Collectivistic and Individualistic Values: Their Effects on Group Dynamics and Productivity in China

By Dean Tjosvold, K. Law, Haifa F. Sun. 2003

97 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/09f28109e0ed429aacfa1a66dd08977d8056e6f3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Modeling team knowledge sharing and team flexibility: The role of within-team competition (2014, methodology): “Within-team competition has the potential motivational power to encourage or discourage team members to share their knowledge (Hansen et al., 2005; Tjosvold et al., 2003a) and it represents a team environment that may affect knowledge sharing within the team (Zarraga and Bonache, 2003).”
Dimensionality of individualism–collectivism and measurement equivalence of Triandis and Gelfand’s scale (2007, methodology): “First, the work by Triandis and his colleagues has been well received and there is an increasing use of this measurement scale in the literature (Chirkov, Lynch, & Niwa, 2005; Kemmelmeier et al., 2003; Nelson & Shavitt, 2002; Ng & Van Dyne, 2001; Park, Rehg, & Lee, 2005; Tjosvold, Law, & Sun, 2003;”
An expectancy model of Chinese–American differences in conflict-avoiding (2006, background): “While there is evidence that Chinese can engage in constructive controversy (Tjosvold et al., 2003), it may not be productive if, as Bond and Hwang (1986) suggest, Chinese ‘make more conforming shifts publicly but actually change their private beliefs less than American[s]’ (p. 257).”
Abusive supervision climate: : A multiple-mediation model of its impact on group outcomes (2014, methodology): “Workgroup performance was assessed with a six-item measure from Tjosvold et al. (2003), adapted to have the members of the work unit as the referent for each item.”
Cronyism: a cross-cultural analysis (2006, background): “(p 53) Grouping diverse acts of malfeasance under the general rubric of corruption limits our analytic power.”