Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Organization Studies
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sinclair, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Tyranny of a Team Ideology

Amanda Sinclair

Graduate School of Management, University of Melbourne, Australia

People at work have been tyrannized by a team ideology based on the use of work groups as a key to effective organizational performance. The hegemony of this ideology has created an obsession with teams in workplaces governed by oppress ive stereotypes of what teams should be like and how they should behave. This paper examines four elements of the prevailing team ideology — the way work in groups is defined, links between individual motivation and organizational per formance, views of leadership, and the effects of power, conflict and emotion in work groups. Some alternative perspectives on team behaviour elucidate the ways in which the prevailing paradigm ultimately hinders groups and tyrannizes the individual team member — by camouflaging coercion and conflict with the appearance of consultation and cohesion. Examination of the limits and effects of the ideology provide the basis for an alternative understanding of the strengths, constraints and complexities of group work.

Organization Studies, Vol. 13, No. 4, 611-626 (1992)
DOI: 10.1177/017084069201300405
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Human RelationsHome page
M. Learmonth
'Girls' working together without 'teams': How to avoid the colonization of management language
Human Relations, December 1, 2009; 62(12): 1887 - 1906.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Business Communication QuarterlyHome page
C. Cockburn-Wootten, P. Holmes, and M. Simpson
Teaching Teamwork in Business Communication/Management Programs
Business Communication Quarterly, December 1, 2008; 71(4): 417 - 420.
[PDF]

Home page
 JIRHome page
D. van den Broek, A. Barnes, and K. Townsend
`Teaming Up': Teams and Team Sharing in Call Centres
Journal of Industrial Relations, April 1, 2008; 50(2): 257 - 269.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Human RelationsHome page
R. Finn
The language of teamwork: Reproducing professional divisions in the operating theatre
Human Relations, January 1, 2008; 61(1): 103 - 130.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Human RelationsHome page
B. Cooke
The Kurt Lewin-Goodwin Watson FBI/CIA files: A 60th anniversary there-and-then of the here-and-now
Human Relations, March 1, 2007; 60(3): 435 - 462.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 JIRHome page
J. Buchanan and R. Hall
Teams and Control on the Job: Insights from the Australian Metal and Engineering Best Practice Case Studies
Journal of Industrial Relations, September 1, 2002; 44(3): 397 - 417.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Crit SociolHome page
H. Gottfried
Developing Neo-Fordism: A Comparative Perspective
Crit Sociol, January 1, 1995; 21(3): 39 - 70.
[Abstract] [PDF]