Spillover Coordination from Global Teams

Abstract Purpose In this chapter we develop a conceptual model describing how global teams do more than accomplish discrete tasks, and create “spillover coordination” effects by influencing the amount of work-related direct contact among team members outside the task boundaries of the team. We theorize that spillover coordination is the result of relational and cognitive social capital developed through team interaction. We also propose that the design of the team and the context in which it operates influence the degree to which social capital develops. Methodology/approach We develop a conceptual model including propositions that can be tested empirically. We suggest avenues for future research. Practical implications Our model proposes that teams are a more powerful cross-border integration mechanism than originally thought in existing literature in international management and organizational behavior, since they affect social capital that can benefit the broader MNE beyond scope of the task and after the team disbands. Our approach suggests that MNE managers should be mindful of global team spillover effects and intentional in the way they design global teams if those benefits are to be achieved. Originality/value Most research on global teams, and teams in general, does not look past the task and time boundary of the team. We expand the view of team effectiveness to encompass those dimensions.

[1]  Audra I. Mockaitis,et al.  Leading global teams , 2012 .

[2]  Yuqing Ren,et al.  Transactive Memory Systems 1985–2010: An Integrative Framework of Key Dimensions, Antecedents, and Consequences , 2011 .

[3]  Ray Reagans,et al.  Close Encounters: Analyzing How Social Similarity and Propinquity Contribute to Strong Network Connections , 2011, Organ. Sci..

[4]  Sara B. Soderstrom,et al.  Dynamics of Dyads in Social Networks: Assortative, Relational, and Proximity Mechanisms , 2010 .

[5]  M. Maznevski,et al.  Unraveling the effects of cultural diversity in teams: A meta-analysis of research on multicultural work groups , 2010 .

[6]  K. Mäkelä,et al.  Interunit interaction contexts, interpersonal social capital, and the differing levels of knowledge sharing , 2009 .

[7]  Tammy L. Rapp,et al.  Team Effectiveness 1997-2007: A Review of Recent Advancements and a Glimpse Into the Future , 2008 .

[8]  C. Bartlett,et al.  Linking organizational context and managerial action: The dimensions of quality of management , 2007 .

[9]  Roger G. Schroeder,et al.  Method and context perspectives on learning and knowledge creation in quality management , 2007 .

[10]  K. Mäkelä Knowledge Sharing Through Expatriate Relationships: A Social Capital Perspective , 2007 .

[11]  Ulrich Lichtenthaler,et al.  Attitudes to Externally Organising Knowledge Management Tasks: A Review, Reconsideration and Extension of the NIH Syndrome , 2006 .

[12]  Daniel J. Brass,et al.  Exploring the Social Ledger: Negative Relationships and Negative Asymmetry in Social Networks in Organizations , 2006 .

[13]  Mary E. Zellmer-Bruhn,et al.  MULTINATIONAL ORGANIZATION CONTEXT: IMPLICATIONS FOR TEAM LEARNING AND PERFORMANCE , 2006 .

[14]  Kyle J. Mayer Spillovers And Governance: An Analysis Of Knowledge And Reputational Spillovers In Information Technology , 2006 .

[15]  J. Hackman,et al.  A theory of team coaching , 2005, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[16]  David Knoke,et al.  “SKONK WORKS HERE”: ACTIVATING NETWORK SOCIAL CAPITAL IN COMPLEX COLLABORATIONS , 2004 .

[17]  Lee Sproull,et al.  More Than an Answer: Information Relationships for Actionable Knowledge , 2004, Organ. Sci..

[18]  Bradley L. Kirkman,et al.  The Impact of Team Empowerment on Virtual Team Performance: The Moderating Role of Face-to-Face Interaction , 2004 .

[19]  John R. Austin Transactive memory in organizational groups: the effects of content, consensus, specialization, and accuracy on group performance. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[20]  Martin Schulz,et al.  Pathways of Relevance: Exploring Inflows of Knowledge into Subunits of Multinational Corporations , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[21]  Kenneth Husted,et al.  Knowledge-Sharing Hostility in Russian Firms , 2003 .

[22]  T. Kostova,et al.  Social Capital in Multinational Corporations and a Micro-Macro Model of its Formation , 2003 .

[23]  Jody Hoffer Gittell,et al.  Coordinating Mechanisms in Care Provider Groups: Relational Coordination as a Mediator and Input Uncertainty as a Moderator of Performance Effects , 2002 .

[24]  A. Edmondson,et al.  Situated Knowledge and Learning in Dispersed Teams , 2002 .

[25]  Snejina Michailova,et al.  Diagnosing and Fighting Knowledge-Sharing Hostility , 2002 .

[26]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing , 2002, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[27]  S. Kozlowski,et al.  A Typology of Virtual Teams , 2002 .

[28]  Vijay Govindarajan,et al.  Cultivating a global mindset , 2002 .

[29]  Anne-Wil Harzing Of bears, bumble-bees, and spiders: the role of expatriates in controlling foreign subsidiaries , 2001 .

[30]  Jennifer A. Chatman,et al.  The Influence of Demographic Heterogeneity on the Emergence and Consequences of Cooperative Norms in Work Teams , 2001 .

[31]  M. McPherson,et al.  Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks , 2001 .

[32]  Jody Hoffer Gittell,et al.  Supervisory Span, Relational Coordination and Flight Departure Performance , 2001 .

[33]  Omar N. Toulan,et al.  Global Account Management in Multinational Corporations: Theory and Evidence , 2001 .

[34]  William B. Stevenson,et al.  Nationality, Cultural Distance, and Expatriate Status: Effects on the Managerial Network in a Multinational Enterprise , 2001 .

[35]  C. Cramton The Mutual Knowledge Problem and Its Consequences for Dispersed Collaboration , 2001 .

[36]  M. Maznevski,et al.  Bridging Space Over Time: Global Virtual Team Dynamics and Effectiveness , 2000 .

[37]  A. Hollingshead Perceptions of Expertise and Transactive Memory in Work Relationships , 2000 .

[38]  Marc H. Anderson,et al.  Sources of Managers' Knowledge of Organizational Capabilities , 2000 .

[39]  Kathleen M. Carley,et al.  Choosing Work Group Members: Balancing Similarity, Competence, and Familiarity. , 2000, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[40]  G. Northcraft,et al.  You have printed the following article : Why Differences Make a Difference : A Field Study of Diversity , Conflict , and Performance in Workgroups , 2007 .

[41]  Abbie Griffin,et al.  Managing communication in global product development teams , 1999 .

[42]  Ananda Mukherji,et al.  Global managers: developing a mindset for global competitiveness 1 1 A version of this paper was pre , 1999 .

[43]  Carrie R. Leana,et al.  Organizational Social Capital and Employment Practices , 1999 .

[44]  R. Moreland Transactive memory: Learning who knows what in work groups and organizations. , 1999 .

[45]  Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa,et al.  Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams , 1999, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[46]  Morten T. Hansen,et al.  The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organization Subunits , 1999 .

[47]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Exploring the Black Box: An Analysis of Work Group Diversity, Conflict and Performance , 1999 .

[48]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital and Value Creation: The Role of Intrafirm Networks , 1998 .

[49]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage , 1998 .

[50]  Scott Shane,et al.  National Cultural Distance and Cross-Border Acquisition Performance , 1998 .

[51]  Daniel J. Brass,et al.  Social Networks and Perceptions of Intergroup Conflict: The Role of Negative Relationships and Third Parties , 1998 .

[52]  S. Lenway,et al.  Global mind‐sets and cognitive shift in a complex multinational corporation , 1998 .

[53]  S. G. Cohen,et al.  What Makes Teams Work: Group Effectiveness Research from the Shop Floor to the Executive Suite , 1997 .

[54]  Karen A. Jehn,et al.  Interpersonal relationships and task performance: An examination of mediation processes in friendship and acquaintance groups. , 1997 .

[55]  J. Birkinshaw How Multinational Subsidiary Mandates are Gained and Lost , 1996 .

[56]  Srilata Zaheer,et al.  Circadian Rhythms: The Effects of Global Market Integration in the Currency Trading Industry , 1995 .

[57]  K. Jehn A Multimethod Examination of the Benefits and Detriments of Intragroup Conflict , 1995 .

[58]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  The interdisciplinary study of coordination , 1994, CSUR.

[59]  Kendall Roth,et al.  The effectiveness of headquarters-subsidiary relationships: The role of coordination, control, and conflict , 1992 .

[60]  H. Ibarra Homophily and differential returns: Sex differences in network structure and access in an advertising firm. , 1992 .

[61]  D. Dougherty Interpretive Barriers to Successful Product Innovation in Large Firms , 1992 .

[62]  A. Tsui,et al.  Being different: Relational demography and organizational attachment. , 1991 .

[63]  Stephen J. Kobrin,et al.  AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE DETERMINANTS OF GLOBAL INTEGRATION , 1991 .

[64]  J. K. Murnighan,et al.  The Development of an Intragroup Norm and the Effects of Interpersonal and Structural Challenges , 1991 .

[65]  K. Weick,et al.  Loosely Coupled Systems: A Reconceptualization , 1990 .

[66]  J. Jarillo,et al.  The Evolution of Research on Coordination Mechanisms in Multinational Corporations , 1989 .

[67]  A. Tsui,et al.  Beyond Simple Demographic Effects: The Importance of Relational Demography in Superior-Subordinate Dyads , 1989 .

[68]  Gregory A. Caldeira,et al.  Political Friendship in the Legislature , 1987, The Journal of Politics.

[69]  S. Ghoshal Global strategy: An organizing framework , 1987 .

[70]  Richard L. Daft,et al.  Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design , 1986 .

[71]  G. Hedlund The hypermodern MNC—A heterarchy? , 1986 .

[72]  L. L. Cummings,et al.  FEEDBACK AS AN INDIVIDUAL RESOURCE: PERSONAL STRATEGIES OF CREATING INFORMATION , 1983 .

[73]  Jon Olson,et al.  Cultural orientations and individual reactions to organizations: A study of employees of Japanese-owned firms. , 1981 .

[74]  C. Fombrun,et al.  Social Network Analysis in Organizations , 1979, Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining.

[75]  Jay R. Galbraith,et al.  Transfer of Managers as a Coordination and Control Strategy in Multinational Organizations. , 1977 .

[76]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  Determinants of Coordination Modes within Organizations , 1976 .

[77]  Mark S. Granovetter The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[78]  Martine R. Haas,et al.  Barriers to knowledge seeking within MNC teams: Which differences matter most? , 2015 .

[79]  Anne S. Tsui,et al.  Journal of Management on Behalf Of: Southern Management Association Journal and Article Identification Content Review Cultural Values Used Topics Studied Type I Studies—culture as Independent Variable Figure 1 Two Types of Cross-national, Cross-cultural Studies on Individuals and Teams in Organizati , 2022 .

[80]  P. Adler,et al.  Social Capital: Prospects for a New Concept , 2002 .

[81]  D. Levin THE STRENGTH OF WEAK TIES YOU CAN TRUST : THE MEDIATING ROLE OF TRUST IN EFFECTIVE KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER , 2002 .

[82]  Jeffrey Stamps,et al.  Virtual teams: The new way to work , 1999 .

[83]  T. Kostova,et al.  Organizational Legitimacy Under Conditions of Complexity: The Case of the Multinational Enterprise , 1999 .

[84]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Interunit Communication in Multinational Corporations , 1994 .