Search results

The characteristics of individual members and how the members are assembled in a group are critical foundations for various group processes and outcomes and often determine important staffing and hiring decisions in organizations. This chapter offers an overview of the history of group composition research across multiple disciplines and identifies three distinct approaches to studying group composition with an emphasis on the role of communication. Scholars treat group composition as a cause that leads to group outcomes, a consequence that results from social and psychological processes, or a process in response to dynamic team environments. A synthesis of previous research reveals that studying group composition as a cause has dominated the field and that the role of communication in group composition has gained little attention. The chapter concludes with a set of future research directions targeting the new digital environment, the role of communication, and research methodologies with special attention to the consequence- and process-oriented approaches.

Team composition research considers how configurations (e.g., team-level diversity) of team members’ attributes (e.g., personality, values, demographics) influence important outcomes. Our chapter describes key issues in understanding and effectively managing team composition over time.

We discuss how context shapes team composition. We review empirical research that examined relationships between team composition, and team processes and emergent properties over multiple time points. We review research that examined how composition can be effectively managed over the lifecycle of a team.

Context shapes the nature of team composition itself (e.g., dynamic composition). To the extent that membership change, fluid boundaries, and multiple team membership are present should be accounted for in research and practice. The research we reviewed indicated no, or fleeting effects for surface-level (e.g., demographics) composition on the development of team processes and emergent properties over time, although there were exceptions. Conversely, deep-level composition affected team processes and emergent properties early in a team’s lifespan as well as later. Team composition information can be used in staffing; it can also inform how to best leverage training, leadership, rewards, tasks, and technology to promote team effectiveness.

Teams are the building blocks of contemporary organizations. Understanding and effectively managing team composition over time can increase the likelihood of team.

Our chapter provides novel insights into key issues in understanding and effectively managing team composition over time.

This article considers how the evaluation of research teams can better account for the challenges of transdisciplinarity, including their larger team size and more diverse and permeable membership, as well as the tensions between institutional pressures on individuals to publish and team goals.

An evaluation team was retained from 2015 to 2020 to conduct a comprehensive external evaluation of a five-year EPSCoR-funded program undertaken by a transdisciplinary research team. The formative portion of the evaluation involved monitoring the program’s developmental progress, while the summative portion tracked observable program outputs and outcomes as evidence of progress toward short- and long-term goals. The evaluation team systematically reviewed internal assessments and gathered additional data for an external assessment via periodic participation in team meetings, participant interviews and an online formative team survey (starting in Year 2).

Survey participants had a better understanding of the project’s “Goals and Vision” compared to other aspects. “Work Roles,” and particularly the timeliness of decision-making, were perceived to be a “Big Problem,” specifically in regard to heavy travel by key managers/leadership. For “Communication Channels,” Year 2 tensions included differing views on the extent to which management should be collaborative versus “hierarchical.” These concerns about communication demonstrate that differences in language, culture or status impact the efficiency and working relationship of the team. “Authorship Credit/Intellectual Property” was raised most consistently each year as an area of concern.

The study involves the use of a unique survey approach.

Intellectual capital (IC) has been suggested to be a means by which firms develop capabilities that enhance competitive advantage. There is, however, a paucity of empirical research linking IC with innovation in construction firms, leaving the IC–innovation link in such environments unclear. The purpose of this paper is to advance understanding of the relationships between IC components and strategic exploratory and exploitative innovation in construction contractor firms.

The sample comprised 135 management personnel from construction contractor firms in Hong Kong. Data were collected through a questionnaire survey using validated scales in the literature which were subjected to confirmatory factor analysis. Hierarchical linear regression was used to test the hypotheses while partial least squares structural equation modelling was used for post hoc analysis.

Social capital (SC) and organisational capital (OC) each have significant positive linear effects on exploratory and exploitative innovation, while human capital (HC) has no direct linear effect on either innovation type. HC, however, affects both exploratory and exploitative innovation through SC or OC. None of the three IC dimensions has a significant quadratic effect on exploratory or exploitative innovation. The findings suggest that in construction contractor firms increases in the accumulation of SC and OC are associated with proportional increases in exploratory and exploitative innovation.

