Exploring the discursive construction of subgroups in global virtual teams

References

• Boden, D. (1994). The business of talk: Organizations in action. Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Boivin, G., Brummans, B. H. J. M., & Barker, J. R. (2017). The institutionalization of CCO scholarship: Trends from 2000 to 2015. Management Communication Quarterly, 31(3), 331–355. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318916687396
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carton, A. M., & Cummings, J. N. (2012). A theory of subgroups in work teams. Academy of Management Review, 37(3), 441–470. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0322
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative research. Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Connaughton, S. L., & Shuffler, M. (2007). Multinational multicultural distributed teams: A review and future agenda. Small Group Research, 38(3), 387–412. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496407301970
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooren, F. (2015). Organizational discourse. Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cramton, C. D., & Hinds, P. J. (2005). Subgroup dynamics in internationally distributed teams: Ethno-centrism or cross-national learning? Research in Organizational Behavior, 26, 231–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-3085(04)26006-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. S. (1994). Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science, 5(2), 121–147. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.5.2.121
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Earley, P. C., & Mosakowski, E. (2000). Creating hybrid team cultures: An empirical test of transnational team functioning. The Academy of Management Journal, 43, 26–29. https://doi.org/10.2307/1556384
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Einola, K., & Alvesson, M. (2019). The making and unmaking of teams. Human Relations, 72(12), 1891–1919. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726718812130
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erhardt, N., Gibbs, J. L., Martin-Rios, C., & Sherblom, J. C. (2016). Exploring affordances of email for team learning over time. Small Group Research, 47(3), 243–278. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496416635823
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fairhurst, G. T., & Putnam, L. (2004). Organizations as discursive constructions. Communication Theory, 14(1), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00301.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibbs, J. L. (2009). Dialectics in a global software team: Negotiating tensions across time, space, and culture. Human Relations, 62(6), 905–935. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726709104547
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibbs, J. L., Nekrassova, D., Grushina, Y., & Abdul Wahab, S. (2008). Reconceptualizing virtual teaming from a communicative perspective: Review, redirection, and agenda for future research. Communication Yearbook, 32, 191–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2008.11679078
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, C. B., & Gibbs, J. L. (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. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.51.3.451
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10(6), 791–815. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.10.6.791
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jehn, K. A., & Bezrukova, K. (2010). The faultline activation process and the effects of activated faultlines on coalition formation, conflict, and group outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 112(1), 24–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.11.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T. (2005). The institutionalization of Alta in organizational communication studies. Management Communication Quarterly, 18(4), 618–627. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318904273851
   Google Scholar
• Lau, D. C., & Murnighan, J. K. (1998). Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups. The Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 325–340. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1998.533229
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Majchrzak, A., Rice, R., Malhotra, A., King, N., & Ba, S. (2000). Technology adaptation: The case of a computer-supported inter-organizational virtual team. MIS Quarterly, 24(4), 569–600. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250948
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McPhee, R. D., & Iverson, J. (2009). Agents of constitution in communidad: Constitutive processes of communication in organizations. In L. L. Putnam, & A. M. Nicotera (Eds.), Building theories of organization: The constitutive role of communication (pp. 49–88). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Meyerson, D., Weick, K. E., & Kramer, R. M. (1996). Swift trust and temporary groups. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 166–195). Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Nordbäck, E. S., Myers, K. K., & McPhee, R. D. (2017). Workplace flexibility and communication flows: A structurational view. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 45, 397–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2017.1355560
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panteli, N., & Davison, R. M. (2005). The role of subgroups in the communication patterns of global virtual teams. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 48(2), 191–200. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2005.849651
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polzer, J. T., Crisp, C. B., Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Kim, J. W. (2006). Extending the faultline model to geographically dispersed teams: How collocated subgroups can impair group functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 679–692. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.22083024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putnam, L. L., & Fairhurst, G. T. (2015). Revisiting “organizations as discursive constructions”: 10 years later. Communication Theory, 25(4), 375–392. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12074
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putnam, L. L., & Nicotera, A. M. (2009). Building theories of organization: The constitutive role of communication. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, C. R., Corman, S. R., & Cheney, G. (1998). Development of structurational model of identification in the organization. Communication Theory, 8(3), 298–336. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.1998.tb00223.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shemla, M., Meyer, B., Greer, L., & Jehn, K. A. (2014). A review of perceived diversity in teams: Does how members perceive their team’s composition affect team processes and outcomes? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(S1), 89–106. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1957
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shockley-Zalabak, P. (2002). Protean places: Teams across time and space. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 30(3), 231–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909880216587
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Tracy, K. (2002). Everyday talk: Building and reflecting identities. Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weick, K. E. (1979). The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar