Building High-Performing Autonomous Teams in Complex Manufacturing Settings: A Naturalistic Research Approach

References

• Barratt, M., Choi, T. Y., & Li, M. (2011). Qualitative case studies in operations management: Trends, research outcomes, and future research implications. Journal of Operations Management, 29, 329–342.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beal, D. J., Cohen, R. R., Burke, M. J., & McLendon, C. L. (2003). Cohesion and performance in groups: A meta-analytic clarification of construct relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(6), 989–1004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D. K., & Mead, M. (1987). The case research strategy in studies of information systems. MIS Quarterly, 11, 369–386.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benson, G. S., Kimmel, M., & Lawler III, E. E. (2013). Adoption of employee involvement practices: Organizational change issues and insights. Research in Organizational Change and Development, 21, 233–257.
   Google Scholar
• Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Klein, C., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., & Halpin, S. M. (2006). What type of leadership behaviors are functional in teams? A meta-analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(3), 288–307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., & Higgs, A. C. (1993). Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology, 46(4), 823–847.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooney, R. (2004). Empowered self-management and the design of work teams. Personnel Review, 33(6), 677–692.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cronin, M. A., & Weingart, L. R. (2007). Representational gaps, information processing, and conflict in functionally diverse teams. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 761–773.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Leede, J., & Stoker, J. I. (1999). Self-managing teams in manufacturing companies: Implications for the engineering function. Engineering Management Journal, 11(3), 19–24.
   Google Scholar
• Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 417–440.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dineen, B. R., & Noe, R. A. (2003). The impact of team fluidity and its implications for human resource management research and practice. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 22, 1–37.
   Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frese, M., & Zapf, D. (1994). Action as the core of work psychology: A German approach. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 4, 2nd ed., pp. 271–340). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
   Google Scholar
• Greasley, K., Bryman, A., Dainty, A., Price, A., Naismith, N., & Soetanto, R. (2008). Understanding empowerment from an employee perspective: What does it mean and do they want it? Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 14(1/2), 39–55.
   Google Scholar
• Hacker, W. (2003). Action regulation theory: A practical tool for the design of modern work processes? European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 12(2), 105–130.
   Google Scholar
• Handfield, R. B., & Melnyk, S. A. (1998). The scientific theory-building process: A primer using the case of TQM. Journal of Operations Management, 16(4), 321–339.
   Google Scholar
• Hu, J., & Liden, R. (2015). Making a difference in the teamwork: Linking team prosocial motivation to team processes and effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 58(4), 1102–1127. doi:10.5465/amj.2012.1142
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, M. D., Hollenbeck, J. R., DeRue, D. S., Barnes, C. M., & Jundt, D. (2013). Functional versus dysfunctional team change: Problem diagnosis and structural feedback for self-managed teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 122(1), 1–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jong, A. D., Ruyter, K. D., & Lemmink, J. (2004). Antecedents and consequences of the service climate in boundary-spanning self-managing service teams. Journal of Marketing, 68(2), 18–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2002). Five-factor model of personality and job satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 530–541.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Julien, D., & Holmshaw, P. (2012). Six Sigma in a low volume and complex environment. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 3(1), 28–44.
   Google Scholar
• Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (2005). The discipline of teams. Harvard Business Review, 83(7), 162.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King, E. B., George, J. M., & Hebl, M. R. (2005). Linking personality to helping behaviors at work: An interactional perspective. Journal of Personality, 73(3), 585–608.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirkman, B. L., & Rosen, B. (1999). Beyond self-management: Antecedents and consequences of team empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 42(1), 58–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kozlowski, S. W., & Bell, B. S. (2003). Work groups and teams in organizations. Handbook of Psychology, Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 12, 333.
   Google Scholar
• Kukenberger, M. R., Mathieu, J. E., & Ruddy, T. (2015). A cross-level test of empowerment and process influences on members’ informal learning and team commitment. Journal of Management, 43(1), 987–1016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lantz, A., Hansen, N., & Antoni, C. (2015). Participative work design in lean production: A strategy for dissolving the paradox between standardized work and team proactivity by stimulating team learning? Journal of Workplace Learning, 27(1), 19–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leach, D. J., Wall, T. D., Rogelberg, S. G., & Jackson, P. R. (2005). Team autonomy, performance, and member job strain: Uncovering the teamwork KSA link. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54(1), 1–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalist inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Magpili, N. & Pazos, P. (2017). Self-managing team performance: A systematic review of multilevel input factors. Small Group Research, in press. doi: 10.1177/1046496417710500
   Google Scholar
• Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26(3), 356–376.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mathieu, J., Maynard, M. T., Rapp, T., & Gilson, L. (2008). Team effectiveness 1997–2007: A review of recent advancements and a glimpse into the future. Journal of Management, 34(3), 410–476.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mathieu, J. E., Gilson, L. L., & Ruddy, T. M. (2006). Empowerment and team effectiveness: An empirical test of an integrated model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(1), 97–108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mathieu, J. E., Heffner, T. S., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2000). The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(2), 273–283.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCutcheon, D. M., & Meredith, J. R. (1993). Conducting case study research in operations management. Journal of Operations Management, 11(3), 239–256.
