Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-fwgfc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T04:30:38.888Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 17 - The Behavioral “Glue” in OPM

A Review of Productive Behaviors of Project Team Members

from Part III - People

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 June 2017

By
Timo Braun
Edited by
Shankar Sankaran ,
Ralf Müller  and
Nathalie Drouin
Shankar Sankaran
Affiliation:
University of Technology, Sydney
Ralf Müller
Affiliation:
BI Norwegian Business School
Nathalie Drouin
Affiliation:
Université du Québec à Montréal
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Organizational Project Management , pp. 250 - 267
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adenfelt, M. (2010). Exploring the performance of transnational projects: Shared knowledge, coordination and communication. International Journal of Project Management, 28(6), 529–538, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.10.004.Google Scholar
Adenfelt, M. & Lagerström, K. (2006). Enabling knowledge creation and sharing in transnational projects. International Journal of Project Management, 24(3), 191–198, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.09.003.Google Scholar
Aibinu, A., Ofori, G., & Ling, F. (2008). Explaining cooperative behavior in building and civil engineering projects’ claims process: Interactive effects of outcome favorability and procedural fairness. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(9), 681–691, http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364.Google Scholar
Autry, C. W., Skinner, L. R., & Lamb, C. W. (2008). Interorganizational citizenship behaviors: An empirical study. Journal of Business Logistics, 29(2), 53–74, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2158-1592.2008.tb00087.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolden, R. (2011). Distributed leadership in organizations: A review of theory and research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(3), 251–269, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00306.x.Google Scholar
Bolino, M. C., Turnley, W. H., & Bloodgood, J. M. (2002). Citizenship behavior and the creation of social capital in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 27(4), 505–522, http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2002.7566023.Google Scholar
Borman, W. C. & Motowidlo, S. J. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. In Schmitt, N. & Borman, W. C. (Eds.), Personnel Selection in Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 71–98.Google Scholar
Bosch-Sijtsema, P. M. & Henriksson, L.-H. (2014). Managing projects with distributed and embedded knowledge through interactions. International Journal of Project Management, 32(8), 1432–1444, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.02.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, T. & Davies, A. (2004). Building project capabilities: From exploratory to exploitative learning. Organization Studies, 25(9), 1601–1621, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0170840604048002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braun, T., Ferreira, A. I., & Sydow, J. (2013). Citizenship behavior and effectiveness in temporary organizations. International Journal of Project Management, 31, 862–876, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.09.003.Google Scholar
Braun, T., Müller-Seitz, G., & Sydow, J. (2012). Project citizenship behavior? An explorative analysis at the project-network-nexus. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 24(4), 271–284, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2012.05.008.Google Scholar
Brief, A. P. & Motowidlo, S. J. (1986). Prosocial organizational behaviors. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 710–725, http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1986.4283909.Google Scholar
Chelariu, C., Johnston, W. J., & Young, L. (2002). Learning to improvise, improvising to learn: A process of responding to complex environments. Journal of Business Research, 55(2), 141–147, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00149-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiocchio, F., Kelloway, K., & Hobbs, B. (eds., 2015). The Psychology and Management of Project Teams: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ding, Z., Ng, F., & Li, J. (2014). A parallel multiple mediator model of knowledge sharing in architectural design project teams. International Journal of Project Management, 32(1), 54–65, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.04.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehrhart, M. G., Bliese, P. D., & Thomas, J. L. (2006). Unit-level OCB and unit effectiveness: Examining the incremental effect of helping behavior. Human Performance, 9(2), 159–173, http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1902_4.Google Scholar
Ekrot, B., Rank, J., & Gemünden, H. G. (2016). Antecedents of project managers’ voice behavior: The moderating effect of organization-based self-esteem and affective organizational commitment. International Journal of Project Management, 34(6), 1028–1042, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.10.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engwall, M. (2003). No project is an island: Linking projects to history and context. Research Policy, 32(5), 789–808, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00088-4.Google Scholar
Ferreira, A. I., Braun, T., & Sydow, J. (2013). Citizenship behavior in project-based organizing: Comparing German and Portuguese project managers. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(20), 3772–3793, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.777937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fong, P. (2008). Can we learn from our past? Managing knowledge within and across projects. In Becerra-Fernandez, I., & Leidner, D. (Eds.), Knowledge Management: An Evolutionary view, Vol. 12. Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe, 204–226.Google Scholar
Gallo, M. & Gardiner, P. D. (2007). Triggers for a flexible approach to project management within UK financial services. International Journal of Project Management, 25(5), 446–456, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2006.12.004.Google Scholar
George, J. M. & Jones, G. R. (1997). Organizational spontaneity in context. Human Performance, 10(2), 153–170, http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1002_6.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, D., Marchington, M., Rubery, J., & Willmott, H. (2005). Fragmenting work across organizational boundaries. In Marchington, M., Grimshaw, D., Rubery, J., & Willmott, H. (Eds.), Fragmenting Work Blurring Organizational Boundaries and Disordering Hierarchies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1–31.Google Scholar
Gross, U. (2014). Fighting the fire: Improvisational behavior during the production launch of new products. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 34(6), 722–749, http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-08-2012-0306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartmann, A. & Dorée, A. (2015). Learning between projects: More than sending messages in bottles. International Journal of Project Management, 33(2), 341–351, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.07.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, S. E., Chuang, C.-H., Harden, E. E., Jiang, Y., & Joseph, J. M. (2006). Toward developing human resource management systems for knowledge-intensive teamwork. In Joseph, J. M. (Ed.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, Vol. 25, Amsterdam: JAI, 27–70.Google Scholar
Jha, K. N. & Iyer, K. C. (2007). Commitment, coordination, competence and the iron triangle. International Journal of Project Management, 25 (5), 527–540, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2006.11.009.Google Scholar
Kissi, J., Dainty, A., & Tuuli, M. (2013). Examining the role of transformational leadership of portfolio managers in project performance. International Journal of Project Management, 31(4), 485–497, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.09.004.Google Scholar
Koskinen, K. U., Pihlanto, P., & Vanharanta, H. (2003). Tacit knowledge acquisition and sharing in a project work context. International Journal of Project Management, 21(4), 281–290, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(02)00030-3.Google Scholar
Leybourne, S. (2006). Improvisation within the project management of change: Some observations from UK financial services. Journal of Change Management, 6(4), 365–381, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14697010601081548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leybourne, S. & Sadler-Smith, E. (2006). The role of intuition and improvisation in project management. International Journal of Project Management, 24(6), 483–492, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2006.03.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loufrani-Fedida, S. & Missonier, S. (2015). The project manager cannot be a hero anymore! Understanding critical competencies in project-based organizations from a multilevel approach. International Journal of Project Management, 33(6), 1220–1235, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.02.010.Google Scholar
Lundin, R. A. (2011). Researchers of projects and temporary organizations – One happy family? [Editorial]. International Journal of Project Management, 29(4), 357–358, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.02.009.Google Scholar
Lundin, R. A. & Söderholm, A. (1995). A theory of the temporary organization. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 11(4), 437–455, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0956-5221(95)00036-U..Google Scholar
Magni, M., Maruping, L. M., Hoegl, M., & Proserpio, L. (2013). Managing the unexpected across space: Improvisation, dispersion, and performance in NPD teams. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(5), 1009–1026, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12043.Google Scholar
Magni, M., Proserpio, L., Hoegl, M., & Provera, B. (2009). The role of team behavioral integration and cohesion in shaping individual improvisation. Research Policy, 38(6), 1044–1053, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.03.004.Google Scholar
Melkonian, T. & Picq, T. (2010). Opening the “black box” of collective competence in extreme projects: Lessons from the French Special Forces. Project Management Journal, 41(3), 79–90, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pmj.20181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melkonian, T. & Picq, T. (2011). Building project capabilities in PBOs: Lessons from the French special forces. International Journal of Project Management, 29(4), 455–467, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.01.002.Google Scholar
Midler, C. (1995). “Projectification” of the firm: The Renault case. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 11(4), 363–375, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0956-5221(95)00035-T.Google Scholar
Moorman, C. & Miner, A. S. (1998). Organizational improvisation and organizational memory. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 698–723, http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1998.1255634.Google Scholar
Müller-Seitz, G. (2012). Leadership in interorganizational networks: A literature review and suggestions for future research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14(4), 428–443, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00324.x.Google Scholar
