Workers hold multiple roles within and across life domains in contemporary work settings. Role theory suggests these roles can either interfere with each other (role strain) or provide mutual benefits (role gain), but these perspectives are typically studied separately. We integrate both by proposing a dual-path model, arguing that holding more roles can simultaneously lead to greater benefits and interferences. Drawing on role integration and temporal literature, we introduce role occurrence proximity—the extent to which roles occur closely in time—as a key moderator that amplifies both strain and gain. Using a two-wave time-lagged survey of 202 participants, we found that the number of roles held is positively related to role gain, especially when roles occur in close temporal proximity. Contrary to expectations, we did not find significant relationships between the number of roles and role strain, regardless of role occurrence proximity. These findings suggest that multiple roles foster gain rather than strain, and that temporal patterns of role engagement shape how workers experience the benefits of their multiple roles. Supplementary analyses further revealed that, among others, role strain emerged specifically when work and nonwork roles overlap in the late morning and late evening, suggesting that it is episodic. All in all, this research extends role theory by highlighting how proximity and temporal patterns of role occurrence shape the consequences of holding multiple roles.

Organizations are increasingly leveraging internal mobility, the transfer of employees across teams within the organization, to enhance workforce flexibility and meet staffing demands. While prior research highlights the organizational benefits of internal mobility, knowledge remains limited about the process through which transferred employees (i.e., internal movers) successfully integrate into their new context, a critical step for realizing those benefits. Drawing on social and human capital theory, we examine how movers' preexisting new team social capital (preentry relationships), accumulated firm human capital (prior internal mobility experience), and transferable former team human capital (prominence in the former team) shape the integration process. Using longitudinal email communication data and internal mobility records from a health care company, we find that movers with preentry relationships in their new teams exhibit higher initial levels of integration, whereas those with more internal mobility experience or greater prominence in their former teams integrate more rapidly over time. Our findings underscore the importance of considering both pre- and postentry dynamics over time to adequately manage how different forms of capital support the successful integration of internal movers into a new team. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Researchers recognize that multiple team membership (MTM) represents a doubleedged sword for teams, but the precise mechanisms that explain the countervailing effects and contingencies that modulate these relationships remain underexplored. We argue that team-level MTM allows team members to access heterogeneous external resources through more diverse external-network ties, benefiting team performance. In contrast, we advance ideas that team-level MTM can negatively impact team adaptability by diminishing the heterogeneity of team members' external roles. To reconcile these divergent arguments, we introduce an informational perspective to suggest that teams can strengthen the benefits and mitigate the downsides of MTM when they have high levels of internal informational diversity. Using data from financial forecast reports published by 473 analyst teams in J. P. Morgan from 2011 to 2019, we find support for our integrated theoretical framework. MTM indeed appears to be beneficial for team performance through increased external network heterogeneity, but detrimental for team adaptability through reduced external role heterogeneity. Teams' internal informational diversity was furthermore found to accentuate these indirect benefits of MTM for team performance, while simultaneously attenuating its indirect detriments for team adaptability.

Research suggests that teams can greatly enhance their performance through boundary management, which comprises activities that establish, maintain, and regulate linkages with the surrounding environment. However, such performance gains do not materialize equally in all instances, and some teams struggle to benefit from boundary management. Integrating insights from social network and team-level resource allocation theories, we develop a contingency framework that considers the internal organization of a team's boundary management (i.e., the carrier, target, and type of such activities) as a key moderating factor that accounts for the varying effects. To test this framework, we use a meta-analytic approach that synthesizes >30 years of empirical research (i.e., 85 primary studies covering 10,848 teams). Our results show a positive main effect of team boundary management on team performance. Crucially, these performance benefits are more pronounced when the target of boundary management is extraorganizational rather than inside the home organization and when the type of boundary management activities is boundary spanning (e.g., coordination, representation, or information search) rather than boundary strengthening (e.g., buffering, guarding, or sentry activities). Moreover, boundary management is more effective when executed by formal team leaders rather than team members, and our results tentatively suggest that this may reflect differences in effectiveness between leaders and members in boundary strengthening, rather than boundary spanning. Overall, our findings advance theory on team boundary management by clarifying previously ambiguous findings and illustrating how teams can design their boundary management activities to be most effective.

