Making Use of Difference: Diversity, Debate, and Decision Comprehensiveness in Top Management Teams.

Simons, Tony; Pelled, Lisa Hope; Smith, Kenneth

doi:10.2307/256987

Cited by 892 publications

(312 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

290

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although somewhat low by general standards, our response rate of 11% is similar, and in some cases superior, to response rates in other research using questionnaires directed toward executives (e.g., Hambrick et al 1993). As an example, Simons et al (1999), in their attempt to survey executives, received only a 6% response rate. Indeed, previous research using the identical Dun & Bradstreet database and mailing list has revealed similar datacollection difficulties with new companies involved in technology and product development (11% response rate in this study) (McDougall et al 1994).…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 72%

Fairness from the Top: Perceived Procedural Justice and Collaborative Problem Solving in New Product Development

Bingham

Umphress

2007

Organization Science

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T he literature on new product development has examined several important determinants of collaboration among project members. However, we are not aware of any study that links top management decisions with project members' collaborative behavior. To address this significant gap, this study examines how perceived procedural justice in top management decisions regarding new products is related to collaborative problem solving among new product development project members. Our results from 109 technology firms-as well as from 91 student-based project groups-suggest that perceived procedural justice in top management decisions is positively related to collaborative problem solving among project members, and that collaborative problem solving mediates the relationship between perceived procedural justice and new product performance. Furthermore, we found that the relationship between perceived procedural justice and collaborative problem solving is positively moderated by environmental uncertainty. Contrary to our expectation, however, our findings show a negative moderating effect of project members' perceived organizational commitment on the relationship between perceived procedural justice and collaborative problem solving.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 72%

Fairness from the Top: Perceived Procedural Justice and Collaborative Problem Solving in New Product Development

Bingham

Umphress

2007

Organization Science

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because it is difficult to gain access to TMTs, much of the research on TMT effectiveness has focused on factors that can be gleaned through archival records. As a result, research has centered on TMT composition (e.g., heterogeneity of function, organizational tenure, team tenure, age, and education; team size) and the external environment (e.g., industry as a proxy for environmental turbulence, market characteristics), and their effects on organizational effectiveness (Eisenhardt & Schoonhoven, 1990;Finkelstein & Hambrick, 1990;Simons, Pelled, & Smith, 1999;Smith et al, 1994;West & Anderson, 1996). Although the amount of empirical work in this area is relatively small compared to work team research in general, the area is active and growing.…”

Section: Types Of Work Teamsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Work Groups and Teams in Organizations

Kozlowski

Bell

2012

Handbook of Psychology, Second Edition

537

678

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract[Excerpt] Our objective in this chapter is to provide an integrative perspective on work groups and teams in organizations, one that addresses primary foci of theory and research, highlights applied implications, and identifies key issues in need of research attention and resolution. Given the volume of existing reviews, our review is not intended to be exhaustive. Rather, it uses representative work to characterize key topics, and focuses on recent work that breaks new ground to help move theory and research forward. Although our approach risks trading breadth for depth, we believe that there is much value in taking a more integrative view of the important areas of team research, identifying key research themes, and linking the themes and disparate topics closer together. To the extent that we identify new and necessary areas of theory development and research, the value of this approach will be evident. We would like to acknowledge several colleagues who provided insightful comments on an initial outline or draft of this chapter. Our thanks to Neil Anderson, Murray Barrick, Jan Cannon-Bowers, Paul Goodman, Stan Gully, Cyn D. Fisher, Richard Hackman, John Hollenbeck, Susan Jackson, Michelle Marks, John Mathieu, Susan Mohamed, Greg Stewart, Anne Tsui, Eduardo Salas, Ruth Wageman, Wang Zhong-Ming, and Michael West. Thanks also to Richard Klimoski for his helpful editorial guidance throughout. We would also like to acknowledge the Air Force Office of Scientific Research for support (F49620-98-1-0363 and F49620-01-1-0283, S.W.J. Kozlowski and R.P. DeShon, Principal Investigators) that in part assisted the composition of this chapter. Although many sources provided inputs to this chapter, the views expressed are those of the authors. Work Groups and Teams RESEARCH ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS Research IssuesContext.Task Interdependence. Levels.Time. Research RecommendationsThe Nature of Teams.Composition.Formation, Socialization, and Development.Team Effectiveness, Processes, and Enhancements.Leadership and Motivation.Continuance and Decline. Conclusion Work Groups and Teams 4The last decade and a half has witnessed a remarkable transformation of organizational structures worldwide. Although there are economic, strategic, and technological imperatives driving this transformation, one of its more compelling aspects has been an ongoing shift from work organized around individual jobs to team-based work structures (Lawler, Mohrman, & Ledford, 1995 This ongoing transformation in the basic organization of work has captured the attention of researchers and is reflected by new theories of team functioning, a rapidly growing number of empirical studies, and numerous literature reviews written on the burgeoning research on teams. It is also reflected in a shift in the locus of team research. For most of its history, small group research has been centered in social psychology (McGrath, 1997). Over the last 15 years, however, group and team research has become increasingly centered in the fields of organizational psycho...

show abstract

“…We have attached great importance to the process of developing alignment or a collective cognition, and yet we also need to focus on what it is that also retains creativity through differentiation (Simons et al 1999). Differentiation is like entropy-a "measure of the disbalance of energy in the system" "a system gaining in entropy is also losing information" (Beer 1966, pp.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Negotiation in Strategy Making Teams: Group Support Systems and the Process of Cognitive Change

Ackermann

Eden

2008

Group Decis Negot

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This version is available at https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/13282/ Strathprints is designed to allow users to access the research output of the University of Strathclyde. Unless otherwise explicitly stated on the manuscript, Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Please check the manuscript for details of any other licences that may have been applied. You may not engage in further distribution of the material for any profitmaking activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute both the url (https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/) and the content of this paper for research or private study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge.Any correspondence concerning this service should be sent to the Strathprints administrator: strathprints@strath.ac.ukThe Strathprints institutional repository (https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk) is a digital archive of University of Strathclyde research outputs. It has been developed to disseminate open access research outputs, expose data about those outputs, and enable the management and persistent access to Strathclyde's intellectual output.Group Decis Negot (2011) Abstract This paper reports on the use of a Group Support System (GSS) to explore at a micro level some of the processes manifested when a group is negotiating strategy-processes of social and psychological negotiation. It is based on data from a series of interventions with senior management teams of three operating companies comprising a multi-national organization, and with a joint meeting subsequently involving all of the previous participants. The meetings were concerned with negotiating a new strategy for the global organization. The research involved the analysis of detailed time series data logs that exist as a result of using a GSS that is a reflection of cognitive theory.

show abstract

Making Use of Difference: Diversity, Debate, and Decision Comprehensiveness in Top Management Teams.

Cited by 892 publications

References 34 publications

Fairness from the Top: Perceived Procedural Justice and Collaborative Problem Solving in New Product Development

Fairness from the Top: Perceived Procedural Justice and Collaborative Problem Solving in New Product Development

Work Groups and Teams in Organizations

Negotiation in Strategy Making Teams: Group Support Systems and the Process of Cognitive Change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About