.

The paper discovers standard assumptions by many trainers about what they need to do are shown to be faulty.

Organizations can look at their own practice and assess if they are responding to knowledge about learning.Originality/valueThe use of Quantum Theory as an exemplar of a paradigm shift is unique in the context of articles on organizational learning. The value of the paper is also apparent in its challenge to misguided organizational practices.

This article aims to provide a theoretical unifying framework for flexible organizational forms, such as so-called adhocracies and network organizations.

In this article, organization practices that are typical of the software industry are analyzed and re-interpreted by means of foundational concepts of organization science. It is shown that one and the same logic is at work in all flexible organizations.

Coordination modes can be fruitfully employed to characterize flexible organizations. In particular, standardization is key in order to obtain flexibility, provided that a novel sort of coordination by standardization is added to those that have been conceptualized hitherto.

This article highlights one necessary condition for organizations to be flexible. Further aspects, only cursorily mentioned in this paper, need to be addressed in order to obtain a complete picture.

A theory of organizational flexibility constitutes a guide for organizational design. This article suggests the non-obvious prescription that the boundary conditions of individual behavior must be standardized in order to achieve operational flexibility.

This theoretical framework can be profitably employed in management classes.

Currently, flexible organizations are only understood in terms of lists of instances. This article shows that apparently heterogeneous case-studies share common features in fact.

Both the learning organization literature and the self‐managed work team literature have alluded to the potential links between teamwork and learning. However, as yet the link between these two concepts remains undeveloped. This study uses a survey of a random sample of 200 Australian organizations to empirically examine the relationships between self‐managed work teams and the learning organization using performance indicators as a medium. It was found that the learning organization concept displays a moderate to strong link with three measures of performance used in this study: knowledge performance, financial performance and customer satisfaction. Although the self‐managed work team concept did not display any significant relationship with performance, the qualitative component of the survey did emphasize that there is a common belief that self‐managed teams can increase performance in the right setting. While an insignificant relationship between self‐managed teams and the learning organization was also found, this study suggests some methodological concerns for future research into the relationship between self‐managed teams and the learning organization.

By combining the influence tactics and team development literatures, this paper aims to propose a new team-level approach to influence tactics in self-managed teams and a temporal account of the extent to which team-level influence tactics are associated with team performance as a dynamic process.

Using 75 self-managed teams, we examined the relationship between the proportion of team members who tend to use each influence tactic to a high degree and team performance at initial versus advanced stages of team development.

Results demonstrated at initial stages of team development, a high proportion of team members who tend to use assertiveness was detrimental to team performance, whereas at advanced stages of team development, a high proportion of team members tending to use ingratiation was detrimental, while rationality was positively associated with team performance. Additionally, a Fuzzy Qualitative Comparative Analysis showed that at advanced stages of team development, tactics configuration matters.

This study sets the stage for a team-level theory of influence tactics by examining the relationship between the proportion of team members who tend to use influence tactics to a high degree and team performance at initial versus advanced stages of team development, and the configurations of tactics associated with better team performance at these developmental stages. While the individual-level literature on influence tactics is based on notions of power and politics, in a team context and specifically with self-managed teams, there is a need to integrate theories of team processes and dynamics to understand how influence tactics are associated with performance.

The introduction of employee empowerment through a self‐managed work teams programme into an organization further requires the introduction of multifaceted changes in person‐job relationships and the whole organizational hierarchy. The self‐managed teams concept can be seen as a strategy to increase motivation, quality, productivity, customer satisfaction and to sustain high performance. Self‐managed teams serve as the main building blocks of the organization. However, they are not simple or easy to create, develop and support. Companies must realize that it takes time, training and resources to implement teams and reap their rewards.

The purpose of this paper was to examine the impact of superleader behaviors in self‐managed work teams, on organization commitment, job satisfaction and organization self‐esteem.

Data were collected on‐site over a period of three days from employees working in a non‐union paper mill located in a small rural community in the northwestern region of the USA. The survey was completed by 141 employees, representing a 9 per cent response rate. Self‐leadership, organization commitment, job satisfaction and organization self‐esteem were all measured using different instruments.

The results indicated that teams groups that were led by a supervisor who exhibited the characteristics of a superleader had higher levels of organization commitment, job satisfaction, and organization self‐esteem.

The study is based on a small sample and relied on self‐report data, thereby allowing for the possibility of same source bias. However, this is a common problem with cross‐sectional designs.

Leading in a self‐managed work team environment requires a unique approach to leadership. The results of this study illustrated that superleader behaviors result in some beneficial outcomes for organizations including enhanced levels of organization commitment, job satisfaction and organization self‐esteem. It behoves organizations to encourage, through training programs, the development of these behaviors.