Managing formalization to increase global team effectiveness and meaningfulness of work in multinational organizations

Journal of International Business Studies - Tập 50 - Trang 1021-1052 - 2019
Cristina B Gibson1, Patrick D Dunlop2, John L Cordery3
1Pepperdine Graziadio School of Business, Pepperdine University, Los Angeles, USA
2Future of Work Institute, Faculty of Business and Law, Curtin University, Bentley, Australia
3Curtin University, Perth, Australia

Tóm tắt

Global teams may help to integrate across locations, and yet, with formalized rules and procedures, responsiveness to those locations’ effectiveness, and the team members’ experiences of work as meaningful may suffer. We employ a mixed-methods approach to understand how the level and content of formalization can be managed to resolve these tensions in multinationals. In a sample of global teams from a large mining and resources organization operating across 44 countries, interviews, observations, and a quantitative 2-wave survey revealed a great deal of variability between teams in how formalization processes were enacted. Only those formalization processes that promoted knowledge sharing were instrumental in improving team effectiveness. Implementing rules and procedures in the set-up of the teams and projects, rather than during interactions, and utilizing protocols to help establish the global team as a source of identity increased this knowledge sharing. Finally, we found members’ personal need for structure moderated the effect of team formalization on how meaningful individuals found their work within the team. These findings have significant implications for theory and practice in multinational organizations.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Adler, P. S. 2012. The sociological ambivalence of bureaucracy: From Weber to Gouldner to Marx. Organization Science, 23(1): 244–266. Adler, P. S., & Borys, B. 1996. Two types of bureaucracy: Enabling and coercive. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1): 61–89. Adler, P. S., & Chen, C. X. 2011. Combining creativity and control: Understanding individual motivation in large-scale collaborative creativity. Accounting, Organization and Society, 26: 63–85. Adler, P. S., McGarry, F. E., Irion-Talbot, W. B., & Binney, D. J. 2005. Enabling process discipline: Lessons on implementing the capability maturity model for software. MIS Quarterly Executive, 4(1): 215–227. Aguinis, H., Gottfredson, R. K., & Culpepper, S. A. 2013. Best-practice recommendations for estimating cross-level interaction effects using multilevel modeling. Journal of Management, 39(6): 1490–1528. Ahrens, T., & Chapman, C. S. 2004. Accounting for flexibility and efficiency: A field study of management control systems in a restaurant chain. Contemporary Accounting Research, 21(2): 271–301. Ashforth, B. E., Harrison, S. H., & Corley, K. G. 2008. Identification in organizations: An examination of four fundamental questions. Journal of Management, 34: 325–374. Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. A. 1998. The power of resistance: Sustaining valued identities. In R. M. Kramer & M. A. Neale (Eds.), Power and influence in organizations (pp. 89–119). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Barker, J. R. 1993. Tightening the iron cage: Concertive control in self-managing teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(2): 408–437. Barrick, M., Mount, M. K., & Li, N. 2013. The theory of purposeful work behavior: The role of personality, higher order goals, and job characteristics. Academy of Management Review, 38(1): 132–153. Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. 1989. Managing across borders. The transnational solution. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Birkinshaw, J. 1996. How multinational subsidiary mandates are gained and lost. Journal of International Business Studies, 27: 467–495. Bliese, P. D. 2000. Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein & S. W. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 349–381). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Bonebright, C. A., Clay, D. L., & Ankenmann, R. D. 2000. The relationship of workaholism with work-life conflict, life satisfaction and purpose in life. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47: 469–477. Bresman, H., & Zellmer-Bruhn, M. 2013. The structural context of team learning: Effects of organizational and team structure on internal and external learning. Organization Science, 24(4): 1120–1139. Bunderson, J. S., & Boumgarden, P. 2010. Structure and learning in self-managed teams: Why “bureaucratic” teams can be better learners. Organization Science, 21(3): 609–624. Burke, M. J., & Dunlap, W. P. 2002. Estimating interrater agreement with the average deviation index: A user’s guide. Organizational Research Methods, 5(2): 159–172. Burke, M. J., Finkelstein, L. M., & Dusig, M. D. 1999. On average deviation indices for estimating interrater agreement. Organizational Research Methods, 2(1): 49–68. Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Salas, E., Pierce, L., & Kendall, D. 2006. Understanding team adaptation: A conceptual analysis and model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91: 1189–1207. Caldwell, D. F., & O’Reilly, C. A. 2003. The determinants of team-based innovation in organizations. Small Group Research, 34: 497–517. Carton, A. M. 2018. “I’m not mopping floors, I’m putting a man on the moon”: How NASA leaders enhanced meaningfulness of work by changing the meaning of work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(2): 323–369. Carton, A. M., Murphy, C., & Clark, J. R. 2014. A (blurry) vision of the future: How leader rhetoric about ultimate goals influences performance. Academy of Management Journal, 57: 1544–1570. Cascio, W. F. 2003. Changes in workers, work, and organizations. In I. B. Weiner (Ed.), Handbook of psychology (pp. 401–422). New York: Wiley. Chan, D. 1998. Functional relations among constructs in the same content domain at different levels of analysis: A typology of composition models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2): 234–246. Charmaz, K. 2008. Constructionism and the grounded theory method. In J. A. Holstein & J. F. Gubrium (Eds.), Handbook of constructionist research (pp. 397–412). New York: Guilford. Chen, C. J., & Huang, J. W. 2007. How organizational climate and structure affect knowledge management—The social interaction perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 27(2): 104–118. Chen, G., Mathieu, J. E., & Bliese, P. D. 2004. A framework for conducting multi-level construct validation. In F. J. Yammarino & F. Dansereau (Eds.), Multilevel issues in organizational behavior and processes (Vol. 3, pp. 273–303). Oxford: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Collins, C., Gibson, C. B., Parker, S., & Quigly, N. 2016. Unpacking team dynamics with growth modeling: An approach to test, refine, and integrate theory. Organizational Psychology Review, 6(1): 63–91. Cordery, J. L., Cripps, E., Gibson, C. B., Soo, C., Kirkman, B. L., & Mathieu, J. M. 2015. The operational impact of organizational communities of practice: A Bayesian approach to analyzing organizational change. Journal of Management, 41(2): 644–664. Cordery, J. L., Soo, C., Kirkman, B. L., Rosen, B., & Mathieu, J. M. 2009. Leading parallel global virtual teams: Lessons from Alcoa. Organizational Dynamics, 38(2): 204–216. Corley, K. G., & Gioia, D. A. 2004. Identity ambiguity and change in the wake of a corporate spin-off. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49: 173–208. Courtright, S. H., Thurgood, G. R., Steward, G. L., & Pierotti, A. J. 2015. Structural interdependence in teams: An integrative framework and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100: 1825–1846. Cramton, C. D. 2001. The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organization Science, 12: 346–371. Cramton, C. D., & Hinds, P. J. 2005. Subgroup dynamics in internationally distributed teams: Ethno-centrism or cross-national learning? Research in Organizational Behavior, 26: 233–265. Cramton, C. D., & Hinds, P. J. 2014. An embedded model of cultural adaptation in global teams. Organization Science, 25(4): 1056–1081. Crawford, E. R., & LePine, J. A. 2013. A configurational theory of team processes: Accounting for the structure of taskwork and teamwork. Academy of Management Review, 38(1): 32–48. Devinney, T. M., Midgley, D., & Venaik, S. 2000. The optimal performance of the global firm: Formalizing and extending the integration-responsiveness framework. Organization Science, 11: 674–695. Dietz, B., Knippenberg, D., Hirst, G., & Restubog, S. L. 2015. Outperforming whom? A multilevel study of performance-prove goal orientation, performance, and the moderating role of shared team identification. Journal of Applied Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038888. Dimitrov, D. 2011. Sources of meaningfulness in the workplace: A study in the U.S. hospitality sector. European Journal of Training and Development, 36(3): 351–371. Doz, Y., Bartlett, C., & Prahalad, C. K. 1981. Global competitive pressures and host country demands: Managing tensions in MNCs. California Management Review, 23(3): 63–74. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Brown, S. L. 1997. The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1): 1–34. Eisenhardt, K. M., Furr, N. R., & Bingham, C. B. 2010. Microfoundations of performance: Balancing efficiency and flexibility in dynamic environments. Organization Science, 21(6): 1263–1273. Elovainio, M., & Kivimäki, M. 1999. Personal need for structure and occupational strain: An investigation of structural models and interaction with job complexity. Personality and Individual Differences, 26(2): 209–222. Enders, C. K., & Tofighi, D. 2007. Centering predictor variables in cross-sectional multilevel models: A new look at an old issue. Psychological Methods, 12(2): 121–138. Festinger, L., Schachter, S., & Back, K. 1950. Social pressures in informal groups: A study of human factors in housing. New York: Harper. Ghoshal, S., & Bartlett, C. 1988. Creation, adoption, and diffusion of innovations by subsidiaries of multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, Fall: 365–388. Ghoshal, S., & Nohria, N. 1989. Internal differentiation within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 10(4): 323–337. Ghoshal, S., & Nohria, N. 1993. Horses for courses: Organizational forms for multinational corporations. Sloan Management Review, 34(Winter): 23–35. Gibson, C. B. 2017. Elaboration, generalization, triangulation, and interpretation: On enhancing the value of mixed method research. Organizational Research Methods, 29(2): 193–223. Gibson, C. B., & Dibble, R. 2013. Excess may do harm: Examining the diminishing returns of external adjustment in team-based collaborations. Organization Science, 24(3): 687–715. Gibson, C. B., & Gibbs, J. 2006. Unpacking the concept of virtuality: The effects of geographic dispersion, electronic dependence, dynamic structure and national diversity on team innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(3): 451–495. Gibson, C. B., Gibbs, J., Stanko, T., Tesluk, P., & Cohen, S. G. 2011. Including the “I” in virtuality and modern job design: Extending the job characteristics model to include the moderating effect of individual experiences of electronic dependence and co-presence. Organization Science, 22: 1481–1499. Gibson, C. B., Huang, L., Kirkman, B. L., & Shapiro, D. 2014. Where global and virtual intersect: The value of examining both in 21st century teams. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology, 1: 217–244. Glaser, B. G. 1992. Emergence vs. Forcing: Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine. Griffin, M. A., Neal, A., & Parker, S. K. 2007. A new model of work role performance: Positive behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2): 327–347. Haas, M. R. 2010. The double-edged sword of autonomy and external knowledge: Analyzing team effectiveness in a multinational organization. Academy of Management Journal, 53: 989–1008. Hansen, M. T., Mors, M. L., & Lovas, B. 2005. Knowledge sharing in organizations: A relational perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 48: 776–795. Hayes, A. F., & Scharkow, M. 2013. The relative trustworthiness of inferential tests of the indirect effect in statistical mediation analysis: Does method really matter? Psychological Science, 24(10): 1918–1927. Hempel, P. S., Zhang, Z., & Han, Y. 2012. Team empowerment and the organizational context: Decentralization and the contrasting effects of formalization. Journal of Management, 38(2): 475–501. Hinds, P., Liu, L., & Lyon, J. B. 2011. Putting the global in global work: An intercultural lens on the practice of cross-national collaboration. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1): 135–188. Hinds, P., & Mortensen, M. 2005. Understanding conflict in geographically distributed teams: An empirical investigation. Organization Science, 16: 290–307. Hinsz, V. B., Tindale, R. S., & Vollrath, D. A. 1997. The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors. Psychological Bulletin, 121: 43–64. Hirst, G., Van Knippenberg, D., Chen, C.-H., & Sacramento, C. A. 2011. How does bureaucracy impact individual creativity? A cross-level investigation of team contextual influences on goal orientation-creativity relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3): 624–641. Hutchins, E. 1991. Organizing work by adaptation. Organization Science, 2: 14–39. Jansen, J. J. P., Tempelaar, M. P., van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. 2009. Structural differentiation and ambidexterity: The mediating role of integration mechanisms. Organization Science, 20(4): 797–811. Jansen, J. J. P., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. 2006. Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Science, 52(11): 1661–1674. Jehn, K. A., & Mannix, E. 2001. The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44: 238–251. Johnson, J. H., Jr. 1995. An empirical analysis of the integration-responsiveness framework: U.S. construction equipment industry firms in global competition. Journal of International Business Studies, 26(3): 621–635. Junni, P., Sarala, R. M., Taras, V., & Tarba, S. Y. 2013. Organizational ambidexterity and performance: A meta-analyisis. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4): 299–312. Kirkman, B. L., Gibson, C. B., & Shapiro, D. 2001. “Exporting” teams: Enhancing the implementation and effectiveness of work teams in global affiliates. Organizational Dynamics, 30(1): 12–29. Kirkman, B. L., & Mathieu, J. E. 2005. The dimensions and antecedents of team virtuality. Journal of Management, 31: 700–718. Kirkman, B. L., Mathieu, J. E., Cordery, J. L., Rosen, B., & Kukenberger, M. 2011. Managing a new collaborative entity in business organizations: Understanding organizational communities of practice effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(6): 1234. Klein, J. A., & Kleinhaus, A. 2001. Closing the time gap in virtual teams. In C. B. Gibson & S. Cohen (Eds.), Virtual teams that work: Creating the conditions for effective virtual teaming. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kobrin, S. J. 1991. Empirical analysis of determinants of global integration. Strategic Management Journal, 21(1): 17–31. Kortmann, S., Gelhard, C., Zimmermann, C., & Piller, F. T. 2014. Linking strategic flexibility and operational efficiency: The mediating role of ambidextrous operational capabilities. Journal of Operations Management, 32(7–8): 475–490. Lavie, D., & Rosenkopf, L. 2006. Balancing exploration and exploitation in alliance formation. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4): 797–818. LePine, J. A., Buckman, B. R., Crawford, E. R., & Methot, J. R. 2011. A review of research on personality in teams: Accounting for pathways spanning levels of theory and analysis. Human Resource Management Review, 21(4): 311–330. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, J. F. 2006. Ambidexterity and performance in small- to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32(5): 646–672. Luo, Y. 2001. Local responsiveness: Perspectives from foreign subsidiaries in an emerging market. Journal of Management, 27: 451–477. Majchrzak, A., Malhotra, A., & John, R. 2005. Perceived individual collaboration know-how development through information technology-enabled contextualization: Evidence from distributed teams. Information Systems Research, 16: 9–27. Manser, T., Howard, S. K., & Gaba, D. M. 2008. Adaptive coordination in cardiac anesthesia: A study of situational changes in coordination patterns using a new observation system. Ergonomics, 51(8): 1153–1178. Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. 2001. A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26: 356–376. Martinez, J. I., & Jarillo, J. C. 1991. Coordination demands of international strategies. Journal of International Business Studies, 22(3): 429–444. Mathieu, J. E., Aguinis, H., Culpepper, S. A., & Chen, G. 2012. Understanding and estimating the power to detect cross-level interaction effects in multilevel modeling. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(5): 951. Mathieu, J. E., Tannenbaum, S. I., Donsbach, J. S., & Alliger, G. M. 2014. A review and integration of team composition models moving toward a dynamic and temporal framework. Journal of Management, 40(1): 130–160. Maznevski, M. L., & Chudoba, K. M. 2000. Bridging space over time: Global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness. Organization Science, 11(5): 473–492. Metiu, A., & Rothbard, N. P. 2013. Task bubbles, artifacts, shared emotion, and mutual focus of attention: A comparative study of the microprocesses of group engagement. Organization Science, 24(2): 455–475. Mohammed, S., & Nadkarni, S. 2014. Are we all on the same temporal page? The moderating effects of temporal team cognition on the polychronicity diversity team performance relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(3): 404–422. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. 2014. Mplus: Statistical analysis with latent variables: User’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén. Neuberg, S. L., & Newsom, J. T. 1993. Personal need for structure: Individual differences in the desire for simpler structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(1): 113–131. Okyhusen, G. A. 2001. Structuring change: Familiarity and informal interventions in problem-solving groups. Acdemy of Management Journal, 44: 794–808. Okyhusen, G. A., & Eisenhardt, K. M. 2002. Integrating knowledge in groups: How formal interventions enable flexibility. Organization Science, 13(4): 370–386. Orlikowski, W. J. 2000. Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization Science, 11: 404–428. Pertusa-Ortega, E. M., Zaragoza-Saez, P., & Claver-Cortes, E. 2010. Can formalization, complexity, and centralization influence knowledge performance? Journal of Business Research, 63(3): 310–320. Quigley, N. R., Tesluk, P. E., Locke, E. A., & Bartol, K. M. 2007. A multlevel investigation of he motivational mechanisms underlying knowledge shairng and performance. Organization Science, 18: 71–88. Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J. 2008. Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of Management, 34(3): 375–409. Raudenbush, S. W., Bryk, A. S., Cheong, Y. F., Congdon, R. T., & du Toit, M. 2011. HLM 7: Linear and nonlinear modeling. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International. Ren, Y., Kraut, R., & Kiesler, S. 2007. Applying common identity and bond theory to design of online communities. Organization Studies, 28(3): 377–408. Rietzschel, E. F., Slijkhuis, J. M., & Van Yperen, N. W. 2014. Task structure, need for structure, and creativity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44(4): 386–399. Rockett, T. L., & Okhuysen, G. A. 2002. Familiarity in groups: Exploring the relationship between inter-member familiarity and group behaviour. In H. Sondak (Ed.), Research on managing groups and teams (Vol. 4, pp. 173–201)., Toward phenomenology of groups and group membership. Bingley: Emerald. Rosso, B. D., Dekas, K. H., & Wrzesniewski, A. 2010. On the meaning of work: A theoretical integration and review. In A. P. Brief & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 30, pp. 91–127). New York: Elsevier. Roth, K., & Morrison, A. J. 1991. An empirical analysis of the integration-responsiveness framework in global industries. Journal of International Business Studies, 21(4): 541–564. Rothaermel, F. T., & Deeds, D. L. 2004. Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology: A system of new product development. Strategic Management Journal, 25(3): 201–221. Saldaña, J. 2013. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Schreyögg, G., & Sydow, J. 2010. Organizing for fluidity? Dilemmas of new organizational forms. Organization Science, 21(6): 1251–1262. Severt, J. B., & Estrada, A. X. 2015. On the structure and function of group cohesion. In A. X. Estrada, W. B. Vessey, & E. Salas (Eds.), Team cohesion: Advances in psychological theory and practice. Oxford: Emerald. Shah, S. K., & Corley, K. G. 2006. Building better theory by bridging the quantitative-qualitative divide. Journal of Management Studies, 43(8): 1821–1835. Siggelkow, N., & Levinthal, D. A. 2003. Temporarily divide to conquer: Centralized, decentralized, and reintegrated organizational approaches to exploration and adaptation. Organization Science, 14(6): 650–669. Smith-Crowe, K., Burke, M. J., Kouchaki, M., & Signal, S. M. 2013. Assessing interrater agreement via the Average Deviation Index given a variety of theoretical and methodological problems. Organizational Research Methods, 16: 127–151. Solansky, S. T. 2011. Team identification: a determining factor of performance. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 26(3): 247–258. Sole, D., & Huysman, M. 2000. Knowledge, practice and the role of location. In M. Huysman & P. van Baalen (Eds.), Communities of practice: A special issue of trends in communication. The Netherlands: Boom. Spreitzer, G. M. 1995. Psychological empowerment in the workplace—Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38: 1442–1465. Stahl, G. K., Maznevski, M. L., Voigt, A., & Jonsen, K. 2010. Unraveling the effects of cultural diversity in teams: A meta-analysis of research on multicultural work groups. Journal of International Business Studies, 41: 690–709. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. 1990. Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. 1994. Grounded theory methodology. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 273–285). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Szulanski, G. 1996. Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17: 27–43. Takeuchi, H., & Porter, M. 1986. Three roles of international marketing in global strategy. In M. E. Porter (Ed.), Competition in global industries (pp. 111–146). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Takeuchi, R., Shay, J. P., & Li, J. 2008. When does decision autonomy increase expatriate managers’ adjustment? An empirical test. Academy of Management Journal, 51: 45–60. Tannenbaum, S. I., Mathieu, J. E., Salas, E., & Cohen, D. 2012. Teams are changing: Are research and practice evolving fast enough? Industrial Organizational Psychology, 5: 2–14. Van Der Vegt, G. S., Van De Vliert, E., & Oosterhof, A. 2003. Informational dissimilarity and organizational citizenship behavior: The role of intrateam interdependence and team identification. Academy of Management Journal, 46(6): 715–727. Wilson, J. M., O’Leary, M. B., Metiu, A., & Jett, Q. R. 2008. Perceived proximity in virtual work: Explaining the paradox of far-but-close. Organization Studies, 29: 979–1002. Weick, K. E. 1976. Educational organizations as loosely cou- pled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21: 1–19. Wouters, M., & Wilderom, C. 2008. Developing performance-measurement systems as enabling formalization: A longitudinal field study of a logistics department. Accounting Organization Society, 33(4–5): 488–516. Zellmer-Bruhn, M., & Gibson, C. B. 2006. Multinational organizational context: Implications for team learning and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 49: 501–518.