Efficacy in Technology-Mediated Distributed Teams

References

• Agarwal, R.; Sambamurthy, V.; and Stair, R. The evolving relationship between general and specific computer self-efficacy—An empirical assessment. Information Systems Research, 11, 4 (2000), 418-430.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, D. The development of collective efficacy in small task groups. Small Group Research, 32, 4 (2001), 451-474.
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. Social Foundation of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1986.
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W.H. Freeman, 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares and T. Urdan (eds.), Adolescence and Education, Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adolescents. Greenwich, CT: Information Age, 2005, pp. 1-39.
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A., and D. Cervone. Self-evaluative and self-efficacy mechanisms governing the motivational effects of goal systems. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 45, 5 (1983), 1017-1028.
   Google Scholar
• Baron, R.M., and D.A. Kenny. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 51, 6 (1986), 1173-1182.
   Google Scholar
• Boudreau, M.; Loch, K.; Robey, D.; and Straub, D. Going global: Using information technology to advance the competitiveness of the virtual transnational organization. Academy of Management Executive, 12, 4 (1998), 120-128.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, H.; Poole, M.; and Rodgers, T. Interpersonal traits, complementarity, and trust in virtual collaboration. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20, 4 (Spring 2004), 115-137.
   Google Scholar
• Cairncross, F. Death of Distance: How the Communication Revolution Is Changing Our Lives. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, G.; Gully, S.M.; Whiteman, J.; and Kilcullen, R.N. Examination of relationships among trait-like individual differences, state-like individual differences, and learning performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 6 (2000), 835-847.
   Google Scholar
• Chin, W.; Gopal, A.; and Salisbury, W.D. Advancing the theory of adaptive structuration: The development of a scale to measure faithfulness of appropriation. Information Systems Research, 8, 4 (1997), 342-368.
   Google Scholar
• Chin, W.; Marcolin, B.; and Newstead, P. A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and voice mail emotion/adoption study. In J.I. DeGross, S.L. Jarvenpaa, and A. Srinivasan (eds.), Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Information Systems. Atlanta: Association for Information Systems, 1996, pp. 21-41.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, S.G., and Gibson, C.B. Virtual Teams That Work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Compeau, D.R., and Higgins, C.A. Application of social cognitive theory to training for computer skills. Information Systems Research, 6, 2 (1995), 118-143.
   Google Scholar
• Compeau, D.R., and Higgins, C.A. Computer self-efficacy—Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19, 2 (1995), 189-211.
   Google Scholar
• Compeau, D.; Higgins, C.A.; and Huff, S. Social cognitive theory and individual reactions to computing technology: A longitudinal study. MIS Quarterly, 23, 2 (1999), 145-158.
   Google Scholar
• Dennis, A., and Valacich, J. Rethinking media richness: Towards a theory of media synchronicity. In R.H. Sprague Jr. (ed.), Proceedings of the Thirty-Second Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press, 1999 (available at http://csdl2.computer.org/comp/proceedings/hicss/1999/0001/01/00011017.PDF
   Google Scholar
• Dennis, A.; Wixom, B.; and VandenBerg, R. Understanding fit and appropriation effects in group support systems via meta-analysis. MIS Quarterly, 25, 2 (2001), 167-193.
   Google Scholar
• Duarte, D.L., and Snyder, N.T. Mastering Virtual Teams: Strategies, Tools, and Techniques That Succeed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Earley, P.C. East meets West meets Mideast: Further explorations of collectivistic and individualistic work groups. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 2 (1993), 319-348.
   Google Scholar
• Espinosa, J.; Cummings, J.; Wilson, J.; and Pearce, B. Team boundary issues across multiple global firms. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19, 4 (Spring 2003), 157-190.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, C.B. Do they do what they believe they can? Group efficacy and group effectiveness across tasks and cultures. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 2 (1999), 138-152.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, C.B.; Randel, A.E.; and Earley, P.C. Understanding group efficacy: An empirical test of multiple assessment methods. Group & Organization Management, 25, 1 (2000), 67-97.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, M.E.; Slade, L.A.; and Schmitt, N. The "science of the sophomore" revisited: From conjecture to empiricism. Academy of Management Review, 11, 1 (1986), 191-207.
   Google Scholar
• Griffith, T.L.; Mannix, E.A.; and Neale, M.A. Conflict in virtual teams. In S.G. Cohen and C.B. Gibson (eds.), Virtual Teams That Work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003, pp. 335-352.
   Google Scholar
• Griffith, T.L.; Sawyer, J.; and Neale, M. Virtualness and knowledge in teams: Managing the love triangle of organizations, individuals, and information technology. MIS Quarterly, 27, 2 (2003), 265-287.
