The Theory and Measurement of Expertise-Based Problem Solving in Organizational Teams: Revisiting Demonstrability

References

• Aime F, Humphrey S, Derue D, Paul JB (2014) The riddle of heterarchy: Power transitions in cross-functional teams. Acad. Management J. 57(2):327–352.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson C, Kilduff GJ (2009) The pursuit of status in social groups. Current Directions Psych. Sci. 18(5):295–298.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson C, Srivastava S, Beer JS, Spataro SE, Chatman JA (2006) Knowing your place: Self-perceptions of status in face-to-face groups. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 91(6):1094–1110.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aramovich NP, Larson JR (2013) Strategic demonstration of problem solutions by groups: The effects of member preferences, confidence, and learning goals. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 122(1):36–52.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bain K, Shannahan D (2018) Just your opinion, man? Demonstrating the dimensions of demonstrability: Scale development and validation. Presentation, Annual Conference of the Interdisciplinary Network for Group Research, Bethesda, MD.Google Scholar
• Baumann MR, Bonner BL (2004) The effects of variability and expectations on utilization of member expertise and group performance. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 93(2):89–101.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baumann MR, Bonner BL (2011) The effects of perceived task difficulty and expected group longevity on memory: Implications for the development of transactive memory. Group Dynam. 15:220–232.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baumann MR, Bonner BL (2017) An expectancy theory approach to group coordination: Expertise, task features, and member behavior. J. Behav. Decision Making 30(2):407–419.Google Scholar
• Benet-Martinez V, John OP (1998) Los cinco grandes across cultures and ethnic groups: Multitrait multimethod analyses of the Big Five in Spanish and English. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 75(3):729–750.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berger J, Zelditch M Jr (1985) Status, Rewards, and Influence: How Expectations Organize Behavior (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA).Google Scholar
• Bock G, Kankanhalli A, Sharma A (2006) Are norms enough? The role of collaborative norms in promoting organizational knowledge seeking. Eur. J. Inform. Systems 15(4):357–367.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bonner BL (2000) The effects of member extroversion on influence in judgmental social tasks. Small Group Res. 31(2):225–244.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bonner BL, Baumann MR (2012) Leveraging member expertise to improve knowledge transfer and demonstrability in groups. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 102(2):337–350.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bonner BL, Bolinger AR (2014) Bring out the best in your team. Harvard Bus. Rev. 92(2):26–27.Google Scholar
• Bonner BL, Cadman BD (2014) Group judgment and advice-taking: The social context underlying CEO compensation decisions. Group Dynam. 18(4):302–317.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bonner BL, Baumann MR, Dalal R (2002) The effects of member expertise on group decision-making and group performance. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 88(2):719–736.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bonner BL, Baumann MR, Romney AC (2017) Working outside of your wheelhouse: Effects of incentives and framing on transactive memory systems and performance. Group Process. Intergroup Relat. 20(6):894–908.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bonner BL, Soderberg AT, Romney AC (2016) In the same group but moving in different directions: Coordination effects in tasks with simultaneous intellective and judgmental performance criteria. J. Experiment. Psych. Appl. 22(4):471–487.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bonner BL, Meikle NL, Bain K, Shannahan D (2018) Advice-giving and advice-taking at the individual, team, and organizational levels of analysis: A theoretical perspective with case examples. Van Swol L, MacGeorge E, eds. Oxford Handbook of Advice (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK), 299–320.Google Scholar
• Brodbeck FC, Kerschreiter R, Mojzisch A, Schulz-Hardt S (2007) Group decision making under conditions of distributed knowledge: The information asymmetries model. Acad. Management Rev. 32(2):459–479.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bunderson JS (2003) Recognizing and utilizing expertise in work groups: A status characteristics perspective. Admin. Sci. Quart. 48(4):557–591.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bunderson J, Van Der Vegt GS, Sparrowe RT (2014) Status inertia and member replacement in role-differentiated teams. Organ. Sci. 25(1):57–72.Link, Google Scholar
