In this paper it is suggested that it is time to take the agency of teams seriously. Whereas the debate has previously focused on how firms may function more effectively by using team-based work organization, our aim here is to discuss and understand how teams affect the evolutionary dynamic of companies. Fieldwork in four Danish manufacturing companies helped us discover that firms as ‘communities of teams’ are highly dynamic entities with complex layers of different team forms that operate, innovate and improve by constantly recombining, collaborating across organizational divisions and redistributing authority, thereby challenging some of the existing ‘idioms’ of team research and theories of the firm. Building on these findings, we rethink research on teams by re-describing the evolutionary dynamics of firms and call for new comparative research.
AndersenJ. G. (2003). Over-Danmark og under-Danmark. Ulighed, velfærdsstat og politisk medborgerskab. Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus Universitetsforlag.
2.
BaconN.BlytonP. (2000). High road and low road teamworking: Perceptions of management rationales and organizational and human resource outcomes. Human Relations, 53, 1425–1458.
3.
BarkerJ. R. (1993). Tightening the iron cage: Concertive control in self-managing teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 408–437.
4.
BechkyB. A. (2003). Sharing meaning across occupational communities: The transformation of understanding on production floor. Organization Science, 14, 312–330.
5.
BendersJ. (2006). Team working: A tale of partial participation. In HarleyB.HymanJ.ThompsonP. (Eds.), Participation and democracy at work. London and Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
6.
BendersJ.van BijsterveldM. (2000). Leaning on lean: The reception of a management fashion in Germany. New Technology, Work and Employment, 15, 50–64.
7.
BendersJ.van HootegemG. (1999). Team and their context: Moving the team discussion beyond existing dichotomies. Journal of Management Studies, 36, 609–628.
8.
BlackburnR.RosenB. (1993). Total quality and human resource management: Lessons learned from Baldridge award winning companies. Academy of Management Executive, 7(3), 49–66.
9.
BrownJ. S.DuguidP. (2001). Knowledge and organization: A social-practice perspective. Organization Science, 12, 198–213.
10.
BundersonJ. S.SutcliffeK. M. (2002). Comparing alternative conceptualizations of functional diversity in management teams: Process and performance effects. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 875–893.
11.
BurnsT.StalkerG. M. (1961). The management of innovation. London, UK: Tavistock.
12.
CarrollJ. S.HatakenakaS.RudolphJ. W. (2006). Naturalistic decision-making and organizational learning in nuclear power plants: Negotiating meaning between managers and problem investigation teams. Organization Studies, 27, 1037–1057.
13.
CaseyC. (1995). Work, self and society: After industrialism. London, UK: Routledge.
14.
ChesbroughH. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
15.
DaltonM. (1959). Men who manage. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
16.
DelbridgeR.LoweJ.OliverN. (2000). Shopfloor responsibilities under lean teamworking. Human Relations, 53, 1459–1479.
17.
Den HertogF.TolnerT. (1996). Groups and teams. International encyclopedia of business and management. London: Routledge.
18.
EliasN. (1974). Foreword – Towards a theory of communities. In BellC.NewbyH. (Eds.), The sociology of community. London, UK: Frank Cass.
19.
EliasN. (1978). What is sociology?London, UK: Hutchinson.
20.
EmirbayerM. (1997). ‘anifesto for a relational sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 103, 281–317.
21.
Eurofound (European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions) (2007) Fourth European Working Condition Survey, Dublin. Retrieved from: www.eurofound.europa.eu.
22.
FettermanD. M. (1989). Ethnography: Step by step. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
23.
FlyvbjergB. (2001). Making social science matter. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
24.
GaribaldoF.RebecchiE. (2004) Some reflections on the epistemological fundaments of an Italian action-research experience. AI &Society, 18, 44–67.
25.
GebertD.BoernerS.KearneyE. (2006). Cross-functionality and innovation in new product development teams: A dilemmatic structure and its consequences for the management of diversity. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15, 431–458.
26.
GuzzoR. A.DicksonM. W. (1996). Teams in organizations: Research on performance and effectiveness. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 307–338.
27.
HeckscherC.AdlerP. S. (Eds.) (2007). The firm as a collaborative community: Reconstructing trust in the knowledge economy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
28.
HerrigelG. (2010). Manufacturing possibilities: Creative action and industrial recomposition in the United States, Germany and Japan. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
29.
KahnR.WolfeD.QuinnR.SnoekJ. DRosenthalR. (1964). Organizational stress: Studies in role conflict and role ambiguity. New York: John Wiley.
30.
KanterR. M. (1979). Power failure in management circuits. Harvard Business Review, 57, 65–75.
31.
KellerR. T. (2001). Cross-functional project groups in research and new product development: Diversity, communication, job stress and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 547–555.
32.
KenneyM.FloridaR. (1993). Beyond mass production: The Japanese system and its transfer to the US. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
33.
KirkmanB. L.RosenB. (1999). Beyond self-management: Antecedents and consequences of team empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 58–74.
34.
KnightsD.McCabeD. (2000). Bewitched, bothered and bewildered: The meaning and experience of teamworking for employees in automobile company. Human Relations, 53, 1481–1517.
35.
KochC. (2004). The tyranny of projects: Teamworking, knowledge production and management in consulting engineering. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 25, 277–300.
36.
KochC.BuhlH. (2001). ERP-supported teamworking in Danish manufacturing?New Technology Work and Employment, 16, 164–177.
37.
KozlowskiS. W. J.IlgenD. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7/3, 77–124.
38.
KristensenP. H. (1986). Teknologiske projekter og organisatoriske processer: Strategier og strukturer under forandring i danske virksomheders drift mod fleksibel specialisering. Roskilde, Denmark: Forlaget for Samfundsøkonomi og Planlægning.
39.
KristensenP. H. (2003). Et grænseløst arbejde: En fantastisk fortælling om danske tillidsvalgtes arbejde, indflydelse og fremtid i multinationale datterselskaber. Copenhagen, Denmark: Nyt fra Samfundsvidenskaberne.
40.
KristensenP. H. (2011). Managing OHS: A route to a new negotiating order in high-performance work organizations?Safety Science, doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2011.02.00110.1016/j.ssci.2011.02.001
41.
KristensenP. H.LiljaK. (Eds.) (2011). Nordic capitalisms and globalization: New forms of economic organization and welfare institutions. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
42.
KristensenP. H.ZeitlinJ. (2005). Local players in global games :The strategic constitution of a multinational corporation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
43.
KuipersB. S.de WitteM. C. (2005). The control structure of team-based organizations: A diagnostic model for empowerment. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 26, 621–643.
44.
KundaG. (2006). Engineering culture: Control and commitment in a high-tech corporation. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
45.
LorenzE.ValeyreA. (2003). Organizational change in Europe: National models or the diffusion of a new ‘one best way’?Prepared for the 15th Annual Meeting on Socio-Economics, LEST, Aix-en-Provence, 26–28 June.
46.
LotzM. (2009). The business of co-creation – and the co-creation of business. PhD Series 15. Copenhagen Business School, Denmark.
47.
MacDuffieJ. P. (1995). Human resource bundles and manufacturing performance: Organizational logic and flexible production systems in the world auto industry. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 48, 197–221.
48.
MeadG. H. (1967 [1934]). Mind, self and society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
49.
MeyerJ. W.RowanB. (1991). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. In DiMaggioP. J.PowellW. W. (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
50.
MinssenH. (2006). Challenges of teamwork in production: Demands of communication. Organization Studies, 27, 103–124.
51.
MorganG.WhitleyR.MoenE. (2005). Changing capitalisms? Internationalization, institutional change and systems of economic organization. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
52.
MoweryD. C. (2009). Plus ca change: Industrial R&D in the ‘third industrial revolution’. Industrial and Corporate Change, 27, 1–50.
53.
MuellerF. (1994). Teams between hierarchy and commitment: Change strategies and the ‘internal environment’. Journal of Management Studies, 31, 383–403.
54.
MuellerF.PurcellJ. (1992). The Europeanization of manufacturing and the decentralization of bargaining: Multinational management strategies in the European automobile industry. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 3, 15–31.
55.
MuellerF.ProctorS.BuchananD. (2000). Teamworking in its context(s): Antecedents, nature and dimensions. Human Relations, 53, 1387–1424.
56.
NelsonR. R.WinterS. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
57.
PenroseE. T. (1980 [1959]). The theory of the growth of the firm. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
58.
PruijtH. (2002). Neo-Tayloristic and anti-Tayloristic models of team-working. Paper presented at the IAS World Congress of Sociology, Research Committee 26, 7–12 July 2002.
59.
SabelC. F. (2007). A real-time revolution in routines. In HeckscherC.AdlerP. S. (Eds.), The firm as a collaborative community: Reconstructing trust in the knowledge economy (pp. 106–156). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
60.
ScarbroughH.KinnieN. (2003). Barriers to the development of teamworking in UK firms. Industrial Relations Journal, 34, 135–149.
61.
SengeP. (1990). The fifth discipline. New York, NY: Doubleday.
62.
SewellG. (1998). The discipline of teams: The control of team-based industrial work through electronic and peer surveillance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 397–428.
63.
SinclairA. (1992). The tyranny of team ideology. Organization Studies, 13, 611–626.
64.
SissonK.MarginsonP. (2000). Coordinated bargaining: A process for our times?ESRC one Europe or several programme. Working Paper 14/00, University of Sussex European Institute.
65.
StarkD. (2009). Assets of ambiguity: Accounts of worth in economic life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
66.
SteijnB. (2001). Work systems, quality of working life and attitudes of workers: An empirical study towards the effects of team and non-teamwork. New Technology, Work and Employment, 16, 191–203.
67.
StewartG. L. (2006). A meta-analytical review of relationships between team design features and team performance. Journal of Management, 32, 29–55.
68.
StewartG. L.BarrickM. R. (2000). Team structure and performance: Assessing the mediating role of intra-team process and the moderating role of task types. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 135–148.
69.
StrangD.JungD. (2009). Participatory improvement at a global bank: The diffusion of quality teams and the demise of sis sigma initiative. Organization Studies, 30, 31–53.
70.
SundstromE.de MeuseK. P.FutrellD. (1990). Work team: Applications and effectiveness. American Psychologist, 45, 120–133.
71.
TownsendK. (2007). Who has control in teams without teamworking?Economic and Industrial Democracy28: 622–649.
72.
Uhl-BienM.GraenG. B. (1998). Individual self-management: Analysis of professionals’ self-managing activities in functional and cross-functional work teams. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 340–350.
73.
Undervisningsministeriet (2005). Det nationale kompetenceregnskab. Hovedrapport. Copenhagen, Denmark.
74.
VallasS. P. (2003). Why teamwork fails: Obstacles to workplace change in four manufacturing plants. American Sociological Review, 68, 223–250.
75.
Van HootegemG.BendersJ.DelarueA.ProcterS. (2005). Teamworking: looking back and forward. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16, 167–173.
76.
Van den BroekD.CallaghanG.ThompsonP. (2004). Teams without teamwork? Explaining the call centre paradox. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 25, 197–218.
77.
Van MaanenJ. (1988). Tales of the field. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
78.
WerginN. E. (2003). Teamwork in the automobile industry: An Anglo-German comparison. European Political Economy Review, 1/2, 152–190.
79.
WhitleyR. (1987). Taking firms seriously as economic actors: Towards a sociology of firm behavior. Organization Studies, 8, 125–147.
80.
WhitleyR. (1999). Divergent capitalisms: The social structuring and change of business systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
81.
WhitleyR.KristensenP. H. (Eds.) (1996). The changing European firm: Limits to convergence. London, UK: Routledge.
82.
WhitleyR.KristensenP. H. (Eds.) (1997). Governance at work: The social regulation of economic relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
83.
WomackJ.P.JonesD. T.RoosD. (1990). The machine that changed the world. New York, NY: Rawson Associates.
84.
WoywodeM. (2002). Global management concepts and local adaptations: Working groups in the French and German Car industry. Organization Studies, 23, 497–524.
85.
Yin RobertK. (2003). Case study research design and methods. London, UK: Sage Publications.
