This paper reviews the literature on self-managing work groups as implemented in organizations, and briefly reviews relevant laboratory and other non-SR WG research. A model is developed exploring the processes of SR WG implementation and operation. Task, organization, and personnel preconditions to implementation are identified, including appropriate expectations by managerial personnel. Design features should include heterogeneous composition and minimal status differences. Activation mechanisms are thought to smooth the way for the successful group, which exhibits the positive process criteria of variety in group member responses, coordination of members, and commitment to group success.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AARMODT, M. S., & KIMBROUGH, W. W.Effects of group heterogeneity on quality of task solutions. Psychological Reports, 1982, 50, 171-174.
2.
AQUILANO, N. J.Multiskilled work teams: Productivity benefits. California Management Review, 1977, 19, 17-22.
3.
ARGOTE, L.Input uncertainty and organizational coordination in hospital emergency units. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1982, 27(3), 420-434.
4.
BAKEMAN, R., & HELMREICH, R.Cohesiveness and performance: Covariation and causality in an undersea environment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1975, 11, 478-489.
5.
BASS, B. M.Team productivity and individual member competence. Small Group Behavior, 1980, 11(4), 431-504.
6.
BIRCHALL, D. W.Work system design and the quality of working life. Omega, 1978, 6, 533-442.
7.
BIRD, A. M.Team structure and success as related to cohesiveness and leadership. Journal of Social Psychology, 1977, 103, 217-223.
8.
BLUMBERG, M.Job switching in autonomous work groups: An exploratory study in a Pennsylvania coal mine. Academy of Management Journal, 1980, 23, 287-306.
9.
BLUMBERG, M. Z., & PRINGLE, C. D.How control groups can cause loss of control in action research: The case of Rushton Coal Mine. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1983, 19(4), 409-425.
10.
BUCKLOW, M.A new role for the work group. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1966, 11, 59-78.
11.
BYRNE, D.The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press, 1971.
12.
CARRON, A. V., & CHELLADURAI, P.The dynamics of group cohesion in sport. Journal of Sport Psychology, 1981, 3, 123-139.
13.
CHACKO, T. I., STONE, T. H., & BRIEF, A. P.Participation in goal-setting programs: An attributional analysis. Academy of Management Review, 1979, 4, 433-438.
14.
CHENG, J. L. C.Interdependence and coordination in organizations: A role-system analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 1983, 26(1), 156-162.
15.
CUMMINGS, T. G.Designing effective work groups. In P. C. Nystrom and W. H. Starbuck, (Ed.), Handbook of organizational design. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1981.
16.
CUMMINGS, T. G., & SRIVASTVA, S.Management of work: A sociotechnical systems approach. Kent, Ohio: Kent State, 1977.
17.
DAVIS, L. E.Optimizing organization-plant design: A complimentary structure for technical and social systems. Organizational Dynamics, 1979, 3-15.
18.
DOYLE, W. J.Effects of achieved status of leader on productivity of group. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1971, 16, 40-50.
19.
GLADSTEIN, D. L.Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1984, 29(4), 499-517.
20.
GOODMAN, P. S.Assessing organizational change: The Rushton Quality of Work Experiment. New York: Wiley, 1979.
21.
GOODMAN, P. S., RAVLIN, E., & SCHMINKE, M.Understanding groups in organizations. In L. L. Cummings and B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 9). Greenwich, Connecticut: JAI Press, 1987.
22.
GREEN, S. G., & TABER, T. D.The effects of three social decision schemes on decision group process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1980, 25, 97-106.
23.
HACKMAN, J. R.The design of work in the 1980's. Organizational Dynamics, 1978, 7, 3-17. (a)
24.
HACKMAN, J. R.The design of self-managing work groups. In B. King, S. Streufert, and F. E. Fiedler, (Eds.), Managerial control and organizational democracy. Washington, D.C.: V. H. Winston & Sons, 1978. (b)
25.
HACKMAN, J. R., & OLDHAM, G. R.Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975, 60(2), 159-170.
26.
HACKMAN, J. R., & OLDHAM, G. R.Work redesign. Reading, Massachusetts: AddisonWesley, 1980.
27.
HACKMAN, J. R., & SUTTLE, J. L.Improving life at work. Santa Monica: Goodyear, 1977.
28.
