臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

創新是推動人類歷史向前發展的一個重要因素，多元化的經濟形式、動態變化的商業環境、持續的競爭擴張，都給創新活動，更多的機會與更加寬廣的舞台。面臨只有創新才能使组織形成自己獨特的優势，許多企業紛紛採用了團隊這種富有彈性的工作單位，藉由團隊的力量來提昇創新效能，進而為組織帶來整體績效，並提昇競爭力。
本研究主要目的在探討團隊多元化、團隊交融記憶系統(transactive memory system , TMS)與團隊創新間的影響關係。本文將團隊多元化分為人口背景多元化(性別、年齡與種族)和任務相關多元化(教育、專業與年資)，並以團隊TMS作為自變數與干擾變數，以構建並驗證團隊多元化與團隊創新的關係。
研究者以公、民營企業與組織中之研發團隊作實證研究，為獲得較準確的資料，於發放問卷之前進行團隊的分析，並對團隊成員人數以3-9人為限。總計發出180個團隊，經篩選後，有效的團隊數為120個、708份問卷，其中包含120份團隊主管問卷以及588份團隊成員問卷，有效回收率為66.7%。針對問卷所蒐集的資料，依據研究目的及所建立之研究假設，採用統計資料分析進行驗證。
實證研究結果顯示，團隊人口背景多元化負向影響團隊創新，與研究假設相符合。團隊任務相關多元化負向影響團隊創新，與研究假設不相符合。團隊TMS正向影響團隊創新，與研究假設也相符合。顯示團隊多元化皆對創新產生負面影響。另外，在探討團隊TMS干擾團隊多元化對團隊創新的影響方面。研究結果證實，團隊人口背景多元化對團隊創新的負向影響，受團隊TMS的干擾而減弱的現象不顯著。但於團隊任務相關多元化對團隊創新的影響部份，團隊TMS的干擾發揮了強化功效，它不僅緩和了團隊任務相關多元化對團隊創新的負向影響，更證實了團隊TMS有助於高任務相關多元化達到提昇團隊創新的目標。換言之，高任務相關多元化的團隊若發展出高TMS，將有利於提昇團隊創新；反之，高任務相關多元化的團隊若處於低TMS的狀態，則反而會對團隊創新造成相當不利的影響。簡言之，「高任務相關多元化」的團隊受到TMS的權變影響，在高TMS時創新績效良好，而在低TMS時反而抑制了團隊的創新績效。基於上述，本研究的發現對未來探討團隊TMS的研究，提供了具體的參考價值。
最後於文末提出研究結論、管理意涵以及未來研究建議，希望透過本學術研究之結果，可提供企業主管對經營團隊運作與管理的參考。

Innovation is a key factor which propels industrial developments. In the modern world, the diversity in the economic forms, the dynamic business environment, and the continuous expansion of competitions provide a wider range of opportunities for fundamentally innovative activities. Facing a world today where innovation seems to be the only way for an organization to stand out among other organizations, many industries have instead adopted cross-functional teams which are more flexible by nature to maintain organizational competitiveness. The expectation is that through collaboration between team members, team innovations can be promoted, which in turn result in better performance and increased competitiveness for the organization.
This research focused on characterizing the relationships among team diversity, transactive memory system (TMS), and innovations. Two types of team diversities were investigated, including demographic diversity (such as gender, age, and race) and task-related diversity (such as education background, functional expertise, and year of service). TMS was investigated as an independent variable as well as a moderator in the characterization of the relationship between team diversity and team innovations.
Research questionnaires were provided to selected governmental and private research organizations. Analysis was performed before distributing the questionnaires to ensure better accuracy of results. In addition, number of team members was limited to 3-9 people. Questionnaires were distributed to 180 teams, and 120 of them were selected based on screening criteria. 708 questionnaires were distributed, 120 of which were distributed to supervisors/managers and 588 of which were distributed to team members. The valid return rate of questionnaires was about 66.7%. Statistical analyses were performed based on study goals and hypotheses.
