The evolution of work team research since Hawthorne.

IF 2.9 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH ACS Chemical Health & Safety Pub Date : 2018-05-01 DOI:10.1037/amp0000255
John E Mathieu, Mikhail A Wolfson, Semin Park
{"title":"The evolution of work team research since Hawthorne.","authors":"John E Mathieu,&nbsp;Mikhail A Wolfson,&nbsp;Semin Park","doi":"10.1037/amp0000255","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Since the Hawthorne studies of the 1920s and 1930s, there has been tremendous progress in the science and the practice of work group effectiveness. We chronicle the evolution of 3 schools of thought concerning work groups that spawned about the time of those studies. We highlight the different emphases of each perspective and how they eventually merged into an integrated view of teamwork. We also illustrate the disciplinary ebbs and flows of work group research over the past quarter century and how many different scholars from diverse institutions are currently contributing to the literature. We highlight the progress that has been made both in terms of scholarly insights and practical advances. We argue that the popular Input-Process-Outcome framework has facilitated progress in the field but has also become a limiting factor. We conclude that future advances will be associated with: (a) the advent of new theories, methodologies, and tools for modeling dynamic team properties; (b) a greater appreciation for, and sophisticated conceptions of, team task environments; and (c) conceptions of teams as entities in multilevel environments. (PsycINFO Database Record</p>","PeriodicalId":12,"journal":{"name":"ACS Chemical Health & Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2018-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"51","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Chemical Health & Safety","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000255","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 51

Abstract

Since the Hawthorne studies of the 1920s and 1930s, there has been tremendous progress in the science and the practice of work group effectiveness. We chronicle the evolution of 3 schools of thought concerning work groups that spawned about the time of those studies. We highlight the different emphases of each perspective and how they eventually merged into an integrated view of teamwork. We also illustrate the disciplinary ebbs and flows of work group research over the past quarter century and how many different scholars from diverse institutions are currently contributing to the literature. We highlight the progress that has been made both in terms of scholarly insights and practical advances. We argue that the popular Input-Process-Outcome framework has facilitated progress in the field but has also become a limiting factor. We conclude that future advances will be associated with: (a) the advent of new theories, methodologies, and tools for modeling dynamic team properties; (b) a greater appreciation for, and sophisticated conceptions of, team task environments; and (c) conceptions of teams as entities in multilevel environments. (PsycINFO Database Record

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
霍桑以来的团队研究演变。
自20世纪20年代和30年代霍桑研究以来,在团队效率的科学和实践方面取得了巨大的进步。我们按时间顺序列出了三个思想流派的演变,这些思想流派与这些研究产生的工作小组有关。我们强调了每个观点的不同重点,以及它们最终如何融合成一个完整的团队合作观点。我们还说明了在过去的四分之一世纪中,工作组研究的学科兴衰和流动,以及来自不同机构的不同学者目前为文献做出了多少贡献。我们强调在学术见解和实践进展方面取得的进展。我们认为,流行的投入-过程-结果框架促进了该领域的进展,但也成为一个限制因素。我们得出的结论是,未来的进展将与:(a)新的理论、方法和工具的出现有关,这些理论、方法和工具将用于建模动态团队属性;(b)对团队任务环境有更大的认识和更复杂的概念;(c)团队作为多层次环境中的实体的概念。(PsycINFO数据库记录
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Chemical Health & Safety
ACS Chemical Health & Safety PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
20.00%
发文量
63
期刊介绍: The Journal of Chemical Health and Safety focuses on news, information, and ideas relating to issues and advances in chemical health and safety. The Journal of Chemical Health and Safety covers up-to-the minute, in-depth views of safety issues ranging from OSHA and EPA regulations to the safe handling of hazardous waste, from the latest innovations in effective chemical hygiene practices to the courts'' most recent rulings on safety-related lawsuits. The Journal of Chemical Health and Safety presents real-world information that health, safety and environmental professionals and others responsible for the safety of their workplaces can put to use right away, identifying potential and developing safety concerns before they do real harm.
期刊最新文献
A CADASIL NOTCH3 mutation leads to clonal hematopoiesis and expansion of Dnmt3a-R878H hematopoietic clones Continuous improvement strategies towards energy transition: The importance of individual employees' entrepreneurial orientation and learning processes Applying circular business models in the Chilean construction sector: A system dynamics perspective Venetoclax in combination with hypomethylating agents in chronic myelomonocytic leukemia: a propensity score matched multicenter cohort study Utilizing of viral RNA fragment to limit acute inflammation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1