Work team effectiveness in organizational contexts

_______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ Report Information from ProQuest 04 February 2013 05:44 _______________________________________________________________ Documento 1 de 1 Work team effectiveness in organizational contexts: Recent research and applications in Spain and Portugal Autor: Gil, Francisco; Carlos-María Alcover; José-María Peiró. Información de publicación: Journal of Managerial Psychology 20. 3/4 (2005): 193-218. Enlace de documentos de ProQuest Resumen: This introductory paper aims to provide a contextualization of recent research and applications on work team effectiveness in organizational contexts carried out in Spain and Portugal and to describe connections between this research and the main trends in the international scene. Since the 1990s, new occupational and organizational realities have deepened scientific interest in work teams in both Spain and Portugal. A range of recently published (1992-2004) works in this area are reviewed. The selected sources are papers published in Spanish, Portuguese and international journals. Reviewing this work, four major trends are identified that synthesize the key concerns of researches in both countries: work teams and new information/communication technologies; intra- and inter-group conflicts in organizational contexts; definition, dimensions and measurement criteria for work team effectiveness; and teams in innovation and change processes. This paper fulfils a panoramic vision of this research area in both Spain and Portugal, and provides an overview of the papers included in this special issue and an outlook for the future. Texto completo: Headnote Abstract Purpose - This introductory paper aims to provide a contextualization of recent research and applications on work team effectiveness in organizational contexts carried out in Spain and Portugal and to describe connections between this research and the main trends in the international scene. Design/methodology/approach - Since the 1990s, new occupational and organizational realities have deepened scientific interest in work teams in both Spain and Portugal. A range of recently published (1992-2004) works in this area are reviewed. The selected sources are papers published in Spanish, Portuguese and international journals. Findings - Reviewing this work, four major trends are identified that synthesize the key concerns of researches in both countries: work teams and new information/communication technologies; intra- and intergroup conflicts in organizational contexts; definition, dimensions and measurement criteria for work team effectiveness; and teams in innovation and change processes. Originality/value - This paper fulfils a panoramic vision of this research area in both Spain and Portugal, and provides an overview of the papers included in this special issue and an outlook for the future. Keywords Team working, Spain, Portugal Paper type General review 1. Introduction Current research on work teams in organizational contexts stems, in the main, from the development of psycho-social theory and inquiry in the field of group psychology since the 1930s. This body of learning was largely generated in the laboratory using experimental methods (McGrath et al., 2000), and comparatively few studies were performed in real contexts, mostly in the 1950s (Sundstrom et al., 2000). It is no surprise, then, that scholars are divided in their evaluations of the results obtained. Some (e.g. West, 1996) hold that the tradition provides a considerable source of useful findings for our understanding of the way in which teams function, while others (e.g. Bramel and Friend, 1987; Cannon-Bowers et al., 1992; Ilgen et al., 1993) have criticized the data as fragmentary, incomplete, confused and, at times, contradictory, although they recognize its value. Over the past 25 years research on groups and work teams has shifted away from the field of social psychology into the domain of work and organizational psychology (Levine and Moreland, 1990; Simpson and Wood, 1992). As Steiner (1986) remarks: The group is too important to an understanding of human behavior and the knowledge of society to be forever neglected. If social psychologists do not research the group, someone else surely will (p. 283). This resurgence of interest has ushered in a golden age, in terms of both the volume and quality of work. Nevertheless, the limited scope of theory and the absence of any comprehensive conceptual framework, problems traditionally associated with psycho-social inquiry, continue to hinder the accumulation of findings that would represent real progress in our knowledge. The reawakening of interest in groups and work teams is related with wider changes in the world of work and organizations driven by economic, strategic and technological imperatives. The pressures of global competition, the need to consolidate business models in complex and shifting environments and the pursuit of continuous innovation have led to a reappraisal of the team as a key element of the basic organizational architecture (Kozlowski and Bell, 2003). In this context, the joint action of individuals working together in a cooperative manner to attain shared goals through the differentiation of roles and functions, and the use of elaborate communication and coordination systems, are now viewed as essential to effectiveness and competitive advantage. As West (2001) points out, the current enthusiasm for work groups and team working: Reflects a deeper, perhaps unconscious, recognition that this way of working offers the promise of greater progress than can be achieved through individual endeavor or through mechanistic approaches to work (p. 270). The mechanistic approach may, of course, be appropriate when activities are stable, planned and predictable, but the modern organization must respond ever more quickly, flexibly and adaptively to shifting circumstances and demands that are often difficult to foresee. Such situations can only be successfully addressed by combining diverse but interrelated competencies, skills, knowledge and experiences, and through cooperation between the members of the organization (Tjosvold et al., 2003). Teams respond to these needs (Kozlowski and Bell, 2003). Unsurprisingly, research in the past two decades has focused almost exclusively on the effectiveness of work teams in organizational contexts. Given the prevalence and expanding role of teams in organizations of all kinds (Devine et al., 1999) the key research issue is to enable individually competent and skilled people to synergize as a team. To put it another way, the question is how to turn a team of experts into an expert team (Salas et al., 1997). The urgent need to discover the factors involved in work team performance and effectiveness, and to develop powerful training strategies, has, however, thrown up a myriad of theoretical models and applications, which are often insufficiently integrated to be of much practical use (Salas et al., 2004). 2. Models of work team effectiveness in organizational contexts With the aim mapping research into work team effectiveness in organizational contexts, Salas et al. (2004) group the dozens of models into two major integrative frameworks. The first comprises models that follow the "input-process-output" structure initially applied to groups by McGrath (1964) and subsequently refined by Hackman and Morris (1975). This has been dubbed the functional approach (Wittenbaum et al., 2004, p. 19), and it is defined by three basic assumptions: (1) Groups are goal-oriented. (2) Group performance varies in quality and quantity, and can be evaluated. (3) Internal and external factors influence group performance via the interaction process. It is currently represented by the integrated model of Tannenbaum et al. (1992). The model identifies four types of input variable, comprising: (1) Members' attributes (e.g. knowledge and skills, motivation, attitudes, mental models and so forth). (2) Work structure (task assignment, team rules and communication structure). (3) Team attributes (distribution of power, similarity of members, team resources, climate and cohesion). (4) The nature of the task (organization, type and complexity of tasks). These variables relate not only to each other but also to the processes performed by the team over time. Processes stand at the center of the structure and include coordination, communication, conflict resolution, decision-making and problem solving, and boundary spanning. Such processes are, in turn, directly related with performance results or output variables, which are usually classified into three groups: (1) Changes in the team (rules, roles, communication patterns and new processes). (2) Team performance (quantity, quality, timing, errors and costs). (3) Individual changes (changes in the input variables represented by individual attributes such as attitudes, motivation, mental models, etc.). Team results provide feedback, upholding or changing the system. One key aspect of this model is that it accounts for the organizational and situational factors that may impact the structure as a whole, affecting input variables, processes and outputs. These factors include reward systems, resource scarcity, management control, environmental stress, organizational climate, competence, inter-group relations and environmental uncertainty. It also addresses the role of team interventions, basically individual and group training programs, and techniques such as team building and development. Structural input-process-output models usually measure team effectiveness in the wide sense on the basis of triple criteria that coincide with the three types of results obtained (Guzzo and Dickson, 1996). These are: (1) Productive results (quantity-quality, cost savings, shorter waiting times, customer complaints, etc.). (2) Member outcomes (acquisition of knowledge, skills, etc., changes in attitudes and personal development). (3) Viability, or the capacity of the team to continue functioning effectively in the future. A fourth measure sometimes applied to assess effectiveness is the degree of innovation in terms either of outcomes or work processes (e.g. Unsworth and West, 2000; West et al., 1998). As Ilgen (1999) notes, research on work teams in organizational contexts has led to a shift in interest from the center (processes) to the right (results or effectiveness) and/or to the left (input variables). As a consequence, the focus has switched to the role of input and context variables as determining factors of team effectiveness, although the importance of processes is accepted. The second group of models mapped by Salas et al. (2004) includes the theoretical "meta" framework for work team effectiveness proposed by Campion and colleagues (Campion et al., 1993; Campion et al., 1996), which integrates and extends numerous earlier models. These scholars define five major categories of team effectiveness variables, comprising job design, interdependence, composition, context and process. Job design refers to self-management, participation and the variety, significance and identity of tasks. Interdependence subsumes tasks and goals, and feedback/rewards. Composition refers to member heterogeneity, flexibility, relative team size and the preference for team work. Context variables include training, managerial support and communication/cooperation between groups. Finally, processes comprise group potency, social support, workload sharing and communication/cooperation between group members. The variables subsumed in both theoretical frameworks are clearly similar. In fact, the only difference is the significance assigned to each and the relationships established. Thus, while input-process-output models structure variables in some kind of order, the theoretical model proposed by Campion and colleagues treats the links between variables and effectiveness more directly. Both approaches highlight the numerous variables influencing team effectiveness, the multitude of interrelationships and, above all, the complex dynamics inherent in the way teams function in contemporary organizational contexts (Cohen and Bailey, 1997; Harris and BarnesFarrell, 1997; Hyatt and Ruddy, 1997; Jordan et al., 2002; Levi and Slem, 1995; Salas et al., 2004; Zalesny et al., 1995). The two frameworks also provide an overview of the methods used to measure team effectiveness (Gibson et al., 2000; Sawyer et al., 1999; Whiteoak et al., 2004). It seems clear, then, that future research will be based on the variables identified in these models, whatever the approach taken, while the results obtained should help clarify and integrate the determining factors of team effectiveness. 