Event criticality, urgency, and duration: Understanding how events disrupt teams and influence team leader intervention

Morgeson, Frederick P.; DeRue, D. Scott

doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.02.006

Cited by 189 publications

(229 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

223

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Teams are often formed to deal with complex, novel, and disruptive tasks and environments (Kozlowski & Bell, 2003;Morgeson, 2005;Morgeson & DeRue, 2006). The availability of other members to exchange information and support one another with their work enables teams to deal more readily with these complexities, relative to individuals working alone.…”

Section: Managerial Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Goal setting in teams: The impact of learning and performance goals on process and performance

Nahrgang

DeRue

Hollenbeck

et al. 2013

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Managerial Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Goal setting in teams: The impact of learning and performance goals on process and performance

Nahrgang

DeRue

Hollenbeck

et al. 2013

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Early identification of poor CoVi maximises potential for rectification, thereby reducing damage to group productivity and member"s mental health (Morgeson & DeRue, 2006). Postulated universality of PILAR (Heslop et al, 2016) extends to the instrument, conceptually allowing maintenance of reliability across varying contexts.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is desirable to ameliorate threats to collaboration before members curtail their participation, or withdraw completely, since either may become a self-fulfilling prophecy (Jehn & Mannix, 2001;Morgeson & DeRue, 2006). Reasons for collaboration breakdown highlighted by the literature are free-riders, interpersonal conflict and poor leadership (Kuhn, 2015), which may be ameliorated through retraining and changes to; roles, workflow processes, oversight systems, and delegation (Daley, 1992).…”

Section: Measuring Collaboration Viabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Upon sign of collaboration unviability, the member"s first recourse is to limit their ongoing investment, such as dedicating less time or money. Once perceived risks outweigh the likelihood of success, leaving the collaboration may be the only option, knowing that doing so may cause sacrificing investments already made (Kendall & Salas, 2015).It is desirable to ameliorate threats to collaboration before members curtail their participation, or withdraw completely, since either may become a self-fulfilling prophecy (Jehn & Mannix, 2001;Morgeson & DeRue, 2006). Reasons for collaboration breakdown highlighted by the literature are free-riders, interpersonal conflict and poor leadership (Kuhn, 2015), which may be ameliorated through retraining and changes to; roles, workflow processes, oversight systems, and delegation (Daley, 1992).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Are We Collaborating Yet? Employee Assessment of Peer’s Perceptions

Heslop¹,

Stojanovski²,

Paul³

et al. 2017

IJHRS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Employers rarely utilise their employees" capacity to assess the collegiality and productivity of their own work unit, yet they are determinants of employee retention and profitability. One reason is the lack of a reliable, valid survey instrument to measure collaboration viability (CoVi), which we postulate is the construct that employees use to implicitly assess their work unit. Inherent weaknesses of own-perception and peer-assessment instruments prevent them reliably measuring CoVi. A novel method overcoming respective deficiencies by combining the strengths of both approaches is proposed that we term peer"s-perception. It is contended that such an instrument may be improved through formulation in accordance with a universal model of collaboration. The model chosen is PILAR as it encapsulates a variety of social and organisational psychology theories. Prospects, involved, liked, agency and respect constitute five Pillars of collaboration . Based on this review, we propose a peer"s-perception instrument (Pillar-PP) and that this instrument be formally evaluated.Keywords: productivity, psychological safety, cohesion, collaboration, peer"s-perception, PILAR Measuring Collaboration ViabilityCollaboration is a synergistic, voluntary combining of individual contributions for a collective goal (Hughes & Jones, 2011;Thomas et al., 2007). Viability of collaboration can be threatened, such as by interpersonal conflict, poor strategy, or selfish manoeuvring (Chen, Ünal, Leung, & Xin, 2016;Topping, 2010). Collaborators are instinctively wary of such behaviours, and monitor their threat to collective success. Upon sign of collaboration unviability, the member"s first recourse is to limit their ongoing investment, such as dedicating less time or money. Once perceived risks outweigh the likelihood of success, leaving the collaboration may be the only option, knowing that doing so may cause sacrificing investments already made (Kendall & Salas, 2015).It is desirable to ameliorate threats to collaboration before members curtail their participation, or withdraw completely, since either may become a self-fulfilling prophecy (Jehn & Mannix, 2001;Morgeson & DeRue, 2006). Reasons for collaboration breakdown highlighted by the literature are free-riders, interpersonal conflict and poor leadership (Kuhn, 2015), which may be ameliorated through retraining and changes to; roles, workflow processes, oversight systems, and delegation (Daley, 1992). To ensure that failing collaboration in the workplace may be identified and repaired, the present study seeks an instrument that can reliably measure collaboration viability (CoVi).The standard method of measuring constructs reminiscent of CoVi is to survey group members for their perceptions of the group, which this article terms own-perception (Edmondson, 1999). A second approach is peer-assessment, which is rarely used to measure CoVi, but offers certain advantages over own-perception. We examine the weaknesses and ISSN 2162-3058 2017 http://ijhrs.macrothink.org 177 strengths of ...

show abstract

“…Team members often face difficulties due to the difference in styles of doing interdependent tasks under time pressure. Temporal leadership's job is to enable its team to perform its function under such conditions [39]. Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory says that a leader must give individualized consideration to each of his or her team members, in order to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the unit [40].…”

Section: The Moderating Effects Of Temporal Team Leadershipmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Interactive Role of Temporal Team Leadership in the Telecom Sector of Pakistan: Utilizing Temporal Diversity for Sustainable Knowledge Sharing

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human or social dimensions need to be significantly considered to maintain organizational sustainability. Unfortunately, this aspect has received relatively little attention when compared to other dimensions of sustainability. This study promotes the presence of a leader to manage conflicts, which cause hindrances in achieving sustainability. This is possible by maximizing sustainable knowledge sharing in a team, by effectively utilizing temporal diversity, including time urgency, time perspective, and pacing style diversity under a certain time pressure. This study has examined the effect of temporal diversity on knowledge sharing within teams by taking temporal conflict as a mediator. Moreover, it was also investigated whether the role of team temporal leadership is effective in utilizing the conflicts arising from the temporal diversity. The research design was quantitative in nature. A purposive sampling technique was used to gather data from 100 dyads working in the telecom sector of Pakistan, by distributing questionnaires. The findings suggest that team temporal leadership plays an effective role when a conflict arises rather than after it has arisen because more time and resources will be required to resolve such conflicts arising from temporal diversity. When the temporal diversity is low, the leader can manage the conflicts quite well, but as the diversity increases, the role of the temporal leader become much harder which may cause increased conflicts because of the limited capacity of a leader to manage those conflicts. Furthermore, it was observed that conflicts, if managed properly, may lead to increased knowledge sharing.

show abstract

Event criticality, urgency, and duration: Understanding how events disrupt teams and influence team leader intervention

Cited by 189 publications

References 31 publications

Goal setting in teams: The impact of learning and performance goals on process and performance

Goal setting in teams: The impact of learning and performance goals on process and performance

Are We Collaborating Yet? Employee Assessment of Peer’s Perceptions

The Interactive Role of Temporal Team Leadership in the Telecom Sector of Pakistan: Utilizing Temporal Diversity for Sustainable Knowledge Sharing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About