Purpose Organizations increasingly rely on cross-functional teams to deal with supply chain (SC) disruptions. These teams may use their broad range of connections and expertise to gather or scout relevant information, enabling them to develop integrative countermeasures and increase their organization’s resilience. Despite their potential, cross-functional teams often struggle to attain information scouting’s prospective benefits for effectively resolving disruptions. By drawing from group information-processing theory, this study aims to explore when and how cross-functional teams can realize information scouting’s full potential for ensuring their organization’s resilience. Design/methodology/approach Multisource, multi-informant data were collected from 80 cross-functional teams exposed to SC disruptions in a realistic SC management simulation. Findings The results show that a cross-functional team’s ability to effectively use information scouting for ensuring its organization’s resilience is contingent upon the degree to which the team’s members share information and align decisions internally (i.e. internal integration). The findings further reveal that this moderating role of internal integration is strengthened when the cross-functional team faces a volatile environment in which multiple SC disruptions are likely to occur (i.e. higher SC vulnerability). Originality/value This study contributes by advancing a more complete perspective on how a cross-functional team may contribute to its organization’s resilience. Specifically, the present research reveals how the benefits of a cross-functional team’s information scouting for dealing with SC disruptions are critically dependent upon internal conditions within the team, as well as external conditions related to its organization’s overall SC (i.e. beyond individual dyadic relationships).

Organizational resilience research has mostly investigated formal coordination during large-scale disruptions. Yet, in practice, it is the small-scale, day-to-day disruptions that affect most of the operational and financial losses in organizations. Timely resolution of day-to-day disruptions depends on effective real-time, informal coordination. Current research has provided limited evidence on effective informal coordination for resilience. Thus, we rely on the modular system design and improvisation literature to propose short- and long-term informal coordination mechanisms likely to balance the control and flexibility necessary for real-time disruption response. We apply relational event modeling across 1,177 disruptions and 184,795 communication events in a water supply company and demonstrate that long-term decentralization and loose coupling combined with short-term restructuring characterized by routine breaking and centralization help solve disruptions faster. Further, we empirically demonstrate that mechanisms forming employees’ reactions to disruption occurrence do not necessarily match the mechanisms shown to help resolve them faster. In this way, we point to potential reasons behind the failures to flexibly adapt coordination when disruptions occur. This study contributes to the resilience literature by demonstrating previously unexplored mechanisms behind effective real-time informal coordination during day-to-day disruptions and provides valuable practical insights for managers in organizations dealing with frequent disruptions.

Firms can adopt several strategies to increase their robustness to potential supply chain (SC) disruptions. One promising strategy is the use of a cross-functional team with representatives from functional departments. Such a team may facilitate sharing relevant information, enabling the firm to respond effectively to SC disruption warnings. However, despite their potential, cross-functional teams also differ in their ability to respond to SC disruption warnings and to ensure firm robustness. Extending insights from information-processing theory and team research to the field of SC management, we propose that a cross-functional team's ability to handle high numbers of SC disruption warnings depends on the extent to which the team adopts centralized decision-making, with one or two members orchestrating the decision-making process. We also introduce internal integration problems as a mediating mechanism explaining why a cross-functional team lacking centralized decision-making may be unable to handle high numbers of SC disruption warnings. In two independent studies, we use multi-source data on cross-functional teams' performance in dealing with SC disruption warnings during a realistic SC management simulation; the results support our predictions.

Purpose Critical infrastructures (CIs) for essential services such as water supply and electricity delivery are notoriously vulnerable to disruptions. While extant literature offers important insights into the resilience of CIs following large-scale disasters, our understanding of CI resilience to the more typical disruptions that affect CIs on a day-to-day basis remains limited. The present study investigates how the interorganizational (supply) network that uses and manages the CI can mitigate the adverse consequences of day-to-day disruptions. Design/methodology/approach Longitudinal archival data on 277 day-to-day disruptions within the Dutch national railway CI were collected and analyzed using generalized estimating equations. Findings The empirical results largely support the study’s predictions that day-to-day disruptions have greater adverse effects if they co-occur or are relatively unprecedented. The findings further show that the involved interorganizational network can enhance CI resilience to these disruptions, in particular, by increasing the overall level of cross-boundary information exchange between organizations inside the network. Practical implications This study helps managers to make well-informed choices regarding the target and intensity of their cross-boundary information-exchange efforts when dealing with day-to-day disruptions affecting their CI. The findings illustrate the importance of targeting cross-boundary information exchange at the complete interorganizational network responsible for the CI and to increase the intensity of such efforts when CI disruptions co-occur and/or are unprecedented. Originality/value This study contributes to our academic understanding of how network-level processes (i.e. cross-boundary information exchange) can be managed to ensure interorganizational (supply) networks’ resilience to day-to-day disruptions in a CI context. Subsequent research may draw from the conceptual framework advanced in the present study for examining additional supply network-level processes that can influence the effectiveness of entire supply networks. As such, the present research may assist scholars to move beyond a simple dyadic context and toward examining complete supply networks