The results suggest that demographic diversity was inversely related to team innovations, which supports the study hypothesis. However, task-related diversity was inversely correlated to team innovations, which does not support the study hypothesis. TMS was shown to be positively correlated to team innovations, which is consistent with study hypothesis. The results suggest that both types of team diversities had negative impacts on team innovations. In addition, the results suggest that team TMS was not a significant moderator for balancing the negative impact of demographic diversity on team innovations. Nevertheless, team TMS was a significant moderator for reinforcing the relationship between task-related diversity and team innovations. Team TMS alleviated the negative impact of task-related diversity on team innovations, which validates the fact that team TMS is useful for team innovations with high task-related diversity.
In other words, team innovations are promoted if a team with high task-related diversity develops a high level of TMS. On the other hand, team innovations are suppressed significantly if a team with high task-related diversity that only maintains a low level of TMS. In summary, team innovations are promoted with high TMS but suppressed with low TMS. Based on the above-mentioned statements, the findings from this study are valuable for future research on team TMS.
Research conclusions, managerial implications, and directions of future research are provided at the end. This study may serve as a useful reference for managers when managing team operations.

目 錄 頁數

中文摘要 Ⅰ
英文摘要 Ⅱ
誌謝辭 Ⅳ
目錄 Ⅴ
表目錄 Ⅶ
圖目錄 Ⅷ
第壹章 緒論 01
第一節 研究背景與動機 01
第二節 研究目的 02
第貳章 文獻探討 03
第一節 團隊的定義與特性 03
第二節 團隊多元化 05
第三節 團隊創新 09
第四節 團隊多元化與創新關係 13
第五節 團隊交融記憶系統 16
第六節 團隊交融記憶系統與創新間關係 19
第七節 團隊多元化、交融記憶系統與創新間關係 21
第參章 研究架構與研究方法 24
第一節 研究架構與假設 24
第二節 研究對象與抽樣方法 25
第三節 變數操作型定義與衡量 25
第四節 控制變項 27
第五節 資料分析 27
第肆章 研究結果 29
第一節 研究構面的敘述性統計 29
第二節 研究變數之因素分析 33
第三節 迴歸分析 39
第四節 研究假設結果彙整 42
第伍章 結論與建議 44
第一節 結論 44
第二節 管理意涵 46
第三節 研究限制 48
第四節 未來研究的建議 49

參考文獻 51
附錄一 團隊多元化對團隊創新之影響問卷(團隊成員) 61
附錄二 團隊多元化對團隊創新之影響問卷(團隊主管) 63
表目錄 頁數
表2-1 團隊定義與特性 04
表2-2 團隊多元化分類 06
表2-3 團隊多元化程度矩陣 08
表2-4 創新的定義 10
表2-5 團隊多元化影響團隊創新之研究整理 13
表4-1 團隊問卷回收狀況統計表 29
表4-2 團隊產業類別分析統計表 30
表4-3 團隊成員性別統計表 30
表4-4 團隊成員年齡分佈統計表 31
表4-5 團隊成員婚姻狀況分析統計表 31
表4-6 團隊成員教育程度分析統計表 32
表4-7 團隊成員省籍類別分析統計表 32
表4-8 團隊人數和年資分析統計表 33
表4-9 知覺多元化量表之驗證性因素分析結果 34
表4-10 團隊TMS量表之驗證性因素分析結果 36
表4-11 團隊創新量表之驗證性因素分析結果 37
表4-12 各變項之敘述統計表 38
表4-13 各變數相關分析表 38
表4-14 團隊人口背景多元化對團隊創新影響之迴歸分析 39
表4-15 團隊任務相關多元化對團隊創新影響之迴歸分析 39
表4-16 團隊TMS對團隊創新影響之迴歸分析 40
表4-17 團隊TMS干擾人口背景多元化對團隊創新影響之迴歸分析 41
表4-18 團隊TMS干擾任務相關多元化對團隊創新影響之迴歸分析 41
表4-19 研究假設驗證彙整表 43

圖目錄 頁數

圖3-1：本研究架構 24
圖4-1：團隊TMS與任務相關多元化二階交互作用圖 42

中文部分
王士軍，2006年8月， 「淺析團隊創新」，西華大學學報(哲學社會科學版)，第4期，頁89-91。
司徒達賢、賴士葆、洪鉛財，1994年，「技術取得策略影響因素分析」，經濟部技術處：產業科技研究發展管理論文集，第四冊, 5月,頁1-22。
李弘暉、鐘麗英，1999年，「團隊運作過程對團隊績效影響之研究」，人力資源學報，第11卷，第11期，頁1- 29。
沈其泰、黃敏萍、鄭伯壎，2004年，「團隊共享心智模式與知識分享行為：成員性格特質與性格相似性的調節效果」，管理學報，第21卷，第5期，頁553-570。
