This study examines if high- and low-performing project teams differ with respect to how they are mobilized and launched and the effects of their mobilization and launch activities and outputs on subsequent team progress and performance. Comparisons of three high- and three low-performing teams drawn from five major corporations showed that the high performers mobilized relatively quickly, used comprehensive rather than limited mobilization strategies, and conducted participatory rather than programmed launch meetings. This combination of activities produced a constellation of salutary outputs: more time for the teams to do their work, team members with essential task-related competencies and sufficient time to contribute to their projects, and complete rather than partial performance strategies. In turn, the three salutary outputs formed a constellation of key inner resources that propelled the high-performing teams on a virtuous path of reinforcing activities and outputs that, despite difficulties, ultimately led to success, whereas the absence of one or more of these resources led the low-performing teams down a vacuous path of accumulating confusion and inactivity from which they never recovered.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AnconaD. G.1990“Outward bound: Strategies for team survival in an organization.”Academy of Management Journal, 33: 334–365.
2.
AnconaD. G.OkhuysenG. A.PerlowL. A.2001“Taking time to integrate temporal research.”Academy of Management Review, 26: 512–529.
3.
ArrowH.McGrathJ. E.1993“Membership matters—How member change and continuity affect small group structure, process, and performance.”Small Group Research, 24: 334–361.
4.
BalesR. R.StrodtbeckF. L.1951“Phases in group problem solving.”Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 46: 485–495.
5.
BettenhausenK. L.MurnighanJ. K.1985“The emergence of norms in competitive decision making groups.”Administrative Science Quarterly, 30: 350–372.
6.
BrownS. L.EisenhardtK. M.1997“The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations.”Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 1–34.
7.
Cannon-BowersJ. L.TannenbaumS. I.SalasE.VolpeC. E.1995“Defining competencies and establishing team training requirements.” In GuzzoR. A., E. Salas, and Associates (eds.), Team Effectiveness and Decision Making: 333–380. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
8.
ChangA.BordiaP.DuckJ.2003“Punctuated equilibrium and linear progression: Toward a new understanding of group development.”Academy of Management Journal, 46: 106–117.
9.
ClarkK.WheelwrightS. C.1992“Organizing and leading ‘heavyweight’ development teams.”California Management Review, 34 (3): 9–28.
10.
CohenS. G.BaileyD. E.1997“What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite.”Journal of Management, 23: 239–290.
11.
EdmondsonA. C.1999“Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams.”Administrative Science Quarterly, 44: 350–383.
12.
EdmondsonA. C.BohmerR. M.PisanoG. P.2001“Disrupted routines: Team learning and new technology implementation in hospitals.”Administrative Science Quarterly, 46: 685–716.
13.
EisenhardtK. M.1989a“Building theories from case-study research.”Academy of Management Review, 14: 532–550.
14.
1989b“Making fast decisions in high velocity environments.”Academy of Management Journal, 32: 543–576.
15.
GersickC. J. G.1988“Time and transition in work teams: Toward a model of group development.”Academy of Management Journal, 31:9–41.
16.
1989“Marking time: Predictable transitions in task groups.”Academy of Management Journal, 32: 274–309.
17.
GersickC. J. G.Davis-SacksM. L.1990“Summary: Task forces.” In HackmanJ. R. (ed.), Groups That Work (and Those That Don't): Creating Teams for Effective Teamwork: 146–154. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
18.
GinnettR. C.1993“Crews as groups: Their formation and their leadership.” In WienerE. L.KankiB. G.HelmreichR. L. (eds.), Cockpit Resource Management: 71–98. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
19.
GladsteinD. G.1984“Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness.”Administrative Science Quarterly, 29:499–517.
20.
GoodmanP. S.LawrenceB. S.AnconaD. G.TushmanM. L.2001“Introduction to the special topic forum on time and organizational research.”Academy of Management Review, 26: 507–511.
21.
HackmanJ. R.1987“Design of work teams.” In LorschJ. W. (ed.), Handbook of Organizational Behavior: 315–342. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
22.
1990“Creating more effective work groups in organizations.” In HackmanJ. R. (ed.), Groups That Work (and Those That Don't): Creating Teams for Effective Teamwork: 479–504. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
23.
2002Leading Teams: Setting the Stage for Great Performances. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
24.
JehnK. A.MannixE. A.2001“The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance.”Academy of Management Journal, 44: 238–251.
25.
KellerR. T.2001“Cross-functional project groups in research and new product development: Diversity, communications, job stress and outcomes.”Academy of Management Journal, 44: 547–556.
26.
KesslerE. H.ChakrabartiA. K.1996“Innovation speed: A conceptual model of context, antecedents, and outcomes.”Academy of Management Review, 21: 1143–1191.
27.
KlimoskiR. J.ZukinL. B.1999“Selection and staffing for team effectiveness.” In SundstromE. and Associates (eds.), Supporting Work Team Effectiveness: 63–94. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
28.
KoslowskiS. W. J.GullyS. M.NasonE. R.SmithE. M.1999“Developing adaptive teams: A theory of compilation and performance across levels and time.” In IlgenD. R.PulakosE. D. (eds.), The Changing Nature of Work Performance: Implications for Staffing, Personnel Actions, and Development: 240–292. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
29.
LimS. G. S.MurnighanJ. K.1994“Phases, deadlines, and the bargaining process.”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 58: 153–171.
30.
LockeE. A.LathamG. P.1990A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
31.
MarksM. A.MathieuJ. E.ZaccaroS. J.2001“A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes.”Academy of Management Review, 26: 343–360.
32.
McGrathJ. E.1986“Studying groups at work: Ten critical needs for theory and practice.” In GoodmanP. S. (ed.), Designing Effective Work Groups: 362–392. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
33.
MilesM. B.HubermanM. A.1984Qualitative Data Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34.
OkhuysenG. A.WallerM. J.2002“Focusing on midpoint transitions: An analysis of boundary conditions.”Academy of Management Journal, 45: 1056–1065.
35.
SeersA.WoodruffS.1997“Temporal pacing in task forces: Group development or deadline pressure?”Journal of Management, 23: 169–187.
36.
SheremataW. A.2000“Centrifugal and centripetal forces in radical new product development under time pressure.”Academy of Management Review, 25: 389–408.
37.
SmithC.ComerD.1994“Self-organization in small groups: A study of group effectiveness with non-equilibrium conditions.”Human Relations, 47: 553–582.
38.
StevensM. J.CampionM. A.1994“The knowledge, skill, and ability requirements for teamwork: Implications for human resource management.”Journal of Management, 20: 503–530.
39.
StraussA. L.CorbinJ. M.1992Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
40.
TuckmanB. W.1965“Developmental sequences in small groups.”Psychological Bulletin, 63: 384–399.
41.
TuckmanB. W.JensenM.1977“Stages of small group development.”Group and Organizational Studies, 2: 419–427.
42.
Van de VenA. H.1992“Suggestions for studying strategy process: A research note.”Strategic Management Journal, 13: 169–191.
43.
VeronaG.1999“A resource based view of product development.”Academy of Management Review, 24: 132–142.
44.
WallerM. J.1999“The timing of adaptive group responses to non-routine events.”Academy of Management Journal, 42: 127–137.
45.
WallerM. J.ConteJ. M.GibsonC. B.CarpenterM. A.2001“The effect of individual perceptions of deadlines on team performance.”Academy of Management Review, 26: 586–600.
46.
WheelanS. A.1994Group Processes: A Developmental Perspective. Sydney: Allyn and Bacon.
47.
YinR. K.1994Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