HACKMAN, J. R., BROUSSEAU, K. R., & WEISS, J. A.The interaction of task design and group performance strategies in determining group effectiveness. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1976, 16, 350-365.
29.
HARKINS, S. G., & PETTY, R. E.Effects of task difficulty and task uniqueness on social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1982, 43, 1214-1229.
30.
HAWLEY, K. E., & HEINEN, J. S.Compatibility and task group performance. Human Relations, 1979, 32, 579-590.
31.
HERBST, P.Autonomous group functioning. London: Tavistock, 1962.
HIROKAWA, R. Y.A comparative analysis of communication patterns within effective and ineffective decision-making groups. Communication Monographs, 1980, 47, 312-321.
34.
HULIN, C. C., & BLOOD, M. R.Job enlargement, individual differences, and work resources. Psychological Bulletin, 1968, 69(1), 41-55.
35.
JAQUES, E.The changing culture of the factory. London: Tavistock, 1951.
36.
KATZ, R.The effects of group longevity on project communication and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1982, 27, 81-104.
37.
KATZ, R., & TUSHMAN, M.Communication patterns, project performance, and task characteristics: An empirical evaluation and integration in an R&D setting. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1979, 23, 139-162.
38.
KELLY, J. E.A reappraisal of socio-technical systems theory. Human Relations, 1978, 31(12), 1069-1099.
39.
KIESLER, C. A.The psychology of commitment: Experiments linking behavior to belief. New York: Academic Press, 1971.
40.
KING, D.Training within the organization. London: Tavistock, 1964.
41.
KOCH, J. L.Effects of goal specificity and performance feedback to work groups on peer leadership, performance, and attitudes. Human Relations, 1979, 32, 819-840.
42.
KOLODNY, H. F., & KIGGUNDU, M. N.Towards the development of a sociotechnical systems model in woodlands mechanical harvesting. Human Relations, 1980, 33(9), 623-645.
43.
KURECKA, P. M., AUSTIN, J. M., JOHNSON, W., & MENDOZA, J. L.Full and errant coaching effects on assigned role leaderless group discussion performance. Personnel Psychology, 1982, 3S, 805-812.
44.
KURILOFF, A.An experiment in management--putting theory Y to the test. Personnel, 1963, 40, 8-17.
45.
LATANE, B., WILLIAMS, K., & HARKINS, S.Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1979, 37, 822-832.
46.
LAWLER, E. E.The new plant revolution. Organizational Dynamics, 1978, 6, 2-12.
47.
LAWLER, E. E., III, & MOHRMAN, S. A.Quality circles after the fact. Harvard Business Review, 1985, 63(1), 65-71.
48.
MARCH, J. G., & SIMON, H. A.Organizations. New York: Wiley, 1958.
49.
MIKALACHKI, A.Group cohesion reconsidered. London, Canada: School of Business Administration, University of Western Ontario, 1969.
50.
MORROW, P. C.Work-related communication, environmental uncertainty, and subunit effectiveness: A second look at the information processing approach to subunit communications. Academy of Management Journal, 1981, 24(4), 851-858.
51.
NIEVA, V. F., FLEISHMAN, E. A., & RIECK, A. Team dimensions: Their identity, their measurement, and their relationships. Unpublished report by Response Analysis Corp., Washington, D.C. 1978.
52.
NIGHTINGALE, D.Workplace democracy: An inquiry into employee participation in Canadian work organizations. Toronto: University of Toronto, 1982.
53.
NIXON, H. L.Reinforcement effects of sports team success cohesiveness related factors. International Review of Sport Sociology, 1977, 4, 17-38.
54.
O'KEEFE, R. D., KERNAGHAN, J. A., & RUBENSTEIN, A. H.Group cohesiveness: A factor in the adoption of innovations among scientific work groups. Small Group Behavior, 1975, 6, 282-292.
55.
O'REILLY, C. A., & ROBERTS, K. H.Task group structure, communication, and effectiveness in three organizations. Journal of Appled Psychology, 1977, 62, 674-681.
56.
PASMORE, W., FRANCIS, C., HALDEMAN, J., & SHANI, A.Sociotechnical systems: A North American reflection on empirical studies of the seventies. Human Relations, 1982, 35(12), 1179-1204.
57.
PEARCE, J. A., II, & RANDOLPH, W. A.Improving strategy formulation pedagogues by recognizing behavioral aspects. Exchange, 1980, 4, 7-10.
