AN EXPLORATION OF MEMBER ROLES AS A MULTILEVEL LINKING MECHANISM FOR INDIVIDUAL TRAITS AND TEAM OUTCOMES

By G. Stewart, I. Fulmer, Murray R. Barrick. 2005

248 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Gender Studies, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/609037fcb24256060efe6536624f6a5cd512e728

How researchers see this paper

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

In Gender Studies

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

The dysfunctions of power in teams: A review and emergent conflict perspective (2017, background): “…properties, such as personality or values, can be compiled to the team level (Bliese, Chan, & Ployhart, 2007; Chan, 1998; Harrison & Klein, 2007; Stewart et al., 2005), those researching power at the team level of analysis have investigated different ways to conceptualize power at the team…”
Enhancing the Effectiveness of Work Groups and Teams (2006, background): “Stewart, Fulmer, and Barrick (2005) assessed both individual and team-level variables in 45 teams of executive MBAs; they argued that team-member roles provided a mechanism through which individual inputs affected team-level outcomes.”
The Effect of Conformist and Attentive-To-Detail Members on Team Innovation: Reconciling the Innovation Paradox (2011, background): “A drop in radical innovation was observed when attentive-to-detail members reached a certain proportion, one that presumably allowed them to influence team norms (Kanter, 1997; Stewart et al., 2005).”
Personality and teamwork behavior in context: The cross‐level moderating role of collective efficacy (2011, background): “32, 65–85 (2011) DOI: 10.1002/job inputs and task inputs, while Stewart et al. (2005) focused on social and task roles.”
The Team Personality–Team Performance Relationship Revisited: The Impact of Criterion Choice, Pattern of Workflow, and Method of Aggregation (2009, background): “As an empirical illustration, Stewart, Fulmer, and Barrick (2005) found that conscientious team members adopt a task-based role within the team, whereas agreeable team members adopted a social-based role.”
Social Loafing Tendencies and Team Performance: The Compensating Effect of Agreeableness and Conscientiousness (2014, background): “They help to maintain harmony and reduce within-group competition (Graziano, Hair, & Finch, 1997), have the necessary skill to work in teams, and are inclined to work cooperatively (Neuman & Wright, 1999; Stewart et al., 2005).”
Teams in extreme environments: Alterations in team development and teamwork (2017, background): “What are the key team member roles that are critical to effective team performance in extreme environments (relative to a normal task setting)? Are there certain “types” of people who fulfill specific roles more readily, such that they experience greater psychological adaptation, less conflict, and ”
The Bright and Dark Sides of Personality: Implications for Personnel Selection in Individual and Team Contexts (2007, background): “Conscientiousness Similar to research indicating that conscientiousness tends to be positively related to individual effectiveness (Barrick and Mount, 1991), there is research indicating that conscientiousness tends to be positively related to individual effectiveness in team contexts (e.g. Hough, 1”