Indian Journal of Industrial Relations: Economics & Social Dev.

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Task Characteristics & Group Effectiveness in Indian Organizations


Affiliations
1 NMIMS University, Mumbai, India
2 Deptt. of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Intitute of Techonoly, Kanpur, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


This study explores the relationship between certain task characteristics and group effectiveness variables. The task characteristic variables were autonomy, skill variety, task structure, task identity, problem demands in terms of time, task difficulty, work schedule, quality assurance, performance rating and task significance. Group effectiveness was conceptualized in terms of group cohesiveness, group goal accomplishment, group growth level and special recognition. Factor analysis and canonical correlations were sought to answer the research questions. Factor-analysis results revealed the underlying dimensions of the variables under study. Canonical correlations revealed that a positive significant relationship existed between the two sets of variables.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Alderfer, C.P. (1969), “An Empirical Test of a New Theory of Human Needs”, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 142-175.

  • Argyris, C & Schon, D.A. (1978), Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective, Reading M.A Addison-Wesley.

  • Anat Drach-Zahavy& Anit Somech (2006), “Professionalism and Helping: Harmonious or Discordant Concepts? An Attribution Theory Perspective”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology 36 (8): 1892–1923.

  • Ancona, D.G. & Caldwell, D.F (1992), “Bridging the Boundary: External Activity and Performance in Organizational Teams” Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(4): 634-65.

  • Antoni C.H. (2005), “Management by Objectives- an Effective Tool for Teamwork?” International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(2):174-84

  • Antoni C.H. (2000), “Group Fabrication to Self Designing Work Teams: The Development of Work Teams in Germany”, in Beyerlein, M.M. (ed), Work Teams: Past, Present and Future, Amsterdam: Kluwer.

  • Argote, L. & McGrath, J.E.(1993), “Group Processes in Organizations: Continuity and Change, in C.L. Cooper & l.T. Robertson (Eds.), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8, New York: John Wiley & Sons.

  • Arnold, H.J. & Feldman, D.C. (1986), Organizational Behaviour. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

  • Brief, A.P. & Weiss, H.M. (2002), “Organizational Behaviour: Affect in Workplace, Annual Review of Psychology, 53: 279-307.

  • Cohen, S.G. & Ledford, G.E. (1994), “The Effectiveness of Self-managing Teams: A Quasi- Experiment”, Human Relations, 47(1): 13- 43.

  • Cohen, S.G., Ledford, G.E. & Spreitzer, G.M.(1996), “A Predictive Model of Selfmanaging Work Team Effectiveness”, Human Relations, 49(5): 643-76.

  • Cordery, J.L., Mueller, W.S. & Smith, L.M. (1991), “Attitudinal and Behavioral Effects of Autonomous Group Working: A Longitudinal Field Setting”, Academy of Management Journal, 34(2): 464-76.

  • Dion,K.L. (2000), “Group Cohesion: From ‘Field of Forces’ to Multidimensional construct, Group Dynamics: Theory and Research and Practice. 4(1):7-26.

  • Doolen, Hacker &Aken (2006), “Managing Organizational Context for Engineering Team Effectiveness”, Team Performance Management, 39:138-54

  • Eden, D. (1990), “Pygmalion without Interpersonal Contrast Effects: Whole Groups Gain from Raising Manager Expectations”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(4): 394- 98.

  • Fried,Y. & Ferris G.R.(1987), “The Validity of Job Characteristics Model: A Review and Meta Analysis”, Personnel Psychology, 40:287-322.

  • Gupta, P.P., Dirsmith, M.W. & Fogarty, T.J. (1994), “Coordination and Control in a Government Agency: Contingency and Institutional Theory Perspectives on GAO Audits”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 39: 264-84.

  • Gladstein, D.L.(1984), “Groups in Context: A Model of Task Group Effectiveness”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 9(4): 499- 517.

  • Goodman, P.S. & Leyden, D.P. (1991), “Familiarity and Group Productivity”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(4): 578-86.

