Search results

Prior experimental budgeting research has focused primarily on individuals’ budget setting and little experimental research has examined budgeting in a group setting. Using a controlled experiment, this study extends prior participative budgeting research by examining the effects of aggregation levels of performance feedback and task interdependence on budgetary slack and the effects of different levels of feedback on group performance in a group participative budget setting.

The results suggest that aggregation levels of performance feedback differentially impact budgetary slack and group performance. Providing both group and individual performance feedback increases group performance and reduces budgetary slack compared to providing group performance feedback only. Providing information about other subordinates’ performance further increases group performance and reduces budgetary slack beyond the effects of providing individual workers information only about their own performance. The results indicate that task interdependence also affects the level of budgetary slack. Specifically, high task interdependence groups created more budgetary slack than did low task interdependence groups.

To reap the value in diverse teams, leaders may try to manipulate structural interdependence – through task design – to foster synergistic collaboration. However, ambiguity about the nature and appropriate intersections of members’ unique and valuable cognitive perspectives can make it difficult to fully anticipate collaborative activity in task design. Here, teams need emergent interdependence – members must develop the desire and expectation to work interdependently for the benefit of the work. We therefore present a model of how leaders can promote emergent interdependence for diverse team success, identifying key antecedents and discussing psychological safety as a condition which can enhance their efforts.

The process approach to multi-level organizational behavior is based on the assumption that multi-level organizational behavior is processual in nature. This article defines group and organizational processes and their representation as process frameworks. Both functional and inclusional classes of levels exist, each of which has at least five categories of levels. All ten categories are special cases of process frameworks. This article provides examples of each category level, which it uses to illustrate new models of organizational work, extended models of interdependence, a new typology of theories based on their levels of processes, and a new tool for survey research called knobby analyses. After explaining the basic idea of knobby analysis, the article briefly describes the processual theory of the organizational hologram, the use of linear programming, and causal-chain analysis to provide multi-level explanations of employee opinion data. These ideas are embodied in conducting a strategic organizational diagnosis, which is the first stage of organizational design. Organizational design encompasses multiple stages, each of which itself involves multiple, multi-level phenomena and analyses. The basic point is that the processual nature of multi-level organizational phenomena gives more hope for improvements in theory building and their application if one uses the process approach rather than a variable approach.

This chapter provides a new theory for organizational leadership in which an organization's leadership, authority, management, power, and environments (LAMPE) are made coherent and integrated. Organizations work best if their LAMPE is coherent, integrated, and operational. The chapter begins by introducing basic concepts, such as structures, processes, process frameworks, task–role matrices, interdependence uncertainty, and virtual-like organizational arrangements. The LAMPE theory is then built upon this base. Leadership is defined as the processes of initiating, enabling, implementing, and sustaining change in an organization. Authority is defined as the legal right to preempt the outcome of a decision or a process. Management is defined in term of its major processes. Power is the control of interdependence uncertainty. When 29 leadership practices are introduced, it is possible to link them to all five of LAMPE's constructs. A number of conclusions are derived, in the form of 36 propositions: 5 dealing with leadership, 5 focusing on leadership requirements matching, 4 relating to leadership effectiveness, 5 dealing with leadership capacity, 4 concerning the benefits of distributed leadership, and 13 linking LAMPE to the theory of the organizational hologram.

In this chapter, the authors theorize organizational integration by extending, elaborating, and combining various theoretical perspectives, such as structural contingency theory, organization economics, and organizational culture. The aim of this study is to provide the foundation for a holistic theory of integration that examines the different relevant facets of integration and a comprehensive set of tools – integrative devices – by which integration can be sought by those who design the organization. To this end, the authors examine the integration challenge that arises from various types of subunit interdependence – pooled, sequential, and reciprocal – and theorize which configurations of integrative devices are more likely to be effective in a given task environment. The authors close by discussing directions for future research on organizational integration.

The verbal and nonverbal behaviors that individuals display (i.e., their communication styles) influence the status positions they attain in their task groups. Prior research has generally concluded that communication behaviors that convey agency (i.e., characteristics denoting intelligence, ambition, and dominance) are more effective for obtaining a high-status position in a task group than communication behaviors that convey communality (i.e., characteristics denoting warmth, sincerity, and agreeableness). The message from these prior studies is that it is more status enhancing to be smart than to be social. The objective of this chapter is to challenge this assertion and argue that in some task groups it may be more status enhancing to be social rather than to be smart. I suggest that the status benefits of particular communication styles depend on the characteristics of the group to which an individual belongs to. Thus, in contrast to prior research in this area, I argue for a more contextual approach to the study of communication styles and status conferral, focusing on how structural and process differences between groups influence how the group members’ words and actions are evaluated.

Most multi-level studies are cross-sectional and focus on a certain point in time, though various changes within levels may occur over time. This chapter presents a statistical method for assessing whether the degree of interdependency within a group has changed over time, using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) as an indicator of the degree of homogeneity within the groups. It then shows how to apply this method using the SAS MIXED procedure. The problem was motivated by a study in which 120 subjects were divided into 40 groups of three. In a portion of the study, collective efficacy was the dependent variable measured for each subject under four different conditions (two levels of task interdependence at two points in time). ICC was used as a measure of group homogeneity with respect to collective efficacy, and the problem was how to compare the dependent ICCs associated with the different conditions.

Technology is often defined as a valuable firm resource particularly relative to marketing functions in the organization (Barua, Kriebel, & Mukhopadhyay, 1995; Bharadwaj, 2000; Christensen, Johnson, & Rigby, 2002). When resources are customized to match a marketing strategy, they become firm specific, and thus central to firm performance. Marketing employees also may be defined as an essential resource, in the context of key marketing activities that need to be accomplished (Barney, 1986, 2001; Coff, 2002; Dess & Picken, 1999). Because both employees and technology play key roles, we ground this study in the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm (Barney, 1991, 2001; Peteraf, 1993; Wernerfelt, 1984).

In this chapter we study job design. Do organizations plan precisely how the job is to be done ex ante, or ask workers to determine the process as they go? We first model this decision and predict complementarity among these following job attributes: multitasking, discretion, skills, and interdependence of tasks. We argue that characteristics of the firm and industry (e.g., product and technology, organizational change) can explain observed patterns and trends in job design. We then use novel data on these job attributes to examine these issues. As predicted, job designs tend to be “coherent” across these attributes within the same job. Job designs also tend to follow similar patterns across jobs in the same firm, and especially in the same establishment: when one job is optimized ex ante, others are more likely to be also. There is evidence that firms segregate different types of job designs across different establishments. At the industry level, both computer usage and R&D spending are related to job design decisions.