Group Creativity
From Jsarmi
Contents |
Chapter 9. Newcomer Innovation in Work Teams
Collaborative work is an increasingly important aspect of organizational life. Many organizations now assign their most critical tasks to small groups, particularly work teams (Hackman, 1990; Sundstrom, 1999). This is not surprising, because there are several reasons to believe that teams should be more effective than individual workers. Not only do most teams possess more task-relevant skills and knowledge than do individuals, but team members can also share these resources, redistribute responsibilities to meet new task demands, and motivate one another to work hard. Unfortunately, however, there is evidence that teams do not always provide the benefits they promise. Research in laboratory settings shows that teams often fail to realize their potential productivity because of coordination and motivation problems (Steiner, 1972). And research in organizational settings suggests that team effectiveness is often reduced by such managerial mistakes as using teams for tasks that are better done by individuals, assuming team members possess all the skills they need to work together, and failing to provide adequate organizational support for team activities (Hackman, 1998).
Personnel Turnover
One of the most daunting challenges for teams is personnel turnover, defined as the entry of new members and/ or the exit of old members.
Research on turnover has been done in both organizations and small groups. In reviewing the organizational literature, Argote (1993, 1999) concluded that the effects of turnover are mixed and depend on such factors as the organization?s coordination requirements, the level of organizational structure, and the individual?s skill level. Research on turnover in small groups indicates that turnover typically disrupts group performance but is more deleterious under some conditions than others. For example, group performance does not vary with the mean rate of turnover but declines when turnover is greater than usual (Trow, 1960). In addition, turnover causes fewer problems when group members work independently rather than interactively (Naylor & Briggs, 1965), and when the group has high rather than low structure (Devadas & Argote, 1995). Although these and other studies (e. g., Hollenbeck et al., 1995) provide useful information about the impact of turnover, they only scratch the surface of a very complex phenomenon. In particular, they pay little attention to the possibility that turnover can have positive rather than negative consequences for group performance. Turnover can improve group performance through two mechanisms: the exit of oldtimers who lack the skills or motivation to help the group attain its goals, and the entry of newcomers who possess such skills or motivation. In this chapter, we focus on the latter mechanism.
Reference
Paulus, Paul B.(Editor). Group Creativity : Innovation through Collaboration. Cary, NC, USA: Oxford University Press, Incorporated, 2003. p 203. http://site.ebrary.com/lib/drexel/Doc?id=10085239&ppg=218
Copyright © 2003. Oxford University Press, Incorporated. All rights reserved.
Reference
Paulus, Paul B.(Editor). Group Creativity : Innovation through Collaboration. Cary, NC, USA: Oxford University Press, Incorporated, 2003. p 202. http://site.ebrary.com/lib/drexel/Doc?id=10085239&ppg=217
Copyright © 2003. Oxford University Press, Incorporated. All rights reserved.