Virtual hackathons have become a popular accelerated innovation tool to help teams develop innovative solutions for complex challenges through intensive collaboration under high time pressure. Prior research on collaboration in hackathons has focused on within-team coordination, limiting our understanding of how participating teams might successfully manage their external connections during virtual hackathons. To address this issue, we integrate insights from the attention-based view of the firm with the literature on tie strength and temporal dimensions of communication, and propose three strategies that might help teams effectively manage their external communication during virtual hackathons. Specifically, we suggest that establishing weaker ties, organizing them in a bursty manner, and limiting the overlap between conversations might help teams successfully manage information overload and the attentional strain associated with increased external communication. Results from a study among 69 teams involved in a virtual hackathon supported the usefulness of the second and third strategy. Our findings contribute to the innovation and team literature by pointing to the importance of the appropriate timing and configuration of team external activities, and point to two strategies that teams and managers might use to leverage the innovative performance potential of virtual hackathons. Keywords: hackathon, open innovation, digital communication, attention-based view of the firm, between-team communication, communication burstiness, multicommunication.

Multiteam structures are increasingly used to coordinate complex tasks between different groups. To realize this potential, however, the members of a multiteam structure must manage a complex set of boundary relations within, between, and beyond the various constituent teams—boundary relations that can be cooperative, competitive, or some combination of both at the same time. This multimethod study provides insight into how multiteam structures can meet this challenge. Specifically, we examined how the different organizations that utilize and support the Dutch railway system learned to manage boundaries as they transitioned from a centralized, arms-length structure to a colocated, multiteam structure for coordinating disruption responses (i.e., the Rail Operations Control Center (ROCC)). In part 1 of our study, qualitative analyses of interview, observational, and archival data suggested that learning to manage boundaries within the ROCC was not simple or linear but evolved through trial and error during various phases. Ultimately, the ROCC developed an approach we call “integrated pluralism,” establishing a dynamic balance that combines both collaborative and competitive approaches to boundary management. In this manner, the ROCC teams were able to attain integrated solutions and coordinated task accomplishment while simultaneously defending internal team operations and home organization interests. In part 2, we employed an interrupted time series analysis to demonstrate that the implementation of the ROCC resulted in significant performance improvements. Consistent with the results of part 1, we found that these improvements emerged gradually over time as teams learned to work out their boundary relations and transitioned to integrated pluralism. These findings provide new insights into how individuals and teams can work together to tackle the unique boundary management challenges presented by multiteam structures and illuminate the dynamic trial and error process by which component teams can learn to both cooperate and compete.

Coping with stress has been primarily investigated as an individual-level phenomenon. In work settings, however, an individual’s exposure to demands is often shared with co-workers, and the process of dealing with these demands takes place in the interaction with them. Coping, therefore, may be conceptualized as a multilevel construct. This paper introduces the team coping concept and shows that including coping as a higher-level team property may help explain individual-level outcomes. Specifically, we investigated the effects of exposure to danger during deployment on burnout symptoms in military service members and examined to what extent this relationship was moderated by individual-level and team-level functional coping. We hypothesized that the relationship between individuals’ exposure to danger and burnout is contingent on both. In line with our predictions, we found that service members who were highly exposed to danger, and did not engage in much functional coping, suffered most from burnout symptoms, but only when their teammates did not engage in much functional coping either. When their teammates did engage in much functional coping, the effect of exposure to danger on burnout was buffered. Hence, team members’ coping efforts functioned as a resilience resource for these service members.

Teams frequently establish and maintain relationships with other teams to manage joint work and obtain external resources. Such “boundary spanning” can be beneficial or detrimental for teams. Nevertheless, prior research has largely focused on the benefits that teams draw from boundary-spanning activities without addressing potentially negative effects. To address this issue, we draw from resource allocation theory to examine when and why boundary spanning benefits and harms team performance. Specifically, we propose that when teams face strongly reduced staffing budgets, boundary spanning helps to replenish team resources, which then benefits team performance. By contrast, when teams face smaller reductions in staffing budgets, we suggest that boundary spanning diverts finite available time and attention from other crucial activities, thereby depleting team resources and hurting team performance. We test this moderated mediation relationship using time-lagged, multi-source data from a healthcare organization that had reduced staffing budgets without lowering output requirements. Corroborating our expectations, our results illustrate that reductions in team staffing budgets critically shape boundary spanning’s implications for teams’ resources availability and performance. Our research, thereby, adds value by offering a more complete and integrated perspective on the performance implications of boundary spanning that complements the one-sided, and overly optimistic, view within much existing research.

