Search results

In the digital age, enterprise social media (ESM) use is becoming more prevalent in the workplace. The “group” function is a very important part in the use of ESM. This paper explores how the characteristics of employees' task requirements affect their group participation behaviors on the ESM.

Based on information processing theory, the authors establish a two-stage research model to explore the impact of task characteristics on employees' online group participation behavior in the context of ESM. Data were collected using a survey of 341 Chinese employees.

The results indicate that (1) task interdependence was positively correlated with participation in small closed groups; (2) task complexity was positively correlated with participation in small groups, large closed groups and open professional groups and (3) task non-routineness was positively correlated with participation in small groups, large closed groups and open professional groups.

This study builds on the literature on task characteristics, information processing theory and employees' online group participation behavior, contributing to the research on ESM in the field of information systems and providing guidance for enterprise practice.

This study examines whether there are unintended consequences that emerge from status interventions in task groups in relation to cohesion and solidarity. Past theorists have argued that inconsistent status structures produce weaker levels of cohesion and solidarity in comparison to consistent status structures.

Data come from an online experiment involving mixed-sex dyads interacting in one of three conditions. Participants individually completed an ambiguous problem-solving task and then worked together over Zoom audio to form a group decision. In the three conditions, participants were either given no performance feedback before the problem-solving task or were informed the male or the female participant performed better on a pretest related to the task. The conversations were recorded and analyzed using measures related to paraverbal synchronization and accommodation.

In terms of self-reported cohesion, there appeared to be a difference, albeit a weak one, in only the inconsistent-status condition, with female participants reporting higher levels of cohesion in comparison to males. However, in terms of solidarity, there was no significant difference between the conditions.

Although inconsistent status structures were associated with weaker perceptions of cohesion, it did not appear to impact solidarity like theorists have suggested. Status structures do not appear to impact group solidarity.

The nature of group membership in conjunction with status consistency/inconsistency may produce the significant differences in solidarity that theorists have suggested.

To date, there has been little empirical examination of how status consistency affects cohesion and solidarity. Relatedly, the current study advances the research on vocal accommodation by analyzing status and solidarity simultaneously.

It is suggested that, to be successful, innovation teams should be small and consist of people with key expertise who want to participate and develop new solutions within their organisations. When it comes to conducting innovation work, I suggest shared leadership may be a factor influencing success. In this chapter, a theoretical framework is presented on the shared leadership of innovation teams. The key to establishing shared leadership in innovation teams is to plan for it as the team is created, not after the team has already been formed, as this may result in various problems in the intended innovation project. The proposed framework details key aspects to consider; some of which are related to external factors such as management and resources, and some to internal factors such as the team’s size, competencies, and their ability to develop norms and ways of working together. The proposed framework is applicable for managers, innovation leaders, and team members, and contributes to previous research on shared leadership and innovation leadership. Further research on the proposed framework is suggested.

Team social capital (TSC) has been attracting increasing research attention aiming to explore team effectiveness through within- and cross-team resource conduits. This study bridges two disconnected theories – TSC and evolutionary theory – to examine gaming clans and analyzes mechanisms of the clans' TSC building from an evolutionary perspective.

This research draws longitudinal data from a sample of gaming teams (N = 1,267) from anonymized player data from the game World of Tanks spanning 32 months. The authors explored teams' evolutionary patterns using hidden Markov models and applied longitudinal multilevel modeling to test hypotheses.

The results showed that teams of different sizes and levels of evolutionary fitness vary in team closure and bridging social capital. The authors also found that larger teams are more effective than smaller ones. The positive association between team-bridging social capital and effectiveness is more substantial for smaller teams.

This research advances the theoretical development of TSC by including the constructs of teams' evolutionary status when analyzing strategic social capital building. Adding to existing literature studying the outcome of TSC, this research also found a moderating effect of team size between TSC and effectiveness. Finally, this study also contributes to a longitudinal view of TSC and found significant evolutionary patterns of teams' membership, TSC, and effectiveness.

Neurodiversity refers to a spectrum of neurological differences. Little is known about the benefits and challenges of employing neurodivergent individuals in the retail industry and how knowing neurodivergent individuals/neurodiversity practices are linked to benefits/challenges. This study provides these insights using the lenses of the value-in-diversity perspective, stigma theory and intergroup contact theory.

