BacharachS. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Some criteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14, 496–515.
2.
ColquittJ. A.Zapata-PhelanC. P. (2007). Trends in theory building and theory testing: A five-decade study of the Academy of Management Journal. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1281–1303.
3.
De WitF. R.GreerL. L.JehnK. A. (2012). The paradox of intragroup conflict: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 360–390.
4.
HomanA. C.GündemirS.BuengelerC.Van KleefG. A. (in press). Leading diversity: Towards a theory of functional leadership in diverse teams. Journal of Applied Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000482
5.
JohnsG. (2006). The essential impact of context on organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 386–408.
6.
KlonekF.GerpottF. H.Lehmann-WillenbrockN.ParkerS. K. (2019). Time to go wild: How to conceptualize and measure process dynamics in real teams with high-resolution. Organizational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386619886674
7.
KnightA.GreerL. L.De JongB. (2020). Start-up teams: A multi-dimensional conceptualization, integrative review of past research, and future research agenda. Academy of Management Annals, 14, 1–36.
8.
RaverJ. L. (2013). Counterproductive work behavior and conflict: Merging complementary domains. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 6, 151–159.
9.
ShufflerM. L.CroninM. A. (2019). The challenges of working with “real” teams: Challenges, needs, and opportunities. Organizational Psychology Review, 9, 211–218.
10.
SuttonR. I.StawB. M. (1995). What theory is not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 371–384.
11.
WeickK. E. (1995). What theory is not, theorizing is. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 385–390.
12.
WhettenD. A. (1989). What constitutes a theoretical contribution?Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 490–495.
