Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cooperative Behaviours in Organizations

  • Chapter
Friends and Enemies in Organizations

Abstract

By 1938 effective organisations were characterized as systems in which individuals cooperated with each other to reach organizational ends (Barnard, 1938). In those days cooperative behaviours were studied under the heading of solidarity within organizations, and were focused on solidarity between employees in conflict with management or in the enforcement of workgroup norms (Roethlisberger & Dickson, 1939; Seashore, 1954; Blau, 1955, 1964; Homans, 1961). Cooperative behaviours became a focus of research when organizations started to structure employees into teams or groups, such as management teams, project groups or selfmanaged teams (Cohen & Bailey, 1997; Goodman, 1986).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Appelbaum, E. & Batt, R. (1994). The New American Workplace. Ithaca: ILR Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aquino, K. (1998). A social dilemma perspective on cooperative behaviour in organisations: The effects of scarcity. Group & Organisation Management, 23, 390–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod, R. (1984). The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azariadis, C. (1987). Implicit contracts. In: J. Eatwell, M. Milgate & P. Newman (eds). The New Palgrave: Allocation, Information and Markets. London: Macmillan, 132–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnard, C. I. (1938). The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, J. N. & Kreps, D. M. (1999). Strategic Human Resources. Framework for General Managers. New York: Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, T. S. & Organ, D. W. (1983). Job satisfaction and the good soldier: The relationship between affect and employee citizenship. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 587–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batenburg, R., Raub, W. & Snijders, C. (2002). Contacts and contracts: Dyadic embeddedness and the contractual behaviour of firms. In V. Buskens, W. Raub & C. Snijders (eds) The Governance of Relations in Markets and Organizations, Research in the Sociology of Organization, pp. 135–188. Oxford: JAI/Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. (1955). The Dynamics of Bureaucracy. Chicago, Il: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blyton, P. & Morris, J. (1992). HRM and the limits of flexibility. In P. Blyton & P. Turnbull (eds) Reassessing Human Resource Management. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boselie, P., Dietz, G. & Boon, C. (2005). Commonalities and contradictions in research on Human Resource Management and Performance. Human Resource Management Journal, 15, 67–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borman, W. C. & Motowidlo, S. J. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. In Schmit, N. and Borman, W. C. (eds), Personnel Selection, San Francisco. Jossey-Bass, 71–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, D. E. & Ostroff, C. (2004). Understanding HRM-Firm performance linkages: The Role of the ‘strength’ of the HRM system. Academy of Management Review, 29(2), 203–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, S. G. & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes team work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23, 239–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. S. (1994). A rational choice perspective on economic sociology. In N. J. Smelser & R. Swedberg (eds) The Handbook of Economic Sociology (pp. 166–180). Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, C. L. & Lewis, S. (1999). Gender and the changing nature of work. In G. N. Powell (ed.). Handbook of Gender and Work. Thousands Oaks, California: Sage Publications, 37–46.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Denison, D. R. & Mishra, K. (1993). Toward a theory of organisational culture and effectiveness. Organisation Science, 6, 204–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobbins, G. R. & Zaccaro, S. J. (1986). The effects of group cohesion and leader behaviour on subordinate satisfaction. Group and Organisational Studies, 11, 203–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorenbosch, L., Sanders, K. & De Reuver, R. (2006). Getting the HR message across: The linkage between line – HR consensus and ‘commitment strength’ among hospital employees. Management Revue, 17, 274–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flache, A. (1996). The Double Edge of Networks: An Analysis of the Effect of Informal Networks on Cooperation in Social Dilemmas. Amsterdam: Thesis Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flache, A. & Macy, M. W. (1996). The weakness of strong ties: Collective action failure in a highly cohesive group. Journal of Mathematical Sociology. 21, 3–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gouldner, A. W. (1960), The norm of redprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, P. S. (1986). The impact of task and technology on group performance. In P. Goodman (ed.) Designing Effective Work Groups. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 120–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. S. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91, 481–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guest, D. E. (1997). Human resource management and performance: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 8(3), 263–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guttman, L. (1952). Multiple group methods for common-factor analysis: Their basis, computation and interpretation. Psychometrika, 17, 209–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hage, J. (1980). Theories of Organisations: Form, Process, and Transformation. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handy, Ch. (1995). Trust and the virtual organisation. Harvard Business Review, May–June, 40–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, O. (1980). Incomplete contracts. In J. hatwetl, M. Milgate hr P. Newman. The New Palgrave: Allocation, Information and Market. London: Macmillan, 16–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hechter, M. (1987). Principles of Group Solidarity. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendriks, P. & Kiers, H. A. L. (1999). Confirmatory factor analysis methods compared: The multiple group method and maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Research Report, Department of Psychology, Groningen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinds, P.J., Carley, K. M., Krackhardt, D. & Wholey, D. (2000). Choosing work group members: Balancing similarity, competence and familiarity. