自我管理型团队建设意义与对策研究

自我管理型团队作为一种扁平化的学习型组织形式,符合当今时代人本管理的要求。本文对自我管理型团队的特征及其建立的意义进行了相关阐述,并对建立自我管理型团队的有效途径进行了重点分析。     

浅谈促进团队建设的管理方法

团队建设是指有意识地在组织中努力开发有效的工作小组。每个小组由一组员工组成，通过自我管理的形式，负责一个完整的工作过程或其中一部分工作。团队建设的好与坏，对企业发展至关重要。     

浅谈项目团队的绩效考核

由于全球化进程的加快,市场竞争日益激烈。项目团队作为一种适应环境变化的组织形式,被越来越多的企业所采用。项目团队的广泛应用使得项目团队绩效考核成为企业关注的一个至关重要的问题。绩效考核是人力资源管理重要组成部分。传统的绩效评价一般按职能部门展开,一直被视为理论研究的重点,但针对项目团队的绩效评价方面的理论还在进一步发展。本文针对项目团队绩效考核的作用和特点进行了分析,对绩效考核的难点进行总结,进而对项目团队绩效考核的原则进行探索。     

探究在企业中合理化构建自我管理团队

自我管理团队的组织理念与模式并非在任何组织中都适用。只有通过系统地总结组建自我管理团队必须具备的基本条件，并进一步归纳了在这些组织中创建自我管理团队的优势与不足，才能针对不足提出合理的改善措施。     

创意团队的创新氛围与创新绩效关系述评

在现代企业中,一种无层级的工作组织形式多被采用,即团队管理形式。团队是解决组织问题,进行创新活动的行动单位,由一群具备不同知识技能以及功能背景的成员组成。因此,企业创新的关键基础是团队的创新。本文试图通过对创意团队的研究,来揭示形成团队创新氛围的因素,以及团队创新氛围与其创新绩效的存在相关联系,并指出从团队过程视角开展研究是推动团队创新理论发展的关键。     

基于SCP范式下高绩效团队建设——以高校教学管理团队为对象

在“买方市场”形式下，高校采用团队形式进行师资培养和教学管理是非常有必要的。目前高校的教学团队建设过程中存在着形式唯上、成员选择随意等各种误区，本文从如何建设高绩效的教学管理团队入手，借助产业组织理论中SCP范式并赋予其新的内涵，从教学团队的结构、成员行为、团队绩效三方面进行分析，提出高绩效教学管理团队是一个动态、不断优化的组织形式。     

敏捷制造环境下分布式团队组织激励研究

敏捷制造环境下,人员组织的一般形式是分布式团队。由于分布式团队能在极短的时间内组成,在需求被满足后很快地被解散,与传统制造企业中相对稳定的组织形式相比,组织激励存在许多根本性差别。本文分析了其中主要的差别,并探讨了影响分布式团队组织激励有效发挥作用的主要外部环境因素。     

开发团队中的共享领导

共享领导，是从新的视角来探讨高度变化的环境下人们如何作出回应的一种领导理论，大多出现在团队情境中。随着科学技术的发展和市场竞争的加剧，工作团队成为企业应对复杂环境的一种行之有效的组织形式。以知识工作为主的团队工作，主要依靠有着高水平的技能和要求工作自主性的成员，他们希望有更多的机会去影响团队工作和参与领导。     

企业高效团队的开发与管理

随着经济全球化、一体化的发展,团队的管理现在已经成为多数企业的基本组织形态,构建一支高绩效、高运转的团队对于现代经济下的企业来说是其顺应经济告诉发展的一个关键因素,本文就通过分析开发一支企业高效团队的方法和其管理形式,探寻出一些打造高效团队的出路。     

团队绩效影响因素研究

随着世界各国经济竞争的加剧以及全球化程度的增加,企业所面临的市场形式变得变幻莫测,传统的影响企业员工工作绩效的因素也随之发生变化,在企业追求进一步的成长的过程中,考虑企业员工的团队绩效的影响因素就显得至关重要。本文从理论上研究了目前影响团队绩效的因素,主要包括团队成员的个体因素、团队自身因素、组织因素。     

Adaptive and Generative Learning: Implications from Complexity Theories

One of the most important classical typologies within the organizational learning literature is the distinction between adaptive and generative learning. However, the processes of these types of learning, particularly the latter, have not been widely analyzed and incorporated into the organizational learning process. This paper puts forward a new understanding of adaptive and generative learning within organizations, grounded in some ideas from complexity theories: mainly self‐organization and implicate order. Adaptive learning involves any improvement or development of the explicate order through a process of self‐organization. Self‐organization is a self‐referential process characterized by logical deductive reasoning, concentration, discussion and improvement. Generative learning involves any approach to the implicate order through a process of self‐transcendence. Self‐transcendence is a holo‐organizational process characterized by intuition, attention, dialogue and inquiry. The main implications of the two types of learning for organizational learning are discussed.     

研发团队领导、团队反思与研发团队绩效关系研究

针对研发团队的特点,以团队领导和团队反思理论为基础,提出了研发团队领导、团队反思与团队绩效之间关系的概念模型,并采用SEM方法进行了实证检验。结果表明,变革型领导和交易型领导都会对团队绩效直接产生影响,但前者的影响更显著;变革型领导能够通过团队反思影响团队绩效,而交易型领导不能。团队反思在鼓励性激励、智能激发、个性化关怀三个变量分别与研发团队绩效作用过程中起到了一定的中介作用。     

团队学习和学习型团队：概念、能力模型、测量及对团队绩效的影响

提出了团队学习和学习型团队的定义,建立了团队学习的9个行为和能力要素,开发了团队学习能力的定义和几种测量模型。采用513个样本数据进行了统计检验,表明所建立的团队学习能力的测量模型具有好的信度和效度,并发现了团队学习能力与团队绩效之间具有显著的正相关关系。     

团队成员交换、社会因素策略与新员工社会化

团队工作方式在组织中日益普遍,团队成员成为影响新员工社会化的重要因素。探讨团队成员交换对新员工社会化结果的影响及其作用机制,尤其是社会因素策略这一组织社会化策略在其中的中介作用,选取201个入职时间在一年半以内的销售人员为调查样本,运用结构方程模型路径分析方法对研究模型进行检验。研究结果表明,团队成员交换对新员工社会化结果产生显著影响;新员工感知的社会因素策略在团队成员交换与任务掌握、角色清晰、工作满意度之间起部分中介作用,在团队成员交换与离职倾向之间起完全中介作用。这表明高质量的团队成员交换关系可以促进新员工感知更多来自组织的正向社会支持以及组织内部人的角色模范作用,最终帮助他们成功社会化。     

企业内部薪酬差距的效应：研究述评

企业内部薪酬差距的设计是薪酬管理中的重要内容。学者们对于薪酬差距的效应的认识有很大差别:竞赛理论认为薪酬差距可以改善员工工作态度、提高个人和组织绩效;行为理论则认为薪酬差距过大会破坏员工的合作关系而有损于个人和组织绩效,这2种观点都得到了一些实证研究的支持。通过对这2种观点的总结和分析对今后的研究会有启发。     

The Use of Anthropomorphizing as a Tool for Generating Organizational Theories

Abstract

Despite admonishments that anthropomorphizing represents a serious error in scientific thinking, this review shows that anthropomorphizing has been a critically important tool for developing influential theories in organization studies. Analyzing the literatures related to organizational identity and organizational knowledge reveals how organization theorists build on their rich and highly accessible understanding of humans (i.e. the self and others) to (1) make guesses and sense of organizational anomalies, (2) articulate theoretical mechanisms to build stronger theories, and (3) create plausible stories that facilitate sensegiving. Our review shows how some theorists by using particular approaches were able to use anthropomorphizing to generate new organizational theories, yet anthropomorphizing does not always lead to such salutary outcomes. Anthropomorphizing is less likely to enhance theorizing in organization studies when the theorist does not sufficiently doubt their guesses about organizational phenomena, fails to develop stronger explanations of the “how” and “why” of the theory thereby only partially exploring the social mechanisms underlying the proposed relationships, and fails in their attempts to tell the theory's “story”. We conclude with a discussion of the conditions under which anthropomorphizing is more or less effective.     

