1932

Abstract

The study of motivation in and of teams has flourished and expanded over the past few decades. We now have a better understanding of core motivational processes at the individual and team levels of analysis, along with cross-level processes through which individuals and teams influence each other. However, societal, cultural, economic, and technological changes have led to new forms of team-based designs and teaming strategies in work organizations. In this article we review five major changes to the nature of teams and teaming and identify fruitful avenues for future research that can generate new and important knowledge about the motivation of individuals in teams as well as the motivation of team systems as wholes.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-111821-031621
2024-01-22
2024-06-16
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/organ/11/1/annurev-orgpsych-111821-031621.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-111821-031621&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Allen R, Choudhury P. 2022. Algorithm-augmented work and domain experience: the countervailing forces of ability and aversion. Organ. Sci. 33:149–69
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Allen TD, Merlo K, Lawrence RC, Slutsky J, Gray CE. 2020. Boundary management and work-nonwork balance while working from home. Appl. Psychol. 70:60–84
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Aru J, Labash A, Corcoll O, Vicente R. 2023. Mind the gap: challenges of deep learning approaches to Theory of Mind. Artif. Intell. Rev. 56:9141–56
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bandura A. 1997. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control New York: Freeman
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Baum JR, Locke EA. 2004. The relationship of entrepreneurial traits, skill, and motivation to subsequent venture growth. J. Appl. Psychol. 89:587–98
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bhave DP, Kramer A, Glomb TM. 2010. Work–family conflict in work groups: social information processing, support, and demographic dissimilarity. J. Appl. Psychol. 95:145–58
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Breuer C, Hüffmeier J, Hertel G. 2016. Does trust matter more in virtual teams? A meta-analysis of trust and team effectiveness considering virtuality and documentation as moderators. J. Appl. Psychol. 101:1151–77
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Campos F, Frese M, Goldstein M, Iacovone L, Johnson HC et al. 2017. Teaching personal initiative beats traditional training in boosting small business in West Africa. Science 357:63571287–90
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Chen G, Kanfer R. 2006. Toward a systems theory of motivated behavior in work teams. Res. Organ. Behav. 27:223–67
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Chen G, Kanfer R, DeShon RP, Mathieu JE, Kozlowski SWJ. 2009. The motivating potential of teams: a test and extension of Chen & Kanfer's 2006 model. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 110:45–55
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Chen G, Kirkman BL. 2024. The study of work motivation across cultures: a review and directions for future research. The Oxford Handbook of Culture and Organizations MJ Gelfand, M Erez Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Chen G, Kirkman BL, Kanfer R, Allen D, Rosen B. 2007. A multilevel study of leadership, empowerment, and performance in teams. J. Appl. Psychol. 92:331–46
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Chen G, Sharma PN, Edinger SK, Shapiro DL, Farh JL. 2011. Motivating and demotivating forces in teams: cross-level influences of empowering leadership and relationship conflict. J. Appl. Psychol. 96:541–57
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Chen G, Smith TA, Kirkman BL, Zhang P, Lemoine GJ, Farh JL. 2019. Multiple team membership and empowerment spillover effects: Can empowerment processes cross team boundaries?. J. Appl. Psychol. 104:321–40
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Chen G, Thomas BA, Wallace JC. 2005. A multilevel examination of the relationships among training outcomes, mediating regulatory processes, and adaptive performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 90:827–41
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Choudhury P, Cirrus F, Larson B. 2021. Work-from-anywhere: the productivity effects of geographical flexibility. Strategic Manag. J. 42:655–83
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Davison RB, Hollenbeck JR, Barnes CM, Sleesman DJ, Ilgen DR. 2012. Coordinated action in multiteam systems. J. Appl. Psychol. 97:808–24
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Deci EL, Olafsen AH, Ryan RM. 2017. Self-determination theory in work organizations: the state of a science. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 4:19–43
    [Google Scholar]
  19. DeShon RP, Kozlowski SWJ, Schmidt AM, Milner KR, Weichmann D. 2004. A multiple goal, multilevel model of feedback effects on the regulation of individual and team performance in training. J. Appl. Psychol. 89:1035–56
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Dietvorst BJ, Simmons JP, Massey C. 2015. Algorithm aversion: People erroneously avoid algorithms after seeing them err. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 144:114–26
    [Google Scholar]
  21. D'Innocenzo L, Luciano M, Mathieu JE, Maynard MT, Chen G. 2016. Empowered to perform: a multilevel investigation of the influence of empowerment on performance in hospital units. Acad. Manag. J. 59:1290–307
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Eden D. 2001. Means efficacy: external sources of general and specific subjective efficacy. Work Motivation in the Context of a Globalizing Economy M Erez, U Kleinbeck, H Thierry 65–77 Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Edmonson AC. 2012. Teamwork on the fly. Harv. Bus. Rev. Apr. https://hbr.org/2012/04/teamwork-on-the-fly-2
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Edmondson AC, Harvey JF. 2018. Cross-boundary teaming for innovation: integrating research on teams and knowledge in organizations. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 28:347–60
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Felstead A, Henseke G. 2017. Assessing the growth of remote working and its consequences for effort, well-being and work-life balance. New Technol. Work Employ. 32:195–212
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Fiol CM, O'Connor EJ. 2005. Identification in face-to-face, hybrid, and pure virtual teams: untangling the contradictions. Organ. Sci. 16:19–32
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Frese M, Krauss SI, Keith N, Escher S, Grabarkiewicz R et al. 2007. Business owners’ action planning and its relationship to business success in three African countries. J. Appl. Psychol. 92:1481–98
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Gibson CB, Huang L, Kirkman BL, Shapiro DL 2014. Where global and virtual meet: the value of examining the intersection of these elements in twenty-first century teams. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 1:217–44
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Gilson LL, Maynard MT, Jones Young N, Vartiainen M, Hakonen M. 2015. Virtual teams research: ten years, ten themes, and ten opportunities. J. Manag. 41:1313–37
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Golden TD. 2021. Telework and the navigation of work-home boundaries. Organ. Dyn. 50:100822
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Golden TD, Veiga JF, Simsek Z. 2006. Telecommuting's differential impact on work-family conflict: Is there no place like home?. J. Appl. Psychol. 91:1340–50
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Gómez-Zará D, DeChurch L, Contractor N. 2020. A taxonomy of team-assembly systems: understanding how people use technologies to form teams. Proc. ACM Human-Comput. Interact. 4:1–36
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Grand JA, Braun MT, Kuljanin G, Kozlowski SWJ, Chao GT. 2016. The dynamics of team cognition: a process-oriented theory of knowledge emergence in teams. J. Appl. Psychol. 101:1353–85
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Gully SM, Incalcaterra KA, Joshi A, Beaubien JM. 2002. A meta-analysis of team efficacy, potency, and performance: interdependence and level of analysis as moderators of observed relationships. J. Appl. Psychol. 87:819–32
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Hackman JR. 1992. Group influences on individuals in organizations. Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology MD Dunnette, LM Hough 3199–267 Palo Alto, CA: Consult. Psychol. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Hackman JR, Oldham GR. 1976. Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 16:250–79
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Halbesleben J, Harvey J, Bolino M. 2009. Too engaged? A conservation of resources view of the relationship between work engagement and work interference with family. J. Appl. Psychol. 94:1452–65
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Handke L, Klonek FE, Parker SK, Kauffeld 2020. Interactive effects of team virtuality and work design on team functioning. Small Group Res. 51:3–47
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Ichhaporia R, Gómez-Zará D, DeChurch L, Contractor N. 2020. A network approach to the formation of self-assembled teams. Complex Networks and Their Applications VIII H Cherifi, S Gaito, J Mendes, E Moro, L Rocha 969–81 Stud. Comput. Intell. 882 Cham, Switz.: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Jussupow E, Spohrer K, Heinzl A, Gawlitza J. 2021. Augmenting medical diagnosis decisions? An investigation into physicians’ decision-making process with artificial intelligence. Inf. Syst. Res. 32:713–35