  • Guzzo, R. A.(1986), “Group Decision Making and Group Effectiveness”, in Goodman, P. S.(Ed.). Designing Effective Work Groups, 34-71.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

  • Guzzo, R.A. & Dickson, M.W. (1996), “Teams in Organizations: Recent research on performance and effectiveness.”, Annual Review of Psychology, 47: 307-338.

  • Hackman, J.R. (1987), “The Design of Work Teams”, in J.W. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Behaviour, Englewood Cliffs, N J: Prentice-Hall.

  • Hackman,J.R. & Lawler,E.E.(1971), “Employee Reaction to Job Characteristics”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 55:259-86.

  • Hackmam,J.R. & Morris, C.G.(1975), “Group Tasks, Group Interaction Process, and Group Performance Effectiveness: A Review and Proposed Integration”, in L. Berkowitz(Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,8. New York: Academic Press.

  • Hackman, J.R. & Oldham, G.(1975), Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey, Journal of Applied Psychology, 60:159-70.

  • Hackman, J.R., and Oldham, G.R. (1976), “Motivation through the Design of Work: Test of a Theory”, Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance: 250-79.

  • Hambrick, D.C. & D’Aveni, R.A.(1992), “Top Team Deterioration as Part of the Downward Spiral of Large Corporate Bankruptcies”, Management Science, 38(10): 1445- 66.

  • Kaur, Parvinder (1992), Success: Options and Organizational Dynamics, New Delhi, Segment Books.

  • Karasek, R. & Theorell, T. (1990), Healthy Work: Stress, Productivity and the Reconstruction of Working Life. Basic Books, New York.

  • Keyton, J. & Springston, J.(1990), “Redefining Cohesiveness in Groups. Small Group Research”, International Journal of Theory Investigation and Application. 2192:234-54.

  • Klimoski, R. & Mohammed, S. (1994), “Team Mental Model: Construct of Metaphor?”, Journal of Management, 20(2): 403-37.

  • Koster,F., Stockman,F., Hodson, R, & Sanders, K.(2007), “Solidarity through Networks: The Effects of Tasks and Informal Interdependence on Cooperation within Teams”, Employee Relations., 29(2):117-37.

  • Kossek, E.E., Barber, A.E. & Winters, D(1999), “Using Flexible Schedules in the Managerial World: The Power of Peers”, Human Resource Management, 38(1):33-46.

  • Lambert, Z. V. & Durand, R.M. (1975), “Some Precautions in Using Canonical Analysis”, Journal of Marketing Research. 12:468-75

  • Levine, D.I. & Tyson, L. (1990), “Participation, Productivity, and the Firm’s Environment”, in A.S. Blinder (Ed.), Paying for Productivity. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

  • Llgen, Hollenbeck, Johnson & Jundt (2005), “Teams in Organizations: From Input-Process- Output Models to IMOI Models”.

  • Annual Review of Psychology,56: 517-43. Likert, R. (1961), New Patterns of Management. New York: McGraw-Hill.

  • Locke, E.A. (1968), “Towards a Theory of Task Motivation and Incentives”, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 3:157-89

  • Locke, E.A.(1976), “The Nature and Causes of Job Satisfaction”, in M.D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Chicago: Rand McNally.

  • Locke, E.A., Cartledge, N., & Koeppel, J.(1968), “Motivational Effects of Knowledge of Results: A Goal Setting Phenomenon?”, Psychological Bulletin, 70: 474-85.

  • McGrath, J.E. (1984), Groups: Interaction and Performance, Englewood Cliffs, N J: Prentice-Hall

  • McGregor, D. (1960), The Human Side of Enterprise. New York: McGraw Hill.

  • Pearson, C.A.L. (1992), “Autonomous Work Groups: An Evaluation at an Industrial Site”, Human Relations, 45(9): 905-36.

  • Pfeffer,J. & Salanick,G.R.(1978), External Control of Organization: A Resource Dependence Perspective. Harper&Row, New York.

  • Pyoria Pasi, (2005), “Information Technology, Human Relations and Knowledge Work Teams”, Team Performance Management, 39: 104-12

  • Raven, B.H., & Rietsema, J. (1957), “The Effects of varied Clarity of Group Goal and Group Path upon the Individual and His Relation to His Group,” Human Relation, 10: 29-44.

  • Ralston, D. A.(1989), “The Benefits of Flexitime: Real or Imagined”. Journal of Organizational Behaviour,10(4):369-73.

  • Ralston, D.A. & Flanagan, M.F. (1985), “The Effects of Flexitime on Absenteeism and Turnover for Male & Female Employees”, Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 26(2):206- 17.

  • Robertson, M.M. & Huang, Yueng-Hsiang (2006), “Effect of Workplace Design and Training Intervention on Individual Performance, Group Effectiveness and Collaboration: The Role of Environmental Control, Work: 27:3-12.

  • Robbins, S.P. (1993), Organization Behavior; Concepts, Controversies, and Applications (6th Ed.), New Jersey, Prentice Hall.

  • Seers, A., Petty, M.M. & Cashman, J.F. (1995), “Team-Member Exchange under Team and Traditional Management: A Naturally Occurring Quasi-Experiment”, Group & Organization Management, 20(1): 18-38.

  • Shanley, Mark & Langfred, Claus (1998), “The Importance of Organizational Context,II: An Empirical Test of Work Group Cohesiveness and Effectiveness in Two Governmental Bureaucracies”, PAQ, Winter.

  • Sims, H.P.,Szilagyi, A.D., Keller, R.T.(1976), “The Measurement of Job Characteristics”, Academy of Management Journal, 19:195- 212

  • Sinha, M.N. & Willbom, W.O. (1985), The Management of Quality Assurance, New York: John wiley & Sons.

  • Sundstrom, E., DeMeuse, K.P. & Futrell, D. (1990), “Work Teams: Applications and Effectiveness”. American Psychologist, 45: 120-33.

  • Steiner, I.D. (1972), Group Process and Productivity, New York: Academic Press.

  • Thomas, J., & Griffin, R.W. (1983), “The Social Information Processing Model of Task Design: A Review of the Literature”, Academy of Management Journal, 672-82

  • Turner, A.N., Lawrence, P. R. (1965), Industrial Jobs and the Worker, Boston, Harvard University Press

  • Van de Van, A.H., Ferry, D.L.(1980), Measuring and Assessing Organizations. Series on Organizational Assessment and Change, New York, Wiley

  • Vroom, V.H. (1964), Work and Motivation, New York: Wiley.

  • Wageman, R. (1995), “Interdependence and Group Effectiveness”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 145-80.

  • Wagner,J.A.(1994), “Participation’s Effects on Performance and Satisfaction: A Reconsideration of Research Evidence”, Academy of Management Review, 19:312-30.

  • Weick, K.E. & Roberts, K.H.(1993), “Collective Mind in Organizations: Heedful Interrelating on Flight Decks”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 3: 357-81.

  • Weisman, C.S., Gordon, D.L. & Cassard, S.D. (1993), “The Effects of Unit Self-management on Hospital Nurses’ Work Process, Work Satisfaction, and Retention”, Medical Care, 31(5): 381-93.

  • Yoo, Y. & Alavi, M, (2001), “Media and Group Cohesion: Relative Influence on Social Presence, Task Participation and Group Consensus”, MIS Quarterly, 25(3):371-90.


Abstract Views: 232

PDF Views: 0




  • Task Characteristics & Group Effectiveness in Indian Organizations

Abstract Views: 232  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Manjari Srivastava
NMIMS University, Mumbai, India
Arvind K. Sinha
Deptt. of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Intitute of Techonoly, Kanpur, India

Abstract


This study explores the relationship between certain task characteristics and group effectiveness variables. The task characteristic variables were autonomy, skill variety, task structure, task identity, problem demands in terms of time, task difficulty, work schedule, quality assurance, performance rating and task significance. Group effectiveness was conceptualized in terms of group cohesiveness, group goal accomplishment, group growth level and special recognition. Factor analysis and canonical correlations were sought to answer the research questions. Factor-analysis results revealed the underlying dimensions of the variables under study. Canonical correlations revealed that a positive significant relationship existed between the two sets of variables.

References