The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Metaphors and Meaning: An Intercultural Analysis of the Concept of Teamwork
Abstract
This paper develops a conceptual framework to explain different understandings of the concept of teamwork across national and organizational cultures. Five different metaphors for teamwork (military, sports, community, family, and associates) were derived from the language team members used during interviews in four different geographic locations of six multinational corporations. Results indicated that use of the teamwork metaphors varies across countries and organizations, after controlling for gender, team function, and total words in an interview. Analyses of specific relationships between national cultural values and categories of metaphor use and between dimensions of organizational culture and categories of metaphor use revealed patterns of expectations about team roles, scope, membership, and objectives that arise in different cultural contexts. We discuss the implications of this variance for future research on teams and the management of teams in multinational organizations.
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
Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams
Edmondson, A. (1999) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2666999 · Cited by 12,026
The self and social behavior in differing cultural contexts.
Triandis, H. C. (1989) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.96.3.506 · Cited by 5,019
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
Cited by
Taras, V., Kirkman, B. L., & Steel, P. (2010) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0018938 · Cited by 1,160
Gibson, C. B., & Gibbs, J. L. (2006) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2189/asqu.51.3.451 · Cited by 1,152
Self-citationEDITOR'S COMMENTS: CONSTRUCT CLARITY IN THEORIES OF MANAGEMENT AND ORGANIZATION.
Suddaby, R. (2010) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2010.51141319 · Cited by 984
Team Diversity and Information Use
Dahlin, K. B., Weingart, L. R., & Hinds, P. J. (2005) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2005.19573112 · Cited by 784
Knowledge connectivity: An agenda for innovation research in international business
Cano-Kollmann, M., Cantwell, J., Hannigan, T. J., Mudambi, R., & Song, J. (2016) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/jibs.2016.8 · Cited by 367
Gibson, C. B. (2017) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428116639133 · Cited by 262
Self-citationGibson, C. B., Huang, L., Kirkman, B. L., & Shapiro, D. L. (2014) · Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091240 · Cited by 163
Self-citationThe Impact of Cultural Value Diversity on Multicultural Team Performance☆
KIRKMAN, B., & SHAPIRO, D. (2005) · Advances in International Management · doi:10.1016/s0747-7929(05)18002-0 · Cited by 94
The effects of virtualness on teamwork behavioral components: The role of shared mental models
Schmidtke, J. M., & Cummings, A. (2017) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.12.011 · Cited by 61
Influence and Political Processes in Cyberspace: The Case of Global Virtual Teams
Elron, E., & Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2006) · International Journal of Cross Cultural Management · doi:10.1177/1470595806070636 · Cited by 45
Gibson, C. B., & McDaniel, D. M. (2010) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691610375560 · Cited by 43
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Gibson, C. B., & Zellmer-Bruhn, M. E.
- Venue
- Administrative Science Quarterly
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 2001-06
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 274-303
- ISSN
- 0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
- 1930-3815
- OpenAlex
- W1986323970
- Cited by
- 372
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 31.71
- 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.