• Burris E, Rockmann KW, Kimmons Y (2017) The value of voice (to managers): Employee identification and the content of voice. Acad. Management J. 60(6):2099–2125.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burtscher MJ, Wacker J, Grote G, Manser T (2010) Managing nonroutine events in anesthesia: The role of adaptive coordination. J. Human Factors Ergonomics Soc. 52(2):282–294.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cabrera SF, Sauer SJ, Thomas-Hunt MC (2009) The evolving manager stereotype: The effects of industry gender-typing on performance expectations for leaders and their teams. Psych. Women Quart. 33(4):419–428.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cacioppo JT, Petty RE (1982) The need for cognition. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 42(1):116–131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cacioppo JT, Petty R, Kao CF (1984) The efficient assessment of need for cognition. J. Personality Assessment 48(3):306–307.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Campbell DT, Fiske DW (1959) Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psych. Bull. 56(2):81–105.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Campbell J, Stasser G (2006) The influence of time and task demonstrability on decision-making in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups. Small Group Res. 37(3):271–294.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carton AM, Cummings JN (2012) A theory of subgroups in work teams. Acad. Management Rev. 37(3):441–470.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Churchman CW (1967) Wicked problems. Management Sci. 14(4):141–142.Link, Google Scholar
• Cohen SG, Bailey DE (1997) What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. J. Management 23(3):239–290.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Creary SJ, Caza BB, Roberts LM (2015) Out of the box? How managing a subordinate’s multiple identities affects the quality of a manager-subordinate relationship. Acad. Management Rev. 40(4):538–562.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cronbach LJ, Meehl PE (1955) Construct validity in psychological tests. Psych. Bull. 52(4):281–302.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cronin MA, Weingart LR (2007) Representational gaps, information processing, and conflict in functionally diverse teams. Acad. Management Rev. 32(3):761–773.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cronin MA, Weingart LR (2019) Conflict across representational gaps: Threats to and opportunities for improved communication. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 116(16):7642–7649.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Crown D, Rosse JG (1995) Yours, mine, and ours: Facilitating group productivity through the integration of individual and group goals. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 64(2):138–150.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davis JH (1982) Social interaction as a combinatorial process in group decision. Brandstatter H, Davis JH, Stocker-Kreichgauer G, eds. Group Decision Making (Academic Press, London), 27–79.Google Scholar
• De Dreu CKW, Weingart LR (2003) Task vs. relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psych. 88(4):741–749.Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Dreu CKW, Nijstad BA, van Knippenberg D (2008) Motivated information processing in group judgment and decision making. Personality Soc. Psych. Rev. 12:22–49.Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Jong BA, Elfring T (2010) How does trust affect the performance of ongoing teams? The mediating role of reflexivity, monitoring, and effort. Acad. Management J. 53(3):535–549.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeRue DS (2011) Adaptive leadership theory: Leading and following as a complex adaptive process. Res. Organ. Behav. 31:125–150.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeRue DS, Ashford SJ (2010) Who will lead and who will follow? A social process of leadership identity construction in organizations. Acad. Management Rev. 35(4):627–647.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Deutsch M, Gerard HB (1955) A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. J. Abnormal Soc. Psych. 51(3):629–636.Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Vries TA, Hollenbeck JR, Davison RB, Walter F, Van Der Vegt GS (2016) Managing coordination in multiteam systems: Integrating micro and macro perspectives. Acad. Management J. 59(5):1823–1844.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dovidio JF, Gaertner SL, Validzic A (1998) Intergroup bias: Status, differentiation, and a common in-group identity. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 75(1):109–120.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Duguid MM, Loyd D, Tolbert PS (2012) The impact of categorical status, numeric representation, and work group prestige on preference for demographically similar others: A value threat approach. Organ. Sci. 23(2):386–401.Link, Google Scholar
• Edmondson A (1999) Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(2):350–383.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmondson AC (2012) Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA).Google Scholar
• Ellis APJ, Mai KM, Christian JS (2013) Examining the asymmetrical effects of goal faultlines in groups: A categorization-elaboration approach. J. Appl. Psych. 98(6):948–961.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Evans JM, Hendron MG, Oldroyd JB (2015) Withholding the ace: The individual- and unit-level performance effects of self-reported and perceived knowledge hoarding. Organ. Sci. 23(2):494–510.Link, Google Scholar