   Google Scholar
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Millikin, J. P., Hom, P. W., & Manz, C. C. (2010). Self-management competencies in self-managing teams: Their impact on multi-team system productivity. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(5), 687–702.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan Jr., B. B., Salas, E., & Glickman, A. S. (1993). An analysis of team evolution and maturation. The Journal of General Psychology, 120, 277–291.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgeson, F. P., Johnson, M. D., Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., & Mumford, T. V. (2006). Understanding reactions to job redesign: A quasi-experimental investigation of the moderating effects of organizational context on perceptions of performance behavior. Personnel Psychology, 59(2), 333–363.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgeson, F. P., Reider, M. H., & Campion, M. A. (2005). Selecting individuals in team settings: The importance of social skills, personality characteristics, and teamwork knowledge. Personnel Psychology, 58(3), 583–611.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pagell, M., & LePine, J. A. (2002). Multiple case studies of team effectiveness in manufacturing organizations. Journal of Operations Management, 20, 619–639.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pais, C. L. (2010). Self-managed teams in the auto components industry. Team Performance Management, 16(7/8), 359–387.
   Google Scholar
• Pauget, B., & Wald, A. (2013). Relational competence in complex temporary organizations: The case of a French hospital construction project network. International Journal of Project Management, 31(2), 200–211.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pazos, P., & Magpili, N. (2014). Understanding the link between team autonomy and effectiveness: A systematic review and synthesis. In Proceedings of the international annual conference of the American Society for Engineering Management, Virginia Beach, VA.
   Google Scholar
• Richter, A. W., Dawson, J. F., & West, M. A. (2011). The effectiveness of teams in organizations: A meta-analysis. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(13), 2749–2769.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roby, D. (1995). Uncommon sense: Lean manufacturing speeds cycle time to improve low‐volume production at Hughes. National Productivity Review, 14(2), 79–87.
   Google Scholar
• Rousseau, V., Aubé, C., & Savoie, A. (2006). Teamwork behaviors: A review and an integration of frameworks. Small Group Research, 37(5), 540–570.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rousseau, V., Aubé, C., & Tremblay, S. (2013). Team coaching and innovation in work teams: An examination of the motivational and behavioral intervening mechanisms. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 34(4), 344–364.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheridan, J. (2000). Aircraft-controls firm combines strategies to improve speed. Flexibility and Quality, 22, 120–125.
   Google Scholar
• Sterling, A., & Boxall, P. (2013). Lean production, employee learning and workplace outcomes: A case analysis through the ability‐motivation‐opportunity framework. Human Resource Management Journal, 23(3), 227–240.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stevens, M. J., & Campion, M. A. (1994). The knowledge, skill, and ability requirements for teamwork: Implications for human resource management. Journal of Management, 20(2), 503–530.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, G. L. (2006). A meta-analytic review of relationships between team design features and team performance. Journal of Management, 32(1), 29–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, G. L., Courtright, S. H., & Barrick, M. R. (2012). Peer-based control in self-managing teams: Linking rational and normative influence with individual and group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(2), 435–447.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stockton, D. J., & Lindley, R. J. (1995). Implementing kanbans within high variety/low volume manufacturing environments. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 15(7), 47–59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stuart, I., McCutcheon, D., Handfield, R., McLachlin, R., & Samson, D. (2002). Effective case research in operations management: A process perspective. Journal of Operations Management, 20(5), 419–433.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thamhain, H. J. (2011). Critical success factors for managing technology-intensive teams in the global enterprise. Engineering Management Journal, 23(3), 30–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Vegt, G. S., Bunderson, S., & Kuipers, B. (2010). Why turnover matters in self-managing work teams: Learning, social integration, and task flexibility. Journal of Management, 36(5), 1168–1191.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Dun, D. H., & Wilderom, C. P. M. (2015, January). Governing highly performing lean team behaviors: A mixed-methods longitudinal study. Paper presented at the Seventy-Fifth Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Vancouver, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Wageman, R., & Gordon, F. M. (2005). As the twig is bent: How group values shape emergent task interdependence in groups. Organization Science, 16(6), 687–700.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Womack, J., Roos, D., & Jones, D. (2006). The machine that changed the world. New York, NY: Rawson and Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, S. B., & Guy, M. E. (2004). Self-managed work teams: Who uses them? What makes them successful? Public Performance & Management Review, 27(3), 60–79.
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. (2003). Applications of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar