This article was downloaded by: [University of Southampton Highfield] On: 18 October 2011, At: 07:53 Publisher: Routledge

Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Public Management Review

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rpxm20

The Effects Of Organizational Context And Teamworking Activities On Performance Outcomes

Julian Seymour Gould-Williams & Mark Gatenby
a b a b

Business School, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK

School of Management, University of Surrey, Guildford, GU2 7XH, UK Available online: 27 Oct 2010

To cite this article: Julian Seymour Gould-Williams & Mark Gatenby (2010): The Effects Of Organizational Context And Teamworking Activities On Performance Outcomes, Public Management Review, 12:6, 759-787 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2010.488862

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sublicensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages

whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

Abstract
This article seeks to evaluate the effects of organizational context and teamworking activities on the performance outcomes of public sector workers. Ability, Motivation and Opportunity (AMO) theory is used as the basis of this study in which it is predicted that employees ability, motivation and opportunities to participate will affect organizational performance. Procter and Muellers (2000) framework is used to identify relevant HR contextual features, namely discretionary rewards, appraisal, training and development, industrial relations and organizational culture. Data based on the 2003 Local Government Workplace Survey (N 3,165) were used to test six research hypotheses and related subhypotheses. The ndings show that individually, the effects of organizational context and teamworking activities were as hypothesized and consistent with AMO theory. However, the interaction effects were far less pronounced in that they were either nonsignicant or negative, with the exception of the interaction term teamworking X appraisal, which positively predicted organizational commitment. However, the teamworking X appraisal interaction also led to increased stress, something we consider to be a sting in the tail for workers. Thus we argue that even though the interaction effects of teamworking and organizational context are minimal, the individual effects contribute to enhanced worker attitudes and perceived organizational performance.

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

THE EFFECTS OF ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT AND TEAMWORKING ACTIVITIES ON PERFORMANCE OUTCOMES

A study conducted in England local government
Julian Seymour Gould-Williams and Mark Gatenby
Julian Seymour Gould-Williams Business School Cardiff University Cardiff UK E-mail: gouldwilliams@cf.ac.uk Mark Gatenby School of Management University of Surrey Guildford GU2 7XH UK E-mail: M.Gatenby@surrey.ac.uk

Key words
HR practices, local government, organizational context, teamworking
Vol. 12 Issue 6 2010 759787 Public Management Review ISSN 1471-9037 print/ISSN 1471-9045 online 2010 Taylor & Francis http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals DOI: 10.1080/14719037.2010.488862

760

Public Management Review

INTRODUCTION There is increasing awareness that organizational context plays a key role in determining the outcomes of teamworking activities (Mueller 1994; Cohen et al. 1996; Currie and Procter 2003). An organizations internal context includes many features such as its structure, culture, leadership style and internal politics. Given that teamworking has become an important management initiative across the private and public sectors, assessing the impact of an organizations context on teamworking activities will make an important contribution to our understanding the conditions needed for teamworking to succeed. A particularly important contextual feature is noted as being an organizations human resource (HR) practices, which are thought to provide the scaffolding to support teamworking activities (IRS 1995: 5). This is consistent with a stream of independent research based on high performance or high commitment work systems, in which teamworking and high involvement practices have been found to lead to enhanced performance outcomes (Arthur 1994; MacDufe 1995). As noted by Currie and Procter (2003), it is possible that certain HR practices may have a more signicant effect than other practices on the outcomes of teamworking activities. For instance, Geary and Dobbins (2001) report that training and skill development, innovative payment systems and union support are particularly important factors to consider. Bacon and Blyton (2000) found that teamworking based on the high-involvement model (Wood and de Menezes 1998) had a profound effect on organizational and employee performance outcomes, with employee motivation being even greater where managers were prepared to relinquish tight control over workers. Certainly, recent writings in the eld of HRM talk about the turning points in the organisation of work and the transformative capacities of new work systems, creating new industrial relations, transforming management employee relations and granting employees the means to be self-managing in their day-today work (Geary and Dobbins 2001: 3). These transformations are thought to reect new managerial thinking a response to heightened competition. Such developments in the eld of HRM could be viewed as being particularly meaningful in the public sector context, given the heightened emphasis placed on engaging public sector workers in securing higher standards of service. For instance, a recent discussion document published by the public sector advisory body I&DeA (Improvement and Development Agency 2007: 7) in England acknowledged:
Councils face challenges in a context of tighter resources. Authorities will need to maximise employees performance, introducing . . . new ways of working, promoting innovation, changing attitudes and behaviours, and supporting staff to work in different and more exible ways. Engaging staff positively in these changes is key to achieving sustainable improvement. . . . Most successful organisations make attracting and retaining talent a top priority.

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

Also, the shift from a rule-bound culture to a performance-based culture under the New Public Management regime has, according to Brown (2008: 3) opened up the way

Gould-Williams & Gatenby: Effects of context and teamworking

761

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

for public managers to adopt sophisticated HRM techniques. Such HRM techniques tend to be based on private sector best practice models which, according to Stewart and Walsh (1992) should be adopted with caution. It is argued that public sector values, such as equity, justice and serving the community, present managers with distinct conditions that do not exist in private sector organizations. In fact, Stewart and Walsh (1992: 512) propose that Effective management of the public sector organizations has to be grounded in the distinctive purposes, conditions and tasks of that domain. Therefore, on this basis, empirical evidence of the effects of innovative approaches to management practice on worker attitudes in the public sector would be useful. There are those who claim that managers motives for introducing new work systems are well meaning the high commitment thesis. This view proposes that these work systems will positively affect employee welfare and motivation, and will be mutually benecial to both workers and employers (Walton 1985; Wright and Snell 1992; Pfeffer 1998). In contrast, others contend that managers are using new work systems as a smoke screen to subversively gain increased control over workers (Parker and Slaughter 1988; Sinclair 1992; Harley 1995). According to this view, workers receive few, if any benets from new forms of working. For example, Hyman and Mason (1995: 191, 193) report that empowerment becomes a euphemism for work intensication . . . [and innovations in work design are] used to disguise workers growing occupational impoverishment. In contrast to these two competing views, Edwards et al. (2001; as quoted in Geary and Dobbins 2001: 5) take a neutral stance on new forms of working, stating that management initiatives are: more limited and controlled than the enthusiasts claim, but more constructive than the critics admit. Importantly, as highlighted by Geary and Dobbins (2001: 5),
New forms of work organization . . . do not have uniform effects but are likely to be contingent on a series of factors, such as the manner in which change is introduced, whether employees and their representatives are involved, employees prior experiences and expectations, . . . and the extent to which HR policies are adapted to support their introduction.

Whatever managers motives for introducing new work systems, it is important to consider whether employees experience negative effects from such systems as the majority of research to date has tended to focus on positive outcomes only (Tsui et al. 1997; Guest 1999; Hoque 1999; Whitener 2001). Therefore, it is the aim of this article to examine the extent to which individual performance outcomes are affected by organizational context and teamworking activities. Hypotheses are developed on the basis of the context variables identied by Procter and Mueller (2000). Essentially this article will empirically test Procter and Muellers framework in the public sector. First the article will describe the dimensions of teamworking and outline broad denitions of the concept and isolate a range of relevant performance outcomes. The ve aspects of context are then noted together with the corresponding research hypotheses. Following this, the methods used for data collection are explained and the results of the statistical

762

Public Management Review

analyses described. Finally, the implications of the research ndings are considered with reference to teamworking and public management policy. DIMENSIONS OF TEAMWORKING
Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