• Farh CI, Lanaj K, Ilies R (2017) Resource-based contingencies of when team–member exchange helps member performance in teams. Acad. Management J. 60(3):1117–1137.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ferguson AJ, Cohen LE, Burton MD, Beckman CM (2016) Misfit and milestones: Structural elaboration and capability reinforcement in the evolution of entrepreneurial top management teams. Acad. Management J. 59(4):1430–1450.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Feynman RP (1988) What Do You Care What Other People Think? (W. W. Norton, New York, NY).Google Scholar
• Firth BM, Hollenbeck JR, Miles JE, Ilgen DR, Barnes CM (2015) Same page, different books: Extending representational gaps theory to enhance performance in multi-team systems. Acad. Management J. 58(3):813–835.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fletcher D, Watson T (2007) Voice, silence and the business of construction: Loud and quiet voices in the construction of personal, organizational and social realities. Organization 14(2):155–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fragale AR, Overbeck JR, Neale MA (2011) Resources vs. respect: Social judgments based on targets’ power and status positions. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 47(4):767–775.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Friedrich TL, Vessey WB, Schuelke MJ, Ruark GA, Mumford MD (2009) A framework for understanding collective leadership: The selective utilization of leader and team expertise within networks. Leadership Quart. 20(6):933–958.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gardner HK, Staats BR, Gino F (2012) Dynamically integrating knowledge in teams: Transforming resources into performance. Acad. Management J. 55(4):998–1022.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gleick J (1993) Genius: The Life and Science of Richard Feynman (Vintage Books, New York, NY).Google Scholar
• Goldin C, Rouse C (2000) Orchestrating Impartiality: The impact of “blind” auditions on female musicians. Amer. Econom. Rev. 90(4):715–741.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guzzo RA, Dickson MW (1996) Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and effectiveness. Annu. Rev. Psych. 47(1):307–338.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hackman JR (1987) The design of work teams. Lorsch, J, ed. Handbook of Organizational Behavior (Prentice Hall, New York), 315–342.Google Scholar
• Hackman JR (1992) Group influences on individuals in organizations. Dunnette MD, Hough LM, eds. Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA), 199–267.Google Scholar
• Hackman RJ, Katz N (2010) Group behavior and performance. Fiske ST, Gilbert DT, Lindzey G, eds. Handbook of Social Psychology (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ), 1208–1251.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hansen MT, Mors M, Løvås B (2005) Knowledge sharing in organizations: Multiple networks, multiple phases. Acad. Management J. 48(5):776–793.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Healey MP, Vuori T, Hodgkinson GP (2015) When teams agree while disagreeing: Reflexion and reflection in shared cognition. Acad. Management Rev. 40(3):399–422.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henry RA, Strickland OJ, Yorges SL, Ladd D (1996) Helping groups determine their most accurate member: The role of outcome feedback. J. Appl. Soc. Psych. 26(13):1153–1170.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hinkin TR, Tracey JB, Enz CA (1997) Scale construction: Developing reliable and valid measurement instruments. J. Hospitality Tourism Res. 21(1):100–120.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hollenbeck JR, Beersm B, Schouten ME (2012) Beyond team types and taxonomies: A dimensional scaling conceptualization for team description. Acad. Management Rev. 37(1):82–106.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hollenbeck JR, Ilgen DR, Sego DJ, Hedlund J, Major DA, Phillips J (1995) Multilevel theory of team decision making: Decision performance in teams incorporating distributed expertise. J. Appl. Psych. 80(2):292–316.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hollenbeck JR, Moon H, Ellis A, West B, Ilgen DR, Sheppard L, Porter COLH, Wagner JA III (2002) Structural contingency theory and individual differences: Examination of external and internal person-team fit. J. Appl. Psych. 87(3):599–606.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hollingshead AB (1998) Communication, learning, and retrieval in transactive memory systems. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 34(5):423–442.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huber GP, Lewis K (2010) Cross-understanding: Implications for group cognition and performance. Acad. Management Rev. 35(1):6–26.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huber GP, Lewis K (2011) Cross-understanding and shared social theories. Acad. Management Rev. 36(2):422–424.Google Scholar
• Jeong-Yeon L, Bachrach DG, Lewis K (2014) Social network ties, transactive memory, and performance in groups. Organ. Sci. 25(3):951–967.Link, Google Scholar
• John OP, Donahue EM, Kentle RL (1991) The big five inventory—Versions 4a and 54. Institute of Personality and Social Research, University of California, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