3. Spanish and Portuguese research on work team effectiveness The recent histories of Spain and Portugal are in many respects very similar. During the twentieth century both were underdeveloped compared to their more advanced European peers, a legacy in both cases of the slow decay of the great empires established in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. At the same time, long-lasting fascist dictatorships aggravated both countries' marginal role in the modern international order (Telo and de la Torre, 2003) by persisting with protectionist and isolationist policies towards neighboring democracies, which reacted by curtailing political and economic involvement beyond the Pyrenees. After 1970, however, the dictatorships were toppled, first in Portugal and later in Spain, setting in train a transition toward democratic government and a swift process of social, political, economic, cultural and technological modernization. While these developments did not entirely eliminate material backwardness, both countries were accepted into the European Union in the mid-1980s and have since succeeded in closing the economic gap with the richer European states (Pinto and Teixeira, 2002). In a little over two decades Portugal and Spain have seen far-reaching change at every level of society and are now much closer to their true potential than could ever have been achieved under the former regimes. The organizational and social contexts in both countries are now comparable to the conditions found in the UK, France, Germany and Italy, which are similar to those of other advanced nations. These outcomes are, of course, traceable to economic and financial globalization and, particularly, the adoption and spread of the new technologies. At the same time, other cultural and social factors have tended to bring the realities of a large part of the world closer together, at least in the somewhat fuzzily defined West. Scientific research in the fields of work and organizational psychology in both Spain and Portugal thus goes ahead in a similar context to Western Europe, North America and the developed countries of Asia. It is hardly surprising, then, that our concerns have much in common with the lines of inquiry pursued by colleagues abroad. Among these issues, work teams have attracted enormous attention since the 1990s, and a particular interest has emerged in the study of the variables and processes we describe below. Meanwhile, let us briefly explain the current orientation of Spanish and Portuguese research. We shall begin by reflecting on scholarly interest in teams and then go on to discuss the variables (following the models identified by Salas et al. (2004)) that have claimed researchers' attention, as well as the connections between their work and the main trends in international science. Finally, we shall try to explain local preferences by placing team research in its social and cultural context in Spain and Portugal. 3.1 The Spanish and Portuguese interest in teams Spain and Portugal have seen major changes in the conceptualization and organization of work in line with the business and occupational contexts created in general by the global economy. Meanwhile, organizations have had to restructure and innovate to share in the European market (Cunha, J.V. and Cunha, M.P., 2001a; Peiro, 2001a, 2002; Peiró and Munduate, 2001). A key consequence of this transformation (Peiro and Munduate, 1999) has been to drive the development of team working through a process of conceptual change in the organization of work. Thus, the notion of a set of discrete tasks clustered together as a job has increasingly given way to conceptualization in terms of flexible areas of responsibility linked to individuals and teams, who cooperate to achieve specific goals. This new system devolves greater responsibility for decision-making upon team members, enhances their commitment to results-based performance, and ensures involvement in the processes of innovation and organizational change. The new occupational and organizational realities have deepened scientific interest in work groups and teams in a movement affecting both Spain (Alcover et al, 2000; Ayestarán, 1998a; Gil and Alcover, 2002) and Portugal (Cunha, M.P. and Cunha, J.V., 2001) since the 1990s. 3.2 Variables and links with international lines of research The following discussion concerns the main lines of Spanish and Portuguese research based on the variables explored. 3.2.1 Work teams and new information/communication technologies. This area has received considerable attention thanks to the efforts of the University of Valencia's Organizational and Work Psychology Research Unit (Unidad de Investigación de Psicología de las Organizaciones y del Trabajo - UIPOT) directed by Professor Peiró, and of the team led by Professors Salanova and Grau at the Jaume I University in Castellón. Both of these research teams are, of course, located in Spain. Spanish and Portuguese scholars were responsible for three out of the six papers published in the monograph issue of Small Group Research given over to European perspectives on electronically mediated communication, which clearly reflects the importance of this line of research in the Peninsula Qesuino, 2002). In these papers, Zornoza et al. (2002b) from the University of Valencia analyze differences in conflict management between face-to-face teams and in groups communicating through computer networks; Dorado et al. (2002), all from the University of Seville except the last (University of Utrecht, The Netherlands), consider electronically mediated negotiating processes in scaled conflicts; and Amaral and Monteiro (2002) from the Lisbon-based Institute for Work and Business Science (Instituto Superior de Ciêcias do Trabalho e da Empresa) examine the processes by which members of groups communicating through computer networks create new identities. A number of other significant papers have been published by researchers at the two Spanish universities mentioned above. Among these we may cite Salanova et al. (2003), the first four from Jaume I University in Castellon and the last from the University of Utrecht, who consider the impact of electronic working practices in teams on well-being and performance, finding a moderating effect on perceived collective efficacy. Thus, perceived low performance had a negative impact on well-being (anxiety), while high performance had a positive influence (engagement). Meanwhile, Orengo et al (2000) have studied the influence of member familiarity, group atmosphere and assertiveness on uninhibited behavior in teams working in situations of face-to-face communication, videoconferencing and computer mediated communication (e-mail). Taking the same three group communication media, Gracia et al. (2002) analyzed the effect of time pressure on group cohesion in teams involved in three different task types (creative, intellectual and mixed-motive tasks), while Orengo et al. (1996) studied group interaction (measured in terms of conflict management and uninhibited behavior) in a multi-decision task. Observations were measured using the SYMLOG technique (Orengo et al, 1998). Martínez et al. (2002) consider the modulating effect of information technology on affective psychological well-being in task groups, and Martínez and Mejías (2003) examine the influence of anonymity and gender upon consensus levels, work group cohesion, and the satisfaction of individuals working in group decision-making environments supported by information technology (e.g. group support systems). Ripoll et al (1998) analyzed differences in the results achieved by work teams depending on the communication channel employed and the experience gained in the use of technological media. Finally, Zornoza et al (1992) examined the influence of previous attitudes to and experiences with new technologies on team performance, while Zornoza et al. (1993) analyzed the effects of different communication media (face-to-face, videoconferencing and e-mail) as a moderating variable for work team performance. Zornoza et al. (2002a) consider how group processes develop and adapt to the communication media employed (face-to-face, videoconferencing and e-mail) depending on time pressures and the task type (creative or intellectual tasks, and conflict). Another key line of inquiry has been developed by João Vieira da Cunha of the MIT Sloan School of Management in Cambridge, Massachusetts (USA) and Miguel Pina e Cunha of the New University of Lisbon. This focuses on improvisation in virtual teams taking into account their structure (Cunha, J.V. and Cunha, M.P., 2001b) and multicultural diversity (Cunha, MP. and Cunha, J.V., 2001). This work is of particular interest in that the authors apply a qualitative methodology (grounded theory), in contrast to the other papers cited in this section, which mainly employ quantitative methodologies. Finally, a team at the University of Malaga (Spain) has studied the factors associated with virtual communication and group efficacy (Canto and Moral, 2003), and the in-group minority influence of computer-mediated communication on different group processes (Moral et al, 2003). Scholars from the three Madrid universities, Gil et al. (2003) have recently opened up a line of research concerning leadership in virtual work teams. 3.2.2 Work team climate. Another fruitful line of research developed by the University of Valencia's Organizational and Work Psychology Research Unit (Spain) focuses on the work team climate. In outline, these contributions refer to climate measurement, the background and consequences of individual climate perceptions, and the formation of an aggregate climate in terms of shared group perceptions, their correlations and influence (for a review, see González-Romá and Peiró, 1999). Inquiry has centered on the validation of collective (González-Romá et al., 1999) and affective climates in work teams (González-Romá et al, 2000); climate formation within teams as an outcome of social interaction (González-Romá et al., 1995); the evolution of climate in work teams and job satisfaction (Mañas et al, 1998); climate history and its consequences for team outcomes (Mañas et al, 1999); the influence of team climate on role stress, tension, job satisfaction and leadership (Peiro et al, 1992); and the antecedents and moderating influence of the strength of team climate (González-Romá et al, 2002). 