According to one source, teamworking has emerged in recent years as one of the most important ways in which work is being re-organised (Procter and Currie 2004: 1549). However, the concept remains surprisingly ambiguous in that it has been used to describe a vast range of organizational values, processes and structures (Benders and van Hootegem 2000; Mueller et al. 2000). Mueller et al. (2000: 1398, 1399) provide a general denition of the team as involving a group of employees, normally between three and fteen members, who meet with some regularity in order to work interdependently on fullling a specic task. They outline a long list of features that typify teams. For instance, Mueller et al. (2000) suggest that teams can: (1) be created on a temporary basis, in order to solve a specic work problem, or on a more permanent basis, working in areas of operations; (2) be led internally by an elected spokesman, or externally by an appointed team leader; (3) either consist of workers from a variety of functions, hierarchical levels and occupations, or consist of a relatively homogeneous group; (4) consist of members who are able to participate on a voluntary basis as part of their employment responsibility (e.g. by being nominated by a superior); (5) meet during working time or outside working time; (6) consist of team members who may or may not receive nancial compensation for their teamworking efforts; (7) meet according to a xed time plan or as and when required; (8) consist of team members who may or may not be involved with the implementation of the teams proposals. Thus, based on this list, teamworking has grown to include a wide range of apparently uncomplementary and even conicting features. Nevertheless, Procter and Currie (2004: 1567) note that what might be considered quite a weak form of teamworking appears capable of having a signicant impact [on performance]. PERFORMANCE OUTCOMES The underlying theory predicting the effects of innovative management practice on performance outcomes is referred to as AMO theory (Appelbaum et al. 2000). This theory states that innovations in management practice should lead to enhanced performance as (1) employees skills and Abilities are improved; (2) employees Motivation to exert discretionary effort is increased; and (3) employees are thereafter provided with Opportunities to make use of their skills, knowledge and attributes in their jobs. Essentially management practice should lead to the removal of barriers to employee performance, and as such are predicted to increase employee motivation to perform, job satisfaction and commitment, while reducing employees intentions to quit. These

Gould-Williams & Gatenby: Effects of context and teamworking

763

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

outcomes have been found to impact measures of organizational performance (see, for instance, Judge et al. 2001; Harter et al. 2002). Further, with specic reference to public sector organizations, the advisory body I&DEA (2007) stated that the retention of talented workers should be a top managerial priority. Therefore, the effects of management practice on employees intention to quit, which has been found to be a powerful proxy of actual turnover, would provide a useful indicator of staff retention. As acknowledged earlier, there are some who would argue that innovations in management practice are leading to the degradation of work experience, with employees suffering from increased work pressure and stress (Godard 2001). These potential outcomes have resulted in a growing awareness of the need to include both positive and negative measures of employee experience so that an informed judgement can be made as to whether any reported improvements in organizational performance are being achieved at a cost to workers. Even though there is now a greater emphasis on the need to consider employees experience of management practice, there are relatively few studies that have done so (Boselie et al. 2005). ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT AND RESEARCH HYPOTHESES As noted earlier, the nature and effects of teamworking are now thought to be highly dependent on context (e.g. Cohen et al. 1996; Mueller et al. 2000; Parker et al. 2001) to the extent that, to discuss teamwork without reference to the organisational . . . context is a pointless exercise (Martinez Lucio et al. 2000: 275). Research undertaken by Cohen et al. (1996) found that of the ve explanatory variables used as predictors of teamworking effectiveness, the most signicant factor was the involvement context. Specically the context included: (1) the ability for members to make decisions about their work and performance; (2) the provision of information relating to work processes and performance; (3) the provision of discretionary rewards; (4) appropriate developmental training; and (5) sufcient resources (such as equipment, tools and materials) to accomplish the task at hand. These areas are derived from Lawlers (1973) principles of employee involvement and are based on motivation theory. The areas identied by Cohen et al. are further corroborated by group effectiveness theory in which the roles of rewards, training, information-sharing and resource allocation are isolated (Gladstein 1984; Hackman 1987). Similarly, Procter and Mueller (2000) identify ve context-based variables they claim inuence team effectiveness. These are discretionary rewards, appraisal, training and development, industrial relations and organizational culture. For instance, as regards rewards it can be stated that even though commentators concur that reward management is an important HR practice inuencing the outcomes of teamworking, the literature appears to be ambivalent about what form rewards should take (Procter and Mueller 2000). Apart from identifying ill-suited payment systems (Procter and Mueller 2000: 15), namely those based on individual performance (Snell and Dean 1994; Lloyd and Newell 2000;

764

Public Management Review

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

Kerrin and Oliver 2002), there is limited prescriptions on the types of payment systems best suited for teamworking activities (see Mueller and Purcell 1992; Ezzamel and Willmott 1998). At the very least, reward systems should endeavour to differentiate between workers performance in some way and in so doing, retain high performing workers. It should also be appreciated that, although bonuses have an impact on workers performance, other factors come into play over time. In fact, the initial incentive effect of performance related pay schemes tend to wane and fail to maintain their motivational impact on workers. However, consistent with Procter and Muellers teamworking context-based argument, we identify our rst research hypothesis to test the effects of rewards on team effectiveness as follows:
Hypothesis 1a: There is a positive relationship between performance related reward schemes and workers commitment, job satisfaction and organizational performance. Hypothesis 1b: There is a negative relationship between performance related reward schemes and workers quit intentions and stress.

Performance appraisals are formal approaches to planning and evaluating employee performance through annual (or regular) individual employee interviews. They are thought to be particularly important where employees have a large degree of discretion at work. Also, appraisals are regarded as being important in promoting employee retention and identifying employees developmental needs. According to Boxall and Purcell (2003: 144, 145):
Performance appraisal systems can form a basis for individual work planning, for discussing critical success factors in the job, and can provide the key (if not the only) input to decisions on merit-based salary increases, training, promotions, and international transfers.

However, as with discretionary pay schemes the effective implementation of performance appraisals is fraught with difculties. These include rater bias (where managers use poor measures of performance), personal preferences and favouritism. Employees expectations of appraisals tend to be high, leading to disappointment when any developmental targets emerging from appraisal interviews are subsequently not met. Ultimately, appraisals simply become another chore to be got out of the way (Boxall and Purcell 2003: 145). Thus, as noted by Huber and Fuller (1998), it is important that the process of performance appraisals should become more valid in order for them to achieve the espoused outcomes of increased motivation and retention. Therefore while acknowledging these limitations, we nevertheless focus on the potential for appraisals to deliver improved performance outcomes in forming our second hypothesis:
Hypothesis 2a: There is a positive relationship between performance appraisals and workers commitment, job satisfaction and organizational performance.

Gould-Williams & Gatenby: Effects of context and teamworking

765

Hypothesis 2b: There is a negative relationship between performance appraisals and workers quit intentions and stress.

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

The third contextual area highlighted by Procter and Mueller (2000) is training and development. Both formal and informal training is regarded as being essential in achieving adequate job performance. Training may provide individuals with the skills needed to meet the immediate requirements of the job, whereas other training programmes may address the longer term, developmental needs of both the individual and organization (Boxall and Purcell 2003). As noted by Currie and Procter (2003) organizations may be eager to reap what they see as the benets of teamworking, however they appear to be less willing to consider the costs associated with training team members (Dunphy and Bryant 1996). Certainly, the consequences of neglecting training and development activities have been demonstrated in a number of studies (Mueller and Purcell 1992; Harvey and von Behr 1994; Lloyd and Newell 2000). Therefore, our third hypothesis reads:
Hypothesis 3a: There is a positive relationship between training and development and workers commitment, job satisfaction and organizational performance. Hypothesis 3b: There is a negative relationship between training and development and workers quit intentions and stress.

The fourth contextual area considered by Procter and Mueller (2000) is that of industrial relations, which they state is too often glossed over (2000: 16). Securing union co-operation with organizational change is thought to be vital for promoting employee acceptance of teamworking (Martinez Lucio et al. 2000). Nevertheless, industrial relations is largely a neglected area of teamworking research, possibly due to the assumed resistance any form of reorganization would meet from unions; a myopic view according to some commentators (Ackers et al. 1996; Bacon and Storey 1996). In fact, there is evidence of successful partnerships between management and unions (Kochan and Osterman 1994). On this basis the industrial relations climate should at least be considered as part of the context in which teamworking initiatives are introduced, and leads to our fourth research hypothesis:
Hypothesis 4a: There is a positive relationship between the industrial climate and workers commitment, job satisfaction and organizational performance. Hypothesis 4b: There is a negative relationship between the industrial climate and workers quit intentions and stress.