   Google Scholar
• Gully, S.M.; Incalcaterra, K.A.; Joshi, A.; and Beaubien, J.M. A meta-analysis of team-efficacy, potency, and performance: Interdependence and level of analysis as moderators of observed relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 5 (2002), 819-832.
   Google Scholar
• Guzzo, R.A.; Yost, P.R.; Campbell, R.J.; and Shea, G.P. Potency in groups: Articulating a construct. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 1 (1993), 87-106.
   Google Scholar
• Hinds, P., and Kiesler, S. Distributed Work. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• James, L.R.; Demaree, R.G.; and Wolf, G. Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 1 (1984), 85-98.
   Google Scholar
• Jarvenpaa, S.L., and Leidner, D.E. Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10, 6 (1999), 791-815.
   Google Scholar
• Jarvenpaa, S.L.; Shaw, T.R.; and Staples, D. Toward contextualized theories of trust: The role of trust in global virtual teams. Information Systems Research, 15, 3 (2004), 250-267.
   Google Scholar
• Jex, S.M., and Gudanowski, D.M. Efficacy beliefs and work stress: An exploratory study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 5 (1992), 509-517.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, R.D., and Marakas, G.M. The role of behavioral modeling in computer skills acquisition: Toward refinement of the model. Information Systems Research, 11, 4 (2000), 402-417.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, S.D.; Suriya, C.; Yoon, S.W.; Berrett, J.V.; and LaFleur, J. Team development and group processes of virtual learning teams. Computers & Education, 39, 4 (2002), 379-393.
   Google Scholar
• Jung, D.I., and Sosik, J.J. Group potency and collective efficacy: Examining their predictive validity, level of analysis, and effects of performance feedback on future group performance. Group & Organization Management, 28, 3 (2003), 366-391.
   Google Scholar
• Kayworth, T., and Leidner, D. Leadership effectiveness in global virtual teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18, 3 (Winter 2001-2002), 7-40.
   Google Scholar
• Kiesler, S., and Cummings, J. What do we know about proximity and distance in work groups? A legacy of research. In P. Hinds and S. Kiesler (eds.), Distributed Work. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002, pp. 57-80.
   Google Scholar
• King, J.L., and Frost, L.R. Managing distance over time: The evolution of technologies and dis/ambiguation. In P. Hinds and S. Kiesler (eds.), Distributed Work. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002, pp. 3-26.
   Google Scholar
• Kozub, S.A., and McDonnell, J.F. Exploring the relationship between cohesion and collective efficacy in rugby teams. Journal of Sport Behavior, 23, 2 (2000), 120-129.
   Google Scholar
• Kraut, R.; Fussell, S.; Brennan, S.; and Siegel, J. Understanding effects of proximity on collaboration: Implications for technologies to support remote collaborative work. In P. Hinds and S. Kiesler (eds.), Distributed Work. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002, pp. 137-162.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, A.S., and Baskerville, R.L. Generalizing generalizability in information systems research. Information Systems Research, 14, 3 (2003), 221-243.
   Google Scholar
• Lent, R.W., and G. Hackett. Career self-efficacy: Empirical status and future directions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 30, 3 (1987), 347-382.
   Google Scholar
• Lester, S.; Meglino, B.M.; and Korsgaard, M.A. The antecedents and consequences of group potency: A longitudinal investigation of newly formed work groups. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 2 (2002), 352-368.
   Google Scholar
• Lipnack, J., and Stamps, J. Virtual Teams: People Working Across Boundaries with Technology. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Majchrzak, A.; Malhotra, A.; Stamps, J.; and Lipnack, J. Can absence make a team grow stronger. Harvard Business Review, 82, 5 (2004), 131-140.
   Google Scholar
• Majchrzak, A.; Rice, R.E.; Malhotra, A.; King, N.; and Ba, S.L. Technology adaptation: The case of a computer-supported inter-organizational virtual team. MIS Quarterly, 24, 4 (2000), 569-600.
   Google Scholar
• Malhotra, A.; Majchrzak, A.; Carman, R.; and Lott, V. Radical innovation without collocation: A case study at Boeing-Rocketdyne. MIS Quarterly, 25, 2 (2001), 229-249.
   Google Scholar
• Mannix, E.A.; Griffith, T.; and Neale, M. The phenomenology of conflict in distributed work teams. In P. Hinds and S. Kiesler (eds.), Distributive Work. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002, pp. 213-233.
   Google Scholar
• Marakas, G.M.; Yi, M.Y.; and Johnson, R.D. The multilevel and multifaceted character of computer self-efficacy: Toward clarification of the construct and an integrative framework for research. Information Systems Research, 9, 2 (1998), 126-163.
   Google Scholar
• Maruping, L.M., and Agarwal, R. Managing team interpersonal processes through technology: A task-technology fit perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 6 (2004), 975-990.
   Google Scholar
• Massey, A.; Montoya-Weiss, M.M.; and Hung, Y. Because time matters: Temporal coordination in global virtual project teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19, 4 (Spring 2003), 129-159.
   Google Scholar
• McGrath, J.E. Groups: Interaction and Performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Montoya-Weiss, M.M.; Massey, A.P.; and Song, M. Getting it together: Temporal coordination and conflict management in global virtual teams. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 6 (2001), 1251-1262.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, C.A.; Coover, D.; and Owen, S.V. Development and validation of the computer self-efficacy scale. Educational & Psychological Measurement, 49, 4 (1989), 893-899.
   Google Scholar
• Northcraft, G.; Griffith, T.; and Fuller, M. Virtual study groups: A challenging centerpiece for working adults. In S.P. Ferris and S.H. Godar (eds.), Teaching and Learning with Virtual Teams. Hershey, PA: Information Science, 2005, pp. 131-157.
   Google Scholar
• Nunnally, J.C., and Bernstein, I.H. Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill 1994.
   Google Scholar
• O'Leary, M.; Orlikowski, W.; and Yates, J. Distributed work over the centuries: Trust and control in the Hudson's Bay Company, 1670-1826. In P. Hinds and S. Kiesler (eds.), Distributed Work. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002, pp. 27-54.
   Google Scholar
• Panteli, N., and Davison, R. The role of subgroups in the communication patterns of global virtual teams. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 48, 2 (2005), 191-200.
   Google Scholar
• Parker, L.E. Working together: Perceived self- and collective-efficacy at the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 1 (1994), 43-59.
   Google Scholar
• Paul, D. Collaborative activities in virtual settings: A knowledge management perspective of telemedicine. Journal of Management Information Systems, 22, 4 (Spring 2006), 143-176.
   Google Scholar
• Paul, D., and McDaniel, R. A field study of the effect of interpersonal trust on virtual collaborative relationship performance. MIS Quarterly, 28, 2 (2004), 183-227.
   Google Scholar
• Pauleen, D. An inductively derived model of leader-initiated relationship building with virtual team members. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20, 3 (Winter 2003-2004), 227-256.
   Google Scholar
• Pescosolido, A.T. Informal leaders and the development of group efficacy. Small Group Research, 32, 1 (2001), 74-93.
   Google Scholar
• Piccoli, G., and Ives, B. Trust and the unintended effects of behavioral control in virtual teams. MIS Quarterly, 27, 3 (2003), 365-395.
   Google Scholar
• Prussia, G.E., and Kinicki, A.J. A motivational investigation of group effectiveness using social-cognitive theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 2 (1996), 187-198.
   Google Scholar
• Salisbury, W.D.; Chin, W.; Gopal, A.; and Newstead, P. Better theory through measurement—Developing an instrument to capture consensus on appropriation. Information Systems Research, 13, 1 (2002), 91-103.
   Google Scholar
• Sarker, S., and Sahay, S. Understanding virtual team development: An interpretive study. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 4, 1 (2003), 1-38.
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt, J.; Montoya-Weiss, M.; and Massey, A. New product development decision making effectiveness: Comparing individuals, face-to-face teams and virtual teams. Decision Sciences, 32, 4 (2001), 575-600.
   Google Scholar
• Shrout, P.E., and Bolger, N. Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 4 (2002), 422-445.
   Google Scholar
• Sosik, J.J.; Avolio, B.J.; and Kahai, S.S. Effects of leadership style and anonymity on group potency and effectiveness in a group decision support system environment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 1 (1997), 89-103.
   Google Scholar
• Souren, P.; Samarah, I.; Seetharaman, P.; and Mykytyn, P. An empirical investigation of collaborative conflict management style in group support system-based global virtual teams Journal of Management Information Systems, 21, 3 (Winter 2004-2005), 185-222.
   Google Scholar
• Staples, S.; Hulland, J.S.; and Higgins, C.A. A self-efficacy theory explanation for the management of remote workers in virtual organizations. Organization Science, 10, 6 (1999), 758-776.
   Google Scholar
• Whiteoak, J.W.; Chalip, L.; and Hort, L.K. Assessing group efficacy: Comparing three methods of measurement. Small Group Research, 35, 2 (2004), 158-173.
   Google Scholar
• Zellars, K.L.; Hochwarter, W.A.; Perrewe, P.L.; Miles, A.K.; and Kiewitz, C. Beyond self-efficacy: Interactive effects of role conflict and perceived collective efficacy. Journal of Managerial Issues, 13, 4 (2001), 483-499.
   Google Scholar
• Zimmerman, B.J.; Bandura, A.; and Martinez-Pons, M. Self-motivation for academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting. American Educational Research Journal, 29, 3 (1992), 663-676.
   Google Scholar