博客栏目停服公告
因网站改版更新,从9月1日零时起美国中文网将不再保留博客栏目,请各位博主自行做好备份,由此带来的不便我们深感歉意,同时欢迎 广大网友入驻新平台!
美国中文网
2024.8.8
||
不止是闲言碎语:检验团队八卦的积极和消极效应
More than idle talk: Examining the effects of positive and negative team gossip
——原载美国《组织行为学杂志》2021年第42卷第5期——
<Journal of Organizational Behavior>, 2021. 42(5)
【摘要】传统上,八卦被认为是组织内一种有害的行为。然而,近年来出现了一种更加平衡的观点认为八卦也可以有重要的益处。本文提出揭露团队八卦潜在益处的一种方法是聚焦于八卦的效价(积极或消极的本质)。基于期望理论,本文提出团队八卦可以通过社会懈怠间接影响团队绩效,因为它在塑造团队情境中的奋斗信念——由团队八卦效价决定的效应中扮演着关键角色。本文假设积极的团队八卦降低了社会懈怠,而消极的团队八卦则增加了社会懈怠。反过来,本文期望通过社会懈怠,积极的团队八卦会对团队绩效产生一种积极的间接影响,而消极的团队八卦则会产生一种消极的间接影响。本研究在63个自我管理的团队样本中验证了这些预测。研究发现,对于积极的团队八卦,本研究的预测得到了支持,但关于消极的团队八卦没有得到支持。本研究的结果指出了八卦存在的潜在益处,并强调了为什么在组织中消除八卦可能会损害团队努力和绩效。
[Abstract] Gossip is a behavior that has been traditionally viewed as harmful in organizations. However, a more balanced perspective has emerged in recent years that suggests gossip can have important benefits. We propose that one way to uncover potential benefits of gossip in teams is to focus on the valence (positive or negative nature) of the gossip. Drawing on expectancy theory, we propose that team gossip indirectly influences team performance through social loafing because it plays a key role in shaping beliefs about effort in team contexts-effects determined by team gossip valence. We hypothesize that positive team gossip decreases social loafing, whereas negative team gossip increases it. In turn, we expect that through social loafing, positive team gossip has a positive indirect effect on team performance, whereas negative team gossip has a negative indirect effect. We test these predictions in a sample of 63 self-managing teams. We find support for our predictions regarding positive team gossip but not regarding negative team gossip. Our findings point to the potential benefits of gossip and highlight why efforts to abolish gossip inorganizations may impair team effort and performance.
论文原文:Trevor M. Spoelma,& Andrea L. Hetrick. (2021). More than idle talk: Examining the effects of positive and negative team gossip. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(5),604-618.
https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2522