Finally, Procter and Mueller (2000) argue that researchers should consider the organizations culture in which teamworking is being introduced when evaluating the

766

Public Management Review

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

effectiveness of teams. This normative aspect of teamworking (Procter and Mueller 2000: 17) is thought to require a change in management and employee attitudes and behaviours. For instance, Mueller (1994: 389) states that one of the motives managers have for introducing teams is to improve the companys culture: the hope is to move closer towards a climate of trust and commitment, where employees identify with the objectives of the company. According to the Industrial Society (1995), cultural change would necessitate a shift from a command and control style of management towards a participative and involved style a view that, according to Sinclair (1992) has been uncritically embraced by scholars. Nevertheless, there is some evidence that such a transformation has occurred, in that the role of supervisor has changed from the traditional directive role to one of facilitator and support (see for instance Peters 1987; Wickens 1987; Procter and Currie 2004). In contrast, Buchanan and Preston (1992: 60) reported that even though their case study organization encouraged a change in management style, to a more open, communicative, participative approach in reality this had not occurred. For instance, within three months of the company introducing the programme of change, foremen had resorted back to their traditional command and control roles. Thus the transformation from policeman to coach had not been achieved due, in part to the lack of senior management support (Buchanan and Preston 1992: 70; similar ndings were also reported by Procter et al. (1995) and Whybrow and Parker (2000)). These ndings reinforce the view that researchers should be careful to differentiate between organizational rhetoric and the reality as experienced by workers. Our fth hypothesis thereafter asserts:
Hypothesis 5a: There is a positive relationship between an involvement, high trust culture and workers commitment, job satisfaction and organizational performance. Hypothesis 5b: There is a negative relationship between a high control culture and workers commitment, job satisfaction and organizational performance. Hypothesis 5c: There is a negative relationship between the involvement, high trust culture and workers quit intentions and stress. Hypothesis 5d: There is a positive relationship between a high control culture and workers quit intentions and stress.

The review so far has considered several distinct aspects of organizational context, which include: (1) discretionary reward systems; (2) performance appraisals; (3) training and development programmes; (4) industrial relations climate; and (5) high involvement culture. It is anticipated that these specic contextual features will not only have their own unique effects on worker outcomes, but may also have interactive effects with teamworking activities. For instance Currie and Procter (2003: 584) state: The assumption that bundles of HR policies and practices should be congruent with

Gould-Williams & Gatenby: Effects of context and teamworking

767

business strategy is one that appears to underlie many accounts of the interaction of human resource policies and practices with teamworking in recent studies. In other words, it is possible that the effects of introducing teamworking alongside training and development programmes, or an involvement culture, will be greater than if teamworking was introduced independently. To test this proposition empirically the following six research sub-hypotheses have been identied:
Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011
Hypothesis 6a: The interaction effect of performance related reward schemes and teamworking will be greater than the individual effects on each of the dependent variables (commitment, job satisfaction, intention to quit, stress and organizational performance). Hypothesis 6b: The interaction effect of performance appraisals schemes and teamworking will be greater than the individual effects on each of the dependent variables (commitment, job satisfaction, intention to quit, stress and organizational performance). Hypothesis 6c: The interaction effect of training and development and teamworking will be greater than the individual effects on each of the dependent variables (commitment, job satisfaction, intention to quit, stress and organizational performance). Hypothesis 6d: The interaction effect of the industrial relations climate and teamworking will be greater than the individual effects on each of the dependent variables (commitment, job satisfaction, intention to quit, stress and organizational performance). Hypothesis 6e: The interaction effect of the high involvement, high trust climate and teamworking will be greater than the individual effects on each of the dependent variables (commitment, job satisfaction, intention to quit, stress and organizational performance). Hypothesis 6f: The interaction effect of the high control climate and teamworking will be greater than the individual effects on each of the dependent variables (commitment, job satisfaction, intention to quit, stress and organizational performance).

RESEARCH CONTEXT: LOCAL GOVERNMENT BACKGROUND Since the early 1980s, successive Conservative and Labour governments have made sustained attempts to reform and modernize local services by making them more business-like (Boyne et al. 1999). Downe and Martin (2006: 465) argue that the period since 1997 has brought an unprecedented attempt by UK central government to transform the politics and performance of English local government. Against a general backdrop of increased scrutiny and inspection, competition and managerialism, the Government introduced a plethora of policies, initiatives and advice to ensure that local authorities modernized and increased their performance. Further, the 1998 White

768

Public Management Review

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

Paper set the ball of government reform rolling by promising a radical re-focusing of councils traditional roles setting a demanding agenda for change that would replace the old culture of paternalism and inwardness (DETR 1998: 5). The showpiece of this rst period of reform (19972000) was the Best Value regime (legislated in the Local Government Act 1999), which according to Boyne et al. (1999) was the single most important reform of the management of local services since the introduction of Compulsory Competitive Tendering (CCT). Best Value placed a duty on local authorities to make arrangements to secure continuous improvement in the way functions are exercised, having regard to a combination of economy, efciency, and effectiveness (DETR 1999: 3.1). The Best Value regime provided a strong impetus for local authorities to change their management systems and processes in order to become more effective and efcient. Such changes often included private sector performance management techniques and high involvement HR practices (Nyhan 2000; Wilson 2004). Indeed, Boyne (2000: 15) argues that Best Value was a public sector form of Total Quality Management (TQM): It clearly conforms to the principles and practices of TQM. It gives most emphasis to the principle of continuous improvement, followed by customer focus and team-working. Boyne et al. (2004) suggest that Best Value was intended to make a number of specic organizational changes in structure, culture, strategy process and strategy content. Since 2001 a reconguring of the improvement agenda was undertaken with the Best Value regime replaced with a new regime referred to as Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA). This regime continued to forge ahead with the drive for improvement in that all councils in England were categorized on a ve-point scale: excellent, good, fair, weak or poor. Excellent authorities were promised less inspection and new exibilities and freedoms. Councils in the bottom quartile of the Audit Commissions performance league table were publicly named and shamed and forced to accept external intervention and recovery support (Martin 2002). Councils have continued to receive encouragement to be innovative and seek on-going improvements in service delivery. These policies have created unprecedented pressure on corporate management to change their style and philosophy of management towards a more performance-driven approach. Thus, recent changes in the organization and scrutiny of local government make this context particularly interesting for the study of teamworking and HRM. METHODS Data collection Data from the 2003 Local Government Workplace Survey (LGWS) were used to test our research hypotheses. The aim of the LGWS was to evaluate the effects of . . . performance initiatives on staff perceptions of their working environment and organisational performance in order to inform the Governments modernization

Gould-Williams & Gatenby: Effects of context and teamworking

769

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

agenda (Ofce of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) 2004: 5). Essentially, the survey provides data relating to different approaches to management practice and their corresponding effects on individual workers. The survey is based on a stratied sample of 3,165 local government workers from forty-seven authorities in England. Responses were collected from a cross section of frontline staff and managers working in seven service departments (Waste Management, Leisure and Culture, Education (excluding schools), Planning, Benets and Reviews, Social Services (Childrens services) and Housing Management). These departments were selected as they provide a range of contrasting council services. The HR manager was contacted and asked to provide a list of staff working in each of the service departments. Every nth staff member was then selected from the lists by the researcher and sent a copy of the questionnaire, covering letter and reply-paid return envelope. This research context is timely given that past researchers have highlighted the need for more evidence from frontline workers in order to account for the reality of teamworking activities, with few studies having considered the outcomes of teamworking activities in the public sector (see, for instance, Currie and Procter 2003). Measures used in the study As the 2003 Local Government Workplace Survey questionnaire was designed to inform policy development rather than to contribute to academic debate, it is possible that the measures used for this analysis may underestimate the effects of the independent variables on the ve dependent variables as most of the measures are based on singleitem statements rather than pre-tested and validated scales. This should be borne in mind when interpreting the data (cf. Gould-Williams 2007). The statements used as measures of the dependent variables were as follows: 1 2 3 4 Organizational commitment: I am proud to tell people who I work for. Job satisfaction: Overall, I couldnt be more satised with my work. Intention to quit: I would like to leave my job. Stress: Combined items (Cronbach alpha .74): . . . 5 My workload negatively affects the quality of my life (e.g. family or social activities). Some days I feel I cant continue in this job due to work pressures. In my job I am often confronted with problems I cant do much about.

