Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,102

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Effects of Group Longevity on Project Communication and Performance

Katz, Ralph·1982·Administrative Science Quarterly
DOI 10.2307/2392547
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In his research on engineering project teams, for example, Allen (1977) carefully demonstrated that only 11 percent of the sources of new ideas and information could be attributed to written media; the rest ocurred through interpersonal communications. This study investigated the communication behaviors and performances of 50 R&D project groups that varied in terms of group longevity, as measured by the average length of time project members had worked together. Analyses revealed that project groups became increasingly isolated from key information sources both within and outside their organizations with increasing stability in project membership. Such reductions in project communication were also shown to affect adversely the technical performance of project groups. Furthermore, variations in communication activities were more associated with the tenure composition of project groups than with the project tenures of individual engineers. These findings are presented and discussed in the more general terms of what happens in project groups with increasing group longevity.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/2392547

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Katz, R.
Venue
Administrative Science Quarterly
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1982-03
Volume
27
Issue
1
Pages
81
ISSN
0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2307/2392547
OpenAlex
W2088913158
Cited by
1,102
References
0
FWCI
9.56
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.