58.
QVALE, T.A Norwegian strategy for democratization of industry. Human Relations, 1976, 29, 453-469.
59.
RAVLIN, E., & WHEELER, H.Some thoughts on worker participation. A paper presented at the Human Resources Conference, University of South CarolinaApril 1985.
60.
RICE, A.Productivity and social organization: The Ahmedabad Experiment. London: Tavistock, 1958.
61.
ROSENBAUM, M. E., MOORE, D. L., COTTON, J. L., COOK, M. S., HIESER, R. A., SHOVAR, M. N., & GRAY, M. J.Group productivity and process: Pure and mixed reward structures and task interdependence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1980, 39(4), 626-642.
62.
RUBENSTEIN, A., BARTH, R., & DOUDS, C.Ways to improve communications between R&D groups. Research Management, 1971, 14, 49-49.
63.
SAKURAI, M. M.Small group cohesiveness and detrimental conformity. Sociometry, 1975, 38(2), 340-357.
64.
SANDERSON, G., & STAPENHURST, F.Industrial democracy today. New York: McGraw Hill, 1979.
65.
SEASHORE, S. E.Group cohesiveness in the industrial work group. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1954.
66.
SELTZER, J., & KILMAN, R. H.Effect of group composition on group process: Homogeneity vs. heterogeneity on task and people dimensions. Psychological Reports, 1977, 41, 1195-1200.
67.
SMITH, R. H.Let your employees choose their co-workers. Society for the Advancement of Management: Advanced Management Journal, 1981, 4, 27-36.
68.
STEINER, I. D.Group process and productivity. New York: Academic Press, 1972.
69.
STRAUSS, G.An experiment in worker control over pacing. In W. Whyte (Ed.), Money and motivation. New York: Harper, 1955.
70.
SUSMAN, G. I.The impact of automation on work group autonomy and task specialization. Human Relations, 1970, 23, 567-577.
71.
SUSMAN, G. I.Technological prerequisites for delegation of decision making to work groups. In L. E., Davis, and A. B. Cherns (Eds.), The quality of working life: Problems, prospects and the state of the art. New York: Free Press, 1975.
72.
TAYLOR, J.Job satisfaction and quality of working life: A reassessment. In L. Davis and J. Taylor (Eds.), Design of jobs. Santa Monica: Goodyear, 1979.
73.
TERBORG, J. R., CASTORE, C., & DeNINNO, J. A.A longitudinal field investigation of the impact of group composition on group performance and cohesion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1976, 34, 782-790.
74.
TJOSVOLD, D.Effects of cooperative and competitive interdependence and task complexity on subordinates' productivity, perception of leader, and group development. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 1982, 14, 24-34.
75.
TJOSVOLD, D., & FIELD, R. H. G.Effects of social context on consensus and majority vote decision making. Academy of Management Journal, 1983, 26(3), 500-506.
76.
TRIST, E. L.Organizational choice. London: Tavistock, 1963.
77.
TRIST, E. L., & BAMFORTH, K. W.Some social and psychological consequences of the longwall method of coal getting. Human Relations, 1951, 4, 3-38.
78.
TRIST, E. L., SUSMAN, G. I., & BROWN, G. R.An experiment in autonomous working in an American underground coal mine. Human Relations, 1977, 4, 175-185.
79.
TUSHMAN, M. L.Impacts of perceived environmental variability on patterns of work related communication. Academy of Management Journal, 1979, 22(3), 482-500. (a)
80.
TUSHMAN, M. L.Work characteristics and subunit communication structure: A contingency analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1979, 24, 82-98. (b)
81.
TZINER, A., & VARDI, Y.Effects of command style and group cohesiveness on the performance effectiveness of self-selected tank crews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1982, 67(6), 769-775.
82.
WAGNER, H., HIBBITS, N., ROSENBLATT, R. D., & SCHULZ, R.Team training and evaluation strategies: State of the art. Technical Report 771-1, Human Resources Research Organization, Alexandria, Virginia, 1977.
83.
WALTON, R. E.Work innovation at Topeka: After six years. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1977, 13, 422-433.
84.
WOODMAN, R., & SHERWOOD, J.Effects of team development intervention: A field experiment. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1980, 16, 211-227.
85.
YORKS, L.A radical approach to job enrichment. New York: AMACOM, 1976.