Organizational performance: Combined items (Cronbach alpha .82): . This department provides excellent service when compared to similar services in other authorities.

770

Public Management Review

. . .

This department has a good reputation. This department provides excellent value for money. This department wastes resources (reverse scored).

The statements used as measures of the independent variables were: 1

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

HR practices . . . In this department those who perform well in their jobs get better rewards than those who just meet the basic job requirements. My line manager/supervisor praises me when I do a good job. Staff are given meaningful feedback regarding their individual performance at least once a year.

Training (combined items Cronbach alpha .86) . . I am provided with sufcient training and development opportunities. In this department we are provided with the training needed to achieve high standards of work.

Involvement culture According to Poole (1985: 84) climate is the empiricist[s] substitute for the richer term culture in that organisational climate is often viewed as a quantiable concept whereas culture is more qualitative and less tangible (Turnipseed, 1988). Also, climate is concerned with those aspects of the social environment that are consciously perceived by organisational members (Denison 1996: 624). Therefore, based on this view and the previous observations made in the literature review (cf. Mueller 1994; Industrial Society 1995), this study will use measures of organizational climate that emphasize employee involvement, trust in management and control (inverse). The questionnaire statements for our climate measure read: . . Line managers/supervisors and staff trust each other. My line manager/supervisor spends too much time monitoring and controlling the work I do.

Involvement (combined measure Cronbach alpha .83): . . . Our line manager/supervisor consults us before making decisions. Our line manager/supervisor asks for suggestions when faced with service related problems. The views of all staff are taken seriously by line managers/supervisors, Involvement.

Gould-Williams & Gatenby: Effects of context and teamworking

771

Industrial relations climate: . The relationship between managers and trade unions is good.

4
Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

Teamworking: . Teamworking is strongly encouraged in our department. This measure of teamworking may be regarded as providing a very broad perspective of teamworking in that early ndings from research into the effects of teamworking in local government (Gatenby 2006) have suggested that the usage and understanding of teamworking by workers varies dramatically among local government departments, directorates and authorities. Essentially this study will capture whether teamworking, however dened by respondents, affects their experience at work. Also, even though introducing a teamworking dummy variable would enable us to differentiate between those respondents who are part of a team (where teamworking is encouraged) and those who are not (where teamworking is not encouraged), we use the full range of responses in line with the other measures used in this study, and in doing so variance is not reduced. Each of the questionnaire statements were measured on a 17 Likert scale, where 1 Strongly disagree, and 7 Strongly agree. Control variables. As with any research of this nature, control variables were included which have been found to inuence employee attitudes and work related behaviours. These included respondents age (six age categories were provided 1617 years; 1820 years; 2130 years; 3145 years; 4560 years; 60 years); job position (frontline worker 0; supervisor 1); service department (dummy variables); and three separate items of resource allocation: . . . This service is understaffed. We have the equipment we need to deliver our service properly (reverse coded). My work mates/colleagues are frequently absent from work.

RESULTS Regression analyses To test our research hypotheses ordinary least squared multiple regression was undertaken with the control variables entered at Step 1, the ve context variables along with the teamworking measure were entered at Step 2 and the interactive terms at Step 3 (see Tables 13). Overall, the equations explained a reasonable degree of change in

772

Public Management Review

Table 1: Regression equations: Dependent variables Commitment and Job Satisfaction EQUATION 1 Commitment Control variables Step 1 bD .01 .11*** 7.07* 7.18*** .03 7.04 .00 7.09*** 7.07* 7.21*** 7.09*** 7.18*** .11 .11*** .11 b .04* .03 7.07* 7.13*** 7.01 7.01 .02 7.07* 7.04 7.07* 7.03 .01 b .04* .03 7.07* 7.13*** 7.02 7.01 .02 7.07** 7.04 7.07*** 7.03 .02 b .04 .09*** 7.12*** 7.10*** .01 7.00 7.00 7.04 7.05 7.23*** 7.11*** 7.12*** .12 .12*** .11 b .08*** .00 7.11*** 7.04 .03 .04 .01 7.02 7.01 7.08*** 7.05* .01 b .07** .00 7.11*** 7.04 .02 .03 .01 7.02 7.01 7.07** 7.04* .01 EQUATION 2 Job Satisfaction

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

Personal characteristics Age Job position Salary Service departments Revenue & Benets Leisure Waste man Education Planning Housing man Resources Lack of equip Under staff Absent colleag R2 DR2 Adj R2 Context variables Step 2 HR practices PRP Appraisals Training Climate Involvement Control Trust IR climate Teamworking Teamworking R2 DR2 Adj R2 .12*** .27 .16*** .27 .08* .15*** .31 .20*** .31 (continued) .17*** .06* .00 .09*** .07* .03 .10 .08 .12* .07* 7.04* .10*** .05* .11 7.01 .01 .05 .07** .06* .16*** .11 7.10 .26*** .06* .04* .17*** 7.02 .11 .09

Gould-Williams & Gatenby: Effects of context and teamworking

773

Table 1: (Continued) EQUATION 1 Commitment Interactive terms Step 3 Teams X PRP Teams X Appraisals Teams X Training Teams X Involvement Teams X Control Teams X Trust Teams X IR R2 DR2 Adj R2 F value N 28.23*** 50.90*** 2717 7.04 .18*** 7.10 .06 7.11* .04 7.05 .28 .01** .27 38.59*** 29.81*** 61.48*** 2717 .08 7.04 .09 .00 7.03 .11 7.00 .32 .01* .31 46.17*** EQUATION 2 Job Satisfaction

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

Notes: *statistically signicant at .05 level; **statistically signicant at .01 level; ***statistically signicant at .001 level. D Standardized beta values shown.

the dependent variables, with the lowest R2 reported for quit intentions (R2 .22) and the highest for organizational performance (R2 .34). Equation 1 (dependent variable commitment) shows that each of the context factors explained respondents commitment (with the exception of the control climate measure), with training and development having the largest effect. Two of the interaction terms (teamworking X appraisals and teamworking X control) had statistically signicant effects on the dependent variable. The equation also reveals that many of the control variables had statistically signicant effects on the dependent variable, but when HR context was added, the effects were greatly reduced, with ve control variables retaining their effects. These were (1) salary (higher paid respondents were less likely to be committed), (2) age (older workers expressed greater pride), two service departments (3) revenue and benets and (4) planning were both less likely to take pride in their organization in comparison to the reference group (social services), and (5) lack of equipment (inverse). Equation 2 shows that the explanatory variables explained 32 per cent of change in job satisfaction. Seven of the context variables had statistically signicant effects on job satisfaction. These were Performance Related Pay (PRP) schemes, job appraisals, training and development, high involvement/high trust climate, low control climate and positive Industrial Relations (IR) climate. None of the interaction terms had a signicant effect on job satisfaction. Of the control variables, two personal characteristics, age and salary (inverse) had statistically signicant effects which

