Asymmetry in structural adaptation: The differential impact of centralizing versus decentralizing team decision-making structures
This study tested predictions derived from Structural Adaptation Theory (SAT) on the longitudinal effects of centralizing and decentralizing decision-making structures in teams. Results from 93 four-person teams working on a command and control simulation generally supported SAT, documenting that it...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Organizational behavior and human decision processes 2011, Vol.114 (1), p.64-74 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 74 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 64 |
| container_title | Organizational behavior and human decision processes |
| container_volume | 114 |
| creator | Hollenbeck, John R. Ellis, Aleksander P.J. Humphrey, Stephen E. Garza, Adela S. Ilgen, Daniel R. |
| description | This study tested predictions derived from Structural Adaptation Theory (SAT) on the longitudinal effects of centralizing and decentralizing decision-making structures in teams. Results from 93 four-person teams working on a command and control simulation generally supported SAT, documenting that it was more difficult for teams to adapt to a centralized decision-making structure after formerly working within a decentralized structure, than it was to adapt in the alternative direction. The negative effects of centralized shifts were mediated by efficiency and adaptability, in the sense that former decentralized teams experienced the negative aspects of centralization (lack of adaptability), but not the positive aspects (efficiency). The dangers of employing structural reconfiguration to solve certain problems in teams are discussed, especially if these changes are based upon expectations generalized from cross-sectional research that did not directly observe teams that experienced true structural change. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.08.003 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_839571849</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0749597810000683</els_id><sourcerecordid>839571849</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c502t-9198cfa03902656b167ffd71b487f7d1d351ea02bd97977ab3a51456b86a6a543</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkUuLFTEQhRtR8Dr6C9w0grjqa9LpzkNwMQw-BgbcjOuQTiretLcfJukL153_3Gp7HNCFuKgUnHx1UuEUxXNK9pRQ_rrfT93BzfuaoELknhD2oNhRotpKqZo8LHZENKpqlZCPiycp9YRQygnZFT8u03kYIMdzGcYy5bjYvERzLI0zczY5TOOb8vYApQveQ4QxB7wMw2xsLidfWlQQD9_D-KU8QUxLKh38oWYww6qFhGbVYL6u4u-XID0tHnlzTPDsrl8Un9-_u736WN18-nB9dXlT2ZbUuVJUSesNYYrUvOUd5cJ7J2jXSOGFo461FAypO6eEEsJ0zLS0QVByw03bsIvi1eY7x-nbAinrISQLx6MZYVqSlky1gspG_Q9Jm5rJGskXf5H9tMQRv6El5VwwISlCbINsnFKK4PUcw2DiWVOi1_h0r3_Fp9f4NJEa48Op620qwgz2fgQA-g0-aWYobfA8Y-EoxRZWEWvG4o0WjT7kAb1e3q1pkjVHH82Iadx71kzUrSASubcbB5jDKUDUyQYYLbgQwWbtpvDPnX8CT6DMQw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>816673781</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Asymmetry in structural adaptation: The differential impact of centralizing versus decentralizing team decision-making structures</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete - AutoHoldings</source><source>RePEc</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><creator>Hollenbeck, John R. ; Ellis, Aleksander P.J. ; Humphrey, Stephen E. ; Garza, Adela S. ; Ilgen, Daniel R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Hollenbeck, John R. ; Ellis, Aleksander P.J. ; Humphrey, Stephen E. ; Garza, Adela S. ; Ilgen, Daniel R.</creatorcontrib><description>This study tested predictions derived from Structural Adaptation Theory (SAT) on the longitudinal effects of centralizing and decentralizing decision-making structures in teams. Results from 93 four-person teams working on a command and control simulation generally supported SAT, documenting that it was more difficult for teams to adapt to a centralized decision-making structure after formerly working within a decentralized structure, than it was to adapt in the alternative direction. The negative effects of centralized shifts were mediated by efficiency and adaptability, in the sense that former decentralized teams experienced the negative aspects of centralization (lack of adaptability), but not the positive aspects (efficiency). The dangers of employing structural reconfiguration to solve certain problems in teams are discussed, especially if these changes are based upon expectations generalized from cross-sectional research that did not directly observe teams that experienced true structural change.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0749-5978</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1095-9920</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.08.003</identifier><identifier>CODEN: OBDPFO</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Kidlington: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adaptability ; Adaptation ; Adaptation to change ; Biological and medical sciences ; Centralization ; Cognition. Intelligence ; Decentralization ; Decision making ; Decision making units ; Decision making. Choice ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Management research ; Organization theory ; Organizational structure ; Perception ; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry ; Psychology. Psychophysiology ; Structural change ; Structure ; Studies ; Teams ; Teams Structure Adaptation ; Teamwork</subject><ispartof>Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 2011, Vol.114 (1), p.64-74</ispartof><rights>2010 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Science Publishing Company, Inc. Jan 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c502t-9198cfa03902656b167ffd71b487f7d1d351ea02bd97977ab3a51456b86a6a543</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c502t-9198cfa03902656b167ffd71b487f7d1d351ea02bd97977ab3a51456b86a6a543</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.08.003$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3548,4005,4021,27921,27922,27923,30997,30998,45993</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=23725708$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://econpapers.repec.org/article/eeejobhdp/v_3a114_3ay_3a2011_3ai_3a1_3ap_3a64-74.htm$$DView record in RePEc$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hollenbeck, John R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ellis, Aleksander P.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Humphrey, Stephen E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garza, Adela S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ilgen, Daniel R.</creatorcontrib><title>Asymmetry in structural adaptation: The differential impact of centralizing versus decentralizing team decision-making structures</title><title>Organizational behavior and human decision processes</title><description>This study tested predictions derived from Structural Adaptation Theory (SAT) on the longitudinal effects of centralizing and decentralizing decision-making structures in teams. Results from 93 four-person teams working on a command and control simulation generally supported SAT, documenting that it was more difficult for teams to adapt to a centralized decision-making structure after formerly working within a decentralized structure, than it was to adapt in the alternative direction. The negative effects of centralized shifts were mediated by efficiency and adaptability, in the sense that former decentralized teams experienced the negative aspects of centralization (lack of adaptability), but not the positive aspects (efficiency). The dangers of employing structural reconfiguration to solve certain problems in teams are discussed, especially if these changes are based upon expectations generalized from cross-sectional research that did not directly observe teams that experienced true structural change.</description><subject>Adaptability</subject><subject>Adaptation</subject><subject>Adaptation to change</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Centralization</subject><subject>Cognition. Intelligence</subject><subject>Decentralization</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Decision making units</subject><subject>Decision making. Choice</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Management research</subject><subject>Organization theory</subject><subject>Organizational structure</subject><subject>Perception</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychophysiology</subject><subject>Structural change</subject><subject>Structure</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Teams</subject><subject>Teams Structure Adaptation</subject><subject>Teamwork</subject><issn>0749-5978</issn><issn>1095-9920</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>X2L</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkUuLFTEQhRtR8Dr6C9w0grjqa9LpzkNwMQw-BgbcjOuQTiretLcfJukL153_3Gp7HNCFuKgUnHx1UuEUxXNK9pRQ_rrfT93BzfuaoELknhD2oNhRotpKqZo8LHZENKpqlZCPiycp9YRQygnZFT8u03kYIMdzGcYy5bjYvERzLI0zczY5TOOb8vYApQveQ4QxB7wMw2xsLidfWlQQD9_D-KU8QUxLKh38oWYww6qFhGbVYL6u4u-XID0tHnlzTPDsrl8Un9-_u736WN18-nB9dXlT2ZbUuVJUSesNYYrUvOUd5cJ7J2jXSOGFo461FAypO6eEEsJ0zLS0QVByw03bsIvi1eY7x-nbAinrISQLx6MZYVqSlky1gspG_Q9Jm5rJGskXf5H9tMQRv6El5VwwISlCbINsnFKK4PUcw2DiWVOi1_h0r3_Fp9f4NJEa48Op620qwgz2fgQA-g0-aWYobfA8Y-EoxRZWEWvG4o0WjT7kAb1e3q1pkjVHH82Iadx71kzUrSASubcbB5jDKUDUyQYYLbgQwWbtpvDPnX8CT6DMQw</recordid><startdate>2011</startdate><enddate>2011</enddate><creator>Hollenbeck, John R.</creator><creator>Ellis, Aleksander P.J.</creator><creator>Humphrey, Stephen E.</creator><creator>Garza, Adela S.</creator><creator>Ilgen, Daniel R.