摘要
新创企业已经成为经济发展的引擎，而新创企业如何实现发展已经成为创业者面临的主要议题。凡是希望在新世纪不断永续经营的企业，人力资本便是最重要的资源。然而在经历多年的企业组织扁平化，人员素质精简，企业组织不停修正、重组、甚至再造。可是，在这样的环境里，仍旧有优质的企业不断诞生，也有优秀的企业在市场消失。究其原因，一些研究者认为，这与企业的团队运作有直接的关系，也有一些研究人员认为这是企业的生命周期使然，甚至一些人认为，这也许与掌管领导与管理钥匙的高层管理者有关。而对于新创企业，永续经营是它们所追求的，高素质的干练人才更是它们所必需的资源。但创业者如何领导这些团队成员实现高效的团队效能却是一个值得研究和探讨的话题，也是新创企业得以长久经营而必须解决的一个关键问题。
近年来，社会的进步、科技的快速发展以及全球化的竞争压力下，企业组织越来越需要成员间可以有效的沟通、协调，以便迅速有效地反应环境的需求。由于企业组织已逐渐认识到现今的工作内容不但日益复杂，且更强调分工协调的特性，若单靠个人的力量是无法独立完成，因此需要透过团队集合每一个成员的能力和特色，利用团队的力量共同协力以完成任务。对于初创企业尤其如此，团队行为和谐一致，团队效能便会最优化。在团队所能造出强大的力量因素下，组织不断增加对团队工作的依赖及促使团队学习以改进工作的程序、战略规划，以应付复杂变动的经营环境。 PeterDrucker在巨变时代的管理（Managing In A Time of Great Change）一书中也曾明确地指出，团队已成为今日多数企业的基本单位，显然处于知识经济的时代潮流下，以团队为为基础的组织结构设计，已成为锐不可挡的趋势。这对于成熟企业和新创企业而言，意义一样重大。对于创业者而言，其必然会依据团队成员的个性，实施恰当的管理和领导，发挥团队成员的才能，实现绩效最大化和最优化。
在对研究基础理论，如人力资源理论进行了分析以及从领导者角色、领导的定义以及领导风格理论三方面对领导风格相关研究进行了分析，详尽梳理了领导风格的相关研究现状，此外，从团队内涵出发对团队互动行为进行了分析，尤其是对团队互动过程的十大模型入手，提炼出了影响团队互动过程的关键变量并作为本文本文变量选择的主要依据；接着对团队效能相关研究进行了述评，最后对上述理论进行了综合评述，提出了本研究的立论依据。
接着在对变量进行内涵界定和维度划分的基础上，提出了本文的研究框架与研究模型，本文的主要研究内容有以下四点：
（1）创业者领导风格（转换型领导与交易型领导）对团队效能（团队绩效、团队满意度与团队承诺）的影响；
（2）创业者领导风格（转换型领导与交易型领导）对团队互动行为（沟通、社会支持、团队凝聚力与团队冲突）的影响；
（3）团队互动行为（沟通、社会支持、团队凝聚力与团队冲突）对团队效能（团队绩效、团队满意度与团队承诺）的影响；
（4）团队互动行为在创业者领导风格与团队效能之间所扮演的中介效应。
而后对变量间的关系进行了分析，并提出了相关研究假设，进一步阐明了变量间的关系机理，这些假设主要有33条。
经过实证研究，本文得出如下结论：
（1）创业团队互动行为与团队效能。具体到各个维度，本文得出了下面四个结论，首先，创业团队内部的沟通行为与团队绩效、团队满意度和团队效能之间存在均具有正相关关系；其次，团对社会支持对团队绩效、团队满地与和团队承诺均有正向影响；再次，团队凝聚力对团队绩效、团队满意度和团队承诺存在正向影响；最后，团队冲突对团队绩效、团队满意度和团队承诺具有显著的负影响。
（2）创业者领导风格与团队效能。本文的研究结论之一就是转换型领导风格与团队绩效、团队满意度和团队承诺之间的关系假设得到验证，而交易型领导风格对团队驾校和团队满意度具有显著地影响，而对团队承诺的影响并不显著。
（3）创业者领导风格与创业团队行为。研究结论之一就是转换型领导风格与团队沟通、团队社会支持和团队凝聚力具有显著的影响。研究结论之二是转换型领导风格与团队冲突之间具有负相关关系。也即转换型领导风格体现的越好，团队的冲突便会减少，这也能够支撑上述关系，即转换型领导风格与团队绩效有显著关系。研究结论之三就是交易型领导风格与团队沟通和团队凝聚力具有显著的影响，但对于社会支持和团队冲突却没有影响。
（4）创业团队互动行为的中介效应。根据McGrath（1964）提出的“I-P-O”研究范式，本文认为，此处的“P”就是团队互动行为，因为创业者的领导风格要发挥作用，离不开团队的帮助和支持，尤其是团队需要通过各种途径和手段来实施创业者所指定的战略规划，最后才能导致效能的出现，因此，创业团队互动行为的中介作用是有价值的。
本文的创新体现在以下几点。
1．基于人力资源管理视角和团队互动过程视角，构建了基于创业视角的“I-P-O”研究范式，将创业者领导风格、创业团队互动行为与团队效能整合到一个综合模型中，并运用全国10个省市的数据进行了实证研究。
2．首次从领导风格或者领导方式视角研究了它们对团队效能的影响。
3．检验了团队互动行为的中介效应。
4．首次检验了团队互动行为中社会支持对团队效能的影响。
本文在以下方面存在一定的研究局限，即：
1．研究结论的普适性问题。本文的调研区域虽然主要包括国内十个省市，既有发达地区，也有比较发达的地区，但是对于欠发达地区，如西部地区，本文并未采集数据。虽然研究结论的一般性尚可，但是仍然不能代表其普适性。本文的研究结论能否扩展到全国范围内，还需要整合来自其他区域的数据做更深入的检验。
2．本文有4条假设未通过验证，这仍需要做进一步的检验。由于本文研究的对象是新创企业，而变量的测度指标源于对成熟企业的研究，而且，新创企业由于创建时间不长，一些特质并未展现出来，此外还有其他多方面的原因，这些均导致了这些假设被通过验证，本文也对可能的原因进行了解释，但仍显不足，将来可以选择典型案例进行研究，以增强实证研究的解释力。
3．创业团队互动行为之间的相互作用机理未得到有效揭示。本文贡献之一就是实证验证了创业团队互动行为的中介效应，但是本文并未深入研究创业团队互动行为的内在机理以及各个行为的相互影响。一种行为（如沟通）可能会影响凝聚力而对团队效能产生明显的影响，这些变量之间的作用机理是什么，需要在将来做深入的验证。
4．创业者领导风格向团队效能的转化路径。本文虽然检验了创业团队互动行为的中介效应，但是创业者领导风格与团队效能之间的转化路径需要进一步的挖掘，也即需要将创业团队互动行为进行维度拆分，研究不同的维度对创业者领导风格与团队效能之间的作用，这可能会对新创企业的发展更有意义。因此，从创业团队互动行为不同的视角研究创业者领导风格和团队绩效的关系也是将来应该关注的焦点之一。
5．本研究所调研之创业团队从时间阶段来看，大致可分为团队成立初期、团队成长期、团队成熟期以及团队目标实现期。在不同阶段下的创业团队，会因彼此之间的互动情形而有不同的结果产生，比如：在新创企业创建的过程中，有可能会因彼此之间的想法、意见不合而使其对团队的满意度降低。团队成员间的满意度与承诺较容易受到时间、事件或成员特质的影响，而在不同的阶段有不同的变化。但本研究并未衡量整个新创企业创建与发展过程从始至终的结果变化，因为时间的限制所以只采用横断面的问卷调查方式，因此也会因各样本之间的团队发展时期的不同，而会产生不如预期的结果。
6．影响团队效能的原因有很多，本研究只采用创业者领导风格，即转型领导风格与交易型领导风格、创业团队互动行为，如沟通、社会支持、凝聚力与冲突等几项因素而已，后续研究者未来还可考虑加入其他的变项，如：团队领导、团队的组成、团队的结构、成员的特性等等来作为研究变量。
综合上述各项结果，在此提出对未来研究的建议：
（一）将“输出-过程-产出”的构架应用于团队效能的研究中
（二）针对其他团队效能的影响因素进行验证研究
（三）发展本土化的研究变量量表
The new venture has become the engine of economic development，while how todevelope the new venture has become the major issues faced by the entrepreneurs.Thosewho hope that the sustainable management of the enterprise in the new century, the humancapital is the most important resource.However, after years of corporate organizationflattened, streamlining the quality of personnel, corporate organizations kept correction,restructuring, or reengineering.But in such an environment, it is still high-quality companieshave been born, also excellent corporate market disappeared.The reason, some researchersbelieve that a direct relationship with the operation of the team, some researchers think thisis the life cycle dictates, even some people think this may be in charge of the leadership andmanagement of key senior managerstelated.As for new ventures, and sustainablemanagement is that they pursue. High-quality resources necessary trained manpower. Buthow entrepreneurs lead team members to achieve efficient team effectiveness is a topicworthy of study and discussion, also a new record enterprises to long-term business and akey issue that must be addressed.
In recent years, the progress of society, the rapid development of science andtechnology, and the competitive pressures of globalization, corporate organizationsincreasingly need effective communication, coordination among the members,in order tofacilitate the rapid and effective reaction to the needs of the environment. Because theseenterprise organizations have gradually recognized that the current job content is not onlybecoming more and more complex but also emphasize on the characteristics of coordinationthat can not be completed independently,they should Integrate the abilities andcharacteristics of each member to complete the task.it is especially important to newenterprise.Team-efficiency would be improved if team-behavior is harmonious.Under thefactor that team can create powerful force,the organization constantly depend on team workand it promptes the team to learn to improve the procedure and strategy in order to deal withthe complex changing of business environment. Peter Drucker in the book-Managing In ATime of Great Change)-also has pointed out thatteam has become the basic unit in mostenterprise and it is obvious that the structure based on team has been Irresistible trend In the era of knowledge-economy.
It is equally important to the mature companies and the startups。 For theentrepreneurs,they must implement appropriate management and leadership according toteam members’ characteristics to develop their abilities and achieve the performance ofmaximization and optimization.
Leadership styles are analyzed from the analysis of basic theories, such as humanresources theory,the definition of the leader and the Leadership-style theory. There is thedetailed research of the leadership style,beside,analysis the team interaction from teamconnotation,especially research on team interaction process from ten model and sum up thekey variables which effect on team interaction process and be selected. Then,commentaryto team performance research review, the last comprehensive review of these theories, theargument based on this study.
Followed connotation defined variables and dimensions divided on the basis of theframework of the research model of this study, the main research content of this article thefollowing four points:
(1)entrepreneurs leadership style (transformational leadership and transactionalleadership) on team performance(team performance, team satisfaction and teamcommitment)
(2) the entrepreneur leadership style (transformational leadership and transactionalleadership) on the impact of team interaction (communication, social support, team cohesionand team conflict);
(3) the impact of team interaction (communication, social support, team cohesion andteam conflict) on team effectiveness (team performance, team satisfaction and teamcommitment);
(4) the effect of team interaction played intermediary between entrepreneurs leadershipstyle and team performance.
Then carry out analysis of the relationship between the variables and related hypotheses,further elucidate the mechanism of the relationship between the variables, the main33ofthese assumptions included.After empirical study, we draw the following conclusions:
(1) entrepreneurial team interaction and team performance. Specific to each dimension,we draw the following four conclusions, first of all, have a positive relationship between theentrepreneurial team internal communication behavior and team performance, team satisfaction and team performance; Second, a group of social support on team performance,the team in Montreal and team commitment had a positive impact; once again, the teamcohesion positively impact on team performance, team satisfaction and team commitment;Finally, team conflict on team performance, team satisfaction and team commitment hassignificant negative impact.
(2) the entrepreneur leadership style and team performance. One of the conclusions ofthis study is the relationship between transformational leadership style and teamperformance, team satisfaction and team commitment assumptions proven transactionalleadership style has a significant impact on the the team driving school and team satisfaction,and team commitment the impact is not significant.
(3) entrepreneurial leadership style and entrepreneurial team behavior. One of theconclusions is transformational leadership style to communicate with the team, the team ofsocial support and team cohesion has a significant impact. Conclusions is a negativecorrelation between the transformational leadership style and team conflict. Thattransformational leadership style embodies the better team conflict will be reduced, which isalso capable of supporting the above relationship, the transformational leadership style andteam performance significant relationship. Conclusions is transactional leadership style andteam communication and team cohesion has a significant impact, but for social support andteam conflict has no effect.
(4) the interactive behavior of the entrepreneurial team mediating effect. According toMcGrath (1964) proposed the "IPO" paradigm, the paper argues that, where the "P" is theteam of interactive behavior, because of the leadership style of the entrepreneurs want toplay a role, can not do without the help and support of the team, especially the team needsFinally, in order to lead to the emergence of performance, therefore, the intermediary role ofthe entrepreneurial team interaction is valuable entrepreneurs specified by various ways andmeans to implement the strategic planning.
The innovation of this paper is reflected in the following points.
1.based on human resource management perspective and team interaction processperspective, building "IPO" research paradigm based on the entrepreneurial perspective, theleadership style of the entrepreneur, the entrepreneurial team interaction and teamperformance integrated into a comprehensive model, and the use of the country's10The dataof the provinces and empirical research.
2.for the first time to study their impact on team performance from the perspective of leadership style or leadership style.
3.testing the mediating effect of team interaction.
4.the first to examine the social support team interaction on team effectiveness.
There are some research limitations of this article in these aspects below:
1.The universality of the research conclusion. Though the survey area of this articlecovers ten provinces and cities in our country, of which there are both developed areas andmore developed areas. We haven’t collect data from the less developed areas such as thewest area. Yet this research conclusion possesses a certain generality, it doesn’t have theuniversality. So, to make it clear if this research conclusion could be applied throughout thecountry, the deep checkout of the data from other areas is required.
2.There are four supposes in this article that haven’t been tested, which need the deepcheckout. The research object of this article is the new businesses, but the measure index ofthe variables is acquired based on the research of the mature companies. Moreover, becauseof the short existence of the new businesses, some characteristics haven’t emerged. Inaddition to some other various reasons, these supposes haven’t been tested. This article hassomewhat analyzed and explained the causes, but it still seems not to enough. In the futurewe might choose some typical cases for study, which can enhance the explanatory power.
3. The mechanism of interaction of the interactive behaviors among entrepreneurialteams hasn’t been effectively revealed. One of the contributions of this article is theconformation for mesomeric effect of the interactive behaviors among entrepreneurial teams.But this article hasn’t deeply studied the internal mechanism of the interactive behaviors, andthe mutual influences among those behaviors. One kind of action, such as communication,might affect the cohesion, which could seriously influence the team effectiveness. Themechanism of action among these variables need to be deeply confirmed in the future.
4.The transformation path from the style of leadership of the entrepreneurs to teameffectiveness. Though this article has confirmed the mesomeric effect of the interactivebehaviors among entrepreneurial teams, the transformation path from the style of leadershipof the entrepreneurs to team effectiveness still needs the deep study. That means we need todivide the interactive behaviors among entrepreneurial teams into several dimensionalities.The research of the different dimensionalities’ effects on the transformation from the style ofleadership of the entrepreneurs to team effectiveness might make a bigger difference to thedevelopment of the new businesses. Therefore, the research for the entrepreneurs’ leadershipstyle and team performance from different perspectives based on entrepreneurial team interaction behaviors will become one of the focuses of attention in the future.
5. From the time phase perspective, the entrepreneurial teams in this research can beroughly divided into team to establish initial, team growth stage, mature stage and teamgoals period. The entrepreneurial teams in different stages have different outcomes, due tothe interactions of each other. For example, in the process of creating new enterprises, team'ssatisfaction may reduce due to the disagreement of each other's ideas, comments. Thesatisfaction and commitment among team members is vulnerable to the time, events ormember trait. And the effect differs in different stages. This study did not scale the changingresults of the whole start-up enterprises to create and develop from the beginning to the end.Because of the limitation of the time, we adopt the cross section of the questionnaire, whichmay cause the result of not acquiring the expected conclusion.
6.There are many reasons which may affect team performance. But in this article, weonly use the entrepreneurs’ leadership style, which consists of transformational leadershipstyle, transactional leadership style and entrepreneurial team interaction behavior. Thefactors that have been considered are only communication, social support, cohesion andconflict. Subsequent researchers still can consider joining other variables in the future, suchas the team leader, the composition of the team, the team structure, the characteristics of themembers and so on.
As a combination of the various results, we put forward some proposals for futureresearch here:
(1)Use "output-process-output" frame in the study of team performance.
(2) Carry out the validation study based on the influence factors of other team’seffectiveness.
(3) Develop the local research variable scale.
引文
[1]田静婷．影响高科技产业研发团队学习绩效相关因素研究[D]．华中师范大学博士论文，2003．
[2]罗宾斯．组织行为学[M]．北京：中国人民大学出版社，PRENTICE HALL出版公司，1997(7)．
[3]徐芳．团队绩效的有效测评[J]．企业改革与管理，2003(11)：122-124．
[4]李红辉，钟莉颖．团队运作过程对团队绩效影响研究[J]．人力资源学报，1999(11)：1-30．
[5]吴慧君．主管领导型态、行政人员自我效能、组织承诺与工作满意度关系之研究-以某私立医学大学为例[D]．福州师范大学硕士论文，2000．
[6]吴慧卿．选手知觉领导行为、团队冲突、团队凝聚力及满意度度关系实证研究
[D]．华中师范大学博士论文，2004．
[7]吴豪萧，玉明，杨欣怡，邓家仁，林纯姬，纪凯莉，王翔．高效率团队[M]．南阳：科技图书出版社，1998．
[8]余燧宾．管理型态、组织承诺与工作绩效关系之研究[D]．中国海洋大学硕士论文，2007．
[9]邱馨仪．小学学校组织文化与教师组织承诺关系研究[D]．厦门大学硕士论文，2009．
[10]周文祥，慕心译，Peter F·Drucker著．巨变时代的管理[M]．南京：中天出版社，1999．
[11]房美玉．半导体产业人力资源管理与组织竞争力研究[J]．科技进步与对策，2011(7)：23-26．
[12]倪家珍．员工性别与职业性别型态的一致性，对个人-组织契合度与个人-工作契合度影响的研究[D]．中国人民大学博士论文，2005．
[13]张文华．组织信任初探[J]．人力发展月刊，2005(80)：14-27．
[14]张淑玲．团队领导、团队价值观对团队效能的影响[D]．中山大学硕士论文，2002．120
[15]许士军．管理学[M]．吉林：东华书局，1999．
[16]许士军．工作满足、个人特质与组织气候-文献探讨及实证研究[J]．南开学报，2007(35)：13-56．
[17]陈静慧．关系与人际关系品质:主观契合度的中介效果与关系类型的调节效果
[D]．台湾大学硕士论文，2007．
[18]杨志良，钟国彪，陈端容．员工与组织价值观契合与员工态度间关系的探讨[J]．科学学研究，2011(7)：62-67．
[19]郑伯壎，郭建志．组织价值观与个人工作效能：符合度与强度研究途径[J]．中国社科院民族学研究所集刊，1999(75)：69-103．
[20]郑伯壎．差序格局与华人组织行为[J]．心理学研究，2002(3):142-219．
[21]欧懿慧．电视新闻主播之工作满足、工作压力与组织承诺之关系[D]．铭传大学硕士论文，2004．
[22]吕晓俊，俞文钊．团队研究的新进展[J]．人类功效学，2001(3)：52-55．
[23]彭剑峰，张望军．如何激励知识型员工[M]．中国人力资源开发，1999．9．
[24]付亚和，许玉林．绩效管理[M]．上海：复旦大学出版社，2003(1)：331-350．
[25]聂晖，黎志成，谢颂华．软件企业项目研发团队绩效定型模拟研究[J]．工业工程与管理，2005(3)：22-28．
[26]王卓．虚拟团队管理理论与创新[D]．天津：天津大学，2004．
[27]谢福泉，李艳平．团队绩效及其评估设计探讨[J]．现代管理科学，2005(8)：49-51．
[28]徐芳．团队绩效测评技术与实践[M]．北京：中国人民大学出版社，2002：50．
[29]杨俐慧．浅谈现代企业团队绩效的管理与提高[J]．广西师范学院学报，2003，24(4)．
[30]张晓彤．绩效管理实务[M]．北京：北京大学出版社，2004.05(1)．
[31]朱亮，王剑．企业研发团队的结构性特征与培训策略[J]．北方经济，2006(7)：36-37．
[32]赵慧军．动力与绩效—知识工作者的资源开发[M]．北京：经济管理出版社，2001：101-105．
[33]陈佳俊．企业战略与业绩评价指标的选择：权变理论的观点[J]．审计理论与实践，2003(12)：81-82．
[34]曾德明，秦吉波，周青，陈立勇．高新技术企业R&D管理[M]．北京：清华大学出版社，2006.11：8-92．
[35]付亚和，许玉林．绩效考核与绩效管理[M]．北京：电子工业出版社，2003：151-165．
[36]何燕珍．Z理论与创新型工作团队[J]．外国经济与管理，2002(2)：14-17．
[37]聂丽莎．高科技企业研发人员绩效考核体系设计[D]．北京：首都经济贸易大学，2006．
[38]柳丽华．企业知识型员工绩效管理研究[D]．山东：山东大学，2006．
[39]段钢．基于战略管理的绩效评价[M]．北京：机械工业出版社，2007：64-108．
[40] Adams, J. S. Wage Inequity, Productivity, and Work Quality[J]. Industrial Relations,1963,3:9-16.