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 81, 226–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organisations, and States. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • rioclson, H. (1999). Organisational anomie and worker consent. Work & Occuparion, 26, 292–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homans, G. C. (1961). Social Behaviour: Its Elementary Forms. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kidwell, Jr, R. E., Mossholder, K. W. & Bennett, N. (1997). Cohesiveness and organisational citizenship behaviour: A multilevel analysis using work groups and individuals. Journal of Management, 23, 775–793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koster, F. (2005). For the time being Accounting for inconclusive findings concerning the effects of temporary employment relationships on solidary behaviour of employees. Veenendaal: Universal Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koster, F., Hodson, R., Stokman, F. & Sanders, K. (2007). Solidarity through networks: The effects of task and informal interdependence on cooperation within teams. Employee Relations, 29, 117–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koster, F. & Sanders, K. (2006a) Serial solidarity: The effects of experiences and expectations on cooperative behaviour of employees. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18, 568–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koster, F. & Sanders, K. (2006b). Organisational Citizens or Cooperative Relationships? A social dilemma approach to solidary behaviour of employees. Personnel Review, 35, 519–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koster, F., Sanders, K. & Van Emmerik, H. (2003). Solidarity of Temporary Workers: The effects of temporal and network embeddedness on solidary behaviour of Ph.D. students. The Netherlands Journal of Social Sciences, 38, 65–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambooij, M. (2005). Promoting cooperation. Studies into the effects of long-term and short-term rewards on cooperation of employees. Veenendaal: Universal Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambooij, M., Flache, A., Sanders, K. & Siegers, J. (2007). Encouraging employees to cooperate. The effects of sponsored training and promotion practices on employees’ willingness to work overtime. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18, 1748–1767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LePine, J. A., Erez, A. & Johnson, D. E. (2002). The nature and dimensionality of organisational citizenship behaviour: A critical review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 52–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macaulay, S. (1963). Non-contractual relations in business. American Sociological Review, 28, 55–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macneil, I. R. (1980). The New Social Contract. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maier, M. (1999). On the gendered substructure of organisation: Dimensions and dilemmas of corporate masculinity. In G. N. Powell (ed.). Handbook of Gender and Work. Thousands Oaks, California: Sage Publications, 69–83.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, E. W. & Phelps, C. C. (1999). Taking charge at work: Extra-role efforts to initiate workplace change. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 403–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Motowidlo, S. J., Borman, W. D., & Schmit, M. J. (1997). A theory of individual differences in task and contextual performance. Human Performance, 10, 71–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Motowidlo, S. J. & Van Scotter, J. R. (1994). Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 475–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie, S., Podsakoff, P. & Fetter, R. (1991). Organisational citizenship behaviour and objective productivity as determinants of supervisorial evaluations of salespersons’ performance. Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 50, 123–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, G. J. (1992). Managerial Dilemmas: the Political Economy of Hierarchy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Motowidlo, S. J. (2000). Some basic issues related to contextual performance and organisational citizenship behaviour in human resource management. Human Resource Management Review, 10, 115–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mowday, R. T., Steers, L. W. & Porter, R. M. (1982). Employee-Organisation Linkages: The Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism, and Turn Over. New York, NY: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Organ, D. W. (1988).Organisational Citizenship Behaviour: The Good Soldier Syndrome. Lexington: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Organ, D. W. (1990). The Motivational Basis of Organisational Citizenship Behaviour. In Staw, B. M. and Cummings, L. L. (eds), Research in Organisational Behaviour. Greenwich: JAI Press, 43–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behaviour: It’s construct clean-up time. Human Performance, 10, 85–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Organ, D. W. & Lingl, A. (1995). Personality, satisfaction, and organisational citizenship behaviour. Journal of Social Psychology, 135, 339–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. (1982). Organisation and Organisation Theory. Boston: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piore, M. J. (2002). Thirty years later: Internal labor markets, flexibility and the new economy. Journal of Management and Governance, 6, 271–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B. & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organisational citizenship behaviours: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26, 513–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pond, S. B., Nacoste, R. W., Mohr, M. F. & Rodriguez, C. M. (1997). The measurement of organisational citizenship behaviour: Are we assuming too much? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27, 1527–1544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Probert, B. (1999). Mothers and the labourforce. Family Matters, 54, 60–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raub, W. (1997). Samenwerking in Duurzame Relaties en Sociale Cohesie. [Cooperation in long-term relationships and social cohesiveness]. Amsterdam: Thesis Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raub, W. & Weesie, J. (1990). Reputation and efficiency in social interactions: An example of network effects. American Journal of Sociology, 96, 626–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raub, W. & Weesie, J. (2000). The management of durable relations. In J. Weesie & W. Raub (eds) The Management of Durable Relations. Theoretical Models and Empirical Studies of Households and Organisations. Amsterdam: Thela Thesis, 1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rholes, W. S., Newman, L. S. & Ruble, D. N. (1990). Understanding self and other: Developmental and motivational aspects of perceiving others in terms of invariant dispositions. In E. T. Higgins & R. Sorrentino (eds) Handbook of Motivation and Cognition: Foundations of Social Behavior: Vol II (pp. 369–407). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roethlisberger, F. J. & Dickson, W. J. (1939). Management and the Worker: An Account of a Research Program Conducted by the Western Electric Company. Mass.: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, K. (2004). Playing truant within organisations: Informal relationships, work ethics and absenteeism. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19, 136–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, K., Emans, B. & Koster, F. (2004). Determinanten van solidair gedrag binnen organisaties: Een terugblik. [Determinants of solidary behaviour within modern organisations: A review]. Gedrag & Organisatie, 17, 120–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, K., Seminara, J. & Koster, F. (2006). Solidarity of women and men in the workplace: Individual characteristics or quality of relationships? In L. den Dulk, T. van der Lippe & J. Schippers (ed.) Emancipatie als Kwestie. Liber Amicorum voor Anneke van Doorne-Huiskes rond het thema vrouwen en beroepsparticipatie. Amsterdam: Dutch University Press, 79–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janclers, K. & Schyns, B. (2006a). Introduction: Trust, connict and cooperative behaviour: Considering reciprocity within organisations. Personnel Review, 35, 508–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, K. & Schyns, B. (2006b). Leadership and solidarity behaviour: Consensus in perception of employees within teams. Personnel Review, 35, 538–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, K., Schyns, B., Koster, F. & Rotteveel, C. (2003). Het stimuleren van solidair gedrag: Een kwestie van leiderschap [Stimulating solidarity: A matter of leadership]. Gedrag & Organisatie, 16, 237–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, K. & Van Emmerik, H. (2004). Does modern organisations and governance threat solidarity? Journal of Management and Governance, 8, 351–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, K., Van Emmerik, I. J. H. & Raub, W. (2002). Nieuwe vragen voor onderzoek naar solidair gedrag binnen moderne organisaties [New questions for research into solidary behaviour within modern organisations]. Gedrag & Organisatie, 15, 184–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, K., Van Emmerik, I. J. & Raub, W. (2005). Solidarität am arbeitsplatz: Fiktion, fakten und kräfte. In J. Berger. (Hg). ZerreiBt das Soziale Band. Beiträge zu einer aktuellen gesellschaftpolitischen Debatte. Frankfurt/New York: Campus Verlag, 121–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, K. & Hoekstra, S. K. (1998). Informal networks and absenteeism within an organisation. Computational and Mathematical Organisation Theory, 4, 149–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schor, J. B. (1992). The Overworked American. The Unexpected Decline of Leisure. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, V. & Vinnicombe, S. (2000). Gendered meanings of commitment from high technology engineering supervisors in the UK and Sweden. Gender, Work and Organisation, 7, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuler, R. S. & Jackson, S. E. (1995). Understanding human resource management in the context of organisations and their environment. Annual Review of Psychology, 46, 237–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seashore, S. E. (1954). Group Cohesiveness in the Industrial Work Group. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jmith, K. U., Carroll, J. & Ashtord, J. (1995). Intra- and interorganisational cooperation: Toward a research agenda. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 7–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W. and Near, J. P. (1983). Organisational citizenship behaviour: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, A. S., Pearce, J. L., Porter, L. W. Sr Tripoh, A. M. (1994). Alternative approaches to the employee-organisation relationship: Does investment in employees pay off? Academy of Management Journal, 40, 1089–1121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (2001). Why do people rely on others? Social identity and social aspects of trust. In K. S. Cook (ed.) Trust in Society. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torenvhed, R. & Velner, G. (1998). Informal networks and resistance to organisational change. Computational and Mathematical Organisation Theory, 4, 165–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Dyne, L., Cummings, L. L. & Parks, J. M. (1995). Extra-role behaviours: In pursuit of construct and definitional clarity (A bridge over muddied waters), in Staw, B. M. and Cummings, L. L. (eds), Research in Organisational Behaviour. Greenwich: JAI Press, 215–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dyne, L. L., Graham, J. W. & Dienesch, R. M. (1994). Organisational citizenship behaviour: Construct redefinition, measurement and validity. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 765–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Emmerik, H., Hermkens, P. & Sanders, K. (1998). Personeelsbeleid en rechtvaardigheidsgevoelens van medewerkers. [HRM practices and feelings of justice of employees]. Gedrag en Organisatie, 11(6), 385–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickens, P. D. (1995). The Ascendant Organisation: Combining Commitment and Control for Long-Term, Sustainable Business Success. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, L. J. & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17, 601–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1975). Market and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1996). The Mechanism of Governance. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Karin Sanders
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Organizational Behaviour programme within the Faculty of Business, AUT University, New Zealand

    Rachel L. Morrison

  2. University of Canterbury, New Zealand

    Sarah L. Wright (lecturer in Organisational Development and Leadership) (lecturer in Organisational Development and Leadership)

Copyright information

© 2009 Karin Sanders

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sanders, K. (2009). Cooperative Behaviours in Organizations. In: Morrison, R.L., Wright, S.L. (eds) Friends and Enemies in Organizations. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230248359_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation