What do we know about the incidence of group work  (if anything)?

Benders, Jos; Huijgen, Fred; Pekruhl, Ulrich

doi:10.1108/00483480210422769

Cited by 31 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Most of the samples are of modest size. (For a comprehensive report of European data, see Benders, Huigen, and Pekruhl 2002. For U.S. employee‐reported data on several of these practices, see Freeman and Rogers 1999.…”

Section: Theory and Empirical Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

U.S. High‐Performance Work Practices at Century's End

Blasi

Kruse

2006

Industrial Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the incidence, industry differences, and economic environment of work practices in the United States in 1994 and 1997 using census data from a nationally representative random sample of establishments. Self-managed work teams were used by a majority of workers in some sites. Work-related meetings had higher incidence. A high-performance work organization is used in about 1 percent of establishments. There were significant industry differences associated with globalization, namely, imports and exports.

show abstract

Section: Theory and Empirical Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

U.S. High‐Performance Work Practices at Century's End

Blasi

Kruse

2006

Industrial Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The perception of widespread diffusion of these practices in Europe has been challenged by several studies (Fröhlich and Pekruhl 1996; Benders, Huijgen, and Pekruhl 2002; Poutsma, Hendrickx and Huijgen 2003). Gill and Krieger (2000) found only limited support for an institutional explanation of collaborative practices in a major European survey.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Diffusion of Calculative and Collaborative HRM Practices in European Firms

Poutsma

Ligthart

Veersma

2006

Industrial Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper is to trace and explain variations in calculative and collaborative human resource management (HRM) practices between companies and across national borders. Variations and similarities are explained in terms of the convergence and divergence of HRM practices determined by national institutions, and the increasing influence of multinational companies (MNCs). We explore the diffusion of HRM practices in Europe over time, using data sets from two surveys conducted in several European countries in 1995 and 2000. We use institutional explanations for the development of three selected bundles of HRM practices: individual, calculative performanceoriented practices; collective incentive schemes for the alignment of interests; and collaborative practices that seek to enhance the commitment of employees. We found substantial effects of country-specific institutions and of the country of origin of MNCs, which clearly support the institutional duality thesis. Foreignowned MNCs, especially those that are US-based, appear to moderate countryspecific institutional effects on the diffusion of the three HRM bundles.

show abstract

“…Very often, the knowledge-intensive work in contemporary organizations is delegated to teams (Benders et al 2002;Devine et al 1999;Reagans and Zuckerman 2001;Strang and Jung 2009;Vera and Crossan 2004). The rationale behind this is that teams integrate various individual knowledges into collective knowledge (Curşeu et al 2008;Okhuysen and Eisenhardt 2002;Zárraga and Bonache 2005), leading to higher quality decisions and solutions (Harrison and Klein 2007;Hinsz et al 1997).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Composing Effective Teams through Team Dating

Curşeu

Kenis

Raab

et al. 2010

Organization Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research showed that short initial interaction in dyads accurately predicts future relation development. The paper extends these results from dyads to teams and demonstrates that data collected from short initial contacts (reciprocal relational preferences) are a sound basis for designing effective teams. In the approach we propose, potential team members have short initial contacts (popularly known as 'speed dating') and we use the information on interpersonal evaluations to create teams by maximizing the number of reciprocal relational preferences within a team. In a sample of 76 teams (N = 378, 36 attribute-based teams and 40 team-dating teams), we show that teams formed based on relational data are more effective than teams formed by maximizing within team diversity (gender and nationality). Team-dating teams show a better teamwork quality and develop more complex collective knowledge structures compared with attribute-based teams.

show abstract

What do we know about the incidence of group work (if anything)?

Cited by 31 publications

References 22 publications

U.S. High‐Performance Work Practices at Century's End

U.S. High‐Performance Work Practices at Century's End

The Diffusion of Calculative and Collaborative HRM Practices in European Firms

Composing Effective Teams through Team Dating

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About