Understanding Group Efficacy

195 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

A meta-analysis of team-efficacy, potency, and performance: interdependence and level of analysis as moderators of observed relationships. (2002, background): “Although we found that use of consensus ratings did not affect conclusions, researchers should continue to do work along the lines of Gibson et al. (2000) and Kirkman, Tesluk, and Rosen (2001).”
Group Potency and Collective Efficacy (2003, methodology): “Among others, leadership in groups may be one of the most important of the variables that need to be examined in future research (Gibson et al., 2000; Gully et al., 2002).”
The Relationship of Group Process Variables and Team Performance (2002, background): “Group potency relates to effectiveness across several tasks, whereas collective efficacy is task specific (Gibson et al., 2000; Guzzo et al., 1993).”
The Efficacy Advantage: Factors Related to the Formation of Group Efficacy1 (2003, background): “Empirical evidence that supports this was obtained in research conducted by Gibson, Randel, and Earley (2000).”
An Exploratory Study of Group Development and Team Learning (2015, methodology): “Group potency was measured with a scale of six items that was previously used by Sargent and Sue-Chan (2001); Gibson, Randel, and Earley (2000), and Van den Bossche et al.”