3.2.3 Cultural factors in work teams. Let us begin this discussion by distinguishing between research into the variables inherent in the culture of a society or nation (e.g. individualism, collectivism, power distance, etc.) and organizational or team culture. Also, many such studies seek to elucidate the relationship between cultural dimensions and conflict management, an issue that is dealt with in a separate section of this review. For this reason they are mentioned only in passing here. The research group directed by Professor Sabino Ayestarán at the University of the Basque Country and the team led by Professor Lourdes Munduate at the University of Seville (Spain) have published a number of important papers in the field of national cultural differences. For example, Arrospide et al (1995) analyzed group members' perceptions of hierarchy and conflict management. Ayestarán (1998b) studied the functioning of work teams based on the variables of power distance, individualism/ collectivism and identification with the group's goals. Finally, Ayestarán and Reoyo (Ayestarán and Reoyo, 1998; Reoyo, 1998) consider relationships between culture, conflict management style and identification in work teams. Meanwhile, Cruces et al. (1999) have studied the influence of cultural (individualism/collectivism) and socio-emotional factors on negotiation processes, focusing particularly on lying in negotiation teams, and Munduate and Dorado (1999) have sought to explain conflict in work teams in terms of cultural factors (e.g. cooperative versus competitive cultures). In the field of organizational and team culture, we may refer to Ayestarán's important contributions and various studies of work team training, conflict management and cultural change within organizations by the Spanish Distance Learning University (Universidad Nacional de Educacion a Distancia or UNED). The UNED scholars Alonso and Sánchez (1998) analyzed organizational commitment on the basis of the predominant culture of work teams and the relationship between culture and group cohesion and identification (Sánchez and Alonso, 2003), while Osca et al. (1994) studied organizational culture in primary healthcare and multi-professional teams working in drug dependence centers. 3.2.4 Intra- and inter-group conflicts in organizational contexts. Research into intra-group conflicts has been closely linked to the work on cultural factors described in the preceding section (see Arróspide et al., 1995; Ayestarán, 1999; Ayestarán and Reoyo, 1998; Munduate and Dorado, 1999) and to the study of the new information and communication technologies in work teams (see, Dorado et al, 2002; Orengo et al, 1996; Peiró and Munduate, 1999); Zornoza et al., 2002b). In addition to these lines of inquiry, we may also mention work on the dimensions of conflict within work teams. Passos and Caetano (n.d.) have found empirical evidence to support a three-dimensional model of intra-group conflict, distinguishing between relational conflict, task conflict and process conflict. Medina et al. (2003), meanwhile, confirm that these conflict types may actually enhance efficacy when team members can enter into constructive debate about their work in a job climate that enables group goal attainment, provided tasks are relatively simple and routine. The same authors (Medina et al., 2004) examine the relationship between conflict types - task and relationship conflict - and work group climate, finding that relationship conflict worsens work group climate, while task conflict increases innovation and goal climate. Also, worker satisfaction increases in teams if high levels of task conflict combine with a high goal climate. These results suggest that constructive controversy may be productive in a climate where teams have compatible goals and are offered contingent rewards. Finally, Monteiro (2003) proposes using the dimensions of identity and diversity inherent in social interaction in psycho-social research applied to inter-group conflicts in organizational contexts. 3.2.5 Group processes in work teams. This section discusses a series of papers concerned with the group processes involved in the functioning and effectiveness of work teams. Let us begin with a mention to research on the processes related with innovation in teams and their role in organizational change. Curral and Chambel (1999) at the University of Lisbon examined relationships between group processes (following the model proposed by Anderson and West (1996) who define four types: (1) Vision. (2) Participation. (3) Task orientation and support for innovation. (4) Innovation. Such group processes were found to be more prevalent in teams producing more and better innovations than in less innovative teams in terms of both quantity and quality. Curral et al. (2001) subsequently confirmed that teams scored higher for group participation and innovation support processes where the demand for innovation was greater. Bigger teams, meanwhile, exhibited poorer group processes, and large teams working under intense pressure to innovate showed weaker group processes than peers with less pressure to innovate. Ayestarán (1993) examined organizational innovation processes implemented through work teams, as well as the variables influencing their effectiveness as vehicles of change. Costa et al. (1997) have analyzed the role of quality circles as tools to gain acceptance for organizational change, while González-Romá et al. (1992) have studied the factors influencing participation in QCs. Finally, González-Romá et al. (1987) examined the impact of QCs on climate, performance and absenteeism in organizational contexts. On the issue of organizational change, Aritzeta (2001) has considered the effects of self-managing work teams on group characteristics related with effectiveness, job satisfaction, commitment, self-esteem and personal autonomy. In general SMWTs were found to have generally beneficial effects compared to traditional individual working. Looking at the effects of certain organizational flexibility strategies, Alcover and Gil studied the impact of member continuity and change over time on the functioning and effectiveness of work teams (Alcover and Gil, 1998), as well as the mediating role of group members' anticipation of change (Alcover and Gil, 1999a) and the influence of different modes of organizational flexibility (temporal, functional, numerical and technological) on work team processes and outcomes (Alcover and Gil, 1999b). Meanwhile, Wood and Tabernero (2000) have sought to explain how beliefs about ability influence behavior through their effect on perceived efficacy and individual and group reactions to performance. Aritzeta (2003) has shown how organizational support for work teams and the interdependence of goals positively predict members' organizational commitment, while raising teams' workloads has a negative impact on commitment. Finally, Ripoll et al. (2004) have studied the modulating role of communications media in the relationship between the communication process (coordination, commitment to the solution and socio-emotional behavior) and group effectiveness (performance and cohesion) when groups are involved in a variety of different tasks. Their results suggest that the influence of interaction processes on group outcomes varies depending on the task participants are asked to perform, and on the communication media used. Thus, it may be important to train work teams to handle group interaction processes, especially when tasks are complex. 3.2.6 Effectiveness critena and dimensions. The last line of inquiry we shall discuss here focuses on the criteria for and dimensions of work team effectiveness. Concerned with the definition of the phenomenon, Lourenço and colleagues have defended the need to analyze the multiple facets of work team effectiveness in order to identify the forms it may take (Lourenço et al., 2000; Lourenço et al., 2004). These authors have also established the two-dimensional nature of effectiveness, distinguishing between social or affective factors and technical or task factors to propose a coherent structure for a socio-technical paradigm (Lourenço and Gomes, 2003). In another paper, Lourenço (2000) proposes an alternative approach to the relationship between effectiveness and leadership. This treats effectiveness as a condition for the exercise of leadership in an effort to expand the explanatory capacity of both phenomena in work teams and organizations. Meanwhile, Segurado et al. (2004) review the different methodologies used to measure work team effectiveness. A number of studies also consider the effects of training and intervention on work teams (Reoyo and López Canas, 2003). Such actions are found to boost collaboration and goal identification, as well as increasing competition between members to improve tasks, reducing conformity and raising satisfaction, all of which enhance the effectiveness of work teams. 3.3 Research on work team effectiveness and the organizational context in Spain and Portugal Spanish and Portuguese research work teams closely follows the main trends of international science, as shown by the above discussion. Nevertheless, we may identify four major areas that synthesize the key concerns of researchers in the Iberian Peninsula. These can be represented graphically using the systemic model (Figure 1). In the first place, interest centers on the multiple effects of the new information and communication technologies (ICTs) on both input variables (e.g. members' attitudes and expectations, task structure and interdependence, levels of training) and on team processes (e.g. decision making, communication, leadership, conflict), which in turn will have an impact on team outcomes or effectiveness. The second focus is defined by the analysis of intra- and inter-group conflict and its effect on outcomes. Thirdly, there is considerable concern for the definition and measurement of work team effectiveness. Finally, researchers have devoted considerable efforts to innovation and change processes, and the role of teams within them. In our opinion, this structure follows a logic derived from organizational (and wider social, cultural and economic) contexts that are characteristic of both countries, despite local differences. Over the past decade Spain and Portugal have been immersed in a process of rapid economic and technological change, the pace of which has been faster than in neighboring countries, if not in absolute then in relative terms. This has obliged firms, organizations and institutions throughout the Peninsula to make a bigger technological and organizational leap than has been the case in other Western European countries or in North America. Moreover, it has been necessary to set up from scratch the various types of work groups and modes of team working discussed above. Interest in innovation processes is closely related, because the same organizations have been forced to undertake change processes, often starting from frankly anachronistic structures, in order to create dynamic and complex new organizational forms. Once again, the leap is greater here than in other more developed