[41] Alper, S., Tjosvold, D.,&Law, K. S. Conflict management, efficacy, and performancein organizational teams[J]. Personnel Psychology,2000,53(3):625-642.
[42] Amason, A. C.&Schweiger, D. M. Resolving the paradox of conflict, strategicdecision making and organizational performance[J]. International Journal of ConflictManagement,1994,5:239-253.
[43] Amason, A. C. Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict onstrategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams[J].Academy of Management Journal,1996,39:123-149.
[44] Amason, A. C.&Sapienza, H. J. The effects of top management team size andinteractive norms on cognitive and affective conflict[J]. Journal of Management,2007,23(4):495-516.
[45] Baron, R. A. Cuntering the effects of destructive criticism: The relative efficacy offour interventions[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,2000,75:235-245.
[46] Baron, R. A. Positive effective of conflict: A cognitive perspective[J]. EmployeeResponsibilities and Right Journal,2001,12:25-36.
[47] Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., Neubert, M. J.,&Mount, M. K. Relating MemberAbility and Personality to Work-Team Processes and Team Effectiveness[J], Journalof Applied Psychology,2008,83(3):377-391.
[48] Becker D.Notes on the Concept Commitment[J], American Journal of Sociology,1996,66:32-42.
[49] Beersma, B.&De Dreu, C. K. W. Negotiation Processes and Outcomes in Prosocially andEgoistically Motivated Groups[J]. The International Journal of Conflict Management,2009,10(4):385-402.
[50] Bishop, J. W.&Scott, K. D. An examination of organizational and team commitmentin a self-directed team environment[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,2000,85:439-450.
[51] Blake, R. R.&Mouton, J. S. The Managerial Grid[M]. Gulf, Houston, TX,1964.
[52] Boulding, K. Conflict and Defense[M], Harper and Row, New York,1962.
[53] Bourgeois, III. L. J. Strategic goals, perceived uncertainty, and economicperformancein volatile environments[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2005,28(3):548-573.
[54] Brock, S. J. Selling Alliances: Issues and Insights[J]. Industrial MarketingManagement,1997,26:149-161.
[55] Buchanan, H. B. Building organizational commitment: The socialization of managersin work organizations[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,2004,39(4):533-546.
[56] Butler, J. K. Trust Expectations, Information Sharing, Climate of Trust, andNegotiation Effectiveness and Efficiency[J]. Group and Organization Management,2009,24(2):217-238.
[57] Cameron, K.&Freeman, S. Cultural congruence, strength, and type: Relationships toeffectiveness[CJ]. Presentation to the Academy of Management Annual Convention,Washington, DC,1989.
[58] Carnevale, D. G.,&Wechsler B. Trust in the Public Sector—Individual andOrganizational Determinants[J]. Administration and Society,1992,23:471-494.
[59] Chatman, J. A. Improving interactional organizational research: A model ofperson-organization fit[J]. Academy of Management Review,2009,14:333-349.
[60] Chatman, J. A. Matching people and organizations: Selection and socialization inpublic accounting firms[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,2001,36(3):,459-484.
[61] Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., Huang, M. P.,&Jen, C. K. Shared team value and teameffectiveness: Assessing the mediating effect of intra team process[M]. Manuscriptsubmitted for publication,2002.
[62] Cosier, R. A.&Schwenk, C. R. Agreement and thinking alike: ingredients for poordecisions[J]. Academy of management executive,2002,24(1):69-74.
[63] Das, T. K., Teng B. S. Between trust and control: Developing confidence in partnercooperation in alliances, Academy of Management[J]. The Academy of ManagementReview,1998,23(3):491-512.
[64] De Dreu, C. K. W.&Weingart, L. R. Task versus relationship conflict, teamperformance, and team member satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis.[J]. Journal of AppliedPsychology,2003,88(4):741-749.
[65] Denison, D. R. Corporate Culture and Organizational Effectiveness[M]. New York:John Wiley&Sons,1990.
[66] Deutsch, M. A theory of cooperation and competition[J]. Human Relations,1949,2:129-151.
[67] Deutsch, M. The Resolution of Conflict[M]. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press,1973.
[68] Deutsch, M. Fifty years of conflict, In Festinger L.(Ed.), Retrospections on SocialPsychology[M]. New York: Oxford University Press,1980.
[69] Deutsch, M. Sixty years of conflict[J]. International Journal of Conflict Management,1990,1:237-263.
[70] Early, P. C.&Mosakowski, E. Creating Hybrid Team Cultures: An Empirical Test ofTransnational Team Functioning[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2010,43(1):26-49.
[71] Edmondson, A. C., Roberto, M. A.,&Watkins, M. D. A dynamic model of topmanagement team effectiveness: Managing unstructured task streams[J]. LeadershipQuarterly,2003,14:297–325.
[72] Eisenhardt, K. M. Making fast strategic decisions in high-velocity environments[J].Academy of Management Journal,1989,32:543–576.
[73] Elenkov, D. S., Judge, W.,&Wright, P. Strategic leadership and executive innovationinfluence: An international multi-cluster comparative study[J]. Strategic ManagementJournal,2005,26:665–682.
[74] Ensley,M. D., Carland, J.W.,&Carland, J. C. Investigating the existence of the leadentrepreneur[J]. Journal of Small Business Management,2000,38:59–77.
[75] Eisenhardt, K. M. Schoonhoven C. Organizational Growth Linking Founding Team,Strategy, Environment and Growth Among U. S. Semiconductor Ventures[J],Administrative Science Quarterly,1990,35:504-529.
