团队边界管理绩效后果的权变框架:基于30年研究的元分析。

IF 9.3 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Journal of Management Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-19 DOI:10.1177/01492063231206107
Ulrich Leicht-Deobald, Julia Backmann, Thomas A de Vries, Matthias Weiss, Sebastian Hohmann, Frank Walter, Gerben S van der Vegt, Martin Hoegl
{"title":"团队边界管理绩效后果的权变框架:基于30年研究的元分析。","authors":"Ulrich Leicht-Deobald, Julia Backmann, Thomas A de Vries, Matthias Weiss, Sebastian Hohmann, Frank Walter, Gerben S van der Vegt, Martin Hoegl","doi":"10.1177/01492063231206107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Research suggests that teams can greatly enhance their performance through boundary management, which comprises activities that establish, maintain, and regulate linkages with the surrounding environment. However, such performance gains do not materialize equally in all instances, and some teams struggle to benefit from boundary management. Integrating insights from social network and team-level resource allocation theories, we develop a contingency framework that considers the internal organization of a team's boundary management (i.e., the carrier, target, and type of such activities) as a key moderating factor that accounts for the varying effects. To test this framework, we use a meta-analytic approach that synthesizes >30 years of empirical research (i.e., 85 primary studies covering 10,848 teams). Our results show a positive main effect of team boundary management on team performance. Crucially, these performance benefits are more pronounced when the target of boundary management is extraorganizational rather than inside the home organization and when the type of boundary management activities is boundary spanning (e.g., coordination, representation, or information search) rather than boundary strengthening (e.g., buffering, guarding, or sentry activities). Moreover, boundary management is more effective when executed by formal team leaders rather than team members, and our results tentatively suggest that this may reflect differences in effectiveness between leaders and members in boundary strengthening, rather than boundary spanning. Overall, our findings advance theory on team boundary management by clarifying previously ambiguous findings and illustrating how teams can design their boundary management activities to be most effective.</p>","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"51 2","pages":"704-747"},"PeriodicalIF":9.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11705025/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Contingency Framework for the Performance Consequences of Team Boundary Management: A Meta-Analysis of 30 Years of Research.\",\"authors\":\"Ulrich Leicht-Deobald, Julia Backmann, Thomas A de Vries, Matthias Weiss, Sebastian Hohmann, Frank Walter, Gerben S van der Vegt, Martin Hoegl\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01492063231206107\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Research suggests that teams can greatly enhance their performance through boundary management, which comprises activities that establish, maintain, and regulate linkages with the surrounding environment. However, such performance gains do not materialize equally in all instances, and some teams struggle to benefit from boundary management. Integrating insights from social network and team-level resource allocation theories, we develop a contingency framework that considers the internal organization of a team's boundary management (i.e., the carrier, target, and type of such activities) as a key moderating factor that accounts for the varying effects. To test this framework, we use a meta-analytic approach that synthesizes >30 years of empirical research (i.e., 85 primary studies covering 10,848 teams). Our results show a positive main effect of team boundary management on team performance. Crucially, these performance benefits are more pronounced when the target of boundary management is extraorganizational rather than inside the home organization and when the type of boundary management activities is boundary spanning (e.g., coordination, representation, or information search) rather than boundary strengthening (e.g., buffering, guarding, or sentry activities). Moreover, boundary management is more effective when executed by formal team leaders rather than team members, and our results tentatively suggest that this may reflect differences in effectiveness between leaders and members in boundary strengthening, rather than boundary spanning. Overall, our findings advance theory on team boundary management by clarifying previously ambiguous findings and illustrating how teams can design their boundary management activities to be most effective.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54212,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Management\",\"volume\":\"51 2\",\"pages\":\"704-747\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11705025/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063231206107\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063231206107","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究表明,团队可以通过边界管理极大地提高绩效,边界管理包括建立、维持和调节与周围环境的联系的活动。然而,这样的绩效提升并不是在所有情况下都能实现的,有些团队很难从边界管理中获益。结合社会网络和团队层面资源配置理论的见解,我们开发了一个权变框架,该框架认为团队边界管理的内部组织(即,这些活动的载体,目标和类型)是解释不同影响的关键调节因素。为了验证这一框架,我们使用了一种综合了30年实证研究(即覆盖10,848个团队的85项主要研究)的元分析方法。研究结果表明,团队边界管理对团队绩效有正向的主效应。至关重要的是,当边界管理的目标是组织外而不是组织内部时,当边界管理活动的类型是跨越边界(例如,协调、表示或信息搜索)而不是加强边界(例如,缓冲、守卫或哨兵活动)时,这些绩效优势更为明显。此外,由正式的团队领导而不是团队成员来执行边界管理更有效,我们的研究结果初步表明,这可能反映了领导者和成员在边界强化方面的有效性差异,而不是边界跨越。总的来说,我们的研究结果通过澄清先前模棱两可的发现并说明团队如何设计最有效的边界管理活动来推进团队边界管理理论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Contingency Framework for the Performance Consequences of Team Boundary Management: A Meta-Analysis of 30 Years of Research.

Research suggests that teams can greatly enhance their performance through boundary management, which comprises activities that establish, maintain, and regulate linkages with the surrounding environment. However, such performance gains do not materialize equally in all instances, and some teams struggle to benefit from boundary management. Integrating insights from social network and team-level resource allocation theories, we develop a contingency framework that considers the internal organization of a team's boundary management (i.e., the carrier, target, and type of such activities) as a key moderating factor that accounts for the varying effects. To test this framework, we use a meta-analytic approach that synthesizes >30 years of empirical research (i.e., 85 primary studies covering 10,848 teams). Our results show a positive main effect of team boundary management on team performance. Crucially, these performance benefits are more pronounced when the target of boundary management is extraorganizational rather than inside the home organization and when the type of boundary management activities is boundary spanning (e.g., coordination, representation, or information search) rather than boundary strengthening (e.g., buffering, guarding, or sentry activities). Moreover, boundary management is more effective when executed by formal team leaders rather than team members, and our results tentatively suggest that this may reflect differences in effectiveness between leaders and members in boundary strengthening, rather than boundary spanning. Overall, our findings advance theory on team boundary management by clarifying previously ambiguous findings and illustrating how teams can design their boundary management activities to be most effective.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
22.40
自引率
5.20%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Journal of Management (JOM) aims to publish rigorous empirical and theoretical research articles that significantly contribute to the field of management. It is particularly interested in papers that have a strong impact on the overall management discipline. JOM also encourages the submission of novel ideas and fresh perspectives on existing research. The journal covers a wide range of areas, including business strategy and policy, organizational behavior, human resource management, organizational theory, entrepreneurship, and research methods. It provides a platform for scholars to present their work on these topics and fosters intellectual discussion and exchange in these areas.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信