林鉦棽、彭台光，2006年，「多層次管理研究：分析層次的概念、理論和方法」，管理學報，第23卷，第6期，頁649-675。
洪贊凱、卓明德、毛科登，2011年，「目標互賴性、團隊TMS對專案績效影響之研究」，管理與系統。
張志學，Pau I S H em pel，韓玉蘭，邱靜，2006年「高技術工作團隊的交互記憶系統及其效果」，心理學報，第38卷，第2期，頁271 -280。
陳文章 (2001)。企業技術創新績效影響因素之研究，長榮管理學院經營管理研究所碩士論文，台南。
張鋼、熊立，2008年5月，「交互記憶系統與團隊任務、成員異質性、團隊績效關係的實證研究」，技術經濟，第27卷，第5期，頁26-33。
張鋼、熊立，2009年1月，「成員異質性與團隊績效：以交互記憶系統為中介變量」，科研管理，第30卷，第1期，頁71-80。
黃家齊，2003年，「多元化與知識分享及創新-社會資本之中介效果」，管理與系統，第4卷，第10期，頁471-498。
黃家齊、蔡達人，2003年，「團隊多元化與知識分享、知識創造及創新績效」，臺大管理論叢，第13期，第2卷，頁233-280。
黃家齊、黃荷婷，2006年，「成員目標導向對於自我與集體效能及創新之影響一個多層次的研究」，管理學報，第20卷，第3期，頁327-346。

黃家齊、許雅婷，2006年，「團隊人格特質對知識分享及創新績效之影響-個人與團隊層次的分析」，管理學報，第23卷，第2期，頁149-170.
Drucker, P., 1985年，創新與創業精神，譯者：蕭富峯、李田樹，台北：長河。
Gary Dessler., 2007年，現代人力資源管理(十版)，譯者：王世榮，台北：華泰文化。
Hunter, J. C., 2004，忠僕，譯者：張亞非，北京，機械工業出版社。
Robbins, S. P., 2006年，組織行為學 (十一版)，譯者：李青芬、李雅婷、趙募芬，台北：華泰文化。
英文部分
Aiken, L. S. & West, S. G., (1991). Multiple Regression: Testing and interpreting interactions, California: Sage.
Akgun, A. E., Byrne, J. C., Keskin, H., & Lynn, G. S. (2006). Transactive Memory System in New Product Development Teams. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 53(1), 95-111.
Akgun, A. E., Byrne, J., Keskin, H., Lynn, G. S., & Imamoglu, S. Z. (2005). Knowledge networks in new product development projects: A transactive memory perspective. Information and Management, 42(8), 1105-1120.
Allen, N. J., Stanley, D. J., Williams, H. M., & Ross, J. S. (2007). Assessing the impact of nonresponse on work group diversity effects. Organizational Research Method, 10(2), 262-286.
Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work environment for creativity, Academy of Management Journal. 39(5), 1154-1184.
Anderson, N. R., & West M. A. (1998). Measuring climate for work group innovation: development and validation of the team climate inventory. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(3), 235-258.
Austin, J. R.(2003). Transactive memory in organizational groups: The effects of content, consensus, specialization, and accuracy on group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5) , 866 – 878
Bantel, K. A., & Jackson, S. E. (1989).Top management and innovations in banking: Does the composition of the top team make a difference? Strategic Management Journal, 10, 107-124.
Bantel, K. A. (1994). Strategic planning openness: The role of top team demography. Group and Organization Management, 19(4), 406-424.
Blau, P. M. (1977) Inequity and heterogeneity, New York: Free Press.
Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, & reliability: Implications for data aggregation & analysis. In K.J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research & methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions & new directions, 349-381, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Borrill, C., West, M., Shapiro, D., & Rees, A. (2000). Team working and effectiveness in health care. British Journal of Health Care Management, 6(8), 364-371.
Bowers, C. A., Pharmer J. A., & Salas, E.(2000). Whenmember homogeneity is needed in work teams: Ameta-analysis. Small Group Research, 31(3), 305-327.
Brewer, M. B., & Kramer, R. M. (1986). Choice behavior in social dilemmas: Effects of social identity, group size, and decision framing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 543-549.
Brown, W. B., & Karagozoglu, N.(1989). A systems model of technological innovation. IEEE Transaction on Engineering Management, 36(1), 5-16.
Chan, D. (1998). Functional relations among constructs in the same content domain at different level of analysis：A typology of composition models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2), 234-246.
Chen, G., Liu, C., & Tjosvold, D. (2005). Conflict management for effective TMT and innovation in China. Journal of Management Studies, 42(2), 277-300.
Cohen, S. G., & Ledford, G. E.(1994). The effectiveness of self-managing teams: A quasi- experiment. Human Relations, 47(1), 13-43.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/ correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd Ed.), Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cho, M. T., & Yen, G. F. (2010). Reexaming the black box: An Analysis of team diversity, conflict, and innovation in a Chinese context, paper presented in The Conference of Business and Information, Kyushu, Japan.
Dahlin, K. B., Weingart, L, R., & Hinds, P. J.(2005). Team diversity and information use. Academy of Management Journal, 48(6), 1107-1123.
De Dreu, C. K.W., & West, M. A. (2001).Minority dissent and team innovation: The importance of participation in decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 1191-1201.
Dunbar, K. (1997). How scientists think: Online creativity and conceptual change in science, In T. B. Ward, S. M. Smith, and S. Vaid (Eds.).Conceptual structures and processes: Emergence, discovery and Change, APA Press. Washington DC.
Faber, J., Hesen, A. B. (2004). Innovation capabilities of europeannations: Cross 2 national analyses of patents and sales of product innovations. Research Policy,(33), 193-207.
Faraj, S. & Lee, S. (2000).Coordinating expertise in software development teams. Management Science, 46(12), 1554-1569.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981).Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable and Measurement Error: A Comment. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 39-50.
Frambach, R. T., & Schillewaert, N. (2002). Organizational innovation adoption: A multi- level framework of determinants and opportunities for future research. Journal of Business Research, 163-176.
George, J. (1990). Personality, affect and behavior in groups. Journal of Applied Psychology , 75(2), 107-116.
Hackman, J. R. (1990).Groups That Work (and Those That Don’t), San Francisco, Jossey-Bass
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R., & Black, W. C.(1998). Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings, London: Prentice Hall
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R., & Black, W. C. (2006). Multivariate data analysis with readings (6th ed.), New Jersey: Merrill.
Hambrick, D. C., Cho, T., and Chen, M., (1996). The influence of top management team heterogeneity on firms competitive moves[J]..Administrative Science Quarterly, 1996, 41 pp. 659-684
Hamel G. & Prahalad. C.K., (1994). Competing for the Future. Harvard Business Review, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Harrington-MacKin., & Deborah.(1993) The Team Building Tool Kit:Tips, Tactics and Rules for Effective Workplace Teams , AMACOM, Paperback, 177.
Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., Gavin, J. H., & Florey, A. T. (2002). Time, teams, and task performance: Changing effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on group functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 45(5), 1029-1045.
Hayes, N.(1997). Successful team management, London, UK: Thomson Business Press.
Henry, R. A. (1995). Improving group judgement accuracy:Information sharing and determing the best member. Organizational Behavior d Human Decision Processes, 62, 190-197.
Hinsz, V. B., Tindale, R. S., & Vollrath, D. A. (1997).The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors. Psychological Bulletin, 121(1), 43-64.
Hobman, E. V., Bordia, P., & Gallois, C. (2003). Consequences of feeling dissimilar from others in a work team. Journal of Business and Psychology, 17(3), 301-325.
Hobman, E. V., Bordia, P., & Gallois, C. (2004). Perceived dissimilarity and work group involvement: The moderating effects of group openness to diversity. Group & Organization Management, 29(5), 560-587.
Hoegl, M., & Gemuenden, H. G. (2001). Teamwork quality and the success of innovative projects: A theoretical concept and empirical. Evidence.Organization science,12(4), 435-449.
Hollingshead, A. B. (1998). Communication, learning, and retrieval in transactive memory systems. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34(5), 423-442.
Hollingshead, A. B. (2001). Cognitive interdependence and convergent expectations in transactive memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(6), 1080-1089.
Horwitz, S. K., & Horwitz, I. B. (2007). The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: A meta-analytic review of team demography. Journal of Management, 33(6), 987-1015.
Hosmer, L. T. (1995).Trust: The connecting link between organizational theory and philosophical ethics. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 379-403
Hurley, R., & Hult, T. (1998). Innovation, market orientation and organizational learning an integration and empirical examination. Journal of Marketing, 62(July), 42-54.
Isaksen, S. G., Lauer, K. J., & Ekvall, G. (2001). Perceptions of the best and worst climates for creativity: Preliminary validation evidence for the situational outlook questionnaire. Creativity Research Journal, 13(2), 171-184.
Jackson, S. E., May, K.E., & Whitney, K.,(1995). Understanding the dynamics of diversity in decision-making teams In R. Guzzo and F. Salas(Eds.) Team effectiveness and desion-making in organizations, 204-261, SanFrancisco:Jossey-Pass.
Jackson, S. E., & A. Joshi. (2004) Diversity in social context: A multi-attribute, multilevel analysis of team diversity and sales performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(6), 675-703.
Jackson, S. E., Brett, J. F., Sessa, V. I., Cooper, D. M., Julin, J. A., & Peyronni, K. (1991). Some differences make a difference: Individual dissimilarity and group heterogeneity as correlates of recruitment, promotions, and turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(5), 675-689.
Jackson, S. E., Stone, V., & Alvarez, E. (1993). Socialization amidst diversity: Impact of demographics on work team oldtimers and newcomers. Research in Organizational behavior, 15, 45-109.
James, L. R. (1982).Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(2), 219-229.
Jehn, K. A., & Mannix, E. A. (2001).The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intergroup conflict and group performance. Academic of Management Journal, 44(2), 238-251.
Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(4), 741-763.
Jehn, K. A., & Shah, P. P. (1997).Informal relatiouships and task performance; an examination of mediating processes in friendship and acquaintance groups. Jounal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72 (4), 775-790.
Jehn, K. A., & Bezrukova, K. (2004). A field study of group diversity:Work group context and performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(6), 703-729.
Jessup, H. R. (1992). The road to results for teams. Training and Development Journal, 46(9), 65-68.
Joshi, A., & Roh, H. (2009). The role of context in work team diversity research: A meta- analytic review. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3), 599-627.
Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith. D. K. (1993), The wisdom of teams, Cambridg, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Kearney, E., Gebert, D., & Voelpel, S. C. (2009). When and how diversity benefits teams: The importance of team members’ need for cognition. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3), 581-598.
Keller, R. T. (1986). Predictors of the Performance of Project Groups in R&D Organizations. Academy of management journal, 29(4), 715-726.
Knight, D., Pearce, C. L., Smith, K. G., Olian, J. D., Sims, H.P., Smith, K. A., & Flood, P. ( 1999).Top management team diversity, group process, and strategic consensus. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 445-465.
Kurtzberg, T. R., & Amabile T. M. (2001). From Guilford to creative synergy: Opening the black box of team-level creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 13(3), 285-294.
Kutner, M. H., Nachtsheim, C. J., Neter, J., & Li, w. (2005). Applied linear statistical models (5nd ed.). Columbus, OH: McGraw - Hill.
Lewis, K.(2003). Measuring Transactive Memory Systems in the Field: Scale Development and Validation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 587-604.
Lewis, K. (2004).Knowledge and performance in knowledge-worker teams: A longitudinal study of transactive memory systems. Management Science, 50(11), 1519-1533.
Liang, D. W., Moreland, R., & Argote, L. (1995). Group versus individual training and group performance: The mediating factor of transactive memory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(4) , 384-393.
Littlepage, G. E., Robisonn, W., & Reddington, K. (1997). Effects of task experience and group experience on group performance, member ability and recognition of expertise. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69, 133-147.
Lovelace, K., Shapiro, D. L., & Weingart, L. R. (2001). Maximizing cross-functional new product teams' innovativeness and constraint adherence: A conflict communication sperspective. Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 779-793.
McGrath, J. E., Berdahl, J. L., & Arrow, H. (1995).Traits, expectations, culture, and cout: The dynamics of diversity in work groups. In S. E. Jackson and M. N. Ruderman (eds.), Diversity in Work Team, 17-45, Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
Milliken, F. J., & Martins, L. L. (1996). Searching for common threads: Understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 21, 402-432.
Miller, C. C., Burke, L. M., & Glick, W. H. (1998). Cognitive diversity among upper-echelon executives: Implications for strategic decision processes. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 39-58.
Mohammed S., & Angell, L. C. (2004).Surface- and deep-level diversity in workgroups: Examining the moderating effects of team orientation and team process on relationship conflict. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(8), 1015-1039.
Mohammed, S., & Dumville, B. C. (2001).Team mental models in a team knowledge framework: Expanding theory and measurement across disciplinary boundaries. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(2), 89-106.
Mohrman, S. A., Cohen, S. G., & Mohrman, A. M. Jr. (1995). Designing team-based organizations: New forms for knowledge work , San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Moreland, R. L. (1999). Transactive memory: Learning who knows what in work groups and organizations,” In L. Thompson, D. Messick and J. Levine (eds.), Sharing knowledge in organizations, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaurn, 3-31.
Moreland, R. L., and Myaskovsky, L. (2000).Exploring the performance benefits of group training: Transactive memory or improved communication? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 117-133.
Nohria, N., & Gulati, R. (1995). What is the optimum amount of organizational slack? A study of the relationship between slack and innovation in multinational firms. Academy of Management Journal, 32-38.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory, 2nd Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill.
OECD (1992). Proposed guidelines for collecting and interpreting technological innovation. data2, Oslo Manual, Paris.
O'Reilly, C. A., Snyder, R., & Boothe, J.(1993). Effects of executive team demography on organizational change. In G. Huber and W. Glick (eds.), Organizational Change and Redesign, 147-175, New York: Oxford University Press.
O.Reilly, C. A., Caldwell, D. F. & Barnett, W. P. (1989).Work group demography, social integration, and turnover. Ad2 ministrative ScienceQuarterly, 34, 21-37.
Orpen, C. (1984). Attitude similarity, attraction, and decision-making in the employment interview. Journal of Psychology, 117, 111-120.
Orlitzky, M., & Benjamin, J. D. (2003). The effects of sex composition on small group performance in a business school competition. Academy of Management Learning and Performance, 2(2), 128-138.
Ostroff, C., & Schmitt, N. (1993) Configuration of organizational effectiveness and efficiency. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1345-1361.
Pappas, R.A., & Remer, D. S. (1985). Measuring R&D productivity. Research Management,. 28(3), 15-20.
Parthasarthy, R., & Hammond, J. (2002). Product innovation input and outcome:moderating moderating effects of the innovation process. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 19, 75-91.
Pelled, L. H., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Xin, K. R. (1999). Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict, and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, . 44(1), 1-28.
Peters, T. J. (1988). Thriving on chaos, New York: Knopf, R. Perloff (eds.), Psychology and Work, Washington DC: American psychological association, 89-136.
Pinto, J. K., & Prescott, J. E. (1990). Planning and tactical factors in the project implementation process. Journal of Management Studies, 27(3), 51-54.
Porter, M. E.(1990). The competitive advantage of nations, The Free Press, New York.
Quick, T. L. (1992). Successful team building. NY: American Management Association.
Randel, A. E. (2002). Identity salience: A moderator of the relationship between groupgender composition and work group conflict. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 749-766.
Riordan, C., & Weatherly, E. (1999). Defining and measuring employees’ identification with their work groups. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59(2), 310-324.
Salas, E. (1992). Toward an understanding of team performance and training. in R.W. Swezey and E. Salas (eds.), Team: Their training and performance, 3-29. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Sharma, M. & Ghosh, A. ( 2007). Does team size matter? A study of the impact of team size on the transactive memory system and performance of it sector teams. South Asian, Journal of Management, 14(4), 96-115.
Shenhar, A. J., & Dvir, D. (1996). Toward a typological theory of project management. Research Policy, 25(4), 607-632.
Shonk, J. H. (1982) Working in teams: A practical manual for improving work, New York: Amacom.
Simons, T., and Pelled, L. H., & Smith, K. A. (1999). Making use of difference: Diversity, debate, and decision comprehensiveness in top management teams. Academy of Management Journal, 42(6), 662-673.
Somech, A. (2006). The effects of leadership style and team process on performance and innovation in functionally heterogeneous terms. Journal of Management, 32(1), 132-157.
Stasser, G., Stewart, D. D., & Wittenbaum, G. M. (1995). Expert roles and information exchange during discussion: The importance of knowing who knows what, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 244-265.
Strauss, J. P., Barrick, M. R., & Connerley, M. L. (2001).An investigation of personality similarity effects (relational and perceived) on peer and supervisor ratings and the role of familiarity and liking. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 637-657.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986).The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations, 7-24, Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
Teachman, J. D. (1980). Analysis of population diversity. Sociological Methods & Research, 8, 341-362.
Tidd, Bessant, & Pavitt (1997), Managing innovation: Integrating technological, market, and organizational change. Chi Chester, West Sussex, England, John Willey, Now York.
Tornatsky, L. G. (1986).Technological change and the structure of work. In M. S.Pallsk and R. Perloff (eds.), Psychology and Work, Washington DC: American Psychological Association, 89-136.
Tompkins, J.A. (1995). The Genesis Enterprise Creating peak-to-peak Performance. USA.37.
Triandis, H., Kurowski, L., & Gelfand, M. (1994). Workplace diversity, In H. Triandis, M. Dunnette and L. Hough (eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, 4, 769-827. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press.
Tsui, A. S., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1989). Beyond simple demographic effects: the importance of relational demography in superior subordinate dyads. Academy of Management Journal, 32(2), 402-423.
Turban, D. B., & Jones, A. P. (1988). Supervisor-subordinate similarity: Types, effects, and mechanism. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(2), 228-234.
Turner, J. C., (1975) Social comparison and social identity: Some prospects for intergroup behaviour, European Journal of Social Psychology, 5(1), 5-34.
Turner, J. C. (1987). A self-categorization theory. In M. Hogg, P. Oakes, S. Reicher, and M. S.
Wetherell (eds.), Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory, 42-67. Oxford: Blackwell.
Tziner, A., & Eden, D. (1985).Effects of crew composition on crew performance: Does the whole equal the sum of its parts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 85-93.
Tushman, M., & Nadler, D. (1986). Organizing for Innovation. California Management Review, Berkeley, 28(3), 74-92.
Van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Homan, A. C. (2004). Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 1008-1022.
Wanger, G. W., Pfeffer, J., & O’Reilly, C. A.(1984). Organizational Demography and Turnover in Top Management Groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 74-92.
Webber, S. S., & Donahue, L. M. (2001). Impact of highly and less job-related diversity on work cohesionandper 2 formance: Ameta-analysis. Journal of Management, 7(2), 141-162.
Wegner, D. M. (1987). Transactive Memory: A Contemporary Analysis of the Group Mind,” In Mullen, B., & Goethals, G. R., (eds.), Theories of Group Behavior, New York: Springer, 185-208.
Wegner, D. M. (1995). A Computer Network Model of Human Transactive Memory. Social Cognition, 13(3), 319-339.
West, M. A. (2002). Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds：An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation within groups. Applied Psychology：An International Review, 51(3), 355-386.
West, M. A., & Hirst, G. (2003). Cooperation and teamwork for innovation. in M. A. West, D. Tjosvold & K. G. Smith (eds.). International handbook of organizational teamwork and cooperative working. Chi Chester, John Wiley, 297-319.
Williams, K. Y.,& O'Reilly., C. A., (1998). Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. In B. M. Staw and L. L. Cummings (eds.), Research in organizational behavior, 20, 77-140. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Wittenbaum, G., & Stasser, G. (1996). Management of information in small group. In J. Nye and M. Brower (eds.), What’s Social About Social Cognition? Social Cognition Research in Small Groups, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2-28.
Wood, W. (1987). Meta-analytic review of sex differences in group performance. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 53-71.
Yoo, Y., & Kanawattanachai, P. (2001). Developments of transactive memory systems and collective mind in virtual teams. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9(2), 187-208.