Bringing the cognitive revolution forward: What can team cognition contribute to our understanding of leadership?

Cognition is a central element of organizational behavior and leaders are seen as key shapers of organizational cognition. Leaders’ influence over organizations often occurs through their influence on the collectives or teams they are leading. Hence, leaders influence organizational outcomes by modeling team cognition. Despite the importance of this relationship for organizational outcomes, there is little integration currently between the leadership and team cognition literatures. To address this gap, we conduct an integrative review. First, we develop a model for leader and team influence based on organizational emergence and leadership complexity theories. Our model makes a distinction between the source of influence over cognition (leader → team, team → leader, reciprocal) and form of cognition emergence (variance reduction, variance enhancement); constraints that shape cognitions that vary in levels (within and between-level, contextual) and focus (individual, interindividual, collective); and leader behaviors (administrative, adaptive, enabling). We apply this model to review and analyze ninety-nine studies in the current literature and then discuss the limitations and future directions drawing on our findings and theoretical model. We contribute a unifying framework of leadership and team emergence that can be expanded and applied to other settings.     

Leadership clarity and team innovation in health care

The relationships among leadership clarity (i.e., team members' consensual perceptions of clarity of and no conflict over leadership of their teams), team processes, and innovation were examined in health care contexts. The sample comprised 3447 respondents from 98 primary health care teams (PHCTs), 113 community mental health teams (CMHTs), and 72 breast cancer care teams (BCTs). The results revealed that leadership clarity is associated with clear team objectives, high levels of participation, commitment to excellence, and support for innovation. Team processes consistently predicted team innovation across all three samples. Team leadership predicted innovation in the latter two samples, and there was some evidence that team processes partly mediated this relationship. The results imply the need for theory that incorporates clarity and not just style of leadership. For health care teams in particular, and teams in general, the results suggest a need to ensure leadership is clear in teams when innovation is a desirable team performance outcome.     

Team Microdynamics: Toward an Organizing Approach to Teamwork

ABSTRACT

Team researchers in the field of organizational behavior (OB) seem to be increasingly aware of the need to embrace the organizing nature of teams. In this article, we outline the limitations of the prevailing static collectivist explanations in team research and suggest how an increased emphasis on a microdynamics-oriented approach that takes into account the essentially relational and organizing nature of teams can provide new insights to our understanding of teamwork. We argue that a multilevel, multi-theoretical, and multi-period framework may help enhance our understanding of teams. To show the advancements of the field in this sense, we review the OB literature on teams and highlight exemplars of research that have started to emphasize the microdynamic nature of teams consistent with this general framework, and their contributions to our understanding of team phenomena. We conclude by outlining the opportunities and needs for a microdynamic insight into team and teamwork, providing guidance for scholars who are interested in adding a microdynamic perspective into their models of teamwork.     

Collective voice mechanisms,HRM practices and organizational performance in Italian manufacturing firms

The literature on employee voice has grown enormously over the past decades. However, the relationships between different employee voice mechanisms and organizational performance are far from being fully understood, and the existing research shows mixed evidence. Moreover, the HRM literature tends to concentrate on individual voice mechanisms (e.g. employee involvement) and to underestimate the role that collective voice may have in the HRM performance relationship. This paper aims to analyze how collective employee voice mechanisms (i.e. union voice and team voice) affect organizational productivity and how these relationships vary when voice mechanisms are adopted in combination with other HRM practices (i.e. variable pay, training, performance appraisals and multitasking). The analysis of a sample of 223 Italian manufacturing firms matched with an external database (AIDA) containing balance sheet information found that union voice is positively related to labor productivity, while team voice does not show any significant relationship with labor productivity. Moreover, both union and team voice have important moderation effects in the HRM-performance relationship. Union voice moderates positively the relationship between variable pay and performance and negatively the relationship between training and performance. Team voice positively moderates the relationship between training and performance. The implications of these findings are discussed.