countries, where change processes tend to be more gradual and less traumatic. At the same time, Spanish and Portuguese firms have found it difficult to compete with more advanced foreign rivals, at least in the mass markets for consumer goods and services. One of the opportunities to compete is therefore to innovate and seek out new market niches. The combination of these two factors explains the interest in the role of work teams in innovation processes. Though practically all of Spanish and Portugal research in one way or another concerns the measurement of effectiveness and the impact of different variables, it is nonetheless possible to identify a specific focus on the criteria for and dimensions of effectiveness. In our opinion, this responds to the need for an accurate assessment of the advantages of work teams in the quest for effectiveness, ensuring the viability of organizations and goal attainment. Concern for effectiveness is, of course, shared by the majority of organizations the world over, but in the case of Spain and Portugal the need is greater, because of the pressure for local firms and organizations to achieve continuous productivity gains and compete in a European and global market. If this cannot be done, it is likely that multinational corporations in particular will continue to relocate plant and services to more competitive countries, albeit the causes of delocalization are more complex. Finally, let us consider intra- and inter-group conflicts in organizational contexts. As mentioned in the introduction, work teams and team working have become increasingly common, indeed essential, in organizational contexts, and this implies a mix of cooperation and conflict that depends, above all, on the type of task. In short: The study of conflict takes on a new relevance for our understanding of work groups, and new research is needed for us to understand its processes and results on new conditions and forms of work (Peiró et al., 1999, p. 48). This important line of inquiry perhaps requires rather more explanation than the other three. We believe it is rooted in cultural and socio-historical factors. Both Spain and Portugal tend to be rated in cultural terms as intermediate countries along the individualism-collectivism dimension. Thus, the results obtained by Triandis (1994, 1995) place the countries of Southern Europe slightly closer to the individualistic end of the scale in relation to a hypothetical center. The research directed by Hofstede (2003, 1996) differs somewhat from Triandis, however, in that the two countries are situated rather further apart. Of the 53 countries and regions included in these studies, Spain was 20th, while Portugal was between the 33rd and 35th (Hofstede, 1996, p. 105), where 1 indicates maximum individualism and 53 maximum collectivism. These scores appear to reflect a slightly stronger tendency towards individualistic values and behavior in Spain than in Portugal, which might result in less frequent or natural cooperation and collaboration, at least in work contexts (social networking and solidarity in times of emergency or catastrophe may be more prevalent in other social milieus). At the same time, sociohistorical factors (such as backwardness and isolation from other more economically developed countries) have allowed certain organizational structures based on the concept of the job and on personal responsibility, competence and merit to survive for longer in both countries. This has hindered gradual change towards more cooperative forms of work in which sharing is a key element, while the hurried implementation of new work systems (e.g. information and communication technologies) has caught many on the back foot, These workers need both teamwork training and time to adapt. Both factors may be behind the high levels of conflict in Spanish and Portuguese organizational contexts, whether affecting individual team members or rival teams. It is in this light that scholarly interest of scholars in the origins and solution of conflicts should be viewed. To sum up, Spanish and Portuguese research into work team effectiveness is intertwined with the main international trends and yet displays its own special characteristics, which inevitably refer to organizational contexts and wider political, social, economic, cultural and economic factors peculiar to both countries. Scholars have sought to contribute both to the progress of knowledge and to its transfer in a manner that is applicable precisely in the local contexts where it is most relevant. Returning to the models discussed in section 2, it is clear that Spanish and Portuguese research into work team effectiveness in organizational contexts closely follows the functional approach (Wittenbaum et al, 2004) or input-process-output model (Salas et al., 2004). Similarly, it reflects what Ilgen (1999) has called a displacement of research on teams towards contextual factors (in our case, analysis of technological factors and the contexts of change and innovation) and towards outcomes (interest in team effectiveness), although this does not mean that researchers have ignored the study of group processes (analysis of conflict and innovation). 4. Monograph issue This section provides an overview of the papers included in this monograph issue. 4.1 Objectives The aim of this issue is to reflect the consolidation and maturity of Portuguese and Spanish research into work teams in organizational contexts. We believe the field has come of age in the Iberian Peninsula after two decades of continuous activity. The dominant lines of research are demonstrably linked to the main thrust of scientific research in other European Union countries and in the US, while Portuguese and Spanish researchers collaborate freely with scholars from abroad. In this light, we may conclude that the field has developed its own identity in each country and internationally. 4.2 Trends and lines of research The papers selected for this issue provide a general idea of the most representative lines of research into work team effectiveness in organizational contexts in Portugal and Spain. Inquiry into conflicts in work teams is represented by two papers. Medina et al. (2005) evaluate the relationships between task conflict and relational conflict, and their influence on certain affective responses of team members such as satisfaction, well-being and propensity to leave a job. The paper also addresses the mediating and moderating role of relational conflict, finding evidence for the existence of a link between the two conflict types and a relationship between task conflict and job satisfaction, and for the mediating role of relational conflict in well-being. Meanwhile, Passos and Caetano (2005) consider the effects of intra-group conflict in three dimensions (relational, task and process conflict), performance feedback and perceived efficacy of decision making processes related with team outcomes and the affective responses of team members. They find that the relationship between process conflict and outcomes is mediated by the perceived efficacy of decision making, while conflicts of this nature directly impact team satisfaction. Feedback is found directly to influence current team outcomes. The second line of research presented here concerns technological and temporal factors affecting the functioning and effectiveness of teams. Caballer et al. (2005) examine the moderating role of time pressure on the influence of the communication media and satisfaction with processes, satisfaction with outcomes, and the commitment of team members to solutions. The group media considered are face-to-face communication, videoconferencing and e-mail. The results obtained point to key effects of time pressure on affective responses and suggest that the interaction between the communication media utilized by groups and time pressure is important to predicting such responses. These results are analyzed in light of the task/technology fit model, while their theoretical implications may recommend a reformulation of the model in certain aspects. Meanwhile, Rico and Cohen (2005) explore the performance of virtual teams based on the fit between task characteristics and the type of communication medium employed by members. Their results show that virtual teams achieve higher levels of performance under conditions of low task interdependence with asynchronous communication, and high task interdependence with synchronous communication. In general, high performance in virtual teams is contingent upon the association between the nature of the task and the type of communication media employed. Finally, Pissarra and Jesuino (2005) analyze the processes by which ideas are generated through computer mediated communication, using "electronic brainstorming". They find that member anonymity provides greater satisfaction and produces better ideas and enhanced conceptual diversity. Furthermore, technology may mediate the generation of ideas at the group level by structuring the emergence of new conceptual categories. The last two papers are concerned with the analysis of variables. Osca et al. (2005) consider the influence of organizational support for the implementation of team based systems through longitudinal design. Their results reveal that organizational support has a positive influence on satisfaction and member commitment to the new work system, and on team productivity appraised through objective measures. Meanwhile, Gil et al. (2005) investigate the impact of change-oriented leadership on team results. Their findings suggest that the team climate (especially in relation to innovation) represents the nexus mediating between change-oriented leadership and group outcomes. This relationship is reinforced by group potency. This sample of Portuguese and Spanish research includes each of the main lines of inquiry discussed in the preceding sections and highlights the links between our concerns and international research on work team effectiveness in organizational contexts. 