Survey results of employees and managers from 25 work groups in a large technology firm demonstrate the moderating effect of within-group task interdependence on the relationship between group autonomy and effectiveness. As hypothesized, autonomy has a positive influence on work group effectiveness when task interdependence is high and a negative effect when task interdependence is low.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Babakus, E. , Ferguson, C. E., & Joereskog, K. G. (1987). The sensitivity of confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis to violations of measurement scale and distributional assumptions. Journal of Marketing Research, 24, 222-228.
2.
Barker, J. R. (1993). Tightening the iron cage: Concertive control in self-managing teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(3), 408-437.
3.
Baron, R. M. , & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
4.
Cohen, A. , & Cohen, P. (1975). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6.
Cohen, S. G. , & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23(3), 239-290.
7.
Cohen, S. G. , & Ledford, G. E. (1994). The effectiveness of self-managing teams: A quasi-experiment. Human Relations, 47(1), 13-43.
8.
Cohen, S. G. , Ledford, G. E., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1996). A predictive model of self-managing work team effectiveness. Human Relations, 49(5), 643-676.
9.
Cotton, J. L. (1993). Employee involvement. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
10.
Cox, E.P.I. (1980). The optimal number of response alternatives for a scale: A review. Journal of Marketing Research, 17, 407-422.
11.
D’Augostino, R. B. , & Stevens, M. A. (Eds.). (1986). Goodness-of-fit techniques. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc.
12.
George, J. M. , & James, L. R. (1993). Personality, affect, and behavior in groups revisited: Comment on aggregation, levels of analysis, and a recent application of within and between analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(5), 798-804.
13.
Guzzo, R. A. , & Dickson, M. W. (1996). Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and effectiveness. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 307-338.
14.
Guzzo, R. A. , & Shea, G. P. (1992). Group performance and intergroup relations in organizations. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 269-313). Palo Alto, CA: Psychological Press.
15.
James, L. R. , Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1984). Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(1), 85-98.
16.
James, L. R. , Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1993). r: An assessment of within-group interrater agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(2), 306-309.
17.
Janz, B. D. , Colquitt, J. A., & Noe, R. A. (1997). Knowledge worker team effectiveness: The role of autonomy, interdependence, team development, and contextual support variables. Personnel Psychology, 50, 877-904.
18.
Jehn, K. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(2), 245-282.
19.
Kim, Y. , & Lee, B. (1995). RandD projects team climate and team performance in Korea: A multidimensional approach. RandD Management, 25(2), 179-196.
20.
Klein, J. A. (1991). A reexamination of autonomy in light of new manufacturing practices. Human Relations, 44, 21-38.
21.
Langfred, C. W. (1996, August). Autonomy and effectiveness: A study of work groups in two government bureaucracies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Cincinnati, OH.
22.
Langfred, C. W. , & Shanley, M. T. (1997). The importance of organizational context, I: A conceptual model of cohesiveness and effectiveness in work groups. Public Administration Quarterly, 21(3), 349-369.
23.
Latham, G. P. , Winters, D. C., & Locke, E. A. (1994). Cognitive and motivational effects of participation: A mediator study. Journal of Organization Behavior, 15, 49-63.
24.
Lawler, E. E. , Mohrman, S. A., & Ledford, G. E. (1995). Creating high performance organizations: Practices and results of employee involvement and total quality management in Fortune 1000 companies. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
25.
Liden, R. C. , Wayne, S. J., & Bradway, L. K. (1997). Task interdependence as a moderator of the relation between group control and performance. Human Relation, 50, 169-181.
26.
Macy, B. A. , & Izumi, H. (1993). Organizational change, design and work innovation: A meta-analysis of 131 North American field studies—1961-1991. In W. Passmore & R. Woodman (Eds.), Research in organizational change and development (pp. 235-313). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
27.
Manz, C. C. , & Sims, H. P. (1993). Business without bosses. New York: John Wiley.
28.
Moreland, R. L. , Levine, J. M., & Wingert, M. L. (1996). Creating the ideal group: Composition effects at work. In E. H. Witte & J. H. Davis (Eds.), Understanding group behavior, Vol. 2: Small group processes and interpersonal relations (pp. 11-35). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
29.
Pearce, J. A. , & Ravlin, E. C. (1987). The design and activation of self-regulating work groups. Human Relations, 40, 751-782.
30.
Saavedra, R. P. , Earley, P. C., & Van Dyne, L. (1993). Complex interdependence in task-performing groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 61-72.
31.
Shanley, M. , & Langfred, C. W. (1998). The importance of organizational context: An empirical test of work group cohesiveness and effectiveness in two government bureaucracies. Public Administration Quarterly, 21(4), 465-485.
32.
Shea, G. P. , & Guzzo, R. A. (1987). Groups as human resources. Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management, 5, 323-356.
33.
Smith, C. , & Comer, D. (1994). Self-organization in small groups: A study of group effectiveness within non-equilibrium conditions. Human Relations, 47, 553-581.
34.
Stewart, G. L. , & Barrick, M. R. (1997, August). Designing effective work teams: Task interdependence, team self-leadership, and task routineness. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Boston, MA.
35.
Stone-Romero, E. F. , & Anderson, L. E. (1994). Relative power of moderated multiple regression and the comparison of subgroup correlation coefficients for detecting moderating effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 354-359.
36.
Van de Ven, A. H. , & Ferry, D. L. (1980). Measuring and assessing organizations. New York: John Wiley.
37.
Wageman, R. (1995). Interdependence and group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 145-180.
38.
Wageman, R. (1997). Critical success factors for creating superb self-managing teams. Organizational Dynamics, 26(1), 49-61.
39.
Yammarino, F. J. , & Markham, S. E. (1992). On the application of within and between analysis: Are absence and affect really group-based phenomena?Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(2), 168-176.