774

Public Management Review

Table 2: Regression equations: Dependent variables Quit Intentions and Stress EQUATION 3 Quit Intentions Control variables Step 1 bD .01 7.05* .09*** .09*** 7.02 .02 7.00 .04 .03 .14*** .10*** .17*** .09 .09*** .08 b 7.03 .01 .09*** .04 7.04 7.02 7.02 .02 .00 .02 .05* .06* b 7.03 .01 .09*** .04 7.04 7.02 7.02 .02 .00 .02 .05* .06** b .05* .01 .16*** 7.02 7.07** 7.01 7.04 7.02 7.02 .16*** .25*** .18*** .19 .19*** .19 b .03 .06* .16*** 7.06* 7.07** 7.04 7.04 7.04 7.04* .08*** .20*** .11*** b .03 .06* .17*** 7.06* 7.07** 7.03 7.04 7.04 7.04 .08*** .20*** .10*** EQUATION 4 Stress

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

Personal characteristics Age Job position Salary Service depts Revenue & Benets Leisure Waste man Education Planning Housing man Resources Lack of equip Under staff Absent work colleag R2 DR2 Adj R2 Context variables Step 2 HR practices PRP Appraisals Training Climate Involvement Control Trust IR climate Teamworking Teamworking R2 DR2 Adj R2 7.08* .22 .14*** .22 7.09* 7.02 .26 .07** .26 (continued) .00 7.16*** .04 7.10*** 7.03 7.05 .05 7.13* 7.03 7.07 .12*** 7.05 7.05* 7.09 7.05 .05 7.03 7.03 7.05 7.12*** 7.02 7.05 7.22** 7.02 7.08* 7.08*** 7.03 7.19** 7.14*

Gould-Williams & Gatenby: Effects of context and teamworking

775

Table 2: (Continued) EQUATION 3 Quit Intentions Interactive terms Step 3 Teams X PRP Teams X Appraisals Teams X Training Teams X Involvement Teams X Control Teams X Trust Teams X IR R2 DR2 Adj R2 F value N 21.00*** 38.59*** 2714 7.01 .00 .10 7.12 7.02 .05 .00 .22 .00 .22 28.78*** 52.79*** 47.13*** 2723 .01 .13* .06 .02 .19*** 7.10 7.02 .27 .01** .26 36.39*** EQUATION 4 Stress

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

Notes: *statistically signicant at .05 level; **statistically signicant at .01 level; ***statistically signicant at .001 level. D Standardized beta values shown.

persisted after the context was included, as did two of the resource variables, lack of equipment (inverse) and understafng (inverse). As shown in Table 2, three of the context variables predicted change in quit intentions (equation 3) (training and development, high involvement and high trust climate). None of the interaction terms had statistically signicant effects on quit intentions. Salary was the only personal characteristic to predict quit intentions (higher paid respondents were more likely to want to leave), along with two of the resource variables (under stafng and absent work colleagues). These effects remained after the introduction of the context variables. The explanatory variables explained 27 per cent change in stress, as outlined in equation 4. Just two of the context variables (job appraisals and training and development) had signicant effects on stress. Also, even though two interaction terms predicted stress (teamworking X appraisals and teamworking X control climate), the teamworking X appraisal interaction was in the opposite direction to that hypothesized. The personal characteristics, job position and salary consistently predicted stress, with more senior respondents and higher paid respondents experiencing greater stress. Also respondents working in revenue and benets and leisure departments experience greater stress in comparison to the reference group. And nally, four of the context variables explained changes in perceived organizational performance (Table 3). These included training and development, high involvement, high trust climate and favourable IR climate. The personal characteristics

776

Public Management Review

Table 3: Regression equation: Dependent variable Organizational Performance EQUATION 5 Organizational Performance Control variables Step 1 bD .04 .11*** 7.02 .11*** .12*** .09*** .14*** .11*** .07* 7.26*** 7.06* 7.20*** .17 .17*** .17 b .07* .03 7.01 .16*** .14*** .12*** .15*** .14*** .10*** 7.12*** 7.01 7.08*** b .07* .03 7.01 .16*** .14*** .12*** .15*** .14*** .10** 7.12*** 7.01 7.08**

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

Personal characteristics Age Job position Salary Service depts Revenue & Benets Leisure Waste man Education Planning Housing man Resources Lack of equip Under staff Absent work colleag R2 DR2 Adj R2 Context variables Step 2 HR practices PRP Appraisals Training Climate Involvement Control Trust IR climate Teamworking Teamworking R2 DR2 Adj R2 .21*** .34 .17*** .33 (continued) .20*** .06* 7.04 .10*** .06* 7.01 7.01 .14* .03 .01 .04 .15*** .04 .03 .15*

Gould-Williams & Gatenby: Effects of context and teamworking

777

Table 3: (Continued) EQUATION 5 Organizational Performance Interactive terms Step 3 Teams X PRP Teams X Appraisals Teams X Training Teams X Involvement Teams X Control Teams X Trust Teams X IR R2 DR2 Adj R2 F value N 47.13*** 69.44*** 2722 7.03 .00 .00 .08 7.03 7.05 .03 .34 .00 .33 51.47***

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

Notes: *statistically signicant at .05 level; **statistically signicant at .01 level; ***statistically signicant at .001 level. D Standardized beta values shown.

that predicted organizational performance were age (older workers were more likely to perceive performance as being higher than younger workers), service departments (all six predicted higher performance in comparison to the reference department), as too did the resource items: lack of equipment (inverse) and absent work colleagues (inverse). DISCUSSION These results provide partial support for our research hypotheses in that all ve contextbased variables identied by Procter and Mueller (2000), had an impact on at least two of our dependent variables, while controlling for the effects of teamworking (see Table 4). For instance, performance related pay positively predicted commitment and job satisfaction, which is consistent with our rst hypothesis (1a and 1b). Performance appraisals (hypothesis 2) had signicant predictive effects on three of the dependent variables (commitment, job satisfaction and stress). Training and development had statistically signicant effects in the hypothesized directions for all ve equations (hypothesis 3). The IR climate predicted four of the ve dependent variables (the exception being respondents quit intentions) consistent with hypothesis 4. And of the three items measuring organizational climate (hypothesis 5), the management control

778

Public Management Review

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

measure had the smallest effect on the dependent variables, affecting just two outcomes (job satisfaction and stress), whereas both a high involvement and high trust climate signicantly predicted commitment, job satisfaction, quit intentions (inverse) and perceived organizational performance in the hypothesized directions. Not only do these ndings provide support for Procter and Muellers (2000) context-based framework, they are also consistent with earlier ndings reported by commentators in that high trust involvement climates (Lawler 1973; Cohen et al. 1996), training and development initiatives (Lloyd and Newell 2000) and collaborative IR climates (Martinez Lucio et al. 2000) had signicant effects on employee outcomes. Further on the basis of our ndings, we would argue that of the ve context variables, training and development has the potential to deliver consistently desirable organizational and individual performance outcomes when applied in teamworking settings. Thus, we would re-afrm the need for public sector managers to be aware of the dangers of
Table 4: Research hypotheses 15 Hypothesis 1a: There is a positive relationship between performance related reward schemes and . . . workers commitment job satisfaction organizational performance Hypothesis 1b: There is a negative relationship between performance related reward schemes and . . . workers quit intentions stress Hypothesis 2a: There is a positive relationship between performance appraisals and . . . workers commitment job satisfaction organizational performance Hypothesis 2b: There is a negative relationship between performance appraisals and . . . workers quit intentions stress Hypothesis 3a: There is a positive relationship between training and development and . . . workers commitment job satisfaction organizational performance Hypothesis 3b: There is a negative relationship between training and development and . . . workers quit intentions stress Hypothesis 4a: There is a positive relationship between the industrial climate and . . . workers commitment job satisfaction organizational performance (continued) 7 7 7 7 7

