Contemporary expert organizations rely heavily on cross-border, often temporary teams typically working through virtual means of communication. While static aspects of teams are well researched, there have been considerably fewer studies on team dynamics and team processes. Existing process studies tend to take a cautious, entity-based approach, emphasizing team structure as much as (or even more than) processual aspects. This article represents a shift from studying teams as entities and structures changing over time to studying teams as an on-going process. Participants engage in teaming and thus in the continued making and sometimes unmaking of teams. We report on a study of three anatomically similar, self-managed teams performing the same set of complex tasks with radically different teaming processes. With more or less successful shared sensemaking, the team members collectively create (or fail to create) not only team task outputs but also the team itself.
BansalPCorleyK (2011) The coming of age for qualitative research: Embracing the diversity of qualitative methods. Academy of Management Journal54(2): 233–237.
6.
BettenhausenKMurnighanJK (1985) The emergence of norms in competitive decision-making groups. Administrative Science Quarterly30(3): 350–372.
7.
BionW (1950) Experiences in groups: V. Human Relations3(1): 3–14.
8.
BionWR (1952) Group dynamics: A re-view. International Journal of Psychoanalysis33: 235–247.
9.
BrandlJNeyerAK (2009) Applying cognitive adjustment theory to cross-cultural training for global virtual teams. Human Resource Management48(3): 341–353.
10.
BrownADStaceyPNandhakumarJ (2008) Making sense of sensemaking narratives. Human Relations61(8): 1035–1062.
11.
BrymanA (1988) Quantity and Quality in Social Research. Contemporary Social Research Series, Vol. 18. New York: Routledge.
12.
BurkeCMMorleyMJ (2016) On temporary organizations: A review, synthesis and research agenda. Human Relations69(6): 1235–1258.
13.
CroninMWeingartLTodorovaG (2011) Dynamics in groups: Are we there yet?Academy of Management Annals5(1): 571–612.
14.
DavisMS (1971) That’s interesting! Towards a phenomenology of sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy of the Social Sciences1(2): 309–344.
15.
DionysiouDDTsoukasH (2013) Understanding the (re)creation of routines from within: A symbolic interactionist perspective. Academy of Management Review38(2): 181–205.
16.
EdmondsonACNembhardIM (2009) Product development and learning in project teams: The challenges are the benefits. Journal of Product Innovation Management26(2): 123–138.
17.
EinolaK (2017) Making sense of successful global teams. Doctoral dissertation: Turku School of Economics. Available at: http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-29-6912-8 (accessed 14 January 2019).
18.
FeldmanMS (2000) Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organization Science11(6): 611–629.
19.
FrenchRBSimpsonP (2010) The ‘work group’: Redressing the balance in Bion’s Experiences in Groups. Human Relations63(12): 1859–1878.
20.
GibbsJLSivunenABoyrazM (2017) Investigating the impacts of team type and design on virtual team processes. Human Resource Management Review27: 590–603. Special issue on Virtual Teams in Organizations.
21.
GilsonLLMaynardMTYoungNCJVartiainenMHakonenM (2015) Virtual teams research 10 years, 10 themes, and 10 opportunities. Journal of Management41(5): 1313–1337.
22.
GioiaDACorleyKGHamiltonAL (2013) Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods16(1): 15–31.
23.
HultinLMähringM (2017) How practice makes sense in healthcare operations: Studying sensemaking as performative, material-discursive practice. Human Relations70(5): 566–593.
24.
JohnsTGrattonL (2013) The third wave of virtual work. Harvard Business Review91(1): 66–73.
25.
JonsenKMaznevskiMLDavisonSC (2012) Global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness. In: StahlGKBjorkmanIMorrisS (eds) Handbook of Research in International Human Resource Management (2nd edn). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
26.
LangleyA (1999) Strategies for theorizing from process data. The Academy of Management Review24(4): 691–710.
27.
LangleyA (2007) Process thinking in strategic organization. Strategic Organization5(3): 271–282.
28.
LevineJMMorelandRL (1990) Progress in small group research. Annual Review of Psychology41(1): 585–634.
29.
LindgrenMPackendorffJSergiV (2014) Thrilled by the discourse, suffering through the experience: Emotions in project-based work. Human Relations67(11): 1383–1412.
30.
LockeKFeldmanMSGolden-BiddleK (2015) Discovery, validation, and live coding. In: ElsbachKKramerR (eds) Handbook of Qualitative Organizational Research: Innovative Pathways and Methods. London: Routledge, 371–380.
31.
MaitlisSChristiansonM (2014) Sensemaking in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward. The Academy of Management Annals8(1): 57–125.
32.
MaitlisSSonensheinS (2010) Sensemaking in crisis and change: Inspiration and insights from Weick 1988. Journal of Management Studies47(3): 551–580.
33.
MaitlisSVogusTJLawrenceTB (2013) Sensemaking and emotion in organizations. Organizational Psychology Review3: 222–247.
34.
MalhotraAMajchrzakARosenB (2007) Leading virtual teams. The Academy of Management Perspectives21(1): 60–70.
35.
MarksMAMathieuJEZaccaroSJ (2001) A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review26(3): 356–376.
36.
MathieuJMaynardMTRappTGilsonL (2008) Team effectiveness 1997–2007: A review of recent advancements and a glimpse into the future. Journal of Management34(3): 410–476.
37.
MaxwellJAMillerBA (2008) Categorizing and connecting strategies in qualitative data analysis. In: Hesse-BiberNSLeavyP (eds) Handbook of Emergent Methods. New York: Guilford Publications, 461–477.
38.
NayakAChiaR (2011) Thinking becoming and emergence: Process philosophy and organization studies. In: TsoukasHChia (ed.) Philosophy and Organization Theory. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Vol. 32. Bingley: Emerald, 281–309.
39.
O’LearyMBMortensenMWoolleyAW (2011) Multiple team membership: A theoretical model of its effects on productivity and learning for individuals and teams. Academy of Management Review36(3): 461–478.
40.
OlieR (1994) Shades of culture and institutions in international mergers. Organization Studies15(3): 381–405.
41.
PotterJWetherellM (1987) Discourse and Social Psychology: Beyond Attitudes and Behaviour. London: SAGE.
42.
RosenBFurstSBlackburnR (2006) Training for virtual teams: An investigation of current practices and future needs. Human Resource Management45(2): 229–247.
43.
SmircichL (1983) Organizations as shared meanings. In: PondyLRFrostPJMorganGDandrigeTC (eds) Organizational Symbolism. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
44.
StahlGKMaznevskiMLVoigtAJonsenK (2010) Unraveling the effects of cultural diversity in teams: A meta-analysis of research on multicultural work groups. Journal of International Business Studies41(4): 690–709.
45.
StakeRE (1995) The Art of Case Study Research. London: SAGE.
TuckmanBW (1965) Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin63(6): 384–399.
48.
TuckmanBWJensenMAC (1977) Stages of small-group development revisited. Group & Organization Management2(4): 419–427.
49.
Van de VenAH (1992) Suggestions for studying strategy process: A research note. Strategic Management Journal13(5): 169–188.
50.
WeickKE (1979) The Social Psychology of Organizing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
51.
WeickKE (1988) Enacted sensemaking in crisis situations. Journal of Management Studies25(4): 305–317.
52.
WeickKE (1995) Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
53.
WelchCPiekkariRPlakoyiannakiEPaavilainen-MäntymäkiE (2011) Theorising from case studies: Towards a pluralist future for international business research. Journal of International Business Studies42(5): 740–762.