4.3 Outlook for the future As we have seen, Spanish and Portuguese research on work groups and teams has made considerable progress in recent decades, contributing both to theoretical development and practical applications. We believe that the study of organizations and work will continue to advance over the coming decade. The need to perfect the functioning of work teams poses an enormous new challenge for the world of work and organizations. Fresh theoretical models, empirical knowledge, intervention and change methodologies and technologies will therefore be required to improve the creation and development of work teams. Emerging work and organizational realities demand progress and innovation in the investigation of work groups and teams. Recent methodological and theoretical developments should provide a boost for basic research and work-group and team-based R&D. We refer here to the methodology for multilevel and cross-level analysis of key variables in group studies. These new methodologies will provide potent research strategies to address long-standing issues. Group studies are likely to benefit enormously from multilevel and cross-level analysis (Klein and Kozlowski, 2000). This technique makes it possible to address the constructs incorporated within theoretical models at different levels, permitting an exploration of relationships across levels. The aggregation strategies used to obtain group measures based on observations or information obtained at the individual level opens up a range of possibilities with regard to the processes contributing to the emergence of group constructs based on individual data and perceptions. Furthermore, dispersion theory suggests the need to consider the diversity of group variables and their theoretical significance. Meanwhile, considerable progress has been made with the measures obtained directly at the group level and the significance of relationships between the various individual measures. A good example of this is relational demographics. Thus, the significance of an individual datum may vary depending on the stance of other subjects within the same group. Studies combining individual characteristics as a gestalt that influences other group constructs and processes are highly relevant to research seeking to obtain a clearer understanding of group effectiveness and outcomes. The appropriate combination of diverse individual, group and contextual features, and the ideal level of diversity depending on the criteria employed (group effectiveness, member satisfaction, etc.) are key to clarifying strategies for the design, development and improvement of work teams. The dynamics of basic psycho-social processes are another area of group studies that will require further development in the future. This concerns inquiry into how shared perceptions, the affective climate and the judgments and beliefs generated by groups under certain conditions emerge and become consolidated through social cognition processes, because these experiences form the basis for cognitions, emotions, affective ties and collective beliefs, though this does not mean the reification of these phenomena. New, farreaching approaches have also emerged in the study of outcomes. Insofar as effective working is something more than the successful completion of previously standardized and defined tasks, but also requires innovation, problem solving, role extension and extra-role behaviors, the issue of work team effectiveness suddenly widens and becomes complex. It is therefore important to expand the spectrum of outcomes considered. Drawing the classic distinction between instrumental, and expressive and socio-emotional outcomes, the groundwork has been laid for the analysis of numerous phenomena making up groups' "psycho-social production". Thus, one of the classic themes in the area of performance and effectiveness is moral satisfaction, cohesion and team climate or culture. However, new issues have begun to emerge, including collective emotions and the processes they produce (e.g. emotional contagion), stress and collective burnout in work teams. An ever increasing body of evidence has in fact been amassed regarding the "collective reality" of certain phenomena, which conventional research has only been able to address at the individual level. Thus, new collective approaches to stress have made it possible to re-conceptualize the constructs involved in group terms. These approaches include the analysis of primary and secondary perceptions of the collective nature of the phenomenon within the work team or unit, and the study of the emotions and affective ties shared by members when the team is under stress. Groups frequently employ collective strategies to combat stress and, indeed, must do so if they are to resolve stressors effectively, while the consequences of team stress may also have collective components. In this light, the analysis of stress at the collective level requires us to question numerous implicit assumptions of the individualistic approach taken in traditional studies, which has inspired research for the last 50 years (Peiró, 2001b). The study of leadership has also enjoyed considerable development, and future progress seems certain both here and in the related, though separate, field of management. Beyond functions and roles studies, which monopolized a good part of classical management research, interest nowadays centers on the study of the managerial skills that allow quick, flexible and adaptive responses to shifting conditions. In the field of leadership, new approaches and paradigms have enriched inquiry, linking up with new team scenarios and needs such as handling change, orientation to innovation, the management of virtual teams, and the management of diversity, all of which require new forms of management and leadership (delegation and empowerment, transformational leadership, knowledge management, etc.). The increasing integration of the new information and communication technologies in the world of work has had profound repercussions for the study of groups. In recent decades, the enormous spread of computer use and telecommunications has driven a wide range of telematic technologies. To name but a few, we may mention computer mediated technologies (e.g. e-mail, chats, forums and instant messaging), audio-conferencing and video-conferencing. Some not only facilitate but also structure communication depending on the design criteria employed to enhance effectiveness, usability, etc. Among these, we may mention decision support systems and other forms of "groupware". One of the most direct and well-known effects of these technologies has been to lower the barriers and the time and spatial constraints upon group working. This has enormously increased asynchronous and non-location specific working. These transformations have been deep, and debate now centers ever less on virtual teams and groups and more on the degree of virtualization, suggesting that the phenomenon could be described in terms of a series of relevant dimensions. All of these technological changes have opened up a new and wide-ranging work group research scenarios. Traditional studies of groups and teams have, of course, assumed that work is carried on face to face. The new technologies, however, have changed this setting, affecting not only the composition and design of groups, but also processes, dynamics, evolution and outcomes. All of these transformations open up new fields for research that were hardly imaginable a few decades ago and remain to a great extent unexplored. Moreover, work teams mediated by the ICTs frequently discover that effective technologies, rules and construction and development procedures formulated to improve "conventional" work teams are no longer applicable because they fall short in situations mediated by ICTs and in virtual teams. This heralds an immense R&D field to revise existing and formulate new technologies for the creation and development of teams. The new technologies also offer new solutions for numerous services. One example that has seen significant development is open and distance learning. In "traditional" learning situations, teamwork was regarded as a fundamental strategy to develop the competencies in demand in the workplace. The new open and distance learning approach also stresses teamwork, but under virtual conditions. The analysis of these "reformulated" and new group processes in terms of the enabling technologies is a matter of considerable theoretical and practical interest. The development of psycho-social technologies permitting the integration and functioning of technical and social subsystems also represents a challenge of unquestionable interest and utility. A further area of enormous theoretical and practical interest concerns the multiple contextual factors of work teams, which are key contingencies for composition, design, structure, processes, evolutionary dynamics and development. Groups, and especially work teams, are created, act and develop in a range of organizational, business and socio-economic contexts. It is by no means easy to identify relevant taxonomies or dimensions that would better our understanding of these environments and their implications for the functioning of groups. Organizations may take a wide range of structural forms, while the phases and changes they undergo are increasingly intense and dynamic in a global environment where competition has become the basis for economic and social development. Conventional analyses that seek to establish bi-variate or multi-variate relations (treating certain variables jointly) have proved insufficient to capture the complexity of these environments and the dynamics of change. In this context, the theoretical models and frameworks underlying research have tended to take into account and incorporate a wide range of constructs and relationships, but empirical research lags far behind and has failed to verify such relations overall, remaining highly fragmented and incomplete. The development of epistemologies, models and methodologies that would permit scientific progress in the validation of theoretical proposals designed to advance our understanding of work groups and teams in more integrated terms is therefore a challenge of no small import. This list of challenges could of course be extended considerably, and we shall therefore end by mentioning the various temporal aspects of groups and teams. Groups are artificial phenomena, and are therefore part and parcel of the historical and temporal situation of human reality. The Spanish philosopher Zubiri insisted on the temporal and historical dimension of humankind, holding that collectivity was a basic element of our nature. It was in these terms that he propounded the concept of "historicity". Groups are necessarily temporal and historical, and this forms a part of their "essence". Nevertheless, the temporal nature of work groups has been only partially investigated. Groups develop while they work. Consequently, all of their processes are of a dynamic nature, the formation, operation and evolution of which is largely unknown. Groups frequently work subject to time constraints or deadlines set, whether implicitly or explicitly, by team members or by external agents or audiences. These time constraints condition the life and work of the group. Thus, "opportunity" becomes a key concept in the operation and development of groups, and in the course of certain processes because outcomes may vary widely depending on the moment. Opportunity thus depends on numerous factors (e.g. the presence or absence of other processes). All of these complex realities are scarcely understood and require further research. Groups of course undergo processes of formation, growth, development, and ageing or decline, and many models have sought to describe stages or states in the evolution of work groups. However, further research on phenomena of this kind is called for in the face of new contexts, realities and demands, and the transformations we have discussed. Many of these issues require a longitudinal approach. For some decades now, there has been increasing insistence on the need for this kind of approach to the study of groups, but a long road remains. Longitudinal research involves one major complication. The number, reiteration and content of the observations to be made, the lag between observations and evaluation of their theoretical significance, control of relevant variables and their accessibility, among other factors, mean that longitudinal research is both costly and difficult. We believe that this is one of the fields in which new theoretical, methodological and practical advances could be made. This would not only allow raise new research questions, but would also clarify numerous existing issues. To sum up, work team effectiveness in