Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T05:29:47.516Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

23 - Information Utilization in Meetings

from Tools and Models for Promoting Meeting Success

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2015

By
Glenn E. Littlepage
Edited by
Joseph A. Allen ,
Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock  and
Steven G. Rogelberg
Joseph A. Allen
Affiliation:
University of Nebraska, Omaha
Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock
Affiliation:
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
Steven G. Rogelberg
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Charlotte
Get access

Summary

Abstract

Meeting effectiveness can be enhanced when member expertise is used effectively. This requires that the group be composed of participants who possess the needed expertise and that meeting procedures encourage the use of expertise. Patterns of uneven participation and tendencies for participants to discuss common knowledge rather than unique knowledge limit the extent of expertise available to the group as a whole. Social and political factors can further limit the discussion and use of information. Meeting procedures that promote problem analysis, generation of multiple ideas, thorough and candid evaluation of advantages and disadvantages of various options, and action planning promote greater use of expertise and enhance meeting effectiveness.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science , pp. 533 - 555
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, J., Beck, T., Scott, C., Rogelberg, S., & Knight, K. (2011, April). Understanding workplace meetings: A qualitative taxonomy of meeting purposes. Poster presented at the 26th meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Bales, R. F. (1955). How people interact in conferences. Scientific American, 192, 31–35. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0355–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumann, M. R., & Bonner, B. L. (2004). The effects of variability and expectations on utilization of member expertise and group performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 93, 89–101. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2003.12.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, S. T. (2007). Deep-level composition variables as predictors of team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 595–615. doi:10.1037/0021–9010.92.3.595CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bell, S. T., Villado, A. J., Lukasik, M. A., Belau, L., & Briggs, A. L. (2011). Getting specific about demographic diversity variable and team performance relationships: A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 37(3), 709–743. doi:10.1177/0149206310365001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonner, B. L., & Baumann, M. R. (2012). Leveraging member expertise to improve knowledge transfer and demonstrability in groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 337–350. doi:10.1037/a0025566CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bowman, J. M., & Wittenbaum, G. M. (2012). Time pressure affects processes and performance in hidden-profile groups. Small Group Research, 43, 295–314. doi:10.1177/1046496412440055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caruso, H. M., & Woolley, A. W. (2008). Harnessing the power of emergent interdependence to promote diverse team collaboration. In Phillips, K. W. (Ed.), Diversity and groups (pp. 245–266). Stamford, CT: JAI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, M. A., Rogelberg, S. G., Allen, J. A., & Luong, A. (2011). Meeting design characteristics and attendee perceptions of staff/team meeting quality. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 15, 90–104. doi:10.1037/a0021549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooke, N. J., Kiekel, P. A., Salas, E., Stout, R. J., Bowers, C., & Cannon-Bowers, J. (2003). Measuring team knowledge: A window to the cognitive underpinnings of team performance. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 7, 179–199. doi:10.1037/1089–2699.7.3.179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cruz, M. G., Henningsen, D. D., & Smith, B. A. (1999). The impact of directive leadership on group information sampling, decisions and perceptions of the leader. Communication Research, 26, 349–369. doi:10.1177/009365099026003004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dabbs, J. M. Jr., & Ruback, R. B. (1987). Dimensions of group process: Amount and structure of vocal interaction. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 20, 123–169. doi:10.1016/S0065–2601(08)60413-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeChurch, L. A., & Haas, C. D. (2008). Examining team planning through an episodic lens: Effects of deliberate, contingency, and reactive planning on team effectiveness. Small Group Research, 39, 542–568. doi:10.1177/1046496408320048CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devine, D. J., Clayton, L. D., Dunford, B. B., Seying, R., & Pryce, J. (2001). Jury decision making: 45 years of empirical research on deliberating groups. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law, 7, 622–727. doi:10.1037/1076–8971.7.3.622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devine, D. J., & Phillips, J. L. (2001). Do smarter teams do better: A meta-analysis of cognitive ability and team performance. Small Group Research, 32, 507–532. doi:10.1177/104649640103200501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 497–509. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.53.3.497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1991). Productivity loss in idea generating groups: Tracking down the blocking effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 392–403. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.61.3.392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 350–383. doi:10.2307/2666999CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edmondson, A. C., & Roloff, K. S. (2009). Overcoming barriers to collaboration: Psychological safety and learning in diverse teams. In Salas, E., Goodwin, G. F., & Burke, C. S. (Eds.), Team effectiveness in complex organizations: Cross-disciplinary perspectives and approaches (pp. 183–208). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group dynamics. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Gibson, D. R. (2003). Participation shifts: Order and differentiation in group conversation. Social Forces, 81, 1335–1380. doi:10.1353/sof.2003.0055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gouran, D. S., & Hirokawa, R. Y. (1986). Counteractive functions of communication in effective group decision-making. In Hirokawa, R. Y. & Poole, M. S. (Eds.), Communication and group decision making (pp. 81–90). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Gouran, D. S., & Hirokawa, R. Y. (2003). Functional theory and communication in decision-making and problem solving groups: An expanded view. In Hirokawa, R. Y. & Poole, M. S. (Eds.), Communication and group decision making (2nd ed., pp. 55–80). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Greitemeyer, T., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2003). Preference-consistent evaluation of information in the hidden profile paradigm: Beyond group-level explanations for the dominance of shared information in group decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 322–339. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.84.2.322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hackman, J. R. (1987). The design of work teams. In Lorsch, J. W. (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 315–342). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Hackman, J. R. (2003). Leading teams: Setting the stage for greater performances. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Hackman, J. R., Brousseau, K. R., & Weiss, J. A. (1976). The interaction of task design and group performance strategies in determining group effectiveness. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 350–365. doi:10.1016/0030–5073(76)90021–0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hackman, J. R., & Wageman, R. (2005). A theory of team coaching. Academy of Management Review, 30, 269–287. doi:10.2307/20159119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herek, G., Janis, I. L., & Huth, P. (1987). Decision-making during international crises: Is quality of processes related to outcome? Journal of Conflict Resolution, 31, 203–226. doi:10.2307/174011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hightower, R., & Sayeed, L. (1996). The impact of computer-mediated communication systems on biased group discussion. Computers in Human Behavior, 11, 33–44. doi:10.1016/0747–5632(94)00019-ECrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirokawa, R. Y. (1988). Group communication and decision-making performance: A continued test of the functional perspective. Human Communication Research, 14, 487–515. doi:10.1177/1046496490212003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirokawa, R. Y., & Scheerhorn, D. R. (1986). Communication in faulty group decision-making. In Hirokawa, R. Y. & Poole, M. S. (Eds.), Communication and group decision making (pp. 63–80). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Hirschfield, R., Jordan, M., Field, H., Giles, W., & Armenakis, A. (2006). Becoming team players: Team members' mastery of teamwork knowledge as a predictor of team task proficiency and observed teamwork effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 467–474. doi:10.1037/0021–9010.91.2.467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffman, L. R. (1979). The group problem solving process. New York, NY: Praeger.Google Scholar
Hoffman, L. R., & Kleinman, G. B. (1994). Individual and group in group problem solving: The valence model redressed. Human Communication Research, 21, 36–59. doi:10.1111/j.1468–2958.1994.tb00338.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hollingshead, A. B. (1996). The rank-order effect in group decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 68, 181–193. doi:10.1006/obhd.1996.0098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, S., & Cummings, J. N. (2011). When critical knowledge is most critical: Centralization in knowledge-intensive teams. Small Group Research, 42, 669–699. doi:10.1177/1046496411410073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphrey, S. E., Morgeson, F. P., & Mannor, M. J. (2009). Developing a theory of the strategic core of teams: A role composition model of team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 48–61. doi:10.1037/a0012997CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ingham, A. G., Levinger, G., Graves, J., & Peckham, V. (1974). The Ringelmann effect: Studies of group size and group performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 371–384. doi:10.1016/0022–1031(74)90033-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascos (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Janis, I. L. (1989). Crucial decisions: Leadership in policy making and crisis management. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Janis, I. L., & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58, 697–720. doi:10.1037/0003–066X.58.9.697CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaplan, M. F., Wanshula, L. T., & Zana, M. P. (1993). Time pressure and information integration in social judgment: The effect of need for structure. In Svenson, O. & Maule, A. J. (Eds.), Time pressure and stress in human judgment and decision making (pp. 255–267). New York, NY: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karau, S. J., & Elsaid, A. M. M. K. (2009). Individual differences in beliefs about groups. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 13, 1–13. doi:10.1037/a0013366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karau, S. J., & Kelly, J. R. (1992). The effects of time scarcity and time abundance on group performance quality and interaction process. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 542–571. doi:10.1016/0022–1031(92)90045-LCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kauffeld, S., & Lehmann-Willenbrock, N. (2012). Meeting matters: Effects of team meetings on team and organizational success. Small Group Research, 43, 130–158. doi:10.1177/1046496411429599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, J. R., & Loving, T. J. (2004). Time pressure and group performance: Exploring underlying processes in the attentional focus model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 185–198. doi:10.1016/S0022–1031(03)00094–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Bell, B. B. (2003). Work groups and teams in organizations. In Borman, W. C, Ilgen, D. R., & Klimoski, R. J. (Eds.), Handbook of psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 333–375). New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Larson, J. R. Jr. (2010). In search of synergy in small group performance. New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Larson, J. R. Jr., Christensen, C., Abbott, A. S., & Franz, T. M. (1996). Diagnosing groups: Charting the flow of information in medical decision making teams. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 315–330. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.71.2.315CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larson, J. R. Jr., Christensen, C., Franz, T. M., & Abbott, A. S. (1988). Diagnosing groups: The pooling, management, and impact of shared and unshared case information in team-based medical decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 93–108. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.75.1.93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larson, J. R., Jr, Foster-Fishman, P. G., & Keys, C. B. (1994). Discussion of shared and unshared information in decision-making groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 446–461. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.67.3.446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latane', B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S.(1979). Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 822–832. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.37.6.822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laughlin, P. R. (1980). Social combination processes of cooperative problem solving groups on verbal intellective tasks. In Fishbein, M. (Ed.), Progress in social psychology (pp. 127–155). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Laughlin, P. R. (2011). Group problem solving. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Leach, D. J., Rogelberg, S. G., Warr, P. B., & Burnfield, J. L. (2009). Perceived meeting effectiveness: The role of design characteristics. Journal of Business and Psychology, 24, 65–76. doi:10.2307/40605716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehman-Willenbrock, N., Allen, J. A., & Kauffeld, S. (2013). A sequential analysis of procedural meeting communication: How teams facilitate their meetings. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 41, 365–388. doi:10.1080/00909882.2013.844847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LePine, J. A., Piccolo, R. F., Jackson, C. L., Mathieu, J. E., & Saul, J. R. (2008). A meta-analysis of teamwork processes: Tests of a multidimensional model and relationships with team effectiveness criteria. Personnel Psychology, 61, 273–307. doi:10.1111/j.1744–6570.2008.00114.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liang, S. W., Moreland, R. L., & Argote, L. (1995). Group versus individual training and group performance: The mediating role of transactive memory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 384–393. doi:10.1177/0146167295214009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littlepage, G. E. (1991). Effects of group size and task characteristics on group performance: A test of Steiner's model. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 449–456. doi:10.1177/0146167291174014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littlepage, G. E., Hollingshead, A. B., Drake, L. R., & Littlepage, A. M. (2008). Transactive memory and performance in work groups: Specificity, communication, ability differences, and work allocation. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 12, 223–241. doi:10.1037/1089–2699.12.3.223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littlepage, G. E., & Poole, J. R. (1993). Time allocation in decision making groups. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 8, 663–672.Google Scholar
Littlepage, G. E., Robison, W., & Reddington, K. (1997). Effects of task experience and group experience on group performance, member ability, and recognition of expertise. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69, 133–147. doi:10.1006/obhd.1997.2677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littlepage, G. E., Schmidt, G. W., Whisler, E. W., & Frost, A. W. (1995). An input-process-output analysis of influence and performance in problem-solving groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 877–889. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.69.5.877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maier, N. R. F. (1958). The appraisal interview. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Maier, N. R. F., & Solem, A. R. (1962). Improving solutions by turning choice situations into problems. Personnel Psychology, 15, 151–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathieu, J. E., Tannenbaum, S. I., Donsbach, J. S., & Alliger, G. M. (2014). Achieving optimal team composition for success. In Salas, E., Tannenbaum, S. I., Cohen, D. J., & Latham, G. (Eds.), Developing and enhancing teamwork in organizations: Evidence-based best practices and guidelines (pp. 520–551). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
McClough, A. C., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2003). Selection in teams: An exploration of the Teamwork Knowledge, Skills, and Ability test. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11, 56–66. doi:10.1111/1468–2389.00226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGrath, J. E. (1991). Time, interaction, and performance (TIP): A theory of groups. Small Group Research, 22, 147–174. doi:10.1177/1046496491222001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & DeChurch, L. A. (2009). Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 535–546. doi:10.1037/a0013773CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyers, R. A., & Brashers, D. E. (1998). Argument in group decision making: Explicating a process model of investigating the argument-outcome link. Communication Monographs, 65, 261–281. doi:10.1080/03637759809376454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, C. E. (1989). The social psychological effects of group decision rules. In Paulus, P. B. (Ed.), Psychology of group influence (2nd ed., pp. 327–355). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Milliken, F. J., Morrison, E. W., & Hewlin, P. F. (2003). An exploratory study of employee silence: Issues that employees don't communicate upward and why. Journal of Management Studies, 40, 1453–1476. doi:10.1111/1467–6486.00387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreland, R. L. (1999). Transactive memory: Learning who knows what in work groups and organizations. In Thompson, L, Messick, D., & Levine, J. (Eds.), Shared cognition in organizations: The management of knowledge (pp. 3–31). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreland, R. L., Levine, J. M., & Wingert, M. L. (1996). Creating the ideal group: Composition effects at work. In Witte, E. H. & Davis, J. H. (Eds.), Understanding group behavior: Small group processes and interpersonal relations (Vol. 2, pp. 11–35). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Moreland, R. L., & Myaskovsky, L. (2000). Exploring the performance benefits of group training: Transactive memory or improved communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82, 117–133. doi:10.1006/obhd.2000.2891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgeson, E. 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, 583–611. doi:10.1111/j.1744–6570.2005.655.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullen, B., Johnson, C., & Salas, E. (1991). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: A meta-analytic review. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 12, 2–23. doi:10.1207/s15324834basp1201_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nixon, C. T., & Littlepage, G. E. (1992). Impact of meeting procedures on meeting effectiveness. Journal of Business and Psychology, 6, 361–369. doi:10.2307/25092344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Offermann, L., Bailey, J., Vasilospoulos, N., Seas, C., & Sass, M. (2004). The relative contributions of emotional competence and cognitive ability to individual and team performance. Human Performance, 17, 219–243. doi:10.1207/s15327043hup1702_5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okhuysen, G. A., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2002). Integrating knowledge in groups: How formal interventions enable flexibility. Organizational Science, 13, 370–386. doi:10.2307/3085972CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orlitzky, M., & Hirokawa, R. Y. (2001). To err is human, to correct for it divine: A meta-analysis of research testing the functional theory of group decision-making effectiveness. Small Group Research, 32, 313–341. doi:10.1177/104649640103200303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, K. C. (1988). Speaking turns in small group interaction: A context-sensitive event sequence model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 965–971. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.54.6.965CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paulus, P. B., & Yang, H. (2000). Idea generation in groups: A basis for creativity in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82, 76–87. doi:10.1006/obhd.2000.2888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Cihangir, S. (2001). Quality of decision making and group norms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 918–930. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.80.6.918CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rogelberg, S. G., Shanock, L. R., & Scott, C. W. (2012). Wasted time and money in meetings: Increasing return on investment. Small Group Research, 43, 236–245. doi:10.1177/1046496411429170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosen, S. R., & Tesser, A. (1979). On the reluctance to communicate undesirable information: The Mum effect. Sociometry, 33, 253–263. doi:10.2307/2786156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sauer, N. C., & Kauffeld, S. (2013). Meetings as networks: Applying social network analysis to team interaction. Communication Methods and Measures, 7, 26–47. doi:10.1080/19312458.2012.760729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shanock, L. R., Allen, J. A., Dunn, A. M., Baran, B. E., Scott, C. W., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2013). Less acting, more doing: How surface acting relates to perceived meeting effectiveness and other employee outcomes. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 86, 457–476. doi:10.1111/joop.12037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Staats, B. R., Milkman, K. L., & Fox, C. R. (2012). The team scaling fallacy: Underestimating the declining efficiency of larger teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 118, 132–142. doi:10.1080/19312458.2012.760729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stasser, G., Stewart, D. D., & Wittenbaum, G. M. (1995). Expert roles and information exchange during discussion: The importance of knowing who knows what. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 244–265. doi:10.1006/jesp.1995.1012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1467–1478. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.48.6.1467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinel, W., Utz, S., & Koning, L. (2010). The good, the bad and the ugly thing to do when sharing information: Revealing, concealing and lying depend on social motivation, distribution and importance of information. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 113, 85–96. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.07.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group process and productivity. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Stephan, F. F., & Mishler, E. G. (1952). The distribution of participation in small groups: An exponential approximation. American Sociological Review, 17, 598–608. doi:10.2307/2088227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, M. J., & Campion, M. A. (1999). Staffing work teams: Development and validation of a selection test for teamwork settings. Journal of Management, 25, 207–228. doi:10.1016/S0149–2063(99)80010–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, G. L. (2006). A meta-analytic review of relationships between team design features and team performance. Journal of Management, 32, 29–55. doi:10.1177/0149206305277792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, D. D., & Stasser, G. (1995). Expert role assignment and information sampling during collective recall and decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 619–628. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.69.4.619CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strodtbeck, F. L., & Lipinski, R. M. (1985). Becoming first among equals: Moral considerations in jury foreman selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 927–936. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.49.4.927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tetlock, P. E., Peterson, R. S., McGuire, C., Chang, S., & Feld, P. (1992). Assessing political group dynamics: A test of the groupthink model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 403–425. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.63.3.403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tjosvold, D., & Deemer, D. K. (1980). Effects of controversy within a cooperative or competitive context on organizational decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 590–595. doi:10.1037/0021–9010.65.5.590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toma, C., Vasiljevic, D., Oberlé, D., & Butera, F. (2013). Assigned experts with competitive goals withhold information in group decision making. British Journal of Social Psychology, 52, 161–172. doi:10.1111/j.2044–8309.2012.02105.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Torrance, E. P. (1959). Some consequences of power differences in decision making in permanent and temporary three-man groups. In Hare, A. P, Borgatta, E. F., & Bales, R. F. (Eds.), Small groups: Studies in interaction (pp. 482–492). New York, NY: Knopf.Google Scholar
Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., & Botero, I. C. (2002). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies, 40, 1359–1392. doi:10.1111/1467–6486.00384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Ginkel, W. P., & Van Knippenberg, D. (2008). Group information elaboration and group decision making: The role of shared task representations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 105, 82–97. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.08.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Ginkel, W., Tindale, R. S., & Van Knippenbberg, D. (2009). Team reflexivity, development of shared task representations, and the use of distributed information in group decision making. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 13, 265–280. doi:10.1037/a0016045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Volmer, J., & Sonnentag, S. (2011). The role of star performers in software design teams. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 26, 219–234. doi:10.1108/02683941111112659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vroom, V. H., & Jago, A. G. (1988). The new leadership: Managing participation in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Vroom, V. H., & Jago, A. G. (2007). The role of the situation in leadership. American Psychologist, 62, 17–24. doi:10.1037/0003–066X.62.1.17CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vroom, V. H., & Yetton, P. W. (1973). Leadership and decision making. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woolley, A. W., Gerbasi, M. E., Chabris, C. F., Kosslyn, S. M., & Hackman, J. R. (2008). Bringing in the experts: How team composition and collaborative planning jointly shape analytic effectiveness. Small Group Research, 39, 352–371. doi:10.1177/1046496408317792CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×