Despite the growth of studies connecting IC to innovation, the link between IC and exploratory and exploitative innovation has focussed on linear effects in units or on radical innovation outcomes. This study makes a novel contextual contribution by exploring both linear and quadratic effects of IC dimensions on strategic exploratory and exploitative innovation processes in construction contractor firms. The insights contribute to advance knowledge on the relationship between IC and innovation categories in different industrial settings.

Past research involving turnover in work teams has largely focused on turnover as a dependent variable. With the growing trend towards more fluid, project-based teams, the effects of team membership changes on team processes and outcomes are in need of theoretical development and systematic study. Building on previous work by others (e.g. Arrow & McGrath, 1995; Marks, Mathieu & Zacarro, 2001), we develop a framework for understanding the effects of the rate of membership change, or team fluidity, on emergent states and processes in teams. Specifically, we: (a) discuss the theoretical underpinnings of team fluidity; (b) review past team research involving turnover; (c) make theoretically-grounded propositions about the effects of team fluidity on emergent states and process variables as well as additional propositions about boundary conditions; (d) discuss implications for human resource management practices; and (e) identify methodological challenges, including measurement issues, in studying team fluidity.

In the extant research on online knowledge communities (OKCs), little attention has been paid to the influence of membership fluidity on the coevolution of the social and knowledge systems. This article aims to fill this gap.

Based on the attraction-selection-attrition (ASA) framework, this paper constructs a simulation model to study the coevolution of these two systems under different levels of membership fluidity.

By analyzing the evolution of these systems with the vector autoregression (VAR) method, we find that social and knowledge systems become more orderly as the coevolution progresses. Furthermore, in communities with low membership fluidity, the microlevel of the social system (i.e. users) drives the coevolution, whereas in communities with high membership fluidity, the microlevel of the knowledge system (i.e. users' views) drives the coevolution.

This paper extends the application of the ASA framework and enriches the literature on membership fluidity of online communities and the literature on driving factors for coevolution of the social and knowledge systems in OKCs. On a practical level, our work suggests that community administrators should adopt different strategies for different membership fluidity to efficiently promote the coevolution of the social and knowledge systems in OKCs.

In this chapter we examine various human resource management (HRM) implications involved in the leadership of fluid teams. Leadership of fluid teams, which are distinguished by their dynamic composition, requires consideration of issues that may not be as pertinent for stable teams. In particular, we focus on the concept of familiarity. Composing and leading teams with members exhibiting varying degrees of familiarity with one another creates obstacles to effective and efficient functioning and may ultimately lead to poor performance. With this in mind, leaders must pay particular attention to issues of coordination, and composition such that a broad range of generalizable teamwork skills exists within the team. Within this chapter, we explain the concepts of fluid teams, team leadership within fluid teams, and other relevant concepts related to the formation of familiarity. Next, we thoroughly review extant empirical and theoretical research within these areas. We identify areas of correspondence among the various concepts and findings of the reviewed studies and generate an integrated model of fluid team leadership. To conclude, we highlight the distinct HRM implications associated with the use, and leadership, of fluid teams.

Multiteam systems (MTSs) have been employed across numerous organizations and occupations (e.g., healthcare, emergency disaster response, business, and military) to achieve complex goals over time. As MTSs are inherently different than team level and organizational level theories, this chapter highlights the defining features of these dynamic systems through a temporal lens. Thus, the main purpose of our chapter is to address the challenges and issues concerning MTSs over time in order to provide a future agenda to guide researchers and practitioners.

To explore temporality throughout this chapter, we leverage two key MTSs frameworks along with contributions from the literature to produce a review, which demonstrates the extent of MTS theoretical and practical findings. After reviewing the definitional components of MTSs, we highlight various compositional, linkage, and developmental attributes that operate within a system. We then expand upon these attributes to consider the structural features of the system that enhance boundaries between component teams (i.e., differentiation) and may disrupt the system over time (i.e., dynamism).

After reviewing and integrating current MTS literature, we provide a new conceptual framework for MTSs and their temporal complexities. We offer several methodologies that managers and researchers can employ to assess these complex systems and suggest practical recommendations and areas for future research as we continue to study MTSs.

Our original conceptual framework considers MTSs through a dynamic lens developing over time and suggests the need for future research to build upon this perspective.