• John OP, Naumann LP, Soto CJ (2008) Paradigm shift to the integrative Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and conceptual issues. John OP, Robins RW, Pervin, LA, eds. Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research (The Guilford Press, New York), 114–158.Google Scholar
• Joshi A (2014) By whom and when is women’s expertise recognized? The interactive effects of gender and education in science and engineering teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 59(2):202–239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Joshi A, Knight AP (2015) Who defers to whom and why? Dual pathways linking demographic differences and dyadic deference to team effectiveness. Acad. Management J. 58(1):59–84.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jung H, Vissa B, Pich M (2017) How do entrepreneurial founding teams allocate task positions? Acad. Management J. 60(1):264–294.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kane AA (2010) Unlocking knowledge transfer potential: Knowledge demonstrability and superordinate social identity. Organ. Sci. 21(3):643–660.Link, Google Scholar
• Kane AA, Argote L, Levine JM (2005) Knowledge transfer between groups via personnel rotation: Effects of social identity and knowledge quality. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 96(1):56–71.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kelley T (2001) The Art of Innovation: Lessons in Creativity from IDEO, America’s Leading Design Firm, 6th ed. (Currency/Doubleday, New York).Google Scholar
• Kerr NL, Tindale RS (2004) Group performance and decision making. Annu. Rev. Psych. 55:623–655.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kirchler E, Davis JH (1986) The influence of member status differences and task type on group consensus and member position change. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 51(1):83–91.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kistruck GM, Lount RB Jr, Smith BR, Bergman BJ Jr, Moss TW (2016) Cooperation vs. competition: Alternative goal structures for motivating groups in a resource scarce environment. Acad. Management J. 59(4):1174–1198.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Korde R, Paulus PB (2017) Alternating individual and group idea generation: Finding the elusive synergy. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 70:177–190.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kotovsky K, Hayes JR, Simon HA (1985) Why are some problems hard? Evidence from Tower of Hanoi. Cognitive Psych. 17(2):248–294.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kozlowski SWJ, Klein KJ (2000) A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. Klein KJ, Kozlowski SWJ, eds. Multilevel Theory, Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and New Directions (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco), 3–90.Google Scholar
• Kozlowski SWJ, Ilgen DR (2006) Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psych. Sci. Public Interest 7(3):77–124.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kozlowski SWJ, Gully SM, Nason ER, Smith EM (1999) Developing adaptive teams: A theory of compilation and performance across levels and time. Ilgen DR, Pulakos ED, eds. The Changing Nature of Performance (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco), 240–292.Google Scholar
• Kozlowski SWJ, Watola D, Jensen JM, Kim B, Botero I (2009) Developing adaptive teams: A theory of dynamic team leadership. Salas E, Goodwin GF, Burke CS, eds. Team Effectiveness in Complex Organizations: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives and Approaches (Routledge Academic, New York), 109–146.Google Scholar
• Kruglanski AW (1990) Lay epistemic theory in social-cognitive psychology. Psych. Inquiry 1(3):181–197.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lanaj K, Hollenbeck JR (2015) Leadership over-emergence in self-managing teams: The role of gender and countervailing biases. Acad. Management J. 58(5):1470–1494.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Langfred CW (2004) Too much of a good thing? Negative effects of high trust and individual autonomy in self-managing teams. Acad. Management J. 47(3):385–399.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Länsisalmi H, Kivimäki M, Elovainio M (2004) Is underutilization of knowledge, skills, and abilities a major barrier to innovation? Psych. Rep. 94(3):739–750.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lau DC, Murnighan J (2005) Interactions within groups and subgroups: The effects of demographic faultlines. Acad. Management J. 48(4):645–659.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laughlin PR (1980) Social combination processes of cooperative problem-solving groups on verbal intellective tasks. Fishbein M, ed. Progress in Social Psychology (Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ), 127–155.Google Scholar
• Laughlin PR (1999) Collective induction: Twelve postulates. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 80(1):50–69.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laughlin PR (2011) Group Problem Solving (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Laughlin PR, Bonner BL (1999) Collective induction: Effects of multiple hypotheses and multiple evidence in two problem domains. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 77(6):1163–1172.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laughlin PR, Ellis AL (1986) Demonstrability and social combination processes on mathematical intellective tasks. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 22(3):177–189.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laughlin PR, Hollingshead AB (1995) A theory of collective induction. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 61(1):94–107.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laughlin PR, Bonner BL, Altermatt TW (1999a) Effectiveness of positive hypothesis testing in inductive and deductive rule learning. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 77(2):130–146.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laughlin PR, Bonner BL, Miner AG (2002) Groups perform better than the best individuals on letters-to-numbers problems. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 88(2):605–620.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laughlin PR, Bonner BL, Miner AG, Carnevale PJ (1999b) Frames of reference in quantity estimations by groups and individuals. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 80(2):103–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levine JM, Moreland RL (1990) Progress in small group research. Annu. Rev. Psych. 41(1):585–634.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levine JM, Smith ER (2013) Group cognition: Collective information search and distribution. Carlston D, ed. The Oxford Handbook of Social Cognition (Oxford University Press, New York), 616–636.Google Scholar
• Lewis K (2003) Measuring transactive memory systems in the field: Scale development and validation. J. Appl. Psych. 88(4):587–604.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Littlepage G, Mueller AL (1997) Recognition and utilization of expertise in problem-solving groups: Expert characteristics and behavior. Group Dynam. 1(4):324–328.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Littlepage G, Robison W, Reddington K (1997) Effects of task experience and group experience on group performance, member ability, and recognition of expertise. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes. 69(2):133–147.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Loyd DL, Phillips KW, Whitson J, Thomas-Hunt MC (2010) Expertise in your midst: How congruence between status and speech style affects reactions to unique knowledge. Group Processes Intergroup Relations 13(3):379–395.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Majchrzak A, More PB, Faraj S (2012) Transcending knowledge differences in cross-functional teams. Organ. Sci. 23(4):951–970.Link, Google Scholar
• Marks MA, Mathieu JE, Zaccaro SJ (2001) A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Acad. Management Rev. 26(3):356–376.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marks MA, Sabella MJ, Burke CS, Zaccaro SJ (2002) The impact of cross-training on team effectiveness. J. Appl. Psych. 87(1):3–13.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McGlynn RP, McGurk D, Effland VS, Johl NL, Harding DJ (2004) Brainstorming and task performance in groups constrained by evidence. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 93(1):75–87.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McGrath JE, Argote L (2001) Group processes in organizational contexts. Hogg M, Tindale RS, eds. Group Processes, Blackwell's Handbook of Social Psychology, vol. 3 (Blackwell Publishers, London), 603–627.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mesmer-Magnus JR, DeChurch LA (2009) Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psych. 94(2):535–546.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mitchell TR, Silver WS (1990) Individual and group goals when workers are interdependent: Effects on task strategies and performance. J. Appl. Psych. 75(2):185–193.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Morgeson FP, Humphrey SE (2006) The work design questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. J. Appl. Psych. 91(6):1321–1339.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nijstad BA, Berger-Selman F, De Dreu CKW (2014) Innovation in top management teams: Minority dissent, transformational leadership, and radical innovations. Eur. J. Work Organ. Psych. 23:310–322.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nishii LH (2013) The benefits of climate for inclusion for gender-diverse groups. Acad. Management J. 56(6):1754–1774.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Leary M, Mortensen M, Woolley A (2011) Multiple team membership: A theoretical model of its effects on productivity and learning for individuals and teams. Acad. Management Rev. 36(3):461–478.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Orasanu J, Salas E (1993) Team decision making in complex environments. Klein G, Orasanu J, Calderwood R, Zsambok C, eds. Decision Making in Action: Models and Methods (Ablex, Norwood, NJ), 327–345.Google Scholar
• Owens BP, Hekman DR (2016) How does leader humility influence team performance? Exploring the mechanisms of contagion and collective promotion focus. Acad. Management J. 59(3):1088–1111.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Perry-Smith JE, Shalley CE (2014) A social composition view of team creativity: The role of member nationality heterogeneous ties outside of the team. Organ. Sci. 25(5):1434–1452.Link, Google Scholar
