Leveraging Team Expertise Location Awareness in Improving Team Improvisation: A Dynamic Knowledge Integration Perspective

References

• Greer LL, de Jong BA, Schouten ME, Dannals JE. Why and when hierarchy impacts team effectiveness: a meta-analytic integration. J Appl Psychol. 2018;103(6):591–613. doi:10.1037/apl0000291
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gino F, Argote L, Miron-Spektor E, Todorova G. First, get your feet wet: the effects of learning from direct and indirect experience on team creativity. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 2010;111(2):102–115. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.11.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Z, Ren S, Chadee D, Liu M, Cai S. Team reflexivity and employee innovative behavior: the mediating role of knowledge sharing and moderating role of leadership. J Knowl Manag. 2021;25(6):1619–1639. doi:10.1108/JKM-09-2020-0683
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vera D, Nemanich L, Vélez-Castrillón S, Werner S. Knowledge-Based and Contextual Factors Associated with R&D Teams’ Improvisation Capability. J Manage. 2016;42(7):1874–1903. doi:10.1177/0149206314530168
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sway P. The “Third Hand”: IT-enabled competitive advantage in T urbulence through improvisational capabilities. Inf Sys Res. 2010;21(3):443–471. doi:10.1287/isre.1100.0280
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hadida AL, Tarvainen W, Rose J. Organizational improvisation: a consolidating review and framework. Int J Manag Rev. 2015;17(4):437–459. doi:10.1111/ijmr.12047
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vera D, Crossan M. Improvisation and Innovative Performance in Teams. Organ Sci. 2005;16(3):203–224. doi:10.1287/orsc.1050.0126
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banin AY, Boso N, Hultman M, Souchon AL, Hughes P, Nemkova E. Salesperson improvisation: antecedents, performance outcomes, and boundary conditions. Ind Marketing Manag. 2016;59:120–130. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.02.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magni M, Proserpio L, Hoegl M, Provera B. The role of team behavioral integration and cohesion in shaping individual improvisation. Res Policy. 2009;38(6):1044–1053. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2009.03.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aime, Federico, et al. The riddle of heterarchy: Power transitions in cross-functional teams. Academy of Management Journal. 2014;57(2):327–352. doi:10.5465/amj.2011.0756
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woolley AW, Gerbasi ME, Chabris CF, Kosslyn SM, Hackman JR. Bringing in the experts: how team composition and collaborative planning jointly shape analytic effectiveness. Small Group Res. 2009;39(3):352–371. doi:10.1177/1046496408317792
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tushman ML, Nadler DA. Information processing as an integrating concept in organizational design. Acad Manag Rev. 1978;3(3):613–624. doi:10.5465/amr.1978.4305791
   Google Scholar
• Scholten L, Knippenberg D. Motivated information processing and group decision-making: effects of process accountability on information processing and decision quality. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2007;43(4):539–552. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2006.05.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bunderson JS. Recognizing and utilizing expertise in work groups: a status characteristics perspective. Adm Sci Q. 2003;48(4):557–591. doi:10.2307/3556637
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stasser G, Stewart DD, Wittenbaum GM. Expert roles and information exchange during discussion: the importance of knowing who knows what. J Exp Soc Psychol. 1995;31(3):244–265. doi:10.1006/jesp.1995.1012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kanawattanachai P, Yoo Y. The impact of knowledge coordination on virtual team performance over time. MIS Quarterly. 2007;31(4):783–808. doi:10.2307/25148820
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis K, Herndon B. Transactive memory systems: current issues and future research directions. Organ Sci. 2011;22(5):1254–1265. doi:10.1287/orsc.1110.0647
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krylova KO, Vera D, Crossan M. Knowledge transfer in knowledge-intensive organizations: the crucial role of improvisation in transferring and protecting knowledge. J Knowl Manag. 2016;20(5):1045–1064. doi:10.1108/jkm-10-2015-0385
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ali A, Wang H, Johnson RE. Empirical analysis of shared leadership promotion and team creativity: an adaptive leadership perspective. J Organ Behav. 2020;41(5):405–423. doi:10.1002/job.2437
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faraj S, Sproull L. Coordinating expertise in software development teams. Manage Sci. 2000;46(12):1554–1568. doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.12.1554.12072
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gajendran RS, Joshi A. Innovation in globally distributed teams: the role of LMX, communication frequency, and member influence on team decisions. J Appl Psychol. 2012;97(6):1252–1261. doi:10.1037/a0028958
