OB & I/O psychology: team research, knowledge on team functioning.HRM literature: focused on individual-level phenomena, the need to more inclusive of team-level phenomena HRM’s adoption of team-level phenomena lagging in the field of practice.
Task: easier to manipulate team features, such as structure, task interdependence, etc.
Study one: competitive –speed, cooperative – accuracy; extroversion & agreeableness – cooperative Study two:Structural contingency theory, organizational level, team level: functional- predictable environmentDivisional – cognitive ability, functional – agreeableness(联系实验中打飞机的任务讲)External fit is low, emotional stability (NOT SUPPORTED IN FUNCTIONAL STRUCTURE)A functional structure may simply provide such a “strong situation” that there is little latitude in behavior that might be traced to individual differences.(这意味着在劳动力市场紧缩tight的情况下，可以用结构性方法进行弥补)
从职能式转变为事业部式结构的团队要求个体担任更整体的角色，进行更多的个人判断和选择。任务复杂性的增加要求个体具有更高水平的认知能力。即认知能力水平调节了不同结构变化间的差异。 the high-cognitive-ability teams also responded worse in the divisional to functional shift, which was not technically a formal prediction of Hypothesis 4
Bridging the gap between i/o psychology and hr practice
Bridging the gap between I/O Research and HR practice: a person-team fit perspective<br />8th International Conference of Strategic Human Resource Management and Entrepreneurship<br />Hongchang Li (Choice Lee)<br />2010-6-24<br />Hangzhou<br />
From person-organization fit to person-team fit<br />Person-organization fit<br /> the relationship between individual differences and outcomes is contingent on the nature of the task or the organization (Kristof, 1996)<br /> dimension: culture<br />Person-team fit (Hollenbeck et al. )<br /> distributed dynamic decision-making (DDD) simulation developed for the Department of Defense<br /> laboratory research<br />
Bridging the gap<br />Team composition: matching people to teams and roles<br /> measurement for team composition traits (aggregation method)<br />diversity of team composition<br />Team task design: changing teams and roles to fit people<br />task allocation structure<br /> reward structure<br />(Hollenbeck, DeRue, & Guzzo, 2004)<br />seeding for maximizing and minimizing trait variance in teams<br />extroversion: complementary fit<br />conscientiousness: supplementary fit<br />(Humphrey, Hollenbeck, Meyer, & Ilgen, 2007)<br />
Reference<br />Hollenbeck, J., Moon, H., Ellis, A., West, B., Ilgen, D., Sheppard, L., et al. (2002). Structural contingency theory and individual differences: Examination of external and internal person-team fit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 599-606.<br />Beersma, B., Hollenbeck, J., Humphrey, S., Moon, H., Conlon, D., & Ilgen, D. (2003). Cooperation, competition, and team performance: Toward a contingency approach. The Academy of Management Journal, 572-590.<br />Hollenbeck, J., DeRue, D., & Guzzo, R. (2004). Bridging the gap between I/O research and HR practice: Improving team composition, team training, and team task design. Human Resource Management, 43(4), 353-366.<br />Moon, H., Hollenbeck, J., Humphrey, S., Ilgen, D., West, B., Ellis, A., et al. (2004). Asymmetric adaptability: Dynamic team structures as one-way streets. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 681-696.<br />DeRue, D., & Morgeson, F. (2007). Stability and change in person-team and person-role fit over time: The effects of growth satisfaction, performance, and general self-efficacy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(5), 1242-1253.<br />Humphrey, S., Hollenbeck, J., Meyer, C., & Ilgen, D. (2007). Trait configurations in self-managed teams: A conceptual examination of the use of seeding for maximizing and minimizing trait variance in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(3), 885-892.<br />