Organizations operate in increasingly turbulent environments requiring them to stay resilient in the face of setbacks, i.e., to maintain desired levels of performance when faced with disruptions. Small-scale disruptions happen frequently in most organizations, and therefore they often co-occur or overlap in time. This creates a significant cognitive burden for the employees because they often need to resolve multiple disruptions at the same time. Despite the fact that small-scale disruptions are so common, most resilience literature to date has not recognized the implications of small-scale disruptions when they co-occur, and has not offered any organizational response strategies for dealing with this challenge. To account for this, we rely on the task-switching literature and suggest that dealing with co-occurring disruptions resembles a task-switching problem for the employees. We propose that increased disruption co-occurrence increases time to recovery from the disruptions, i.e., negatively impacts organizational resilience. Further, we propose that assuring that different groups of employees can work on different disruptions, i.e., increasing the fragmentation of the information-sharing network, dampens the positive relationship between disruption co-occurrence and time to recovery. These hypotheses were supported on a sample of 2,009 situations of co-occurring disruptions in a public water supply company. This study advances knowledge on the effects of the small-scale disruptions on organizational resilience, and suggests that network fragmentation can be a successful organizational strategy to sustain resilience under increased disruption co-occurrence. Keywords: Organizational resilience; small-scale disruptions; information-sharing network; task-switching; network fragmentation

Existing research suggests that boundary spanning can greatly advance team performance; yet, realizing boundary spanning’s benefits is notoriously difficult. Our meta-analysis develops and empirically examines a conceptual framework of contingency factors to explain how boundary spanning is most likely to be effective for a team. Drawing from a configural perspective, we derive moderators of the team boundary spanning-team performance link based on different configuration of team boundary spanning (including the type, target, and primary carrier of boundary spanning). Synthesizing four decades of empirical research and meta-analyzing 71 primary studies (comprising 9,197 teams with more than 56,000 members), we find support for our conceptual framework in these configurational aspects to either strengthen (i.e., target of boundary spanning outside one’s organization, team members as carriers of boundary spanning activities) or counteract (i.e., boundary spanning activities that are exclusionary toward external stakeholders) the positive effect of boundary spanning on team performance. These findings contribute to theory development on boundary spanning in teams by demonstrating how team boundary spanning can be implemented to be most effective.

Within complex networks of organizations, small disruptions at one organization can affect interdependent organizations and ultimately disrupt the whole network. We investigate the impact of network disruptions from two distinct research perspectives: a structural and a behavioral. While the structural perspective focuses on how network characteristics proliferate a disruption’s impact, the behavioral perspective focuses on the capabilities and strategies organizations use to mitigate a disruption’s impact. Each perspective lacks, however, a clear consideration of elements studied in the other perspective. Integrating both perspectives, the present research investigates how the time and place of a disruption determine the benefits of cross-boundary collaboration (i.e., boundary spanning) for mitigating the disruption’s impact. We examine these notions in an empirical sample of 381 network disruptions. Using an ordinary least squares (OLS) regression analysis, we largely find support for our hypotheses that boundary spanning reduces time to recovery when the time and place of a disruption are particularly harmful. In contrast, we find that boundary spanning is not preferable when these disruption characteristics are less adverse. Our findings illustrate how combining insights from structural and behavioral perspectives can advance academic knowledge on disruptions in networks of interdependent organizations and offer practical solutions for mitigating such disruptions.

In complex crises, coordination between organizations is challenging. Knowledge needed to coordinate, like responsibilities, capabilities and interdependencies between tasks are often not known or not communicated systematically. As a result, coordination develops gradually and causes confusion. In this paper we describe an approach and tool called 'Profiler', that focuses on quickly increasing knowledge and understanding about the participating organizations while preparing for, or at the beginning of a crisis. Profiler was evaluated during an exercise of 1 Civil Military Coordination Battalion (1CIMICbat). Teams consisting of functional specialists performed a damage and needs assessments after a flooding. The results show that participants that used Profiler increased their knowledge and integrated understanding, when this was initially lacking. Further, participants with improved knowledge and integrated understanding, coordinated more within and between teams, when they perceived to be interdependent. Our results point in the direction that coordination effectiveness and efficiency may be improved with our approach. et al.; Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM); Iterop; KIMOCE; Safe Cluster; Vinovalie - Les Vignerons Dovalie