Self‐managing Work Teams: An International Perspective

Salem, Mahmoud; Banner, David K.

doi:10.1108/01437739210022847

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The first phase involves the establishment and development of an effective intrapreneurial team. Initially, the team develops through the stages proposed by Tuckman (1965) and then advances through the process of becoming a self‐managed team in a form as presented in the literature (Ankarlo, 1993; Carr, 1991; Holpp, 1993; Manz et al , 1990; Manz and Sims, 1987; Salem, 1992; Salem et al , 1992). The further development of self‐managed teams is progressed through an approach that has a knowledge development and management system that utilises the PDSA cycle (Deming, 1986).…”

Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing an intrapreneur‐led three‐phase model of innovation

Gapp

Fisher

2007

International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior &Amp; Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2010),"Organizational support for intrapreneurship and its interaction with human capital to enhance innovative performance", Management Decision, Vol. 48 Iss 5 pp. 732-755 http://dx.If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The paper seeks to demonstrate an intrapreneur-led three-phase model of innovation based on understanding the relationships between service delivery and product development thought, and the application of intrapreneurial-focused teams in the healthcare and manufacturing industries. Design/methodology/approach -The research proposes a model that starts with effective teambuilding within an intrapreneurial context, then encompasses the relationship between service and product as a platform for the development of more effective innovation. A two-part qualitative case study provides insight and understanding of the model's application within both service and manufacturing environments. Findings -Investigating service delivery shortfalls with effectively developed intrapreneurial teams leads to new and/or improved services. New service developments in turn lead to the development of new products. An action research model based on Deming's PDSA (plan, do, study, act) cycle determines the point of departure for each stage of innovation. The PDSA cycle provides a method for combining innovation, knowledge development and management. Practical implications -Current approaches focus on the characteristics of intrapreneurs rather than on the linked activities that lead to successful product/service innovation. Important issues such as how teams progress through the stages of service and product development are not usually considered. As a consequence, there is little in the extant literature to guide prospective intrapreneurs or organisations. Originality/value -Little research has been conducted into how intrapreneurship occurs in organisations. This paper provides insight into how intrapreneurship functions through new service and new product innovations in both the service and manufacturing sectors.

show abstract

Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing an intrapreneur‐led three‐phase model of innovation

Gapp

Fisher

2007

International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior &Amp; Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This PDM form flourishes in many countries, mostly western (e.g. Australia, Canada, Sweden, the UK, and the USA; Salem & Banner, 1992). Despite the dominant individualistic orientation, team members manage to reconcile personal ambition in order to achieve more responsibilities and higher job interest and independence (Cohen et al, 1996).…”

Section: Self-managing Teamsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Participative Decision-Making in Organizations

Sagie¹,

Aycan²

2003

Human Relations

154

137

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite considerable awareness about various forms and meanings of participative decision-making (PDM) in different parts of the world, there is less agreement on the causes of variation in PDM. This article argues that among other exogenous (e.g. sociopolitical, legal, historical) forces, the sociocultural context plays an important role in the observed differences among PDM approaches and practices across nations. Similarly, subcultures and organizational cultures may influence PDM within nations. Two cultural dimensions: individualism-collectivism and power distance, are linked with four widespread employee participation approaches: face-to-face PDM, collective PDM, pseudo-PDM, and paternalistic PDM. The attributes of each PDM form, including the cultural determinants, underlying beliefs, the types of decisions made, and the relationship between a specified form and other PDM meanings (e.g. self-managing teams) are elaborated.

show abstract

“…The adoption of SMWTs has been limited in the United Kingdom, where the present study was carried out. Comparing the United Kingdom with other major nations over recent decades, Salem and Banner (1992) noted that "the evolution of worker participation in the UK could be classified as stagnant, at best." However, it has also been reported that due to increasing pressures for high-performance work design, their wider usage is now becoming very apparent (Grayson, 1990;Salem & Banner, 1992).…”

Section: Background Of Self-managing Teamsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual Differences in Cognitive Style and their Effects on Task and Social Orientations of Self-Managed Work Teams

Armstrong

Priola

2001

Small Group Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When assembling self-managing work teams, the personalities of team members are often overlooked. One personality variable known to be critical for effective decision making in teams is cognitive style. This study sought to examine how differences and similarities in analytic/intuitive cognitive styles affected the behavior of team members on the task/emotionally expressive dimension identified by Bales. As hypothesized, intuitive individuals and homogeneous intuitive teams were found to initiate more social-emotional acts. Contrary to expectations, intuitive rather than analytic individuals and homogeneous intuitive rather than analytic teams engaged in more task-oriented behaviors. Teams also tended to select intuitive individuals as leaders. The possibility that different combinations of styles may be important for overall team effectiveness was subsequently discussed, and it was suggested that this may depend on whether the nature of the work environment is relatively well structured and mechanistic or relatively unstructured and organic.

show abstract

Self‐managing Work Teams: An International Perspective

Cited by 10 publications

References 5 publications

Developing an intrapreneur‐led three‐phase model of innovation

Developing an intrapreneur‐led three‐phase model of innovation

A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Participative Decision-Making in Organizations

Individual Differences in Cognitive Style and their Effects on Task and Social Orientations of Self-Managed Work Teams

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About