The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Work Organization, Technology, and Performance in Customer Service and Sales
Abstract
The author analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of Total Quality Management and Self-Managed Teams, as compared to mass production approaches to service delivery, among customer service and sales workers in a large unionized regional Bell operating company. Participation in self-managed teams was associated with a statistically significant improvement in self-reported service quality and a 9.3% increase in sales per employee. When combined with new technology, teams boosted sales an additional 17.4%. These effects persisted over time. Total Quality Management, by contrast, did not affect performance. This study represents a “strong test” of the efficacy of teams because theory predicts weak outcomes for self-managed teams among service and sales employees in establishments where technology and organizational structure limit opportunities for self-regulation, the nature of work and technology do not require interdependence, and downsizing creates pervasive job insecurity—conditions found at the company studied here.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
What Makes Teams Work: Group Effectiveness Research from the Shop Floor to the Executive Suite
Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (1997) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639702300303 · Cited by 3,526
Trist, E. L., & Bamforth, K. W. (1951) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/001872675100400101 · Cited by 3,379
Cited by
Future work design research and practice: Towards an elaborated model of work design
Parker, S. K., Wall, T. D., & Cordery, J. L. (2001) · Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1348/096317901167460 · Cited by 617
Cameron, L. D., & Rahman, H. (2022) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2021.1557 · Cited by 269
(2007) · D-Scholarship@Pitt (University of Pittsburgh) · Cited by 141
Metadata
- Authors
- Batt, R.
- Venue
- ILR Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1999-07
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 539-564
- ISSN
- 0019-7939 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-271X
- OpenAlex
- W1981625388
- Cited by
- 380
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 25.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Work Organization, Technology, and Performance in Customer Service and Sales. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/001979399905200403
- The paper
- Batt, R. (1999). Work Organization, Technology, and Performance in Customer Service and Sales. ILR Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/001979399905200403
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.