• Priesemuth M, Schminke M, Ambrose ML, Folger R (2014) Abusive supervision climate: A multiple-mediation model of its impact on group outcomes. Acad. Management J. 57(5):1513–1534.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Quigley NR, Tesluk PE, Locke EA, Bartol KM (2007) A multilevel investigation of the motivational mechanisms underlying knowledge sharing and performance. Organ. Sci. 18(1):71–88.Link, Google Scholar
• Randolph-Seng B, Norris J (2011) Cross-understanding in groups: How to cross over without dying. Acad. Management Rev. 36(2):420–422.Google Scholar
• Reagans R, Miron-Spektor E, Argote L (2016) Knowledge utilization, coordination, and team performance. Organ. Sci. 27(5):1108–1124.Link, Google Scholar
• Reagans R, Zuckerman E, Mcevily B (2004) How to make the team: Social networks vs. demography as criteria for designing effective teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 49(1):101–133.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rogers W (1986) Rogers Commission Report. Report, Presidential Commission, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Schulte M, Cohen N, Klein KJ (2012) The coevolution of network ties and perceptions of team psychological safety. Organ. Sci. 23(2):564–581.Link, Google Scholar
• Schriesheim CA, Powers KJ, Scandura TA, Gardiner CC, Lankau MJ (1993) Improving construct measurement in management research: Comments and a quantitative approach for assessing the theoretical content adequacy of paper-and-pencil survey-type instruments. J. Management 19(2):385–417.Google Scholar
• Schwab D (1980) Construct validity in organizational behavior. Res. Organ. Behav. 2:3–43.Google Scholar
• Shaw ME (1932) A comparison of individuals and small groups in the rational solution of complex problems. Amer. J. Psych. 44(3):491–504.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shore J, Bernstein E, Lazer D (2015) Facts and figuring: An experimental investigation of network structure and performance in information and solution spaces. Organ. Sci. 26(5):1432–1446.Link, Google Scholar
• Sinaceur M, Thomas-Hunt MC, O’Neill O, Neale MA (2010) Influence and perceived expertise in group decision making: Minority members’ impact on private judgments and public decision. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 36(3):423–437.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sniezek JA, Buckley T (1995) Cueing and cognitive conflict in judge–advisor decision making. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 62:159–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stasser G, Stewart D (1992) Discovery of hidden profiles by decision-making groups: Solving a problem vs. making a judgment. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 63(3):426–434.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Steiner ID (1972) Group Process and Productivity (Academic Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Stevens MJ, Campion MA (1994) The knowledge, skill, and ability requirements for teamwork: Implications for human resource management. J. Management 20(2):503–530.Google Scholar
• Thomas-Hunt MC, Phillips KW (2004) When what you know is not enough: Expertise and gender dynamics in task groups. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 30(12):1585–1598.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tindale RS, Kameda T (2000) ‘Social sharedness’ as a unifying theme for information processing in groups. Group Processes Intergroup Relat. 3(2):123–140.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Triplett N (1898) The dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition. Amer. J. Psych. 9(4):507–533.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tsai M, Bendersky C (2016) The pursuit of information sharing: Expressing task conflicts as debates vs. disagreements increases perceived receptivity to dissenting opinions in groups. Organ. Sci. 27(1):141–156.Link, Google Scholar
• Tzabbar D, Margolis J (2017) Beyond the startup stage: The founding team’s human capital, new venture’s stage of life, founder–CEO duality, and breakthrough innovation. Organ. Sci. 28(5):857–872.Link, Google Scholar
• Van Oorschot KE, Akkermans H, Sengupta K, Van Wassenhove LN (2013) Anatomy of a decision trap in complex new product development projects. Acad. Management J. 56(1):285–307.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Swol L, Prahl A (2018) Giving and receiving advice in groups, networks, and organizations. Van Swol L, MacGeorge E, eds. Oxford Handbook of Advice (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK), 299–320.Google Scholar
• Varella P, Javidan M, Waldman DA (2012) A model of instrumental networks: The roles of socialized charismatic leadership and group behavior. Organ. Sci. 23(2):582–595.Link, Google Scholar
• Wang S, He Y (2008) Compensating nondedicated cross-functional teams. Organ. Sci. 19(5):753–765.Link, Google Scholar
• Wittenbaum GM, Hollingshead AB, Botero IC (2004) From cooperative to motivated information sharing in groups: Moving beyond the hidden profile paradigm. Commun. Monogr. 71(3):286–310.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Young-Hyman T (2017) Cooperating without co-laboring: How formal organizational power moderates cross-functional interaction in project teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 62(1):179–214.Crossref, Google Scholar