Team Flexibility in Organizational Change Context: Antecedents and Consequences

References

• Allen J, Jimmieson NL, Bordia P, Irmer BE. Uncertainty during organizational change: managing perceptions through communication. J Chang Manag. 2007;7(2):187–210. doi:10.1080/14697010701563379
   Google Scholar
• Krysinski PR, Reed DB. Organizational change and change leadership. J Leadersh Org Stud. 1994;1(2):65–72. doi:10.1177/107179199400100207
   Google Scholar
• Bordia P, Hunt E, Paulsen N, Tourish D, DiFonzo N. Uncertainty during organizational change: is it all about control? Eur J Work Organ Psy. 2004;13(3):345–365. doi:10.1080/13594320444000128
   Google Scholar
• Park S, Park S. How can employees adapt to change? Clarifying the adaptive performance concepts. Hum Resour Dev Q. 2021;32(1):E1–E15. doi:10.1002/hrdq.21411
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Heuvel M, Demerouti E, Bakker AB, Hetland J, Schaufeli WB. How do employees adapt to organizational change? The role of meaning-making and work engagement. Span J Psychol. 2020;23:e56. doi:10.1017/SJP.2020.55
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cloutier J, Robert-Huot G. How organizations adapt their HR practices to a changing environment: 11 theoretical dimensions to inform human resource management. Can J Adm Sci. 2021;38(3):288–302. doi:10.1002/cjas.1608
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Heuvel M, Demerouti E, Bakker AB, Schaufeli WB. Adapting to change: the value of change information and meaning-making. J Vocat Behav. 2013;83(1):11–21. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2013.02.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• He H, Baruch Y, Lin C-P. Modeling team knowledge sharing and team flexibility: the role of within-team competition. Hum Relat. 2014;67(8):947–978. doi:10.1177/0018726713508797
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunford R, Cuganesan S, Grant D, Palmer I, Beaumont R, Steele C. “Flexibility” as the rationale for organizational change: a discourse perspective. J Organ Change Manag. 2013;26(1):83–97. doi:10.1108/09534811311307923
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tienari J, Tainio R. The myth of flexibility in organizational change. Scandinavian J Manage. 1999;15(4):351–384. doi:10.1016/S0956-5221(98)00021-9
   Google Scholar
• Li Y, Shepherd M, Liu JY-C, Klein G. Enhancing development team flexibility in IS projects. Inform Technol Manag. 2017;18(1):83–96. doi:10.1007/s10799-016-0258-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li Y, Chang K-C, Chen H-G, Jiang JJ. Software development team flexibility antecedents. J Syst Software. 2010;83(10):1726–1734. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2010.04.077
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu L, Yetton P. Sponsorship and it vendor management of projects. J Inf Technol-Uk. 2009;24(1):46–54. doi:10.1057/jit.2009.2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shin J, Taylor MS, Seo M-G. Resources for change: the relationships of organizational inducements and psychological resilience to employees’ attitudes and behaviors toward organizational change. Acad Manage J. 2012;55(3):727–748. doi:10.5465/amj.2010.0325
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orridge M. Change Leadership: Developing a Change-Adept Organization. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Company; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Kotter JP. Leading change: why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Bus Rev. 1995;73(2):59–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ling B, Guo Y, Chen D. Change leadership and employees’ commitment to change: a multilevel motivation approach. J Pers Psychol. 2018;17(2):83–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrick MR, Stewart GL, Neubert MJ, Mount MK. Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. J Appl Psycho. 1998;83(3):377–391. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.83.3.377
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Reilly CA III, Tushman ML. Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: resolving the innovator’s dilemma. In: Brief AP, Staw BM, editors. Res Organ Behav. Vol. 28. 2008:185–206.
