Cutthroat Cooperation: Asymmetrical Adaptation To Changes In Team Reward Structures

By Michael D. Johnson, J. Hollenbeck, Stephen E. Humphrey, Daniel R. Ilgen, Dustin K. Jundt, C. J. Meyer. 2006

254 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Safety Research, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/149d08c710a94f1bbc8cb608ee3ccf9fe44496c3

How researchers see this paper

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

In Safety Research

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Why individuals in larger teams perform worse (2012, background): “, rewarding group efforts), competitive reward structures (which emphasize individual achievements) decrease information sharing between group members (Johnson et al., 2006).”
Less need to be there: Cross-level effects of work practices that support work-life flexibility and enhance group processes and group-level OCB (2007, background): “For example, Johnson et al. (2006) demonstrated that it is much easier for groups to change from cooperative to competitive reward structures.”
From the Editors Publishing Laboratory Research in AMJ: A Question of When, Not If (2008, background): “For example, studies of individual and team performance have tracked a number of intervening mechanisms, including information search, information sharing, mental models, and transactive memory (Ellis, 2006; Johnson et al., 2006; Seijts et al., 2004).”
Challenging the Norm of Self-Interest: Minority Influence and Transitions to Helping Norms in Work Units (2012, background): “This contributes to the emergence of self-interested norms, which tend to be quite persistent (Johnson et al., 2006).”
The Bright Side of Being Prosocial at Work, and the Dark Side, Too: A Review and Agenda for Research on Other-Oriented Motives, Behavior, and Impact in Organizations (2016, background): “…& Lee, 2004), and that it is easier to shift from cooperation to competition than vice-versa—groups that start cooperative easily shift to friendly competition, whereas groups that begin competitive develop patterns of “cutthroat cooperation” that are far from prosocial (Johnson et al., 2006).”
Information sharing and team performance: a meta-analysis. (2009, unknown): “" (p. 619) Johnson et al. (2006) " The degree to which team members share information with each other.”
Beyond Team Types and Taxonomies: A Dimensional Scaling Conceptualization for Team Description (2012, background): “In addition, structural adaptation theory (Beersma et al., 2009; Johnson et al., 2006) also proposes that teams change their decisionmaking structure over time in reaction to failure, which again places one of the more common building blocks of team types into the role of a dependent variable.”
Unfolding the Proactive Process for Creativity (2012, background): “…1992; Cummings, 2004; Tiwana & McLean, 2005), with team performance as the major dependent variable of interest (e.g., Bunderson & Sutcliffe, 2002; Johnson et al., 2006; Keller, 2001; Mesmer-Magnus & DeChurch, 2009).2 Despite the fact that creative ideas are generated by individuals and that team…”
Team Microdynamics: Toward an Organizing Approach to Teamwork (2014, background): “Johnson et al. (2006) built off of the prior article by examining the effect of shifting team rewards on team cooperation and performance.”