2022
DOI: 10.1108/mrr-12-2021-0869
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

From the periphery to the centre: a bibliometric review of global virtual teams as a new ordinary workplace

Abstract: Purpose This study aims to offer a bibliometric analysis of the already substantial and growing literature on global virtual teams (GVTs). Design/methodology/approach Using a systematic literature review approach, it identifies all articles in the Web of Science from 1999 to 2021 that include the term GVTs (in the title, the abstract or keywords) and finds 175 articles. The VOSviewer software was applied to analyze the bibliometric data. Findings The analysis revealed three dialogizing research clusters in… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 59 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The key finding and difference in GVTs compared to traditional work settings is that the statistically significant relationship between job satisfaction and equity perception has the opposite sign: Benevolents ("givers") always increase satisfaction when moving from underrewarded to overrewarded, whereas the opposite happens for Entitled ("takers") Table 4. ET has significant implications in terms of employee retention, morale, productivity, relationships and psychological well-being, the latter point being particularly expressive since mental health issues at work are on the rise, particularly in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic and telework (Tavoletti, 2020;Tavoletti and Taras, 2022). In addition, as authors such as Kickul and Lester (2001), Wheeler (2002) and Yamaguchi (2003) point out, there is an increasing emphasis on conducting work in GVTs implies that social comparison processes, such as the Equity Sensitivity Construct, will become increasingly influential in determining team objectives.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…The key finding and difference in GVTs compared to traditional work settings is that the statistically significant relationship between job satisfaction and equity perception has the opposite sign: Benevolents ("givers") always increase satisfaction when moving from underrewarded to overrewarded, whereas the opposite happens for Entitled ("takers") Table 4. ET has significant implications in terms of employee retention, morale, productivity, relationships and psychological well-being, the latter point being particularly expressive since mental health issues at work are on the rise, particularly in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic and telework (Tavoletti, 2020;Tavoletti and Taras, 2022). In addition, as authors such as Kickul and Lester (2001), Wheeler (2002) and Yamaguchi (2003) point out, there is an increasing emphasis on conducting work in GVTs implies that social comparison processes, such as the Equity Sensitivity Construct, will become increasingly influential in determining team objectives.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…ET has significant implications in terms of employee retention, morale, productivity, relationships and psychological well-being, the latter point being particularly expressive since mental health issues at work are on the rise, particularly in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic and telework (Tavoletti, 2020; Tavoletti and Taras, 2022). In addition, as authors such as Kickul and Lester (2001), Wheeler (2002) and Yamaguchi (2003) point out, there is an increasing emphasis on conducting work in GVTs implies that social comparison processes, such as the Equity Sensitivity Construct, will become increasingly influential in determining team objectives.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Multidiscipline focus and co-authorship networksAs several of the selected reviews include an influential author list (seeCaputo et al, 2022;Muszy nska, 2021;Tavoletti and Taras, 2022), in document cross-comparison, there is little overlap, apart from a few author exceptions. This of course is a logical finding, as each of these reviews address different research questions and different nuanced scopes of research, and perhaps focus on different fields or discipline domains.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%