Functional versus dysfunctional team change: Problem diagnosis and structural feedback for self-managed teams
AbstractWe describe and examine three changes (personnel, process, and structure) that self-managed teams can make to remedy performance problems. We also discuss why self-managed teams may over-emphasize process and (to a lesser extent) personnel changes over structural changes. Furthermore, we describe and test two specific diagnostic feedback interventions aimed at helping teams make functional structural change. Seventy-eight 4-person teams of undergraduate students participated in two trials of a networked laboratory simulation task. All teams were initially structurally misaligned and subsequently received (a) no feedback, (b) one type of feedback only, or (c) both types of feedback. Results confirmed that structurally misaligned teams demonstrated dysfunctional change by changing process more frequently than structure, with detrimental effects for subsequent performance. When teams received the feedback interventions, however, they were more likely to change their structure and thereby improve their performance.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.
Volume (Year): 122 (2013)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp
Teams; Decision making; Structure;
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Moorhead, Gregory & Neck, Christopher P. & West, Mindy S., 1998. "The Tendency toward Defective Decision Making within Self-Managing Teams: The Relevance of Groupthink for the 21st Century," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 73(2-3), pages 327-351, February.
- Alper, Steve & Tjosvold, Dean & Law, Kenneth S., 1998. "Interdependence and Controversy in Group Decision Making: Antecedents to Effective Self-Managing Teams," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 33-52, April.
- Hollenbeck, John R. & Ellis, Aleksander P.J. & Humphrey, Stephen E. & Garza, Adela S. & Ilgen, Daniel R., 2011. "Asymmetry in structural adaptation: The differential impact of centralizing versus decentralizing team decision-making structures," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 114(1), pages 64-74, January.
- Laughlin, Patrick R., 1999. "Collective Induction: Twelve Postulates," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 50-69, October.
- Gersick, Connie J. G. & Hackman, J. Richard, 1990. "Habitual routines in task-performing groups," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 65-97, October.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.