Gould-Williams & Gatenby: Effects of context and teamworking

779

Table 4: (Continued) Hypothesis 4b: There is a negative relationship between the industrial climate and . . . workers quit intentions stress Hypothesis 5a: There is a positive relationship between an involvement, high trust culture and . . . workers commitment 7 7 7 7 job satisfaction organizational performance Hypothesis 5b: There is a negative relationship between a high control culture and . . . workers commitment job satisfaction organizational performance Hypothesis 5c: There is a negative relationship between the involvement, high trust culture and . . . . workers quit intentions stress Hypothesis 5d: There is a positive relationship between a high control culture and . . . workers quit intentions stress

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

deciencies in training and development provision especially during periods when resources are constrained (Currie and Procter 2003: 585). Even though the principal aim of this study was to consider the effects of organizational context on worker attitudes, the results revealed the consistent effects of teamworking activities. For instance, our teamworking measure positively affected job satisfaction, commitment and organizational performance, and negatively affected intention to quit. It would therefore appear that local government managers should continue to encourage the up-take of teamworking activities as part of the modernization agenda in pursuing a performance-driven culture. This could be regarded as a welcomed nding, as it is consistent with the espoused collective values of public sector organizations. Also, given the consistent and positive effects of teamworking on worker attitudes, such activities may assist councils classied in the lower CPA categories (weak or poor), to boost their ratings through increased employee commitment. Having considered the unique contributions of organizational context and teamworking activities on employee outcomes and organizational performance, the discussion will now consider the ve sub-hypotheses relating to the interaction effects of teamworking. Our results provide little support for the interactive effects of HR context and teamworking activities (see Table 5). Partial support was noted for hypothesis 2c (teamworking X appraisal) which positively affected both commitment and stress. However, here we predicted that the combined effect of teamworking and appraisals would have a negative impact on stress. We can only speculate as to why the

780

Public Management Review

Table 5: Interaction terms: Hypotheses 6a6f Hypothesis 6a: The interaction effect of performance related reward schemes and teamworking will be greater than the individual effects on each of the dependent variables . . . commitment job satisfaction 7 7 7 7 7

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

intention to quit stress Hypothesis 6b: organizational performance The interaction effect of performance appraisals schemes and teamworking will be greater than the individual effects on each of the dependent variables (commitment, job satisfaction, intention to quit, stress and organizational performance). commitment job satisfaction intention to quit stress Hypothesis 6c: organizational performance The interaction effect of training and development and teamworking will be greater than the individual effects on each of the dependent variables (commitment, job satisfaction, intention to quit, stress and organizational performance). commitment job satisfaction intention to quit stress organizational performance Hypothesis 6d: The interaction effect of the industrial relations climate and teamworking will be greater than the individual effects on each of the dependent variables (commitment, job satisfaction, intention to quit, stress and organizational performance). commitment job satisfaction intention to quit stress organizational performance Hypothesis 6e: The interaction effect of the high involvement, high trust climate and teamworking will be greater than the individual effects on each of the dependent variables (commitment, job satisfaction, intention to quit, stress and organizational performance).

7 7 7* 7

7 7 7 7 7

7 7 7 7 7

(continued)

Gould-Williams & Gatenby: Effects of context and teamworking

781

Table 5: (Continued) commitment job satisfaction intention to quit stress organizational performance Hypothesis 6f: The interaction effect of the high control climate and teamworking will be greater than the individual effects on each of the dependent variables (commitment, job satisfaction, intention to quit, stress and organizational performance). commitment job satisfaction intention to quit stress organizational performance 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

Note: *Interaction term changed the sign of the relationship so that teamworking X appraisals had a signicant, positive association with stress.

teamworking X appraisal interaction term increased stress among respondents. It is possible that the combination of internal peer pressure to perform, as may be experienced in a teamworking setting, together with regular appraisals, places additional burdens on workers to meet pre-determined and possibly ambitious performance standards. This observation is consistent with the critical writers who, as we noted earlier, argue that management innovations are simply a means of subversively gaining increased control over workers (Sinclair 1992; Harley 1995). For instance, Barker (1993) postulated that any initial benets of new work systems are offset by increased peer pressure and enhanced performance norms. Further, Godard (2001: 798) states:
Under the concertive control thesis, we might expect peer pressures and performance norms to be internalized and hence reected in higher motivation and commitment on the one hand, yet a more stressful and diminished quality of work experience on the other.

Certainly, more research is needed to determine whether this nding is replicated across public sector organizations or even in other local government service departments. Also, it would be important to corroborate these ndings through case study research, which could provide further insights into why such outcomes are noted or to discern whether respondents readily identify with such outcomes. Also, one of our measures of climate (teamworking X managerial control) as noted in hypothesis 6f reduced commitment and increased stress, which was consistent with our hypothesis and previous research ndings (Wood and de Menezes 1998). As such, in pursuit of performance-based cultures, public managers need to ensure that erstwhile

782

Public Management Review

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

rule-bound cultures, in which managers closely supervised and tightly controlled employee performance, are removed (cf. Bacon and Blyton 2000; Brown 2008). Senior management support for such policies will be imperative (Buchanan and Preston 1992). On the basis of these ndings we would argue that in the main the positive effects of teamworking and HR context are no more or less pronounced when introduced in combination. Therefore, these ndings do not suggest that bundling HR policies and practices, or any of the other context variables with teamworking will provide any additional benets to either the employee or organization over and above the individual effects experienced (Currie and Procter 2003). In other words, implementing teamworking independently of any one of the organizational context features will positively affect workers responses. And consistent with Geary and Dobbins (2001) the results reported here point to certain HR practices having a more signicant effect than other practices on worker outcomes. Notably, training and development, high involvement and high trust climates, along with a positive IR climate, had consistent desirable effects on work related attitudes and behaviours. As such, the policy directives offered by I&DEA (as noted at the outset of this article) should be given serious consideration by senior managers in local government authorities. For instance, I&DEA (2007: 7) exhorted managers to use innovative forms of staff engagement and focus on providing staff with the training and support they need to deliver services in an attempt to retain talent. CONCLUSIONS This article sought to determine the extent to which organizational context plays a role in supporting teamworking activities. It was suggested that HR practices are an important contextual feature, with some HR practices having more of an impact on worker outcomes than others (IRS 1995; Geary and Dobbins 2001; Currie and Procter 2003). Essentially, this article has endeavoured to test empirically Procter and Muellers (2000) framework in which ve contextual attributes are identied. Consistent with the literature review and AMO theory (Appelbaum et al. 2000), the distinctive aspects of an organizations context considered in this study were: (1) training and development; (2) discretionary rewards; (3) appraisals; (4) organizational climate (high trust, high involvement and high control); and (5) industrial relations climate. It was further anticipated that these contextual features will not only have their own unique effects on worker outcomes, but may also have interaction effects with teamworking activities (Currie and Procter 2003; Guest et al. 2004). Although this study did not assess managers motives for introducing new work systems, it did consider a range of employee outcomes that would indicate whether such systems were having detrimental effects on workers. The outcomes used as dependent variables were commitment, job satisfaction, intention to quit, stress and organizational performance. According to the mutuality thesis, new work systems

