Skip main navigation
Articles

When Equity Seems Unfair: The Role of Justice Enforceability in Temporary Team Coordination

    Published Online:11 Dec 2018https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.1101

    Abstract

    Temporary teams can accomplish tightly coupled complex work even without the shared experience that enables coordination in longstanding teams. To advance understanding of this process, I conducted an inductive study of temporary teams in four hospital emergency departments (EDs), and found that the teams in two EDs coordinated effectively, but the teams in the other two EDs did not. To theorize an explanation, I draw on the organizational justice literature and introduce the idea of justice enforceability, defined as the perception that authorities can act fairly, given the potential for other people to cheat. The team members’ perceptions of justice enforceability were focused on whether the distribution of work within and between teams was fair or could be cheated. When team members perceived that justice was enforceable, they were willing to engage in the extra-role behaviors that wove together their individual responsibilities. But when they perceived that cheating was possible, they avoided the extra-role behaviors that would have made them suckers for working hard while others cheated. Justice enforceability thus resolves a common tension in temporary teams, namely that the potential for uneven effort can undermine team coordination. In these ED teams, members only trusted that authorities could act fairly when the distribution of work was exactly equal; then team members felt they were all “in it together,” and each put in the work to coordinate as a team.

    REFERENCES

    • Adams, J. S. 1963. Towards an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67: 422–436. Google Scholar
    • Adams, J. S. 1965. Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (2nd ed.): 267–299. New York, NY: Academic Press. Google Scholar
    • Alderfer, C. P., & Smith, K. K. 1982. Studying intergroup relations embedded in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27: 35–65. Google Scholar
    • Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. 1992. Bridging the boundary—External activity and performance in organizational teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37: 634–665. Google Scholar
    • Balliet, D., & Ferris, D. L. 2013. Ostracism and prosocial behavior: A social dilemma perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 120: 298–308. Google Scholar
    • Barsade, S. G. 2002. The ripple effect: Emotional contagion and its influence on group behavior. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47: 644–675. Google Scholar
    • Bartunek, J. M. 2011. Intergroup relationships and quality improvement in healthcare. BMJ Quality & Safety, 20: I62–I66. Google Scholar
    • Bechky, B. A. 2006. Gaffers, gofers, and grips: Role-based coordination in temporary organizations. Organization Science, 17: 3–21. Google Scholar
    • Benkler, Y. 2017. Peer production, the commons, and the future of the firm. Strategic Organization, 15: 264–274. Google Scholar
    • Bies, R. J., & Shapiro, D. L. 1987. Interactional fairness judgments: The influence of causal accounts. Social Justice Research, 1: 199–218. Google Scholar
    • Bigley, G. A., & Roberts, K. H. 2001. The incident command system: High-reliability organizing for complex and volatile task environments. Academy of Management Journal, 44: 1281–1299.Link , Google Scholar
    • Bishop, J. W., & Scott, K. D. 2000. An examination of organizational and team commitment in a self-directed team environment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85: 439–450. Google Scholar
    • Blader, S. L., & Tyler, T. R. 2009. Testing and extending the group engagement model: Linkages between social identity, procedural justice, economic outcomes, and extrarole behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94: 445–464. Google Scholar
    • Cappelli, P. 1999. Career jobs are dead. California Management Review, 42: 146–167. Google Scholar
    • Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P. E. 2001. The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86: 278–321. Google Scholar
    • Collins, R. 2004. Interaction ritual chains. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Google Scholar
    • Colquitt, J. A. 2004. Does the justice of the one interact with the justice of the many? Reactions to procedural justice in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89: 633. Google Scholar
    • Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O., & Ng, K. Y. 2001. Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 425–445. Google Scholar
    • Colquitt, J. A., LePine, J. A., Piccolo, R. F., Zapata, C. P., & Rich, B. L. 2012. Explaining the justice–performance relationship: Trust as exchange deepener or trust as uncertainty reducer? Journal of Applied Psychology, 97: 1–15. Google Scholar
    • Colquitt, J. A., Noe, R. A., & Jackson, C. L. 2002. Justice in teams: Antecedents and consequences of procedural justice climate. Personnel Psychology, 55: 83–109. Google Scholar
    • Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., Rodell, J. B., Long, D. M., Zapata, C. P., Conlon, D. E., & Wesson, M. J. 2013. Justice at the millennium, a decade later: A meta-analytic test of social exchange and affect-based perspectives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Google Scholar
    • Crisp, C. B., & Jarvenpaa, S. L. 2013. Swift trust in global virtual teams. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 12: 45–56. Google Scholar
    • Cummings, J. N., & Haas, M. R. 2012. So many teams, so little time: Time allocation matters in geographically dispersed teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33: 316–341. Google Scholar
    • DiBenigno, J., & Kellogg, K. C. 2014. Beyond occupational differences: The importance of crosscutting demographics and dyadic toolkits for collaboration in a US hospital. Administrative Science Quarterly, 59: 375–408. Google Scholar
    • Dugan, R. E., & Gabriel, K. J. 2013. “Special forces” innovation: How DARPA attacks problems. Harvard Business Review, 91: 74–84. Google Scholar
    • Dukerich, J. M., Golden, B. R., & Shortell, S. M. 2002. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder: The impact of organizational identification, identity, and image on the cooperative behaviors of physicians. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47: 507–533. Google Scholar
    • Edmondson, A. 2012a. Teaming: How organizations learn, innovate, and compete in the knowledge economy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Google Scholar
    • Edmondson, A. C. 2003. Speaking up in the operating room: How team leaders promote learning in interdisciplinary action teams. Journal of Management Studies, 40: 1419–1452. Google Scholar
    • Edmondson, A. C. 2012b. Teamwork on the fly. Harvard Business Review, 90: 72–80. Google Scholar
    • Edmondson, A. C., Bohmer, R. M., & Pisano, G. P. 2001. Disrupted routines: Team learning and new technology implementation in hospitals. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46: 685–716. Google Scholar
    • Edmondson, A. C., & McManus, S. E. 2007. Methodological fit in management field research. Academy of Management Review, 32: 1155–1179. Google Scholar
    • Edmondson, A. C., & Nembhard, I. A. 2009. Product development and learning in project teams: The challenges are the benefits. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 26: 123–138. Google Scholar
    • Faraj, S., & Xiao, Y. 2006. Coordination in fast-response organizations. Management Science, 52: 1155–1169. Google Scholar
    • Feufel, M. A., Robinson, F. E., & Shalin, V. L. 2011. The impact of medical record technologies on collaboration in emergency medicine. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 80: 85–95. Google Scholar
    • Flowerdew, L., Brown, R., Vincent, C., & Woloshynowych, M. 2012. Development and validation of a tool to assess emergency physicians’ nontechnical skills. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 59: 376–385. Google Scholar
    • Gilliland, S. W. 1993. The perceived fairness of selection systems: An organizational justice perspective. Academy of Management Review, 18: 694–734.Link , Google Scholar
    • Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. 1967. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter. Google Scholar
    • Goffman, E. 1959. The presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. Google Scholar
    • Greenberg, J., & Cropanzano, R. 1993. The social side of fairness: Interpersonal and informational classes of organizational justice. Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resource management. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar
    • Hackman, R., & Katz, N. 2010. Group behavior and performance. In S. T. FiskeD. T. GilbertG. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology (5th edition): 1208–1251. New York, NY: Wiley. Google Scholar
    • Hoffman, R., Casnocha, B., & Yeh, C. 2013. Tours of duty: The new employer-employee contract. Harvard Business Review, 91: 49–56. Google Scholar
    • Huckman, R. S., & Staats, B.R. 2011. Fluid tasks and fluid teams: The impact of diversity in experience and team familiarity on team performance. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 13: 310–328. Google Scholar
    • Hutter, M., & Diehl, M. 2011. Motivation losses in teamwork: The effects of team diversity and equity sensitivity on reactions to free-riding. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14: 845–856. Google Scholar
    • Jick, T. D. 1979. Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24: 602–611. Google Scholar
    • Klein, K. J., Ziegert, J. C., Knight, A. P., & Xiao, Y. 2006. Dynamic delegation: Hierarchical, shared and deindividualized leadership in extreme action teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51: 590–621. Google Scholar
    • Kramer, R. M., Hanna, B. A., Su, S., & Wei, J. 2001. Collective identity, collective trust, and social capital: Linking group identification and group cooperation. In M. E. Turner (Ed.), Applied social research. Groups at work: Theory and research: 173–196. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Google Scholar
    • Leventhal, G. S. 1976. The distribution of rewards and resources in groups and organizations. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 9: 91–131. Google Scholar
    • Leventhal, G. S. 1980. What should be done with equity theory? Social exchange: 27–55. New York, NY: Springer. Google Scholar
    • Lind, E. A., Kanfer, R., & Earley, P. C. 1990. Voice, control, and procedural justice: Instrumental and non-instrumental concerns in fairness judgements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59: 952–959. Google Scholar
    • Matta, F. K., Scott, B. A., Colquitt, J. A., Koopman, J., & Passantino, L. G. 2017. Is consistently unfair better than sporadically fair? An investigation of justice variability and stress. Academy of Management Journal, 60: 743–770.Link , Google Scholar
    • Meyerson, D., Weick, K. E., & Kramer, R. M. 1996. Swift trust and temporary groups. In R. M. KramerT. E. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research: 166–195. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
    • Miles, L. K., Griffiths, J. L., Richardson, M. J., & Macrae, C. N. 2010. Too late to coordinate: Contextual influences on behavioral synchrony. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40: 52–60. Google Scholar
    • Okhuysen, G. A. 2001. Structuring change: Familiarity and formal interventions in problem-solving groups. Academy of Management Journal, 44: 794–808.Link , Google Scholar
    • Olivola, C. Y., & Shafir, E. 2013. The martyrdom effect: When pain and effort increase prosocial contributions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26: 91–105. Google Scholar
    • O’Malley, A. S., Grossman, J. M., Cohen, G. R., Kemper, N. M., & Pham, H. H. 2010. Are electronic medical records helpful for care coordination? Experiences of physician practices. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 25: 177–185. Google Scholar
    • Parsons, T. 1951. The social system. Glencoe, IL: Free Press. Google Scholar
    • Podsakoff, N. P., Whiting, S. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & Blume, B. D. 2009. Individual- and organizational-level consequences of organizational citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94: 122–141. Google Scholar
    • Porter, C. O., Hollenbeck, J. R., Ilgen, D. R., Ellis, A. P., West, B. J., & Moon, H. 2003. Backing up behaviors in teams: The role of personality and legitimacy of need. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 391–403. Google Scholar
    • Retelny, D.,Robaszkiewicz, B., To, A., Lasecki, W. S., Patel, J., Rahmati, N., Doshi, T., Valentine, M., & Bernstein, M. S. 2014. Expert crowdsourcing with flash teams, Proceedings of the 27th annual ACM symposium on user interface software and technology: 75–85. Honolulu, HI: ACM. Google Scholar
    • Risser, D. T., Rice, M. M., Salisbury, M. L., Simon, R., Jay, G. D., & Berns, S. D. 1999. The potential for improved teamwork to reduce medical errors in the emergency department. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 34: 373–383. Google Scholar
