Search results

In this study, the construct validity and effectiveness of a newly identified influence tactic, organizational appeal, is tested. Utilizing a sample of practicing professional accountants, study results show that organizational appeal is distinct from other influence tactics, is perceived to be used frequently by supervisors, and is effective at influencing subordinates. The organizational appeal influence tactic could be particularly useful in situations where accounting supervisors and managers use proactive tactics to influence others to complete tasks or make decisions; to influence outsiders (e.g., suppliers, clients, government agents) over whom they have little authority; and where other influence tactics are not effective or appropriate.

Teams are best positioned for success when certain enabling conditions are in place such as the right mix of individuals. Effective team staffing considers team members’ knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) as well as the configuration of team member KSAOs and their relations, called team composition. In practice, however, how to integrate team composition considerations into team staffing to facilitate outcomes such as team cohesion can seem nebulous. The purpose of this chapter is to describe how team member KSAOs and their configurations and relations affect team cohesion, and suggest how this information can inform team staffing. We frame team cohesion as an aspect of team human capital to understand when it may be an important consideration for staffing. We describe multilevel considerations in staffing cohesive teams. We summarize theories that link team composition to team cohesion via interpersonal attraction, a shared team identity, and team task commitment. Finally, we propose a six-step approach for staffing cohesive teams, and describe a few areas for future research.

Cohesion is a key contributor to team effectiveness, leading to great interest in understanding how to diagnose, monitor, and enhance it in practice. However, there is great inconsistency in how cohesion is conceptualized and measured, making it difficult to compare findings across studies, and therefore limiting the ability to advance science and practice. To begin addressing these issues, we draw from qualitative and quantitative analyses and extract themes indicating what matters most for effective cohesion measurement. Such themes are presented around six major questions – who, what, when, where, why, and how – as they pertain to each major component of the cohesion measurement process. Emerging approaches to cohesion measurement and corresponding avenues for future research are also discussed.

In this chapter we discuss attitudinal and affective factors in the context of science teams. We review some of the key findings on conflict, trust, and cohesion in teams and discuss the differentiation between team-related and task-related definitions of each. In so doing, we discuss their relevance to team effectiveness in science teams and provide guidance on notional areas of research for understanding how these are related to effectiveness in science teams.

Teams do not operate in a vacuum, but in specific real-world contexts. For many teams, this context includes high-demand, high-stress conditions which can negatively impact team functioning. In this chapter, we discuss how stress may impact team cohesion and examine stress mitigation strategies to overcome these effects.

The relationship between team cohesion and individual well-being is clear. Being part of a highly cohesive team is likely to contribute to the well-being of individual team members. A multidirectional relationship is likely as individual well-being is also likely to contribute to team cohesion. This chapter examines such critical relationships in the context of team performance. To do so, we draw on the dominant literatures related to these concepts, focusing on two specific types of team cohesion – social cohesion and task cohesion – and two specific types of well-being – subjective well-being (SWB) and psychological well-being (PWB). We contend that social cohesion and SWB are likely to be strongly related, while task cohesion and PWB are likely to share a strong relationship. Therefore, the chapter focuses on the evidence regarding the transactional relationship between social team cohesion and SWB, and transactional relationship between task team cohesion and PWB. Of course, we also recognize the close relationships between social and task cohesion, and between SWB and PWB. We consider the practical implications of studying the relationships between these concepts and put forth a number of recommendations for future research in this area.

This chapter shares ideas about how to encourage students to take responsibility for their individual learning and their role as a team member through the use of team contracts and peer evaluations. We also share how instructors can more easily determine individual grades for team projects. Team contracts can help instill a sense of responsibility, encourage accountability, and add structure by promoting the clarification of task-specific roles. In conjunction with team contracts, peer evaluations can reinforce the responsibilities assigned through the contract. Peer evaluations provide an opportunity for students to objectively and thoughtfully evaluate team member contributions to the collective result and reward individual participants more equitably related to the outcome obtained.

The chapter provides discussion and examples of student-developed team contracts and a sample peer evaluation form along with a discussion of how these documents have been used in the classroom. Using responses from a convenience survey of undergraduate and graduate students, we conclude by examining student feedback to suggest patterns of the perceptions of students toward the use of these tools.

The field of organization development is fragmented and lacks a coherent and integrated theory and method for developing an effective organization. A 20-year action research program led to the development and evaluation of the Strategic Fitness Process (SFP) – a platform by which senior leaders, with the help of consultants, can have an honest, collective, and public conversation about their organization's alignment with espoused strategy and values. The research has identified a syndrome of six silent barriers to effectiveness and a dynamic theory of organizational effectiveness. Empirical evidence from the 20-year study demonstrates that SFP always enables truth to speak to power safely, and in a majority of cases enables senior teams to transform silent barriers into strengths, realign their organization's design and strategic management process with strategy and values, and in a few cases employ SFP as an ongoing learning and governance process. Implications for organization and leadership development and corporate governance are discussed.