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Kanfer R, Ackerman PL. 2004. Aging, adult development, and work motivation. Acad. Manag. Rev. 29:440–58
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Kanfer R, Chen G. 2016. Motivation in organizational behavior: history, advances and prospects. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 136:6–19
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Kanfer R, Chen G, Pritchard R. 2008. The three C's of work motivation: content, context, and change. Work Motivation: Past, Present, and Future R Kanfer, G Chen, RD Pritchard 1–16 New York, NY: Routledge Academic
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Kanfer R, Frese M, Johnson RE. 2017. Motivation related to work: a century of progress. J. Appl. Psychol. 102:338–55
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Kaven E, Kaven I, Gómez-Zará D, DeChurch L, Contractor N. 2021. Assessing how team task influences team assembly through network analysis. Complex Networks and Their Applications IX RM Benito, C Cherifi, H Cherifi, E Moro, LM Rocha, M Sales-Pardo 322–34 Stud. Comput. Intell. 944 Cham, Switz.: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Kirkman BL, Chen G, Farh JL, Chen ZX, Lowe KB. 2009. Individual power distance orientation and follower reactions to transformational leaders: a cross-level, cross-cultural examination. Acad. Manag. J. 52:744–64
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Kirkman BL, Mathieu JE. 2005. The dimensions and antecedents of team virtuality. J. Manag. 31:700–18
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Kirkman BL, Shapiro DL. 1997. The impact of cultural values on employee resistance to teams: toward a model of globalized self-managing work team effectiveness. Acad. Manag. Rev. 22:730–57
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Knight AP, Greer LL, De Jong B. 2020. Start-up teams: a multidimensional conceptualization, integrative review of past research, and future research agenda. Acad. Manag. Ann. 14:231–66
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Kozlowski SWJ, Bell BS. 2013. Work groups and teams in organizations: review update. Comprehensive Handbook of Psychology, Vol. 12: Industrial and Organizational Psychology N Schmitt, S Highhouse 412–69 New York: Wiley, 2nd ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Kozlowski SWJ, Chen G, Salas E. 2017. One hundred years of the Journal of Applied Psychology: background, evolution, and scientific trends. J. Appl. Psychol. 102:237–53
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Kozlowski SWJ, Ilgen DR. 2006. Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychol. Sci. Public Interest 7:77–124
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Larson L, DeChurch LA. 2020. Leading teams in the digital age: four perspectives on technology and what they mean for leading teams. Leadersh. Q. 31:101377
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Lazar M, Miron-Spektor E, Agarwal R, Erez M, Goldfarb B, Chen G. 2020. Entrepreneurial team formation. Acad. Manag. Ann. 14:29–59
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Lazar M, Miron-Spektor E, Chen G, Goldfarb B, Erez M, Agarwal R. 2022. Forming entrepreneurial teams: mixing business and friendship to create transactive memory systems for enhanced success. Acad. Manag. J. 65:1110–38
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Leavitt K, Schabram K, Hariharan P, Barnes CM. 2021. The machine hums! Addressing ontological and normative concerns regarding machine learning applications in organizational scholarship. Acad. Manag. Rev. In press. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2021.0166
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  57. LePine JA, Piccolo RF, Jackson CL, Mathieu JE, Saul JR. 2008. A meta-analysis of teamwork processes: tests of a multidimensional model and relationships with team effectiveness criteria. Pers. Psychol. 61:273–307
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Locke EA, Latham GP. 2002. Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: a 35-year odyssey. Am. Psychol. 57:705–17
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Manz CC, Sims HP Jr. 1993. Business Without Bosses: How Self-Managing Work Teams Are Building High Performing Companies New York: Wiley
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Marks MA, DeChurch LA, Mathieu JE, Panzer FJ, Alonso A. 2005. Teamwork in multiteam systems. J. Appl. Psychol. 90:964–71
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Marks MA, Mathieu JE, Zaccaro SJ. 2001. A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Acad. Manag. Rev. 26:356–76
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Mathieu JE, Chen G. 2011. The etiology of the multilevel paradigm in management research. J. Manag. 37:610–41
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Mathieu JE, Gallagher PT, Domingo MA, Klock EA. 2019. Embracing complexity: reviewing the past decade of team effectiveness research. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 6:17–46
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Mathieu JE, Hollenbeck JR, van Knippenberg D, Ilgen DR. 2017. A century of work teams in the Journal of Applied Psychology. J. Appl. Psychol. 102:452–67
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Mathieu JE, Marks MA, Zaccaro SJ. 2001. Multiteam systems. Organizational Psychology: Vol. 2. Handbook of Industrial, Work and Organizational Psychology N Anderson, DS Ones, HK Sinangil, C Viswesvaran 289–313 London: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Mathieu JE, Wolfson MA, Park S, Luciano MM, Bedwell-Torres WL et al. 2022. Indexing dynamic collective constructs using computer-aided text analysis: construct validity evidence and illustrations featuring team processes. J. Appl. Psychol. 107:533–59
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Matusik J, Heidl R, Hollenbeck JR, Yu A, Lee HW, Howe MD. 2019. Wearable Bluetooth sensors for capturing relational variables and temporal variability in relationships: a construct validation study. J. Appl. Psychol. 104:357–87
    [Google Scholar]
  68. National Acad. Sci. Eng. Med. 2022. Human-AI Teaming: State-of-the-Art and Research Needs Washington, DC: The National Acad. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Neal A, Ballard T, Vancouver JB. 2017. Dynamic self-regulation and multiple-goal pursuit. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 4:401–23
    [Google Scholar]
  70. O'Leary MB, Mortensen M, Woolley AW. 2011. Multiple team membership: a theoretical model of its effects on productivity and learning for individuals and teams. Acad. Manag. Rev. 36:461–78
    [Google Scholar]
  71. O'Leary-Kelly AM, Martocchio JJ, Frink DD. 1994. A review of the influence of group goals on group performance. Acad. Manag. J. 37:1285–301
    [Google Scholar]
  72. O'Neill TA, McNeese NJ, Barron A, Schelble B. 2022. Human–autonomy teaming: a review and analysis of the empirical literature. Hum. Factors 64:904–38
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Parker SK, Morgeson FP, Johns G. 2017. One hundred years of work design research: looking back and looking forward. J. Appl. Psychol. 102:403–20
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Pluut H, Flestea AM, Curşeu PL. 2014. Multiple team membership: a demand or resource for employees?. Group Dyn.: Theory Res. Pract. 18:333–48
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Rapp TL, Mathieu JE. 2019. Team and individual influences on members’ identification and performance per membership in multiple team membership arrangements. J. Appl. Psychol. 104:303–20
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Schaubroeck J, Lam SSK, Cha SE. 2007. Embracing transformational leadership: team values and the impact of leader behavior on team performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 92:1020–30
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Seibert SE, Wang G, Courtright SH. 2011. Antecedents and consequences of psychological and team empowerment in organizations: a meta-analytic review. J. Appl. Psychol. 96:981–1003
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Shuffler ML, Carter DR. 2018. Teamwork situated in multiteam systems: key lessons learned and future opportunities. Am. Psychol. 73:390–406
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Wang D, Waldman DA, Zhang Z. 2014. A meta-analysis of shared leadership and team effectiveness. J. Appl. Psychol. 99:181–98
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Wax A, DeChurch L, Contractor N. 2017. Self-organizing into winning teams: understanding the mechanisms that drive successful collaborations. Small Group Res. 48:665–718
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Wellman HM. 2014. Making Minds: How Theory of Mind Develops Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Williams J, Fiore SM, Jentsch F. 2022. Supporting artificial social intelligence with theory of mind. Front. Artif. Intell. 5:750763
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Zaccaro SJ, Dubrow S, Torres EM, Campbell LNP. 2020. Multiteam systems: an integrated review and comparison of different forms. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 7:479–503
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Zhu M, Huang Y, Contractor NS. 2013. Motivations for self-assembling into project teams. Soc. Netw. 35:251–64
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Zika-Viktorsson A, Sundström P, Engwall M. 2006. Project overload: an exploratory study of work and management in multi-project settings. Int. J. Project Manag. 24:385–94
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-111821-031621
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-111821-031621
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error