Data were collected from an online survey of retail supervisors and co-workers from Australia, resulting in 502 responses from various retail organizations.

The findings indicate that supervisors have higher awareness of neurodiversity and perceived benefits of neurodivergent employees. Knowing neurodivergents was positively associated with perceived benefits and disclosure challenges and negatively associated with equity and inclusion challenges. Neurodiversity practices were positively associated with benefits of neurodivergent employees, negatively associated with disclosure challenges and equity and inclusion challenges in small stores, and positively associated with equity and inclusion challenges in large stores.

Current empirical research on workplace neurodiversity is scarce. This study provides pioneering evidence for awareness of workplace neurodiversity in the retail industry and the impact of knowing neurodivergent employees/neurodiversity practices on benefits and challenges. It differentiates between supervisors' and co-workers’ perceptions, highlighting the importance of exposure to information in reducing stigma.

Diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) have become prioritized goals of business, such as hiring more women and racial minorities. This study adds to the body of research regarding the value of diversity in organizations by examining the relationship between diversity at the workforce level and the financial performance of the organization. The empirical results of prior research have provided mixed results, finding mainly positive, but also negative, and nonsignificant relationships (Sharma et al., 2020; Vlas et al., 2022). The purpose of this study is to examine the current employment status of women and racial minorities in top US companies, then analyze if a correlation exists between a company’s profit margin and its percentage of women and racial minority employees and managers.

This study examined the top 200 companies in the Fortune 500 companies; these are the largest companies by revenue in the USA. Companies were ranked according to each variable (% of women employees, % of racial minority employees, % of women managers and % of racial minority managers) and then divided into equal quartiles. The mean profit margin for the top quartile was compared with the mean profit margin for the bottom quartile. T-tests were used to determine whether significant differences in profit margin exist between companies. This methodology of comparing top and bottom quartiles was developed in prior studies.

Fortune 200 companies have an average of 40% women and also 40% racial minorities in their workforce. Both women and racial minorities account for a smaller percentage of managers. Women account for 34% of managers, while racial minorities account for 29%. There is a significant positive relationship between profit margin and two of the variables. Companies with 45% or more women managers have a significantly higher profit margin than companies with the lowest percentages of women managers. Companies with 48% or more racial minority employees have a significantly higher profit margin than companies with the lowest percentages of racial minority employees. These findings are in-line with the existing body of research that has found mixed impacts of diversity on firm performance (cf. Hoobler et al., 2018; Leung et al., 2022) and draws attention to the need to consider the impact of gender and racial diversity on firms at various management levels within the firm to better understand the impact that increasing diversity has on firm performance (cf. Curado et al., 2022).

This paper adds to the body of knowledge by assessing the current status of women and racial minorities in top US companies and, then, analyzing if a correlation exists between a company’s profit margin and the number of women and racial minority employees and managers. Findings provide companies with further incentive to maintain DEI as a prioritized goal.

Managers must make numerous strategic decisions in order to initiate and implement a business model innovation (BMI). This paper examines how managers perceive the management team interacts when making BMI decisions. The paper also investigates how group biases and board members’ risk willingness affect this process.

Empirical data were collected through 26 in-depth interviews with German managing directors from 13 companies in four industries (mobility, manufacturing, healthcare and energy) to explore three research questions: (1) What group effects are prevalent in BMI group decision-making? (2) What are the key characteristics of BMI group decisions? And (3) what are the potential relationships between BMI group decision-making and managers' risk willingness? A thematic analysis based on Gioia's guidelines was conducted to identify themes in the comprehensive dataset.

First, the results show four typical group biases in BMI group decisions: Groupthink, social influence, hidden profile and group polarization. Findings show that the hidden profile paradigm and groupthink theory are essential in the context of BMI decisions. Second, we developed a BMI decision matrix, including the following key characteristics of BMI group decision-making managerial cohesion, conflict readiness and information- and emotion-based decision behavior. Third, in contrast to previous literature, we found that individual risk aversion can improve the quality of BMI decisions.