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baumann MR, Bonner BL. The effects of variability and expectations on utilization of member expertise and group performance. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 2004;93(2):89–101. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2003.12.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berman SL, Down J, Hill CW. Tacit knowledge as a source of competitive advantage in the National Basketball Association. Acad Manag J. 2002;45(1):13–31. doi:10.5465/3069282
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Okhuysen GA, Bechky BA. Coordination in organizations: an integrative perspective. Acad Manag Ann. 2009;3(1):463–502. doi:10.1080/19416520903047533
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mathieu JE, Kukenberger MR, D’Innocenzo L, Reilly G. Modeling reciprocal team cohesion–performance relationships, as impacted by shared leadership and members’ competence. J Appl Psychol. 2015;100(3):713–734. doi:10.1037/a0038898
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicolaides VC, LaPort KA, Chen TR, et al. The shared leadership of teams: a meta-analysis of proximal, distal, and moderating relationships. Leadersh Q. 2014;25(5):923–942. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.06.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang D, Waldman DA, Zhang Z. A meta-analysis of shared leadership and team effectiveness. J Appl Psychol. 2014;99(2):181–198. doi:10.1037/a0034531
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearce, Craig L., & Jay A. Conger (Eds.) (2003). Shared Leadership: Reframing the Hows and Whys Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• D’Innocenzo L, Mathieu JE, Kukenberger MR. A meta-analysis of different forms of shared leadership–team performance relations. J Manage. 2016;42(7):1964–1991. doi:10.1177/0149206314525205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardner HK, Gino F, Staats BR. Dynamically integrating knowledge in teams transforming resources into performance. Acad Manag Ann. 2012;55(4):998–1022. doi:10.5465/amj.2010.0604
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lv J, Zhang G. The mechanisms of knowledge heterogeneity on creativity of knowledge teams: an interactive cognition perspective. Acta Psychol Sinica. 2015;47(4):533. doi:10.3724/sp.j.1041.2015.00533
   Google Scholar
• Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Podsakoff NP. Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Ann Rev Psychol. 2012;63(1):539–569. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiu CC, Owens BP, Tesluk PE. Initiating and utilizing shared leadership in teams: the role of leader humility, team proactive personality, and team performance capability. J Appl Psychol. 2016;101(12):1705–1720. doi:10.1037/apl0000159
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carson JB, Tesluk PE, Marrone JA. Shared leadership in teams- an investigation of antecedent conditions and performance. Acad Manag Ann. 2007;50(5):1217–1234. doi:10.5465/amj.2007.20159921
   Google Scholar
• Hackman JR, Wageman R. A theory of team coaching. Acad Manag Rev. 2005;30(2):269–287. doi:10.5465/amr.2005.16387885
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiwana A, Mclean ER. Expertise Integration and Creativity in Information Systems Development. J Manag Inf Sys. 2005;22(1):13–43. doi:10.1080/07421222.2003.11045836
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avgerinos E, Fragkos I, Huang Y. Team familiarity in cardiac surgery operations: the effects of hierarchy and failure on team productivity. Human Relations. 2019;73(9):1278–1307. doi:10.1177/0018726719857122
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Hayes, Andrew F. An index and test of linear moderated mediation. Multivariate behavioral research. 2015;50(1):1–22. doi:10.1080/00273171.2014.962683
   Google Scholar
• Lewis K. Knowledge and performance in knowledge-worker teams: a longitudinal study of transactive memory systems. Manage Sci. 2004;50(11):1519–1533. doi:10.1287/mnsc.1040.0257
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ilgen DR, Hollenbeck JR, Johnson M, Jundt D. Teams in organizations: from input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annu Rev Psychol. 2005;56:517–543. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070250
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans KO. Mining for Solutions How Expertise Distribution and Influence Structures Impact Team Improvisation. Washington University in St. Louis; 2016:552.
   Google Scholar
• Abrantes ACM, Passos AM, Cunha MP, Santos CM. Bringing team improvisation to team adaptation: the combined role of shared temporal cognitions and team learning behaviors fostering team performance. J Bus Res. 2018;84:59–71. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.11.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedrich TL, Vessey WB, Schuelke MJ, Ruark GA, Mumford MD. A framework for understanding collective leadership: the selective utilization of leader and team expertise within networks. Leadersh Q. 2009;20(6):933–958. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.09.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li N, Zhao HH, Walter S, Zhang X-A, Yu J. Achieving more with less: extra milers behavioral influences in teams. J Appl Psychol. 2015;100(4):1025–1039. doi:10.1037/apl0000010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar