The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Team Reflexivity and Innovation: The Moderating Role of Team Context
Abstract
Team reflexivity, the extent to which teams collectively reflect upon and adapt their working methods and functioning, has been shown to be an important predictor of team outcomes, notably innovation. As described in the current article, the authors developed and tested a team-level contingency model of team reflexivity, work demands, and innovation. They argue that highly reflexive teams will be more innovative than teams low in reflexivity when facing a demanding work environment. A field study of 98 primary health care teams in the United Kingdom corroborated their predictions: Team reflexivity was positively related to team innovation, and team reflexivity and work demands interacted such that high levels of both predicted higher levels of team innovation. Furthermore, an interaction between team reflexivity, quality of physical work environment (PWE), and team innovation showed that poor PWE coupled with high team reflexivity was associated with higher levels of team innovation. These results are discussed in the context of the need for team reflexivity and team innovation among teams at work facing high levels of work demands.
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
Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability.
Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420 · Cited by 24,532
Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations.
Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.7.4.422 · Cited by 11,335
Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.57.9.705 · Cited by 7,766 · cited 1×
“…domain (cf. Kahneman, 1973; Locke & Latham, 1990; Schippers, Den Hartog, Koopman, & van Knippenberg, 2008; Schippers et al., in press), prompting arousal and action such as innovation to reduce the discrepancies (e.g., Cyert & March, 1963; Locke, Cartledge, & Knerr, 1970; Locke & Latham, 2002).”
BackgroundEstimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias
James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1984) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.69.1.85 · Cited by 4,774
Equivalence of the Mediation, Confounding and Suppression Effect
MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. (2000) · Prevention Science · doi:10.1023/a:1026595011371 · Cited by 4,188
A Temporally Based Framework and Taxonomy of Team Processes
Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2001) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259182 · Cited by 3,659
Lepine, J. A., Podsakoff, N. P., & Lepine, M. A. (2005) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2005.18803921 · Cited by 2,438
Ely, R. J., & Thomas, D. A. (2001) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2667087 · Cited by 2,433
rwg: an assessment of within-group interrater agreement
James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1993) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.2.306 · Cited by 2,221 · cited 2×
“A value of .70 or above is suggested as “good” with respect to within-group interrater agreement (James et al., 1993) and “satisfactory” with respect to ICC(2) (Bliese, 2000).”
BackgroundOrganizational Behavior: Affect in the Workplace
Brief, A. P., & Weiss, H. M. (2002) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135156 · Cited by 1,797
The impact of interpersonal environment on burnout and organizational commitment
Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (1988) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.4030090402 · Cited by 1,597
The Contingency Model and the Dynamics of the Leadership Process
Fiedler, F. E. (1978) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60005-2 · Cited by 409
Leadership clarity and team innovation in health care
West, M. A., Borrill, C. S., Dawson, J. F., Brodbeck, F., Shapiro, D. A., & Haward, B. (2003) · The Leadership Quarterly · doi:10.1016/s1048-9843(03)00044-4 · Cited by 379
Self-citation
Cited by
Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206314527128 · Cited by 3,103
Impact of 12 h shift patterns in nursing: A scoping review
Harris, R., Sims, S., Parr, J., & Davies, N. (2015) · International Journal of Nursing Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2014.10.014 · Cited by 69
Metadata
- Authors
- Schippers, M. C., West, M. A., & Dawson, J. F.
- Venue
- Journal of Management
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-04-17
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 769-788
- ISSN
- 0149-2063 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-1211
- OpenAlex
- W2088675912
- Cited by
- 345
- References
- 13
- FWCI
- 11.72
- 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
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.