    • Robbins, T. L. 1995. Social loafing on cognitive tasks: An examination of the sucker effect. Journal of Business and Psychology, 9: 337–342. Google Scholar
    • Roberson, Q. M., & Colquitt, J. A. 2005. Shared and configural justice: A social network model of justice in teams. Academy of Management Review, 30: 595–607.Link , Google Scholar
    • Rodell, J. B., & Colquitt, J. A. 2009. Looking ahead in times of uncertainty: The role of anticipatory justice in an organizational change context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94: 989–1002. Google Scholar
    • Schnake, M. E. 1991. Equity in effort: The sucker effect in co-acting groups. Journal of Management, 17: 41–55. Google Scholar
    • Scott, B. A., Colquitt, J. A., & Paddock, E. L. 2009. An actor-focused model of justice rule adherence and violation: The role of managerial motives and discretion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94: 756–769. Google Scholar
    • Shepperd, J. A. 1993. Productivity loss in performance groups: A motivation analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 113: 67–81. Google Scholar
    • Southard, P. A. 1994. Trauma economics: Realities and strategies. Critical Care Nursing Clinics of North America, 6: 435–440. Google Scholar
    • Spradley, J. P. 1979. The ethnographic interivew. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston. Google Scholar
    • Staats, B. R., & Upton, D. M. 2011. Lean knowledge work. Harvard Business Review, 89: 100–110. Google Scholar
    • Tannenbaum, S. I., Mathieu, J. E., Salas, E., & Cohen, D. 2011. Teams are changing: Are research and practice keeping pace? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5: 2–24. Google Scholar
    • Thibaut, J., Walker, L., LaTour, S., & Houlden, P. 1973. Procedural justice as fairness. Stanford Law Review, 26: 1271–1289. Google Scholar
    • Tucker, A. L., Nembhard, I. M., & Edmondson, A. C. 2007. Implementing new practices: An empirical study of organizational learning in hospital intensive care units. Management Science, 53: 894–907. Google Scholar
    • Vacharkulksemsuk, T., & Fredrickson, B. L. 2012. Strangers in sync: Achieving embodied rapport through shared movements. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48: 399–402. Google Scholar
    • Valentine, M. A., & Edmondson, A. C. 2015. Team scaffolds: How mesolevel structures enable role-based coordination in temporary groups. Organization Science, 26: 405–422. Google Scholar
    • Valentine, M. A., Retelny, D., To, A., Rahmati, N., Doshi, T., & Bernstein, M. S. 2017. Flash organizations: Crowd-sourcing complex work by structuring crowds as organizations. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Google Scholar
    • Van De Ven, A. H., Delbecq, A. L., & Koenig, R. 1976. Determinants of coordination modes within organizations. American Sociological Review, 41: 322–338. Google Scholar
    • Van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A. 2002. Uncertainty management by means of fairness judgments. Advances in experimental social psychology, 34: 1–60. Google Scholar
    • Van der Vegt, G. S., & Bunderson, J. S. 2005. Learning and performance in multidisciplinary teams: The importance of collective team identification. Academy of Management Journal, 48: 532–547.Link , Google Scholar
    • Van Lange, P. A. M., Joireman, J., Parks, C. D., & Van Dijk, E. 2013. The psychology of social dilemmas: A review. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 120: 125–141. Google Scholar
    • Wageman, R. 1995. Interdependence and group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 145–180. Google Scholar
    • Wageman, R., Gardner, H., & Mortensen, M. 2012. The changing ecology of teams: New directions for teams research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33: 301–315. Google Scholar
    • Wageman, R., Hackman, J. R., & Lehman, E. 2005. Team diagnostic survey: Development of an instrument. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 41: 373–398. Google Scholar
    • Weick, K. E., & Roberts, K. H. 1993. Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38: 357–381. Google Scholar
    Academy of Management
      Academy of Management
      100 Summit Lake Drive, Suite 110
      Valhalla, NY 10595, USA
      Phone: +1 (914) 326-1800
      Fax: +1 (914) 326-1900
    © 2025 Academy of Management
    Powered by Atypon® Literatum