Beyond Team Types and Taxonomies: A Dimensional Scaling Conceptualization for Team Description

Hollenbeck, John R.; Beersma, Bianca; Schouten, Maartje E.

doi:10.5465/amr.2010.0181

Cited by 267 publications

(286 citation statements)

References 86 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

276

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The need to assess effectiveness is particularly relevant in this case because the distinctiveness of the group types in the current typology have not been confirmed empirically; a limitation held in common with most other group typologies (e.g., Devine, 2002;Hollenbeck et al, 2012;McGrath, 1984;Steiner, 1972;Wildman et al, 2012). With regard to identifying an ideal classification, the evaluation of typology effectiveness involves three primary aspects: internal validity, external validity, and utility (Fleishman & Zaccaro, 1992).…”

Section: Typology Effectivenessmentioning

confidence: 98%

Seeing the “we” in “me” sports: The need to consider individual sport team environments.

Evans¹,

Eys²,

Bruner³

2012

Canadian Psychology / Psychologie canadienne

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most individual sport settings involve groups, as athletes often train in a team environment even though they compete individually and often in opposition to their teammates. Despite the pervasiveness of individual sport, group dynamics research has almost exclusively investigated team sports because team members rely on one another during the competitive group task. However, the reliance on task interdependence to dichotomize sport environments into one of two categories (i.e., team or individual) overlooks further differences in how members rely on each other (e.g., interdependence for individual and group-level outcomes or resources). The purpose of this article is to promote the investigation of group dynamics and social influence in individual sport by proposing a typology that distinguishes types of sport group environments according to levels of structural interdependence. This typology identifies six distinct sport team types and leads to a number of relevant theoretical and practice-based propositions. This work is a call for increased group dynamics research involving individual sport environments that acknowledges the multiple forms of interdependence that are present both in the group structure and the perceptions held by athletes.

show abstract

Section: Typology Effectivenessmentioning

confidence: 98%

Seeing the “we” in “me” sports: The need to consider individual sport team environments.

Evans¹,

Eys²,

Bruner³

2012

Canadian Psychology / Psychologie canadienne

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, based on Compeau & Higgins (1995) and Compeau et al's (1999) measure, to obtain a final measure of actual usage, respondents were asked to estimate, in minutes, the duration of time on a typical workday during the previous 3-month adoption period that they spent using the global ledger system. Proficient usage Given that adopters had to utilize several different applications in the ledger system software in order to do their jobs, we developed a weighted composite (formative) measure to capture proficient usage Given that most proficiency tests are commonly developed by subject matter experts and because using their judgments has been frequently recommended as a way to improve the operationalization of a measure (e.g., Gandhi & Sauser, 2008;Hollenbeck et al, 2012), we impaneled 15 subject matter experts to operationalize proficient usage and establish the content validity of our measure. The panel consisted of the five original designers of the global ledger system and 10 senior financial analysts who had extensively pre-tested the system as end-users and were highly proficient users.…”

Section: Post-adoption Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

The longitudinal impact of enterprise system users’ pre-adoption expectations and organizational support on post-adoption proficient usage

Veiga

Keupp²,

Floyd

et al. 2014

European Journal of Information Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although enterprise systems (ES) are ubiquitous, many firms report less than stellar payoffs from these costly investments, with underutilization often attributed to failures in the implementation process. Unfortunately, research has not provided sufficient insights into these failures, in part because it has focused on actual usage, as opposed to proficient usage, as the benchmark for successful implementation. Moreover, research has not generally examined how the adoption process unfolds over time, thus overlooking potential underlying mechanisms that may help explain how adopters achieve proficiency. To begin addressing these shortcomings, we study how adopters' pre-adoption expectations, enacted over time, can influence their post-adoption proficiency, by shaping how and why they spend time using the system during the adoption period. We analyzed time-lagged survey data from 153 financial analysts, required to adopt new ES-based software, at a multinational bank. We found that adopters who hold pre-adoption expectations reflecting greater internal and external motives to adopt the system as well as systematically integrate it into their work routines are more apt to use the system in ways that enhance their cumulative knowledge of it, and subsequently develop higher levels of proficiency post-adoption. Moreover, greater organizational support enhanced the impact of adopters' expectations on proficiency, except when their actual use is low in which case organizational support had an adverse effect.

show abstract

“…This can be linked to the dimension of skill differentiation mentioned by Hollenbeck, et al (2012): this means that members have more or less specialised knowledge or functional capacities that make them more or less difficult to replace. As such, in interdisciplinary teams teachers have expertise in different subject areas.…”

Section: Discipline Level: Disciplinary or Interdisciplinarymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These different categorisations overlap to some extent and the teams mentioned in the literature appear to fit into these categories to a certain degree. For that reason, the abovementioned existing categories, together with typologies of teams in general (not teacher teams in specific) (Devine et al, 1999;Hollenbeck et al, 2012;Cohen & Bailey, 1997), will serve as a starting point for the typology that is made here. They will be supplemented with other important categories and dimensions that play an important role in the literature discussing teacher teams.…”

Section: Transcending the Different Existing Categorisations: A Typologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The crossing of these two typologies results in four team types: ad hoc project teams, ongoing project teams, ad hoc production teams and ongoing production teams. The article of Hollenbeck et al (2012) searched to transcend different existing team typologies relying on a dimensional scaling approach based on three underlying constructs: skill differentiation, authority differentiation and temporal stability.…”

Section: Team Typologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Beyond individualism and isolation in schools: What types of teacher teams are there in schools? Or can we merely speak about groups?

Vangrieken¹,

Dochy²,

Raes³

et al. 2013

FLR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Beyond Team Types and Taxonomies: A Dimensional Scaling Conceptualization for Team Description

Cited by 267 publications

References 86 publications

Seeing the “we” in “me” sports: The need to consider individual sport team environments.

Seeing the “we” in “me” sports: The need to consider individual sport team environments.

The longitudinal impact of enterprise system users’ pre-adoption expectations and organizational support on post-adoption proficient usage

Beyond individualism and isolation in schools: What types of teacher teams are there in schools? Or can we merely speak about groups?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About