   Google Scholar
• Luger J, Raisch S, Schimmer M. Dynamic balancing of exploration and exploitation: the contingent benefits of ambidexterity. Organ Sci. 2018;29(3):449–470. doi:10.1287/orsc.2017.1189
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weiss L, Kanbach KD. Toward an integrated framework of corporate venturing for organizational ambidexterity as a dynamic capability. Manag Rev Q. 2021. doi:10.1007/s11301-021-00223-y
   Google Scholar
• Herold DM, Fedor DB, Caldwell S, Liu Y. The effects of transformational and change leadership on employees’ commitment to a change: a multilevel study. J Appl Psycho. 2008;93:346–357. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.346
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raelin J. Leadership-as-practice: antecedent to leaderful purpose. J Chang Manag. 2021;4:1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Gill R. Change management or change leadership? J Chang Manag. 2002;3:307–318. doi:10.1080/714023845
   Google Scholar
• Acikgoz A, Gunsel A, Kuzey C, Zaim H. Team foresight in new product development projects. Group Decis Negot. 2016;25(2):289–323. doi:10.1007/s10726-015-9443-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Günsel A, Açikgöz A. The effects of team flexibility and emotional intelligence on software development performance. Group Decis Negot. 2013;22(2):359–377. doi:10.1007/s10726-011-9270-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McComb SA, Green SG, Dale Compton W. Team flexibility’s relationship to staffing and performance in complex projects: an empirical analysis. J Eng Technol Manage. 2007;24(4):293–313. doi:10.1016/j.jengtecman.2007.09.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang K-C, Wong J-H, Li Y, Lin Y-C, Chen H-G. External social capital and information systems development team flexibility. Inform Software Tech. 2011;53(6):592–600. doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2011.01.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Georgsdottir AS, Getz I. How flexibility facilitates innovation and ways to manage it in organizations. Creat Innov Manag. 2004;13(3):166–175. doi:10.1111/j.0963-1690.2004.00306.x
   Google Scholar
• O’Reilly CA, Tushman ML. Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: resolving the innovator’s dilemma. Res Organ Behav. 2008;28:185–206.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanchez R. Strategic flexibility in product competition. Strategic Manage J. 1995;16(S1):135–159. doi:10.1002/smj.4250160921
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zolin R, Kuckertz A, Kautonen T. Human resource flexibility and strong ties in entrepreneurial teams. J Bus Res. 2011;64(10):1097–1103. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2010.11.026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• March JG. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ Sci. 1991;2(1):71–87. doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cao Q, Gedajlovic E, Zhang H. Unpacking organizational ambidexterity: dimensions, contingencies, and synergistic effects. Organ Sci. 2009;20(4):781–796. doi:10.1287/orsc.1090.0426
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katou AA, Budhwar PS, Patel C. A trilogy of organizational ambidexterity: leader’s social intelligence, employee work engagement and environmental changes. J Bus Res. 2021;128:688–700. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.01.043
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• He Z-L, Wong P-K. Exploration vs. exploitation: an empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organ Sci. 2004;15(4):481–494. doi:10.1287/orsc.1040.0078
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao W, Feng T, Xin X, Hao G. How to respond to competitors’ green success for improving performance: the moderating role of organizational ambidexterity. Bus Strateg Environ. 2021;30(1):489–506. doi:10.1002/bse.2633
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA, March JG. The myopia of learning. Strategic Manage J. 1993;14(S2):95–112. doi:10.1002/smj.4250141009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu C, Yang H, Sun H, Lin Z. Rivals or collaborators? Relational ambidexterity and absorption speed. J Manage. 2021;5:01492063211021141.
   Google Scholar
• Lee G, Xia WD. The ability of information systems development project teams to respond to business and technology changes: a study of flexibility measures. Eur J Inform Syst. 2005;14(1):75–92. doi:10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000523
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hastings BJ, Schwarz GM. Leading change processes for success: a dynamic application of diagnostic and dialogic organization development. J Appl Behav Sci. 2021;56:00218863211019561
   Google Scholar
• van der Voet J. Change leadership and public sector organizational change: examining the interactions of transformational leadership style and red tape. Am Rev Public Adm. 2016;46(6):660–682. doi:10.1177/0275074015574769
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Onyeneke GB, Abe T. The effect of change leadership on employee attitudinal support for planned organizational change. J Organ Change Manag. 2021;34(2):403–415. doi:10.1108/JOCM-08-2020-0244
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caulfield JL, Senger A. Perception is reality: change leadership and work engagement. Leadership Org Dev J. 2017;38(7):927–945. doi:10.1108/LODJ-07-2016-0166
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siren C, Patel PC, Wincent J. How do harmonious passion and obsessive passion moderate the influence of a CEO’s change-oriented leadership on company performance? Leadersh Q. 2016;27(4):653–670. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.03.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karp T, HelgӨ TIT. From change management to change leadership: embracing chaotic change in public service organizations. J Chang Manag. 2008;8:85–96. doi:10.1080/14697010801937648
   Google Scholar
• Armenakis AA, Bedeian AG. Organizational change: a review of theory and research in the 1990s. J Manage. 1999;25(3):293–315. doi:10.1177/014920639902500303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi M. Employees’ attitudes toward organizational change: a literature review. Hum Resour Manage-Us. 2011;50:479–500. doi:10.1002/hrm.20434
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griffin MA, Neal A, Parker SK, New A. Model of work role performance: positive behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts. Acad Manage J. 2007;50(2):327–347. doi:10.5465/amj.2007.24634438
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghitulescu BE. Making change happen: the impact of work context on adaptive and proactive behaviors. J Appl Behav Sci. 2013;49(2):206–245. doi:10.1177/0021886312469254
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batistič S, Černe M, Kaše R, Zupic I. The role of organizational context in fostering employee proactive behavior: the interplay between HR system configurations and relational climates. Eur Manag J. 2016;34(5):579–588. doi:10.1016/j.emj.2016.01.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bohlmann C, Zacher H. Making things happen (un) expectedly: interactive effects of age, gender, and motives on evaluations of proactive behavior. J Bus Psychol. 2021;36(4):609–631. doi:10.1007/s10869-020-09691-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caldwell SD, Herold DM, Fedor DB. Toward an understanding of the relationships among organizational change, individual differences, and changes in person-environment fit: a cross-level study. J Appl Psychol. 2004;89(5):868–882. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.868
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fugate M, Prussia GE, Kinicki AJ. Managing employee withdrawal during organizational change: the role of threat appraisal. J Manage. 2012;38:890–914.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liao H-P, Pan X-F, Yin X-Q, Liu Y-F, Li J-Y, Wang J-L. Decreased COVID-related adaptive behavior and increased negative affect: a multivariate latent growth curve model. J Health Psychol. 2021;135910532110216. doi:10.1177/13591053211021651
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Clercq D, Khan MA, Haq IU. Perceived organizational politics and turnover intentions: critical roles of social adaptive behavior and emotional regulation skills. J Manage Organ. 2021;2:1–19.
   Google Scholar
• Wadhwa S, Rao KS. Towards a proactive flexibility management view. Glob J Flex Syst Manag. 2002;3(2/3):1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Faupel S, Helpap S. Top management’s communication and employees’ commitment to change: the role of perceived procedural fairness and past change experience. J Appl Behav Sci. 2020;57(2):204–232. doi:10.1177/0021886320979646
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schminke M, Cropanzano R, Rupp DE. Organization structure and fairness perceptions: the moderating effects of organizational level. Organ Behav Hum Dec. 2002;89(1):881–905. doi:10.1016/S0749-5978(02)00034-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kauppila O-P. Creating ambidexterity by integrating and balancing structurally separate interorganizational partnerships. Strateg Organ. 2010;8(4):283–312. doi:10.1177/1476127010387409
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Jeong-Yeon L, Podsakoff NP. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol. 2003;88(5):879. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patel PC, Messersmith JG, Lepak DP. Walking the tightrope: an assessment of the relationship between high-performance work systems and organizational ambidexterity. Acad Manage J. 2013;56(5):1420–1442. doi:10.5465/amj.2011.0255
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shinkle GA, Goudsmit M, Jackson CJ, Yang F, McCann BT. On establishing legitimate goals and their performance impact. J Bus Ethics. 2019;157:731–751.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eichhorn BR. Common Method Variance Techniques. Cleveland, OH: SAS Institute Inc.; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Bliese PD. Within-group agreement, non-Independence, and reliability: implications for data aggregation and analysis. In: Klein KJ, Kozlowski SWJ, editors. Multilevel Theory, Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and New Directions. San Francisco, CA, US: Jossey-Bass; 2000:349–381.
   Google Scholar
• James LR, Demaree RG, Wolf G. Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. J Appl Psychol. 1984;69:85–98. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.69.1.85
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen G, Bliese PD. The role of different levels of leadership in predicting self- and collective efficacy: evidence for discontinuity. J Appl Psychol. 2002;87:549–556. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.549
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raudenbush SW, Bryk AS. Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. 2 ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang Z, Zyphur MJ, Preacher KJ. Testing multilevel mediation using hierarchical linear models: problems and solutions. Organ Res Methods. 2009;12:695–719. doi:10.1177/1094428108327450
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pituch KA, Murphy DL, Tate RL. Three-level models for indirect effects in school- and class-randomized experiments in education. J Exp Educ. 2010;78(1):60–95. doi:10.1080/00220970903224685
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selig JP,  Preacher KJ. (2008, June). Monte Carlo method for assessing mediation: An interactive tool for creating confidence intervals for indirect effects [Computer software]. Available from:  http://quantpsy.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Preacher KJ, Kelley K. Effect size measures for mediation models: quantitative strategies for communicating indirect effects. Psychol Methods. 2011;16(2):93–115. doi:10.1037/a0022658
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stettner U, Lavie D. Ambidexterity under scrutiny: exploration and exploitation via internal organization, alliances, and acquisitions. Strategic Manage J. 2014;35(13):1903–1929. doi:10.1002/smj.2195
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar