Works
- Beyond team types and taxonomies: a dimensional scaling conceptualization for team description, Academy of Management Review 37(1), 82 to 106, 2012
- Coordinated action in multiteam systems, Journal of Applied Psychology 97(4), 808 to 824, 2012
- The double-edged sword of decentralized planning in multiteam systems, Academy of Management Journal 56(3), 735 to 757, 2013
- Same page, different books: extending representational gaps theory to enhance performance in multiteam systems, Academy of Management Journal 58(3), 813 to 835, 2015
- Managing coordination in multiteam systems: integrating micro and macro perspectives, Academy of Management Journal 59(5), 1823 to 1844, 2016
- A century of work teams in the Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Applied Psychology 102(3), 452 to 467, 2017
- The highs and lows of hierarchy in multiteam systems, Academy of Management Journal 65(5), 1571 to 1592, 2022
In Organizational Structures
Known for
Experimental research on teams and multiteam systems
Ideas
Describing teams by dimensions, not types. Teams are better differentiated by three underlying dimensions, skill differentiation, authority differentiation, and temporal stability, than by categorical team types. Caveat: Conceptual.
Decentralization's double edge in multiteam systems. Decentralized planning in multiteam systems raised proactivity and aspiration but caused even larger losses through excessive risk seeking and coordination failures. Caveat: 210 multiteam systems of three six-person teams each; the abstract does not describe the setting.