[76] Enz, C. A. The Role of Value Congruity in Intra organizational Power[J].Administrative Science Quarterly,1998,33(2),284-304.
[77] Freud, S. Civilization and Its DiscontentsM]. London: Hogarth Press,1980.
[78] Ganesan, S. Determinants of long-term orientation in buyer-seller relationships[J].Journal of Marketing,1994,58:1-19.
[79] Gefen, D. E-commerce: The Role of Familiarity and Trust[J], Omega,2000,28(6):725-727.
[80] Gladstein, D. L. Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness[J].Administrative Science Quarterly,1984,29(4):499-517.
[81] Glicak, W., Miller, C.,&Huber, W. The impact of upper echelon diversity onorganizational performance[J], In Huber, G.&Glick, W.(Eds), Organizational changeand redesign, New York,1993:176-224.
[82] Guetzkow, Harold,&John Gry An analysis of conflict in decision-making groups[J].Human Relations,1954,7:367-381.
[83] Guzzo, R.&Sales, E. Team Effectiveness and Decision Making in Organization[M].SF: Jossey-Bass,1995.
[84] Hackman, J. R. The design of effective work groups. In J. W. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbookof Organizational Behavior [M]. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall,1983:315-342.
[85] Hackman, J. R. The design of work team, In J. W. Lorsh (Ed.), Handbook ofOrganizational Behavior[M]. NJ: Prentice-Hall,2007,315-342.
[86] Hoppock, R. Job Satisfaction[M]. New Nork: Harper and Row,1995.
[87] Howard, J. A.&Sheth J. N. The Theory of Buyer Behavior[M]. New York: JohnWiley and Sons, Inc,2009.
[88] Hosmer, L. T., Trust: the connection link between organizational theory andphilosophical ethics[J]. Academy of Management Review,2009,20(2):379-403.
[89] James, L.R. Demaree, R.G.&Wolf, G., Estimating within-group inter-rater reliabilitywith and without response bias[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,1984,69:85-98.
[90] Janssen, O., De Vliert, E. V.,&Veenstra, C. How task and person conflict shape therole of positive interdependence in management teams[J]. Journal of Management,1999,25(2),117-142.
[91] Jehn, K. A. The transformation of conflict: A longitudinal study of intra groupconflict[C]. Paper presented at the International Association for Conflict ManagementConference, Minneapolis,1992.
[92] Jehn, K. A. The Impact of Intra group Conflict on Effectiveness: a MultimethodExamination of the Benefits and Detriments of Conflict[D]. Unpublished DoctoralDissertation, Northwestern University,1992.
[93] Jehn, K. A. Enhancing effectiveness: An investigation of advantages and disadvntagesof value-based intra group conflict[J]. International Journal of Conflict Management,2002,5(3):223-238.
[94] Jehn, K. A. A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intra groupconflict[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,1995,40:256-283.
[95] Jehn, K. A. A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimensions in organizationalgroups[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,1997,42:530-558.
[96] Jehn, K. A., Chadwick, C.,&Thatcher, M. B. T. To agree or not to agree: The effectsof value congruence, individual demographic dissimilarity, and conflict on workgroupoutcomes[J]. International Journal of Conflict Management,1997,8:287-305.
[97] Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B.,&Neale, M. A. Why difference make a difference: Afield study of diversity, conflict, and performance in work groups[J]. AdministrativeScience Quarterly,1999,:44:741-763.
[98] Jehn, K. A.&Chatman, J. A. The influence of proportional and perceptual conflictcomposition on team performance[J]. International Journal of Conflict Management,2000,11(1):56-73.
[99] Jehn, K. A.&Mannix, E. A. The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study ofintra group conflict and group performance[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2001,44(2):238-251.
[100] Jessup, H. R. New roles in team leadership[J]. Training and Development Journal,1999,44:79-83.
[101] Jones, G. R.&George, J. M. The Experience and Evolution of Trust: Implications forCooperation and Teamwork[J]. Academy of Management Review,1998,23(3):531-546.
[102] Katz, R.&Kahn, R. L., The Social Psychology Organizations[M].(2nd ed.), NewYork: Wiley,1978.
[103] Kasperson, R. E., Golding, D.,&Tuler, S. Social distrust as a factor in sitinghazardouss facilities and communicating risks[J]. Journal of Social Issues,1992,48(4):161-187.
[104] Katzenbach, J. R.&Smith, D. K. The wisdom of teams: Creating the highperformance organization[M], New York: Happer Collins,2003.
[105] Katzenbach, J. R.&Smith D. The Discipline of Teams[J]. Harvard Business Review,2003,71(2):111-120.
[106] Katzenbach J. R.&Smith D. The Discipline of Teams[J]. Harvard Business Review,2007,32:112-127.
[107] Kahai, S. S., Sosik, J. J.,&Avolio, B. J. Effects of Leadership Style and ProblemStructure on Work Group Process and Outcomes in an Electronic Meeting SystemEnvironment[J]. Personnel Psychology,1997,50:121-146.
[108] Kenny, David A.,&Lawrence La Voie.Separating individual and group effects[J].Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,1985,48:339-348.
[109] Kilmann, R. H., Saxton, M. J.,&Serpa, R. Gaining Control of The CorporateCulture[M]. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,1985.
[110] Kluckhohn, C. K. M. Value and value organization in the theory of action: Anexploration in definition and classification. In Parsons T.&Shils E. A.(Eds), Towarda General Theory of Action[M]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,1951.