Müller, J. (2015). Formal and informal practices of knowledge sharing between project teams and enacted cultural characteristics. Project Management Journal, 46(1), 53–68, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pmj.21471.Google Scholar
Müller, R., Vaagaasar, A. L., Nikolova, N., Sankaran, S., & Drouin, N. (2015). The socio-cognitive space for linking horizontal and vertical leadership. APROS/EGOS Conference December 9–11, 2015, Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
Nesheim, T. & Hunskaar, H. M. (2015). When employees and external consultants work together on projects: Challenges of knowledge sharing. International Journal of Project Management, 33(7), 1417–1424, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.06.010.Google Scholar
Organ, D. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (2006). Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Its Nature, Antecedents, and Consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Park, J.-G. & Lee, J. (2014). Knowledge sharing in information systems development projects: Explicating the role of dependence and trust. International Journal of Project Management, 32(1), 153–165, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.02.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearce, C. L. & Herbik, P. A. (2004). Citizenship behavior at the team level of analysis: The effects of team leadership, team commitment, perceived team support, and team size. Journal of Social Psychology, 144(3), 293–310, http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/SOCP.144.3.293-310.Google Scholar
Pina e Cunha, M., Vieira da Cunha, J., & Kamoche, K. (1999). Organizational improvisation: What, when, how and why. International Journal of Management Reviews, 1(3), 299–341, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2370.00017.Google Scholar
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26(3), 513–563, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920630002600307.Google Scholar
Ruuska, I. & Teigland, R. (2009). Ensuring project success through collective competence and creative conflict in public–private partnerships – A case study of Bygga Villa, a Swedish triple helix e-government initiative. International Journal of Project Management, 27 (4), 323–334, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2008.02.007.Google Scholar
Ruuska, I. & Vartiainen, M. (2003). Critical project competences – A case study. Journal of Workplace Learning, 15(7/8), 307–312, http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13665620310504774.Google Scholar
Ruuska, I. & Vartiainen, M. (2005). Characteristics of knowledge sharing communities in project organizations. International Journal of Project Management, 23(5), 374–379, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.01.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sage, D., Dainty, A., & Brookes, N. (2014). A critical argument in favor of theoretical pluralism: Project failure and the many and varied limitations of project management. International Journal of Project Management, 32(4), 544–555, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.08.005.Google Scholar
Söderlund, J. (2008). Competence dynamics and learning processes in project-based firms: Shifting, adapting and leveraging. International Journal of Innovation Management, 12(1), 41–67, http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S1363919608001911.Google Scholar
Söderlund, J. (2011). Pluralism in project management: Navigating the crossroads of specialization and fragmentation. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(2), 153–176, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2010.00290.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Söderlund, J., & Tell, F. (2011). Strategy and capabilities in the P-form corporation: Linking strategic direction with organizational capabilities. In, Cattani, G., Ferriani, S., Frederiksen, L. & Täube, F. (Eds.), Project-Based Organizing and Strategic Management (Advances in Strategic Management, Vol. 28). Bingley: Emerald, 235–262.Google Scholar
Stevenson, D. H. & Starkweather, J. A. (2010). PM critical competency index: IT execs prefer soft skills. International Journal of Project Management, 28(7), 663–671.Google Scholar
Turner, J. R., & Müller, R. (2005). The project manager’s leadership style as a success factor on projects: A literature review. Project Management Journal, 36(2), 49–61, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.11.008.Google Scholar
Van Dyne, L., Graham, J. W., & Dienesch, R. M. (1994). Organizational citizenship behavior: Construct redefinition, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 37(4), 765–802, http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/256600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, S. & Noe, R. A. (2010). Knowledge sharing: A review and directions for future research. Human Resource Management Review, 20(2), 115–131, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2009.10.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, W.-T., & Ko, N.-Y. (2012). Knowledge sharing practices of project teams when encountering changes in project scope: A contingency approach. Journal of Information Science, 38(5), 423–441, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0165551512445240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiewiora, A., Murphy, G., Trigunarsyah, B., & Brown, K. (2014). Interactions between organizational culture, trustworthiness, and mechanisms for inter-project knowledge sharing. Project Management Journal, 45(2), 48–65, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pmj.21407.Google Scholar
Zhang, L., He, J., & Zhou, S. (2013). Sharing tacit knowledge for integrated project team flexibility: Case study of integrated project delivery. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 139(7), 795–804, http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000645.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×