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><general>Elsevier Science Publishing Company, Inc</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>DKI</scope><scope>X2L</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2011</creationdate><title>Asymmetry in structural adaptation: The differential impact of centralizing versus decentralizing team decision-making structures</title><author>Hollenbeck, John R. ; Ellis, Aleksander P.J. ; Humphrey, Stephen E. ; Garza, Adela S. ; Ilgen, Daniel R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c502t-9198cfa03902656b167ffd71b487f7d1d351ea02bd97977ab3a51456b86a6a543</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Adaptability</topic><topic>Adaptation</topic><topic>Adaptation to change</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Centralization</topic><topic>Cognition. Intelligence</topic><topic>Decentralization</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Decision making units</topic><topic>Decision making. Choice</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Management research</topic><topic>Organization theory</topic><topic>Organizational structure</topic><topic>Perception</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychophysiology</topic><topic>Structural change</topic><topic>Structure</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Teams</topic><topic>Teams Structure Adaptation</topic><topic>Teamwork</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hollenbeck, John R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ellis, Aleksander P.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Humphrey, Stephen E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garza, Adela S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ilgen, Daniel R.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>RePEc IDEAS</collection><collection>RePEc</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Organizational behavior and human decision processes</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hollenbeck, John R.</au><au>Ellis, Aleksander P.J.</au><au>Humphrey, Stephen E.</au><au>Garza, Adela S.</au><au>Ilgen, Daniel R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Asymmetry in structural adaptation: The differential impact of centralizing versus decentralizing team decision-making structures</atitle><jtitle>Organizational behavior and human decision processes</jtitle><date>2011</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>114</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>64</spage><epage>74</epage><pages>64-74</pages><issn>0749-5978</issn><eissn>1095-9920</eissn><coden>OBDPFO</coden><abstract>This study tested predictions derived from Structural Adaptation Theory (SAT) on the longitudinal effects of centralizing and decentralizing decision-making structures in teams. Results from 93 four-person teams working on a command and control simulation generally supported SAT, documenting that it was more difficult for teams to adapt to a centralized decision-making structure after formerly working within a decentralized structure, than it was to adapt in the alternative direction. The negative effects of centralized shifts were mediated by efficiency and adaptability, in the sense that former decentralized teams experienced the negative aspects of centralization (lack of adaptability), but not the positive aspects (efficiency). The dangers of employing structural reconfiguration to solve certain problems in teams are discussed, especially if these changes are based upon expectations generalized from cross-sectional research that did not directly observe teams that experienced true structural change.</abstract><cop>Kidlington</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><doi>10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.08.003</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0749-5978 |
| ispartof | Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 2011, Vol.114 (1), p.64-74 |
| issn | 0749-5978 1095-9920 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_839571849 |
| source | Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete - AutoHoldings; RePEc; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA) |
| subjects | Adaptability Adaptation Adaptation to change Biological and medical sciences Centralization Cognition. Intelligence Decentralization Decision making Decision making units Decision making. Choice Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Management research Organization theory Organizational structure Perception Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry Psychology. Psychophysiology Structural change Structure Studies Teams Teams Structure Adaptation Teamwork |
| title | Asymmetry in structural adaptation: The differential impact of centralizing versus decentralizing team decision-making structures |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T12%3A48%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Asymmetry%20in%20structural%20adaptation:%20The%20differential%20impact%20of%20centralizing%20versus%20decentralizing%20team%20decision-making%20structures&rft.jtitle=Organizational%20behavior%20and%20human%20decision%20processes&rft.au=Hollenbeck,%20John%20R.&rft.date=2011&rft.volume=114&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=64&rft.epage=74&rft.pages=64-74&rft.issn=0749-5978&rft.eissn=1095-9920&rft.coden=OBDPFO&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.08.003&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E839571849%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=816673781&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0749597810000683&rfr_iscdi=true |