[111] Klimoski, R. J.&Jones, R.G. Staffing for Effective Group Decision Making: KeyIssues in Matching People and Teams? Team Effectiveness and Decision Making inOrganizations[M]. SF: Jossey-Bass,1995.
[112] Kruglanski, A.W. Attributing Trustworthiness in Supervisor-Worker Relations[J],Journal of Experimental Psychology,1980,6:214-232.
[113] Lewicki, R. J.&Bunker, B. B. Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships,Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research[J]. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage,2006:114-139.
[114] Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J.,&Bies, R. J. Trust and distrust: new relationships andrealities[J]. Academy of Management Review,2008,23(3):438-458.
[115] Litterer, J. A. Conflict in organization: A reexamination, In William P. Sexton (Ed.),Organization theories[M]. Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company,2000.
[116] Mayer, R. C., Davis J. H.,&Schoorman F. D. An Integrative Model of OrganizationalTrust[J]. Academy of Management Review,2009,20(3):709-734.
[117] McAllister, D. J. Affect and Cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonalcooperation in organizations[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2005,38(1):24-59.
[118] Meglino, B. M., Ravlin, E. C.,&Adkins, C. L. A work values approach to corporateculture: A field test of the value congruence process and its relationship to individualoutcomes[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,2009,74(3):424-432.
[119] Meyer, J. P., Paunonem, S. V., Gellatly, I. R., Goffin, R. D.,&Jackson, D. N.Organizational Commitment and Job Performance: It’s the Nature of the CommitmentThat Coun[J].tJournal of Applied Psychology,1989,74:152-156.
[120] Mohrman, S. A., Cohen, S. G.,&Mohrman, A. M. Designing Team-basedOrganizations: New Forms for Knowledge Work[M]. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,1995.
[121] Murnighan, J. K.&Conlon, D. E. The Dynamics of Intense work Grouo: A Study ofBritish String Quartets[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,1991,36:165-186.
[122] Mullen, Brian,&Carolyn Cooper. The relationship between group cohesiveness andperformance: An integration[J]. Psychological Bulletin,1994,115:210-227.
[123] Neuman, G. A.&Wright, J. Team effectiveness: Beyond skills and cognitive ability[J].Journal of Applied Psychology,1999,84:376-389.
[124] O'Reilly, C. A. The intentional distortion of information in organizationalcommunication: A laboratory and field investigation[J]. Human Relations,2008,31(2):173-193.
[125] O'Reilly Ⅲ, C. A., Caldwell, D. F.,&Barnett, W. P., Work group demography, socialintegration, and turnover[J]. Administrative Science Quarteraly,1989,34(1):21-37.
[126] O'Reilly, C. A., Chatman, J. A.,&Caldwell. D. People and organizational culture: Aprofile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit[J]. Academy ofManagement Journal,2001,34(3):487-516.
[127] Pelled, L. H., Eisenhardt, K. M.&Xin, K. R. Exporing the black box: an analysis ofwork group diversity, conflict, and performance[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,1999,44:1-28.
[128] Pervin, L. Performance and satisfaction as a function of the individual-environmentfit[J]. Psychological Bulletin,1968,69,1:56-68.
[129] Peterson, R. S. A directive leadership style in group decision making can be bothvirtue and vice: Evidence from elite and experimental groups[J]. Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology,2007,72:1107-1121.
[130] Peterson, R. S.&Behfar, K. J. The dynamic relationship between performancefeedback, trust, and conflict in groups: A longitudinal study[J]. OrganizationalBehavior and Human Decision Processes,2003,92:102-112.
[131] Pincus, J. D., Knipp, J. E.,&Rayfield, R. E. Communication and Job SatisfactionRevise Organizational Trust and Influence on Supervisors[J]. PR Research Annual,1999,2:240-265.
[132] Pondy, L. R. Organizational conflict: concepts and models[J]. Administrative ScienceQuarterly,2007,12(2):296-320.
[133] Porter, L.W., Steers, R. M.&Mowday R.T. The Measurement of OrganizationalCommitment[J]. Journal of Vocational Behavior,2009,14:224-247.
[134] Posner, B. Z., Kouzes, J. M.,&Schmidt, W. H. Shared values make a difference: Anempirical test of corporate culture[J]. Human Resource Management,2005,24(3):293-309.
[135] Rahim, M. A. A Measure of Styles of Handling Interpersonal Conflict[J]. Academy ofManagement Journal,2003,26:368-376.
[136] Ring, P. S.&Van de Ven, A. H. Structuring Cooperative Relationships BetweenOrganizations[J]. Strategic Management Journal,2002,13:483-498.
[137] Riordan, C. M. Relational demography within groups: Past developments,contradictions, and new directions[J]. Research in Personnel and Human ResourcesManagement,2000,19:131-173.
[138] Robbins, S. P. Organizational Behavior[M]. America: Prentice-Hall, In,2002.
[139] Rokeach, M. The Nature of Human Values[M]. New York: Free Press,1973.
[140] Rotter, J. B. A New Scale for the Measurement of Interpersonal trust[J]. Journal ofPersonality,2006,35:651-665.
[141] Rousseau, S. B., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S.,&Camerer, C. Not so different after all: Across-discipline view of trust[J]. Academy of Management Review,2008,23(3):393-404.
[142] Salancik J. New Directions in Organizational Behavior[M]. Chicago: St. Clair Press,2007.
[143] Salas, E., Dickinson, T. L., Converse, S. A.&Tannenbaum, S. I. Toward anUnderstanding of Team Performance and Training. Teams: Their Training andPerformance[C]. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation,1993:(3-29).