This paper provides managers with an opportunity to become aware of group biases that may impede their strategic BMI decisions. Specifically, it points out that managers should consider the key cognitive constraints due to their interactions when making BMI decisions. This work also highlights the importance of risk-averse decision-makers on boards.

This qualitative study contributes to the literature on decision-making by revealing key cognitive group biases in strategic decision-making. This study also enriches the behavioral science research stream of the BMI literature by attributing a critical influence on the quality of BMI decisions to managers' group interactions. In addition, this article provides new perspectives on managers' risk aversion in strategic decision-making.

The purpose of this paper is to expand the use of ethnography to advance research on team science by revealing the barriers to teamwork as manifesting at institutional, cultural, and interpersonal contextual scales. The analysis suggests strategies to enhance team science's collaborative potential.

This paper considers some of the practical and analytical challenges of team science through the use of ethnographic methods. The authors formed a three-person subteam within a larger multisited, federally-funded, interdisciplinary scientific team. The authors conducted six months of participant observation, semi-structured interviews, and a focus group, using iterative deductive and inductive analyses to investigate the larger team's roles, relationships, dynamics, and tensions.

Integrating ethnography into the study of team science can uncover and mitigate barriers faced by teams at three primary levels: (1) academic culture, (2) institutional structures, and (3) interpersonal dynamics. The authors found that these three contextual factors are often taken for granted and hidden in the team science process as well as that they are interactive and influence teams at multiple scales of analysis. These outcomes are closely related to how team science is funded and implemented in academic and institutional settings.

As US federal funding initiatives continue to require scientific collaboration via inter-, multi-, and transdisciplinary research, there is little work done on how teams grapple with the practical tensions of scientific teamwork. This paper identifies and addresses many practical tensions and contextual factors across institutional and organizational structures that affect and challenge the conduct of collaborative scientific teamwork. The authors also argue that ethnography can be a method to challenge myths, understand contextual factors, and improve the goals of team science.

Employees play an essential role in interactive innovation activities in Open Innovation Communities (OICs). Nevertheless, the factors influencing employees' innovation behavior in OICs have not been studied in depth. This study selects personality traits and social network characteristics to explain why and how these two factors affect employees' innovation behavior in OICs.

Three regression models were constructed to test the relationship between personality traits, social network characteristics, and interactive innovation behaviors. The authors examined how employees' personality traits (Big Five personality traits) influence employees' innovative behavior (initiating and supporting innovation) directly in OICs and explored whether social network characteristics (social group) mediate the relationship between employees' personality traits and employees' innovation behavior.

Using empirical data on 162 employees from Salesforce's IdeaExchange, the authors found that extraversion and openness to experience have significant positive effects on employees' interactive innovation behaviors, while conscientiousness has a significant negative effect on employees' interactive innovation behaviors in OICs. Furthermore, the mediation effect test results indicated that social network characteristics have a mediating effect on the relationship between extraversion and innovative behavior, and between openness and innovative behavior.

This study analyzes how personality traits influence innovation behavior in an open innovation environment, thus enriching research related to the factors influencing interactive innovation behavior. Meanwhile, the study integrates personality, social network, and innovative behavior research streams and clearly explains the relationship between the three variables. The research findings assist firms in selecting suitable employees to participate in interactive innovation behaviors in OICs.

The inconsistent results shown in previous group faultline research have created a need for investigating the underlying mechanisms of the faultline's effects. This study focuses on clarifying the competing mediating roles of information diversity and team conflict in the nonlinear relationship between board faultlines (BF) and decision quality.

This study is empirically tested with the questionnaire data from 105 Chinese listed companies.

This study finds: (1) an inverted U-shaped curve relationship between BF and board decision quality and (2) that the joint mediating effect of team conflict and information diversity leads to the inverted U-shaped curve relationship between BF and decision quality. Specifically, BF shows a U-shaped curve relationship with team conflict and an inverted U-shaped curve relationship with information diversity. Either too weak or too strong faultlines will inhibit the positive effects of information diversity and amplify the negative effects of team conflicts, leading to low-quality decisions.

This study contributes to the research on: (1) board governance as it clarifies the effect of BF on the board decision-making process and its quality, which helps to open the black box of board decision-making and (2) group faultlines as it reveals how information diversity and team conflict can play a joint mediating role in the functioning of team faultlines.