organizational contexts is a vigorous field of research, which has a promising future. There is no shortage of issues, while new theoretical models and research techniques continue to emerge. Portuguese and Spanish researchers have contributed to this development to the full extent possible not only within their own cultural and national context, and in response to local social demand, but also taking into account general theory and issues. This balance between the general and the local means researchers in our two countries will continue to make contributions to the development of science and technology related with work teams and units in close collaboration with the international scientific community. References References Alcover, C.M. and Gil, F. (1998), "La anticipación del cambio como estrategia para afrontar la flexibilidad en la composición de los equipes de trabajo" ("Change anticipation like strategy for flexibility coping in the composition of work teams", II Congreso Iberoamericano de Psicologia, Madrid, 13-17 July, CD-ROM, ISBN 84-923717-0-6. Alcover, C.M. and Gil, F. (1999a), "The effects of member change and continuity on the productive efficiency of work teams", Psychology in Spain, Vol. 3, pp. 88-97. Alcover, C.M. and Gil, F. (1999b), "Influencias de las nuevas formas de flexibilidad organizational sobre los equipes de trabajo" ("Influences of new kinds of organizational flexibility on work teams"), Revista de Psicología General y Aplicada, Vol. 52, pp. 177-201. Alcover, C.M., Martínez-Íñigo, D., Rodriguez-Mazo, F., Gil, F. and Calderon, N. (2000), "La investigación sobre equipes de trabajo en España en la segunda mitad del siglo XX" ("Spanish work teams research in the second half of 20th century"), in Agulló, E., Remeseiro, C. and Fernández, J.A. (Eds), Psicología del Trabajo, de las Organizaciones y de los Recursos Humanos, Vol. 86-102, Biblioteca Nueva, Madrid, pp. 86-102. Alonso, E. and Sánchez, J.C. (1998), "El compromiso organizacional de los grupos de trabajo en función de su cultura" ("Work groups' organizational commitment depending on his culture"), II Congreso Iberoamericano de Psicología, Madrid, 13-17 July, CD-ROM, ISBN 84-923717-0-6. Amaral, M.J. and Monteiro, M.B. (2002), "To be without being seen: computer-mediated communication and social identity management", Small Group Research, Vol. 33, pp. 575-89. Anderson, N.R. and West, M.A. (1996), "The team climate inventory: the development of the TCI and its applications in teambuilding for innovativeness", European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 5, pp. 53-66. Aritzeta, A. (2001), "Efectos de los Equipes de Trabajo Autogestionados (EQTA) y del trabajo individual sobre caracteristicas grupales e individuales" ("Effects of self-managed work teams (SMWT) and individual work on group and individual characteristics"), Revista de Psicologia del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, Vol. 17, pp. 197-218. Aritzeta, A. (2003), "Compromiso organizacional en los equipes de trabajo: un análisis multinivel" ("Organizational commitment and work teams: a multilevel analysis"), Encuentros en Psicología Social, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 114-19. Arróspide, J.J., Martínez-Taboada, C. and Ayestarán, S. (1995), "Estudio longitudinal de grupo: focalizado en la percepción de jerarquía y el manejo del conflicto" ("Group longitudinal analysis: focus on hierarchy perception and conflict management"), in Sánchez, J.C. and Ullán, A.M. (Eds), Procesos Psicosodaks Básicos y Grupales, Eudema, Salamanca, pp. 531-40. Ayestarán, S. (1993), "La innovación a través de los equipos de trabajo" ("Innovation through work teams"), in Munduate, L. and Barón, M. (Eds), Gestión de Recursos Humanos y Calidad de Vida Laboral, Eudema, Sevilla, pp. 69-72. Ayestarán, S. (1998a), "La Psicologia y los grupos" ("Psychology and the groups"), Papeks del Psicólogo, Vol. 70, pp. 13-16. Ayestarán, S. (1998b), "Cultura y manejo de conflictos en equipos de trabajo" ("Culture and conflict management in work teams"), II Congreso Iberoamericano de Psicología, Madrid, 13-17 July, CD-ROM, ISBN 84-923717-0-6. Ayestarán, S. (1999), "Formación de equipos de trabajo, conductas de manejo de conflicto y cambio cultural en las organizaciones" ("Team building, conflict management behaviors and cultural change in organizations"), Revista de Psicologia General y Aplicada, Vol. 52, pp. 203-17. Ayestarán, S. and Reoyo, A. (1998), "Culture, styles of conflict management and identification in work teams", paper presented at the llth Annual Conference of the International Association for Conflict Management, Madrid, 7-10 June. Bramel, D. and Friend, R. (1987), "The work group and its vicissitudes in social and industrial psychology", Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 23, pp. 233-53. Caballer, A., Gratia, F. and Peiró, J.-M. (2005), "Affective responses to work process and outcomes in virtual teams: effects of communication media and time pressure", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 20 Nos 3/4, pp. 245-60. Campion, M.A., Medsker, G.J. and Higgs, A.C. (1993), "Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: implications for designing effective work groups", Personnel Psvchobsy, Vol. 46, pp. 823-50. Campion, M.A., Papper, E.M. and Medsker, G.J. (1996), "Relations between work team characteristics and effectiveness: a replication and extension", Personnel Psychology, Vol. 49, pp. 429-52. Cannon-Bowers, J.A., Oser, R. and Flanagan, L. (1992), "Work teams in industry: a selected review and proposed framework", in Sweezy, R.W. and Salas, E. (Eds), Teams: Their Training and Performance, Ablex Pub., Norwood, NJ, pp. 355-77. Canto, J.M. and Moral, F. (2003), "Comunicacion virtual, grupos y eficacia" ("Virtual communication, groups and efficacy"), Encuentros en Psicologia Social, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 109-12. Cohen, S.G. and Bailey, D.E. (1997), "What makes teams work? Group effectiveness research from the shopfloor to the executive suite", Journal of Management, Vol. 23, pp. 239-90. Costa, M., Rumbo, A. and Pérez, M. (1997), "Circules de calidad para la aceptación del cambio organizativo?" ("Quality circles for organizacional change acceptance?"), Cadernos de Psicologia, Vol. 17, pp. 41-5. Cruces, S.J., Cisneros, I.F.J., Munduate, L, Gomez, T. and Dorado, M.A. (1999), "Factores culturales y socioemocionales en los procesos de negociación: la importancia de la mentira en una muestra española" ("Cultural and socio-emotional factors in negotiation processes: the importance of the lie in a Spanish sample"), Revista de Psicología General y Aplicada, Vol. 52, pp. 255-68. Cunha, J.V. and Cunha, M.P. (200Ia), "Round the clock: collaborative work in the international moulding industry", International Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 5, pp. 49-71. Cunha, J.V. and Cunha, M.P. (200Ib), "Brave new (paradoxical) world: structure and improvisation in virtual teams", Strategic Change, Vol. 10, pp. 337-47. Cunha, M.P. and Cunha, J.V. (2001), "Managing improvisation in crosscultural virtual teams", International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management, Vol. 1, pp. 187-208. Curral, L. and Chambel, MJ. (1999), "Processus de grupo em equipas de inovação" ("Group processes in innovation teams"), Psicologia, Vol. 13, pp. 163-92. Curral, L., Forrester, R.H., Dawson, J.F. and West, M.A. (2001), "It's what you do and the way that you do it: team task, team size, and innovation-related group processes", European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 10, pp. 187-204. Devine, D.J., Clayton, L.D., Philips, J.L., Dunford, B.B. and Melner, S.B. (1999), "Teams in organizations: prevalence, characteristics, and effectiveness", Small Group Research, Vol. 30, pp. 678-711. Dorado, M.A., Medina, F.J., Munduate, L., Cisneros, I.F.J. and Euwema, M. (2002), "Computer-mediated negotiation of an escalated conflict", Small Group Research, Vol. 33, pp. 50924. Gibson, C.B., Randel, A.E. and Earley, P.C. (2000), "Understanding group efficacy: an empirical test of multiple assessment methods", Group and Organization Management, Vol. 25, pp. 67-97. Gil, F. and Alcover, C.M. (2002), "Small group research in Europe: contributions to the field from Spanish social psychology 19552000", European Psychologist, Vol. 7, pp. 265-74. Gil, F., Rico, R., Alcover, C.M. and Barrasa, A. (2005), "Change-oriented leadership, satisfaction and effectiveness in work groups: effects of team climate and group potency", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 20 Nos 3/4, pp. 312-28. Gil, F., Rico, R., Fernández Rios, M., Barrasa, A., Alcover, C.M. and Rodriguez Mazo, F. (2003), "Liderazgo en equipos virtuales" ("Leadership in virtual teams"), Encuentros en Psicologia Social, Vol. 1 No. 5, pp. 101-6. González-Romá, V. and Peiró, J.-M. (1999), "Clima en las organizaciones laborales y en los equipes de trabajo" ("Climate in work organizations and work teams"), Revista de Psicología General y Aplicada, Vol. 52, pp. 269-85. González-Romá, V., Peiró, J.-M. and Prieto, F. (1992), "Un análisis de la participacián en los círculos de calidad" ("An analysis of participation in quality circles"), Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, Vol. 10, pp. 189-97. GonzálezRomá, V., Peiro, J.-M. and Tordera, N. (2002), "An examination of the antecedents and moderador influences of climate strength", Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87, pp. 465-73. González-Romá, V., Peiró, J.-M., Lloret, S. and Zornoza, A. (1999), "The validity of collective climates", Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 72, pp. 25-40. González-Romá, V., Peiró, J.-M., Subirais, M. and Mañas, M.A. (2000), "The validity of affective work team climates", in Vartiainen, M. and Avallone, F. (Eds), Innovative Theories, Tools, and Practices in Work and Organizational Psychology, Hogrefe and Huber Publishers, Kirkland, WA, pp. 97-109. González-Romá, V., Canero, J., Meliá, J.L., Peiró, J.-M. and Prieto, F. (1987), "Quality circles and its influence on management perception, organizational climate, work performance and absenteeism in an organizational context", in de Witte, K. (Ed.), The Challenge of Technological Change for Work and Organization: Tools and Strategies for the 1990s, Proceedings of the 3rd Wets European Congress on the Psychology of Work and Organization, Vol. II, Amberes, 13-15 April, pp. 651-4. González-Romá, V., Ramos, J., Peiró, J.-M., Rodríguez, I. and Muñoz, P. (1995), "Formación del clima de los equipes de trabajo e interaction social" ("Formation of work team climate and social interaction"), in Zurriaga, R. and Sancerni, M.D. (Eds), Experiencias Laborales en Organizaciones de Trabajo, Nau Llibres, Valencia, pp. 65-78. Gracia, F., Caballer, A. and Peiró, J.-M. (2002), "Efectos de la presion temporal sobre la cohesión grupal en diferentes tipos de tareas y en diferentes canales de comunicaciôn" ("Effects of time pressure on group cohesiveness in different task types and communication media"), Psicothema, Vol. 14, pp. 434-9. Guzzo, R.A. and Dickson, M.W. (1996), "Teams in organizations: recent research on performance and effectiveness", Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 47, pp. 307-28. Hackman, J.R. and Morris, C.G. (1975), "Group tasks, group interaction process, and group performance: a review and proposed integration", in Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 8, Academic Press, New York, NY, pp. 45-99. Harris, T.C. and BarnesFarrell, J.L. (1997), "Components of teamwork: impact of evaluations of contributions to work team effectiveness", Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 27, pp. 1694-715. Hofstede, G. (1996), Culturasy Organizaciones. El Software Mental La Cooperacion Internacional y su Importancia Para la Supervivencia (Cultures and Organizations. Software of the Mind. Intercultural Cooperation and its Importance for Survival), Alianza Editorial, Madrid. Hofstede, G. (2003), Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations across Nations, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Hyatt, D.E. and Ruddy, T.M. (1997), "An examination of the relationship between work group characteristics and performance: once more into the breach", Personnel Psychology, Vol. 50, pp. 553-85. Ilgen, D.R. (1999), "Teams embedded in organizations: some implications", American Psvcholoeist. Vol. 54, DP. 129-39. Ilgen, D.R., Major, D.A., Hollenbeck, J.R. and Sego, DJ. (1993), "Team research in the 1990s", in Chemers, M.M. and Ayman, R. (eds), Leadership Theory and Research: Perspectives and Directions, Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp. 245-70. Jesuino, J.C. (2002), "Introduction: European views of computer-mediated communication", Small Group Research, Vol. 33, pp. 475-80. Jordan, M.H., Feild, H.S. and Armenakis, A.A. (2002), "The relationship of group process variables and team performance", Small Group Research, Vol. 33, pp. 121-50. Klein, K.J. and Kozlowski, S.WJ. (Eds) (2000), Multilevel Theory, Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and New Directions, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Kozlowski, S.W.J. and Bell, B.S. (2003), "Work groups and teams in organizations", in Borman, W.C., Ilgen, D.R. and Klimoski, RJ. (Eds), Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 12, John Wiley &Sons, Hoboken, NJ, pp. 333-75. Levi, D. and Slem, C. (1995), "Team work in research and development organizations: the characteristics of successful teams", International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Vol. 16, pp. 29-42. Levine, J.M. and Moreland, RL. (1990), "Progress in small group research", Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 41, pp. 585-634. Lourenço, P.R. (2000), "Liderança e eficacia: uma relação revisitada" ("Leadership and efficacy: a revisited relation"), Revista Psicológica, Vol. 23, pp. 119-30. Lourenço, P.R. and Gomes, A.D. (2003), "Da pluralidade àbidimensionalidade da eficacia dos grupos/equipas de trabalho" ("From plurality to bidimensionality of work groups/teams efficacy"), Revista Psicologíca, Vol. 33, pp. 7-32. Lourenço, P.R., Miguez, J., Gomes, A.D. and Carvalho, C. (2004), "Eficácia grupal: análise e discussão de um modelo multidimensional" ("Group efficacy: an analysis and discussion of a multidimensionality model"), Psicologica, Extra-Série, pp. 611-21. Lourenço, P.R., Miguez, J., Gomes, A.D. and Freire, P. (2000), "Equipas de trabalho: eficácia ou eficacias?" ("Work teams: efficacy or efficacies?"), in Gomes, A.D., Caetano, A., Keating, J. and Cunha, M.P. (Eds), Organizações em transiçõo. Contributes da Psicologia do Trabalho e das Organizações, Imprensa da Universidade, Coimbra. McGrath, J.E. (1964), Social Psychology: A Brief Introduction, Holt, Rinehart &Winston, New York, NY. McGrath, J.E., Arrow, H. and Berdahl, J.L. (2000), "The study of groups: past, present, and future", Personality and Social Psychology Review, Vol. 4, pp. 95-105. Mañas, M.A., González-Romá, V. and Peiró, J.-M. (1998), "Clima de los equipos de trabajo y satisfactión laboral: un estudio longitudinal" ("Work team climate and work satisfaction: a longitudinal study"), in de Diego, R. and Valdivieso, J.D. (Eds), Psicología del Trabajo. Nuevos Conceptos, Controversias y Aplicaciones, Pirámide, Madrid, pp. 43-9. Mañas, M.A., González-Romá, V. and Peiró, J.-M. (1999), El Clima de los Equipas de Trabajo: Determinantes y Consecuencias (Work Team Climate: Determinants and Consequences), Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Almería/Instituto de Estudios Almerienses, Almeria. Martínez, I. and Mejías, R.J. (2003), "Efectos del anonimato y el género sobre el nivel de consenso, cohesión y satisfacción en grupos con apoyo de sistemas informáticos" ("Effects of anonymity and gender on consensus, cohesion and satisfaction in group support systems"), Revista de Psicología Social, Vol. 18, pp. 107-20. Martínez, I., Cifre, E., Llorens, S. and Salanova, M. (2002), "Efectos de la tecnología asistida por ordenador en el bienestar psicológico afectivo" ("Effects of computer-aided technology on affective psychological wellbeing"), Psicothema, Vol. 14, pp. 118-23. Medina, F.J., Munduate, L., Dorado, M.A., Martinez, I. and Cisneros, I.F.J. (2005), "Types of intragroup conflict and affective reactions", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 20 Nos 3/4, pp. 219-30. Medina, F.J., Munduate, L, Martínez, I, Dorado, M.A. and Mañas, M.A. (2003), "Una perspectiva contingente en el estudio de la efectividad de los tipos de conflicto organizacional. El rol moderador del clima de los equipos de trabajo" ("A contingent perspective in the study of organizational conflict types effectiveness. The moderational role of work group climate"), Encuentros en Psicología Social, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 341-6. Medina, F.J., Munduate, L, Martinez, I., Dorado, M.A. and Mañas, M.A. (2004), "Efectos positives de la activación del conflicto de tarea sobre el clima de los equipos de trabajo" ("Positive effects of task-conflict stimulation on work-team climate"), Revista de Psicología Social, Vol. 19, pp. 3-15. Monteiro, M.B. (2003), "Dealing with intergroup conflicts in organizations: a challenge to the right of diversity", Portuguese Journal of Social Science, Vol. 2, pp. 79-88. Moral, F., Canto, J.M. and Gómez Jacinto, L. (2003), "Comunicación mediada por ordenador: influencia minoritaria endogrupal" ("Computer-mediated communication: In-group minority influence"), Encuentros en Psicología Social, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 153-7. Munduate, L. and Dorado, M.A. (1999), "El conflicto en los grupos de trabajo" ("Conflict in work groups"), in Morales, J.F. and Yubero, S. (Eds), El Conflicto en los Grupos de Trabajo, Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, Cuenca, pp. 101-16. Orengo, V., Ripoll, P., Gosálvez, I. and Solanes, A. (1998), "Análisis de la interacción grupal a partir de una adaptación de la técnica SYMLOG en funcion del canal de comunicación y del tipo de tarea" ("Analysis of group interaction through an adaptation of the SYMLOG technique as a function of channel communication and task type"), Revista de Psicologia Social, Vol. 13, pp. 241-50. Orengo, V., Zornoza, A., Acín, C., Prieto, F. and Peiró, J.-M. (1996), "Análisis de la interacción grupal a través de medidas de observation en comunicación mediada" ("Group interaction analysis in mediated communication through observational measures"), Revista de Psicología Social, Vol. 11, pp. 151-62. Orengo, V., Zornoza, A.M., Prieto, F. and Peiró, J.-M. (2000), "The influence of familiarity among group members, group atmosphere and assertiveness on uninhibited behavior through three different communication media", Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 16, pp. 141-59. Osca, A., Alonso, E. and Palací, F. (1994), "La cultura organizacional en los Equipos de Atención Primaria (EAPS) y de los Centras de Atención a Drogodependientes (CADS)" ("Organizacional culture in primary health-care teams and in drugs dependence centers"), in Zurriaga, R. and Sancerni, M.D. (Eds), Experiencias Laborales en Organizaciones de Trabajo, Nau Llibres, Valencia, pp. 49-64. Osca, A., Urien, B., González-Camino, G. and Martinez-Pérez, M.D. (2005), "Organizational support and performance in teamwork systems: a longitudinal study", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 20 Nos 3/4, pp. 292-311. Passos, A.M. and Caetano, A. (n.d), "Tipos de conflito intragrupal: um modelo tridimensional" ("Intergroup conflict types: a tridimensional model"), in Vala, J. and Garrido, M. (Eds), Percursos de investigação em psicologia social e organizacional (in press), Colibri, Lisboa. Passos, A.M. and Caetano, A. (2005), "Exploring the effects of intragroup conflict and past performance feedback on team effectiveness", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 20 Nos 3/4, pp. 231-44. Peiró, J.-M. (2001a), "Perspectiva histórica y desarrollos recientes de la psicología del trabajo y de las organizaciones en España" ("Historical overview and recent developments of work and organizational psychology in Spain"), Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, Vol. 17, pp. 255-71. Peiró, J.-M. (2001b), "Stressed teams in organizations: a multilevel approach to the study of stress in work units", in Pryce, J., Weilkert, C. and Torkelson, E. (Eds), Occupational Health Psychology: Europe 2001, European Academy of Occupational Health, Nottingham, pp. 9-13. Peiró, J.M. (2002), "Perspectiva histórica y tendencias actuales de la psicología del trabajo, las organizaciones y del personal en España. Un modelo para su análisis" ("Historic perspective and present tendencies of the work, organizational and personnel psychology in Spain. A model for its analysis"), Revista de Historia de la Psicología, Vol. 23, pp. 223-47. Peiró, J.-M. and Munduate, L. (1999), "Psicología del trabajo y de las organizaciones en España en la década de los no venta" ("Work and organizational psychology in Spain in the 1990s"), Revista de Psicología General y Aplicada, Vol. 52, pp. 371-428. Peiró, J.-M. and Munduate, L. (2001), "Research developments on work and organizational psychology in Spain: an overview", Revista de Psicología Social Aplicada, Vol. 11, pp. 31-48. Peiró, J.-M., González-Romá, V. and Ramos, J. (1992), "The influence of work-team climate on role stress, tension, satisfaction, and leadership perceptions", European Review of Applied Psychology/Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée, Vol. 42, pp. 49-56. Peiró, J.-M., Prieto, F., Zornoza, A. and Ripoll, P. (1999), "El conflicto y su gestión en el trabajo en equipo mediado por nuevas tecnologias de la información" ("Conflict and its management in team work mediated for new information technologies"), in Morales, J.F. and Yubero, S. (Eds), El Grupo y Sus Conflictos, Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, Cuenca, pp. 47-99. Pinto, A.C. and Teixeira, N.S. (Eds) (2002), Southern Europe and the Making of the European Union, Columbia University Press, New York, NY. Pissarra, J. and Jesuino, J.C. (2005), "Idea generation through computer-mediated communication: the effects of anonymity", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 20 Nos 3/4, pp. 275-91. Reoyo, A.M. (1998), "Cultura, manejo del conflicto e identificación grupal en los grupos de trabajo" ("Culture, conflict management and identification in work teams"), Revista de Psicología Social, Vol. 13, pp. 261-8. Reoyo, A.M. and López Canas, R. (2003), "Efectividad de la intervención psicosocial en los equipos de trabajo: comparación de muestras universitarias y de empresa" ("Psychosocial intervention effectiveness in work teams: comparison between university students and company workers samples"), Encuentros en Psicología Social, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 113-18. Rico, R. and Cohen, S. (2005), "Effects of task interdependence and type of communication on performance in virtual teams", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 20 Nos. 3/4, pp. 261-74. Ripoll, M.P., González-Navarro, P., Zornoza, A. and Orengo, V. (2004), "La influencia de los procesos de interacción grupal y el medio de comunicación sobre la eficacia de los grupos de trabajo" ("Influences of group interaction processes and communication media on work group effectiveness"), Revista Latinoamemana de Psicología, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 195-208. Ripoll, M.P., Subirais, M., Torres, M.J. and Marzo, J.C. (1998), "Nuevas tecnologías telemáticas y trabajo en grupo: un estudio de las diferencias en los resultados grupales en función del canal de comunicación utilizado y de la experiencia adquirida" ("New telematic technologies and work team: a study of group outcomes differences depending on communication channel and gained experience"), in de Diego, R. and Valdivieso, J.D. (Eds), Psicología del Trabajo. Nuevos Conceptos, Controversias y Aplicaciones, Pirámide, Madrid, pp. 159-71. Salanova, M., Llorens, S., Cifre, E., Martínez, I. and Schaufeli, W.B. (2003), "Perceived collective efficacy, subjective wellbeing and task performance among electronic work groups: an experimental study", Small Group Research, Vol. 34, pp. 43-73. Salas, E., Cannon-Bowers, J.A. and Johnston, J.H. (1997), "How can you turn a team of experts into an expert team? Emerging training strategies", in Zsambok, C.E. and Klein, G. (Eds), Naturalistic Decision Making, Erlbaum and Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 359-70. Salas, E., Stagl, K.C. and Burke, C.S. (2004), "25 years of team effectiveness in organizations: research themes and emerging needs", in Cooper, CL. and Robertson, I.T. (Eds), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 19, John Wiley &Sons, Chichester, pp. 47-91. Sánchez, J.C. and Alonso, E. (2003), "La cultura de los equipos de trabajo y su relación con la cohesión e identification grupal" ("The culture of work teams and their relationship with group cohesion and identification"), Encuentros en Psicología Social, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 22-5. Sawyer, J.E., Latham, W.R., Pritchard, R.D. and Bennett, W.R. (1999), "Analysis of work group productivity in an applied setting: application of a time series panel design", Personnel Psychology, Vol. 52, pp. 927-67. Segurado, A., Mier, L. and Fernández, M.A. (2004), "El estudio de la eficacia en los equipos de trabajo: avances metodologicos" ("Effectiveness teamwork: methodological advances"), Encuentros en Psicología Social, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 15762. Simpson, J.A. and Wood, W. (1992), "Introduction: where is the group in social psychology? An historical overview", in Worchel, S. and Simpson, J.A. (Eds), Group Process and Productivity, Sage, Newbury Park, CA, pp. 1-12. Steiner, I.V. (1986), "Paradigms and groups", in Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 19, Academic Press, New York, NY, pp. 251-89. Sundstrom, E., McIntyre, M, Halfhill, T. and Richards, H. (2000), "Work groups: from the Hawthorne studies to work teams of the 1990s and beyond", Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, Vol. 4, pp. 44-67. Tannenbaum, S.I., Beard, R.L. and Salas, E. (1992), "Team building and its influence on team effectiveness: an examination of conceptual and empirical developments", in Kelley, K. (Ed.), Issues, Theory, and Research in Industrial/Organizational Psychology, Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, pp. 117-53. Telo, A.J. and de la Torre, H. (2003), Portugal y España en los Sistemas Internationales Contemporáneos (Portugal and Spain in Comtemporary International Systems), Gabinete de Iniciativas Transfronterizas de la Junta de Andalucía, Mérida. Tjosvold, D., West, M.A. and Smith, K.G. (2003), "Teamwork and cooperation: fundamentals of organizational effectiveness", in West, M.A., Tjosvold, D. and Smith, K.G. (Eds), International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working, John Wiley &Sons, Chichester, pp. 3-8. Triandis, H.C. (1994), Culture and Social Behavior, McGrawHill, New York, NY. Triandis, H.C. (1995), Individualism and Collectivism, Westview Press, Boulder, CO. Unsworth, K.L. and West, M.A. (2000), "Teams: the challenges of cooperative work", in Chmiel, N. (Ed.), Introduction to Work and Organizational Psychology: A European Perspective, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 327-46. West, MA. (1996), "Preface: introducing work group psychology", in West, M.A. (Ed.), Handbook of Work Group Psychology, John Wiley &Sons, Chichester, pp. xxv-xxxiii. West, M.A. (2001), "The human team: basic motivations and innovations", in Anderson, N., Ones, D.S., Sinangil, H. and Viswesvaran, C. (Eds), Handbook of Industrial, Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 2, Sage, London, pp. 270-88. West, M.A., Borrill, C.S. and Unsworth, K.L. (1998), "Team effectiveness in organizations", in Cooper, C.L. and Robertson, I.T. (Eds), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 13, John Wiley &Sons, Chichester, pp. 148. Whiteoak, J.W., Chalip, L. and Hort, L.K. (2004), "Assessing group efficacy: comparing three methods of measurement", Small Group Research, Vol. 35, pp. 158-73. Wittenbaum, G.M., Hollingshead, A.B., Paulus, P.B., Hirokawa, R.Y., Ancona, D.H., Peterson, R.S., Jehn, K.A. and Yoon, K. (2004), "The functional perspective as a lens for understanding groups", Small Group Research, Vol. 35, pp. 17-43. Wood, R.E. and Tabernero, C. (2000), "Conception de capacidad como determinante de autoeficacia y eficacia grupal percibida" ("Conceptions of ability as determinants of self-efficacy and group efficacy"), Apuntes de Psicologia, Vol. 18, pp. 39-56. Zalesny, M.D., Salas, E. and Prince, C. (1995), "Conceptual and measurement issues in coordination: implications for team behavior and performance", in Ferris, G.R. (Ed.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, Vol. 13, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 81-115. Zornoza, A., Ripoll, P. and Peiró, J.M. (2002b), "Conflict management in groups that work in two different communication contexts: face-toface and computer-mediated communication", Small Group Research, Vol. 33, pp. 481-508. Zornoza, A., Orengo, V., Gosálvez, I. and González, P. (2002a), "Teamwork in different communication contexts: a longitudinal study", Psychology in Spain, Vol. 6, pp. 41-55. Zornoza, A., Prieto, F., Martí, C. and Peiró, J.M. (1993), "Group productivity and telematic communication", European Work and Organizational Psychologist, Vol. 3, pp. 117-27. Zornoza, A., Marín, F., Ramos, J., Prieto, F. and Martí, C. (1992), "Medio de comunicación y rendimiento en grupo: influencia de las actitudes y experiencias con nuevas tecnologías" ("Communication media and group performance: influences of attitudes and experience with new technologies"), Revista de Psicología Social Aplicada, Vol. 2, pp. 73-88. AuthorAffiliation Francisco Gil Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain Carlos-María Alcover Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain, and José-María Peiró Universidad de Valencia, Valencia, Spain AuthorAffiliation (Francisco Gil is Professor of Group and Organizational Psychology at the Complutense University of Madrid (Spain). His current research interests include work teams, leadership and organizational learning. He has written several books and academic papers about these topics (Introduction to Group Psychology, Introduction to Organizational Psychology, Group Techniques in Organizational Contexts), he has coordinated international publications (Knowledge Management) and congress (Competencies Management; Coaching and Mentoring; Leadership), and he has directed and taken part in international research, as UIM projects - about formation and modernization of local administration in Ibero-American countries - and Globe Project (Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness). E-mail: [email protected]) (Carlos María Alcover is a Tenured Professor of Work and Organizational Psychology at Social Psychology Area of the University Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain. He earned his PhD in Social Psychology from the University Complutense of Madrid. His current research is focused on work groups - specifically on teamwork under temporal, functional, and technological flexible conditions - psychological contracts in contemporary employment relations, emotional labor in service workers, and psychological and social consequences of the early retirement. He has published a number of articles and books within these fields. His latest books written in collaboration with other authors are Group Techniques in Organizational Contexts and Introduction to Work Psychology, both published in 2004. He coordinates the Research Group "In-Psitro" (research in work and organizational psychology) at his University. E-mail: [email protected]) (Jose-M. Peiró is Professor of Work and Organizational Psychology at the University of Valencia (Spain) and senior researcher of the Economic Research Institute in Valencia (IVIE). He is also President elect of the International Association of Applied Psychology. Division 1 of Work and Organizational Psychology. He is associate editor of the European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology and has been president of the European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology (1997-1999). His work focuses on stress, climate, team work at work and customer satisfaction and quality of services. E-mail: [email protected]) Materia: Studies; Teamwork; Effectiveness; Trends Lugar: Spain, Portugal Clasificación: 9175: Western Europe, 9130: Experimental/theoretical, 2500: Organizational behavior Título: Work team effectiveness in organizational contexts: Recent research and applications in Spain and Portugal Autor: Gil, Francisco; Carlos-María Alcover; José-María Peiró Título de publicación: Journal of Managerial Psychology Tomo: 20 Número: 3/4 Páginas: 193-218 Número de páginas: 26 Año de publicación: 2005 Fecha de publicación: 2005 Año: 2005 Sección: INTRODUCTION Editorial: Emerald Group Publishing, Limited Lugar de publicación: Bradford País de publicación: United Kingdom Materia de la revista: Psychology ISSN: 02683946 Tipo de fuente: Scholarly Journals Idioma de la publicación: English Tipo de documento: Feature Características del documento: references ID del documentos de ProQuest: 215868258 URL del documento: http://search.proquest.com/docview/215868258?accountid=14730 Copyright: Copyright MCB UP Limited (MCB) 2005 Última actualización: 2010-06-09 Base de datos: ABI/INFORM Complete Bibliography Citation style: APA 6th - American Psychological Association, 6th Edition Gil, F., Carlos-María Alcover, & José-María Peiró. (2005). Work team effectiveness in organizational contexts: Recent research and applications in spain and portugal. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20(3), 193-218. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/215868258?accountid=14730 _______________________________________________________________ Contactar con ProQuest Copyright  2012 ProQuest LLC. Reservados todos los derechos. - Términos y condiciones View publication stats