|
| ||
|
|
||
Boundary Permeability (boundary + permeability)
Selected AbstractsVirtual team culture and the amplification of team boundary permeability on performanceHUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY, Issue 4 2005Michael Workman The implementation of virtual teams is briskly increasing, particularly among transnational organizations that find global virtual teams a natural way to address their needs for global reach. While proximal and virtual teams share many attributes, including similar performance measures, they differ in characteristics in the nature of the work. This quasi-experimental field study examined virtual team subcultures relative to structure, relationships, and primacy, and the moderation from team boundary permeability on project schedule variance and the number of errors created by the team in a transnational organization. Consequently, recommendations are made for formalization and thinning team boundaries. [source] Invited reaction: Virtual team culture and the amplification of team boundary permeability on performanceHUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY, Issue 4 2005Linda Moran First page of article [source] Behavioural responses to habitat patch boundaries restrict dispersal and generate emigration,patch area relationships in fragmented landscapesJOURNAL OF ANIMAL ECOLOGY, Issue 4 2003Nicolas Schtickzelle Summary 1We studied the consequences of behaviour at habitat patch boundaries on dispersal for the bog fritillary butterfly Proclossiana eunomia Esper in two networks of habitat differing in fragmentation and matrix quality. We tested for differences in responses to patch boundaries according to the fragmentation level of the network by analysing movement paths of adult butterflies. 2Butterflies systematically engaged in U-turns when they reached a boundary in the fragmented network while they crossed over boundaries in more than 40% of boundary encounters in the continuous one. 3We applied the Virtual Migration model (Hanski, Alho & Moilanen 2000) to capture,mark,recapture data collected in both networks. The model indicated (i) a lower dispersal rate and (ii) a lower survival during dispersal in the fragmented network. This latter difference is likely to be the key biological process leading to behavioural avoidance of patch boundary crossings. 4On the basis of this behavioural difference, we designed an individual-based simulation model to explore the relationship between patch area, boundary permeability and emigration rate. 5Predictions of the model fitted observed results of the effect of patch area on emigration rate according to fragmentation: butterflies are more likely to leave small patches than large ones in fragmented landscapes (where patch boundary permeability is low), while this relationship disappears in more continuous landscapes (where patch boundary permeability is high). [source] Innovation alignment and project network dynamics: An integrative model for changePROJECT MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, Issue 3 2007John E. Taylor Abstract Innovation research has predominantly focused on hierarchically organized firms competing within single markets. Recently, however, researchers have debated over whether the increasing use of project networks within and across industries promotes or stifles innovation. This paper discusses a model based on crossnational diffusion data from three technological innovations in three-dimensional computer-aided design (3D CAD) and related implementation data from 82 firms. From the data we induce a set of constructs that form the basis of a two-stage model for understanding innovation in project networks. In the first stage of the model the alignment of an innovation to the existing allocation of work in a project network is ascertained. In the second stage, the implementation success and diffusion outcomes for innovations misaligned with the allocation of work are governed by the relational stability, accrual of interests, boundary permeability, and existence of an agent for project network change. In developing this integrative, two-stage model we resolve the contradiction in the academic literature regarding the degree to which project network dynamics can promote or stifle innovation. [source] | ||||||||||