[144] Sarin, S.&Mahajan, V. The effect of reward structures on the performance ofcross-functional product development teams[J]. Journal of Marketing,2011,65(2):35-53.
[145] Sashkin, M.&Morris, W.C. Organization Behavior: Concept and Experience[M].New Jersey: Reston Publishing Co.,2004:321-342.
[146] Schminke, M.&Wells, D. Group process and performance and their effects onindividuals’ ethical frameworks[J]. Journal of Business Ethics,1999,18:367-381.
[147] Schneider, B. The people make the place[J]. Personnel Psychology,2007,40:437-453.
[148] Shapiro, D., Sheppard, B. H.,&Cheraskin, L. Business on a Handshake[J].Negotiation Journal,1982,8(4):365-377.
[149] Shaver, K.,&Scott, L. Person, process, choice: The psychology of new venturecreation[J]. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,1991,16:23–45.
[150] Schriesheim, C.,&Kerr, S. Theories and measures of leadership: A critical appraisalof present and future directions. In J. C. Hunt,&L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership: Thecutting edge. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press,2007.:9–44
[151] Simons, T. Top management team consensus, heterogeneity, and debate as contingentpredictors of company performance: The complementarity of group structure andprocess. Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings,2005:62–66.
[152] Smith, K. G., Mitchell, T. R.,&Summer, C. E. Top level management priorities indifferent stages of the organizational life cycle[J]. Academy of Management Journal,1985,28:799–821.
[153] Smith, K. G., Smith, K. A., Olian, J. D., Sims, H. P., O’Bannon, D. P.,&Scully, J. A.Top management team demography and process: The role of social integration andcommunication[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,2004,39:412–433.
[154] Smith, N. R.,&Miner, J. B. Type of entrepreneur, type of firm, and managerialmotivation: Implications for organizational life cycle theory[J]. Strategic ManagementJournal,2003,24:325–340.
[155] Spreitzer, G.M. Social structural characteristics of psychological empowerment[J].Academy of Management Journal,1996,39:483–504.
[156] Shonk, J. H. Working in Teams: A Practical Manual For Improving Work Groups[M].New York: Amacom,2002.
[157] Simons, Tony., Pelled, Lisa Hope.&Smith, K. A. Making use of difference: Diversity,debate, and decision comprehensiveness in top management teams[J]. Academy ofManagement Journal,1999,42(6):662-673.
[158] Sitkin, S. B.&Roth, N. L. Explaining the limited effectiveness of legalistic "remedies"for trust/distrust[J]. Organization Science,1993,4(3):367-392.
[159] Smith, P.C., Kendall, L. M.&Hullin, C. L. The Measurement of Satisfaction in Workand Retirement[M]. Chicago: Rand Mcnally,1969.
[160] Smith, J. B.&Barclay, D. W. The Effect of Organizational Differences and Trust onthe Effectiveness of Selling Partner Relationship[J]. Journal of Marketing,1997,61(1):3-21.
[161] Smyth, T. Confronting conflict[J]. Nursing Management,1993,160(10):21-24.
[162] Straw D. New Directions in Organizational Behavior[M]. Chicago: St. Clair Press,2007.
[163] Stewart, G. L.&Barrick, M. R. Team structure and performance: Assessing themediating role of intra team process and the moderating role of task type[J]. Academyof Management Journal,2000,43(2):135-148.
[164] Szilagyi, A. D.&Wallar M. J. Organizational Behavior and Performance[M]. C. A.:Good-Year Publishing Company, Inc,2nd,1980.
[165] Tedeschi, James, Barry Schlenker,&Thomas Bonoma[M]. Conflict, Power, andGames, Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company，1973.
[166] Thomas, K. W. Conflict and conflict management, in Dunnette M. D.(Ed.), Handbookof Industrial and Organizational Psychology[M]. Chicago, Rand McNally，2006:889-935,.
[167] Tjosvold, D. Cooperative and competitive interdependence: Collaboration betweendepartments to serve customers[J]. Group and Organization Studies,1988,13(3):274-289.
[168] Tjosvold, D., Dann, V.,&Wong, C. Managing conflict between departments to servecustomers[J]. Human Relations,2002,45:1035-1053.
[169] Tjosvold, D., Hui, Chun., Ding, Daniel Z.&Hu, Junchen. Conflict values and teamrelationships: Conflict's contribution to team effectiveness and citizenship in China[J].Journal of Organizational Behavior,2003,24(2):69-88.
[170] Vroom, V. R. Work and Motivation[M]. New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc,2004.
[171] Wall, James A. Jr.&Callister. Conflict and its management[J]. Journal ofManagement,2005,21:515-558.
[172] Whyte, W. H. The Organizational Man, New York, Simon and Schuster[M].2006.
[173] Weldon, E.&Weingart, L. R. Group goals and group performance[J]. British Journalof Social Psychology,1993,32:307-334.
[174] Whitener, E. M., Brodt, S. E., Korsgaard, M. A.,&Werner, J. M. Managers asInitiators of Trust: An Exchange Relationship Framework for UnderstandingManagerial Trustworthy Behavior[J]. Academy of Management Review,1998,23(3):513-530.
[175] Wicks, A. C., Berman, S. L.&Jones, T. M. The Structure of Optimal Trust: Moral andStrategic Implications[J]. Academy of Management Review,1999,24(1):99-116.
[176] Williams, M. In whom we trust: Group membership as an affective context for trustdevelopment[J]. Academy of management Review,2001,26(3):377-396.
[177] Zucker, L. G. Production of trust: Institutional sources of economic structure[J].Research in Organizational Behavior,1986,8:53-111.