Gould-Williams & Gatenby: Effects of context and teamworking

783

should positively affect employee welfare and organizational performance (Walton 1985; Pfeffer 1998). In contrast, the critical writers assert that organizations benet at the cost to workers through greater work intensication and stress (Sinclair 1992; Harley 1995). Our ndings revealed that in the main, the individual effects of both teamworking activities and the various context features were in the hypothesized directions and do not support the concerns of the critical writers. With specic reference to AMO theory, it was noted that training and development (providing employees with the skills needed to perform), along with involving them in decision making (providing employees with the motivation to perform) as well as teamworking (creating opportunities for employees to use their skills) enhanced perceptions of organizational performance (cf. Guest et al. 2004). However, the interactive effects of teamworking with each of the context variables were either non-signicant or negative, with one exception in which the interaction term teamworking X appraisal had a positive effect on respondents commitment. In this instance, the combination of teamworking with job appraisals further enhanced workers commitment. However, this combination exacerbated respondents stress and thus produces a sting in the tail for workers. This reminds us of the observation made by Geary and Dobbins (2001: 5) in which they asserted that New forms of work organization . . . do not have uniform effects but are likely to be contingent on a series of factors. It appears that the combination of HR practices may indeed have unanticipated and even un-intended effects on workers, something that commentators are only just beginning to address (see, for instance, Peccei 2004; Paauwe 2009). As in most research of this nature, our results need to be considered with the following limitations in mind. Our ndings are based on self-completed survey questionnaires and thus provide cross-sectional data in which causality can only be inferred. It is necessary to conduct longitudinal research in order to resolve issues of causation. Second, the results may suffer from common method variance (Podsakoff and Organ 1986). To some extent this issue would have been overcome had our ve dependent variables been based on managers evaluations of worker attitude and behaviour rather than self-reports. However, there are those who argue that the magnitude of the over-estimation effect is not as large as once thought (Crampton and Wagner 1994), with the option of using supervisory ratings introducing a different set of limitations arising from halo or horn effects. Here positive or negative bias based on a particular employee characteristic obscures the supervisors ability to assess fairly actual behaviour (Lance et al. 1994). And nally, although each of our ve regression equations explained a signicant amount of change in the dependent variables, in some cases up to 78 per cent of change was left unexplained. It was noted that the questionnaire was primarily designed to address policy issues and thus the measures could under-estimate the effects of each of the explanatory variables on the dependent variables. Also, it is plausible that the equations may have omitted key explanatory variables, such as public service motivation (Perry 1996), leadership style (Wright et al. 2005) and personal affect (Agho et al. 1992) which may increase the explanatory power of the equations.

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

784

Public Management Review

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

So, in conclusion we observe that even though organizational context and teamworking activities positively affect individual performance outcomes in the hypothesized directions, the individual effects are far more pronounced than the interactive effects. In other words, individually both teamworking and organizational context have the anticipated effects on worker outcomes, but in combination the effects are dramatically reduced. It therefore appears that even though it may not be considered to be absolutely essential to have HR scaffolding in place for teamworking activities to impact employees work related attitudes, the scaffolding does further enhance worker outcomes. Certainly, as suggested by Procter and Currie (2004), we assert that even if teamworking in local government organizations should be regarded as a relatively weak form of team activity, it nevertheless has the potential to achieve signicant and consistent positive effects on individual worker outcomes. REFERENCES
Ackers, P., Smith, C. and Smith, P. (1996) Against All Odds? British Trade Unions in the New Workplace in P. Ackers, C. Smith and P. Smith (eds) The New Workplace and Trade Unionism, London: Routledge. Agho, A. O., Price, J. L. and Mueller, C. W. (1992) Discriminant Validity of Measures of Job Satisfaction, Positive Affectivity and Negative Affectivity. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 65: 3 pp18596. Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P. and Kalleberg, A. (2000) Manufacturing Advantage: Why High-Performance Work Systems Pay Off, Ithaca, NY: ILR Press. Arthur, J. B. (1994) Effects of Human Resource Systems on Manufacturing Performance and Turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 37: 3 pp67087. Bacon, N. and Blyton, P. (2000) High Road and Low Road Teamworking: Perceptions of Management Rationales and Organizational and Human Resource Outcomes. Human Relations, 53: 11 pp142558. Bacon, N. and Storey, J. (1996) Individualism and Collectivism and the Changing Role of Trade Unions in P. Ackers, C. Smith and P. Smith (eds) The New Workplace and Trade Unionism, London: Routledge. Barker, R. (1993) Tightening the Iron Cage: Concertive Conict in Self-Managed Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38: 3 pp40837. Benders, J. and van Hootegem, G. (2000) How the Japanese Got Teams in S. Procter and F. Mueller (eds) Teamworking, London: MacMillan Business. Boselie, P., Dietz, G. and Boon, C. (2005) Commonalities and Contradictions in HRM and Performance Research. Human Resource Management Journal, 15: 3 pp6794. Boxall, P. and Purcell, J. (2003) Strategy and Human Resource Management, New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Boyne, G. A. (2000) External Regulation and Best Value in Local Government. Public Money and Management, 20: 3 pp712. Boyne, G. A., Gould-Williams, J. S., Law, J. and Walker, R. M. (1999) Competitive Tendering and Best Value in Local Government. Public Money and Management, 19: 4 pp239. (2004) Towards the Self-Evaluating Organization: An Empirical Test of the Wildavsky Model. Public Administration Review, 64: 4 pp46373. Brown, K. (2008) Human Resource Management in the Public Sector in R. S. Beattie and S. P. Osborne (eds) Human Resource Management in the Public Sector, Oxon: Routledge. Buchanan, D. and Preston, D. (1992) Life in the Cell: Supervision and Teamwork in a Manufacturing Systems Engineering Environment. Human Resource Management Journal, 2: 4 pp5576.

Gould-Williams & Gatenby: Effects of context and teamworking

785

Cohen, S., G. Ledford and G. Spreitzer (1996) A Predictive Model of Self-Managing Work Team Effectiveness. Human Relations, 49: 5 pp64376. Crampton, S. M. and Wagner, J. A. (1994) Percept-percept Ination in Micro-organizational Research: An Investigation of Prevalence and Effect. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79: 1 pp6776. Currie, G. and Procter, S. (2003) The Interaction of Human Resource Policies and Practices with the Implementation of Teamworking: Evidence from the UK Public Sector. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14: 4 pp58199. Denison, D. R. (1996) What Is the Difference between Organizational Culture and Organizational Climate? A Natives Point of View on a Decade of Paradigm Wars. Academy of Management Review, 21: 3 pp61954. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) (1998) Modern Local Government: In Touch with the People (Cm 4014), London: The Stationery Ofce. (1999) Best Value in Housing Framework Consultation Paper, London: DETR. Downe, J. and Martin, S. J. (2006) Joined Up Policy in Practice? The Coherence and Impacts of the Local Government Modernisation Agenda. Local Government Studies, 32: 4 pp46588. Dunphy, D. and Bryant, B. (1996) Teams: Panaceas or Prescriptions for Improved Performance? Human Relations, 49: 5 pp67799. Edwards, P., Geary, J. and Sisson, K. (2001) Employee Involvement in the Workplace: Transformative, Exploitative, or Limited and Controlled? in J. Belanger (ed.) Work and Employment Relations in the High Performance Workplace, London: Cassell/Mansell. Ezzamel, M. and Willmott, H. (1998) Accounting for Teamworking: A Critical Study of Group-Based Systems of Organisational Control. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43: 2 pp35896. Gatenby, M. (2006) What Does Teamworking Mean in UK Local Government?. Paper presented to the 10th International Workshop on Teamworking, Groningen, The Netherlands, September. Geary, J. F. and Dobbins, A. (2001) Teamworking: A New Dynamic in the Pursuit of Management Control. Human Resource Management Journal, 11: 1 pp323. Gladstein, D. L. (1984) Groups in Context: A Model of Task Group Effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29: 4 pp499517. Godard, J. (2001) High Performance and the Transformation of Work? The Implications of Alternative Work Practices for the Experience and Outcomes of Work. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 54: 4 pp776805. Gould-Williams, J. S. (2007) HR Practices, Organisational Climate and Employee Outcomes: Evaluating Social Exchange Relationships in Local Government. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18: 9 pp162747. Guest, D. E. (1999) Human Resource Management: The Workers Verdict. Human Resource Management Journal, 9: 3 pp525. Guest, D., Conway, N. and Dewe, P. (2004) Using Sequential Tree Analysis to Search for Bundles of HR Practices. Human Resource Management Journal, 14: 1 pp7996. Hackman, J. R. (1987) The Design of Work Teams in J. W. Lorsch (ed.) Handbook of Organizational Behavior, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Harley, B. (1995) Team Membership and the Experience of Work in Britain: An Analysis of the WERS98 Data. Work, Employment & Society, 15: 4 pp72142. Harter, J., Schmidt, F. and Haynes, T. (2002) Business Unit Level Relationships between Employee Satisfaction, Employee Engagement and Business Outcomes: A Meta Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87: 2 pp26879. Harvey, N. and van Behr, M. (1994) Groupwork in the American and German Non Automotive Manufacturing. International Journal of International Factors in Manufacturing, 4: 4 pp34560. Hoque, K. (1999) Human Resource Management in the Hotel Industry: A Comparative Analysis. Human Resource Management Journal, 37: 3 pp41943.

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

786

Public Management Review

Huber, V. and Fuller, S. (1998) Performance Appraisal, in M. Poole and M. Warner (eds) The IEBM Handbook of Human Resource Management, London: Thomson Business Press. Hyman, J. and Mason, B. (1995) Managing Employee Involvement and Participation, London: Sage. Improvement and Development Agency (I&DEA) (2007) The Future Shape of Local Authorities Workforces, Discussion Document. Industrial Relations Services (IRS) (1995) Key Issues in Effective Teamworking. Employee Development Bulletin, 69 pp516. Industrial Society (1995) Self Managed Teams, London: Industrial Society. Judge, T., Thoresen, C., Bono, J. and Patton, G. (2001) The Job SatisfactionJob Performance Relationship: A Qualitative and Quantitative Review. Psychological Bulletin, 127 pp376407. Kerrin, M. and Oliver, N. (2002) Collective and Individual Improvement Activities: The Role of Reward Systems. Personnel Review, 31: 3 pp32037. Kochan, T. A. and Osterman, P. (1994) The Mutual Gains Enterprise: Forging a Winning Partnership among Labour, Management and Government, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Lance, C. E., LaPointe, J. A. and Stewart, A. M. (1994) A Test of the Context Dependency of Three Causal Models of Halo Rating Error. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79: 2 pp33240. Lawler, E. E., III (1973) Motivation in Work Organizations, Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. Lloyd, C. and Newell, H. (2000) Selling Teams to the Salesforce: Teamworking in the UK Pharmaceutical Industry in S. Procter and F. Mueller (eds) Teamworking, Basingstoke: MacMillan Business. MacDufe, J. P. (1995) Human Resource Bundles and Manufacturing Performance: Organisational Logic and Flexible Production Systems in the World Auto Industry. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 48: 2 pp197221. Martin, S. (2002) The Modernization of UK Local Government. Public Management Review, 4: 3 pp291307. Martinez Lucio, M., Jenkins, S. and Noon, M. (2000) Management Strategy, Union Identity and Oppositionalism: Teamwork in the Royal Mail in S. Procter and F. Mueller (eds) Teamworking, London: MacMillan Business. Mueller, F. (1994) Teams between Hierarchy and Commitment: Change Strategies and the Internal Environment. Journal of Management Studies, 31: 3 pp383403. Mueller, F. and Purcell, J. (1992) Cover Story: The Drive for Higher Productivity. Personnel Management, 24 pp2833. Mueller, F., Procter, S. and Buchanan, D. (2000) Teamworking in Its Context(s): Antecedents, Nature and Dimensions. Human Relations, 53: 11 pp1387424. Nyhan, R. C. (2000) Changing the Paradigm: Trust and Its Role in Public Sector Organisations. American Review of Public Administration, 30: 1 pp87109. Ofce of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) (2004) The 2003 Local Government Workplace Survey, London: HMSO. Paauwe, J. (2009) HRM and Performance: Achievements, Methodological Issues and Prospects. Journal of Management Studies, 46: 1 pp12942. Parker, M. and Slaughter, J. (1988) Choosing Sides: Unions and the Team Concept, Boston, MA: Labor Notes. Parker, S., Wall, T. and Cordery, J. (2001) Future Work Design Research and Practice: Towards an Elaborated Model of Work Design. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74: 4 pp41340. Peccei, R. (2004) Human Resource Management and the Search for the Happy Workplace. Inaugural Address, Erasmus Research Institute of Management, Rotterdam, 15 January. Perry, J. L. (1996) Measuring Public Service Motivation: An Assessment of Construct Reliability and Validity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6: 1 pp522. Peters, T. (1987) Thriving on Chaos: Handbook for a Management Revolution, New York: Knopf. Pfeffer, J. (1998) The Human Equation: Building Prots by Putting People First, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

Gould-Williams & Gatenby: Effects of context and teamworking

787

Downloaded by [University of Southampton Highfield] at 07:53 18 October 2011

Podsakoff, P. M. and Organ, D. (1986) Self-reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Prospects. Journal of Management, 12: 4 pp531544. Poole, M. S. (1985) Communication and Organisational Climates: Review, Critique and a New Perspective in R. D. McPhee and P. A. Tomkins (eds) Organisational Communication: Traditional Themes and New Directions, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Procter, S. and Currie, G. (2004) Target-Based Teamworking: Groups, Work and Interdependence in the UK Civil Service. Human Relations, 57: 12 pp154772. Procter, S. and Mueller, F. (2000) Teamworking: Strategy, Structure, Systems and Culture in S. Procter and F. Mueller (eds) Teamworking, London: MacMillan Business. Procter, S., Hassard, J. and Rowlinson, M. (1995) Introducing Cellular Manufacturing: Operations, Human Resources and High-Trust Dynamics. Human Resource Management Journal, 5: 2 pp4664. Sinclair, A. (1992) The Tyranny of a Team Ideology. Organization Studies, 13: 4 pp61126. Snell, S. A. and Dean, J. W. (1994) Strategic Compensation for Integrated Manufacturing: The Moderating Effects of Jobs and Organizational Inertia. Academy of Management Journal, 37: 5 pp110940. Stewart, J. and Walsh, K. (1992) Change in the Management of Public Services. Public Administration, 70: 4 pp499518. Tsui, A. S., Pearce, J. L., Porter, L. W. and Tripoli, A. M. (1997) Alternative Approaches to the Employee Organization Relationship: Does Investment in Employees Pay Off? Academy of Management Journal, 40: 5 pp1089121. Turnipseed, D. (1988) An Integrated, Interactive Model of Organisational Climate, Culture and Effectiveness. Leadership and Organisation, 9: 5 pp1721. Walton, R. E. (1985) From Control to Commitment in the Workplace. Harvard Business Review, 63: 2 pp7784. Whitener, E. M. (2001) Do High Commitment Human Resource Practices Affect Employee Commitment? A Cross-Level Analysis Using Hierarchical Linear Modeling. Journal of Management, 27: 5 pp51535. Whybrow, A. C. and Parker, S. K. (2000) Introducing Teamworking: Managing the Process of Change in S. Procter and F. Mueller (eds) Teamworking, London: MacMillan Business. Wickens, P. (1987) The Road to Nissan: Flexibility, Quality, Teamwork, Basingstoke: MacMillan. Wilson, J. (2004) Comprehensive Performance Assessment Springboard or Dead-Weight? Public Money and Management, 24: 1 pp638. Wood, S. and de Menezes, L. (1998) High Commitment Management in the UK: Evidence from the Workplace Industrial Relations Survey and Employers Manpower and Skills Practices Survey. Human Relations, 51: 4 pp485515. Wright, P. M. and Snell, S. A. (1991) Toward an Integrative View of Strategic Human Resource Management. Human Resource Management Review, 1: 3 pp20325. Wright, P. M., Gardner, T., Moynihan, L. and Allen, M. (2005) The Relationship between HR Practice and Firm Performance: Examining Causal Direction. Personnel Psychology, 58: 2 pp40946.