Teamwork pp 1-21 | Cite as

Introduction: Teamwork in Theory and in Practice

  • Natalie Gold


Teamwork is studied in many disciplines, but there is as yet no comprehensive theory of teams. This book brings together perspectives on teamwork from evolutionary biology, psychology, economics, robotics, philosophy, management and artificial intelligence. They provide a wide-ranging survey of current research on teams, using methodologies as diverse as laboratory experiments and evolutionary modelling, epistemic logic and the programming of robots. But teamwork is not only of theoretical, academic interest. It is also of practical application in our everyday lives. Obvious examples are found in the workplace and on the sports field but, if we allow that a team is a group of agents with a common goal which can only be achieved by appropriate combinations of individual activities, then it becomes clear that teamwork is a phenomenon which occurs in a wide variety of forms. Teamwork is commonly found when people engage in any type of joint activity. Professionals such as managers and coaches may have a specialist expertise but we all have some experience of teamwork.


Nash Equilibrium Rational Choice Group Identity Social Dilemma Rational Choice Theory 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bacharach, M. (1999) ‘A Contribution to the Theory of Cooperation’, Research in Economics 53, 117–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bacharach, M. (2005) Beyond Individual Choice, N. Gold and R. Sugden (eds) (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
  3. Beddoes-Jones, F. (1999) Thinking Styles: Relationship strategies that work! (Stainby: BJA Associates).Google Scholar
  4. Beibin, R. M. (2000) Beyond the Team (Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann).Google Scholar
  5. Beibin, M. (1981) Management Teams: Why they succeed or fail (London: Butterworth Heinemann).Google Scholar
  6. Berry, D. (1997) How Implicit is Implicit Learning (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bornstein, G., Gneezy, U., and Nagel, R. (2002) ‘The effect of intergroup competition on group coordination: An experimental study,’ Games and Economic Behavior, 41(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brewer, M. (1991) ‘The social self: on being the same and different at the same time’, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 17: 475–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brewer, M. B. and Kramer, R. M. (1986) ‘Choice behavior in social dilemmas: Effects of social identity, group size and decision framing’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 543–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brewer, M. and Miller, N. (1996), Intergroup Relationships (Open University Press: Buckingham).Google Scholar
  11. Frey, B. and Jegen, R. (2001) ‘Motivation Crowding Theory: A Survey of Empirical Evidence’, Journal of Economic Surveys 15(5), 589–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Goodman J. P. Campbell and R. J. Campbell (1988) Productivity in organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  13. Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J. and Higgs, A. C. (1993) ‘Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups’, Personnel Psychology, 46, 823–850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Caporael, L. R. (1997). ‘The evolution of truly social cognition: The core configuration model’, Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 276–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cattell, R. (1947) ‘Confirmation and Clarification of Personality Factors’, Psychometrica 12, 197–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cookson, R. (2000) ‘Framing Effects in Public Goods Games’, Experimental Economics, 3, 55–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dawes, R. M. Orbell, J. and van der Kragt, A. (1990) ‘The Limits of Multilateral Promising’, Ethics 100, 616–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dawkins, R. (1976) The Selfish Gene (New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
  19. De Cremer, D. and Van Vugt, M. (1999) ‘Social Identification Effects in Social Dilemmas: a Transformation of Motives’, European Journal of Social Psychology 29, 871–893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dennett, D. (1995) Darwin’s Dangerous Idea (London: Penguin).Google Scholar
  21. Dion, K. L. (1973) ‘Cohesiveness as a Determinant of Ingroup-Outgroup Bias’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 28(2), 163–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Elster, J. (2000) Ulysses Unbound (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Elster, J. (1999) Alchemies of the Mind (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  24. Eysenck, H. J. (1991) ‘Dimensions of Personality 16, 5, or 3? Criteria for a Taxonomic Paradigm’, Personality and Individual Differences 12, 773–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hamilton, W. (1964) ‘The genetical evolution of social behaviour I & II’, Journal of Theoretical Biology 7, 1–16, 17–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hirschman, A. (1970) Loyalty, Voice and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States (Cambridge Ma.: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
  27. Holmstrom, B. (1982) ‘Moral hazard in teams’, Bell Journal of Economics 13, 324–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kramer, R. M. and Brewer, M. B. (1984) ‘Effects of Group Identity on Resource Use in a Simulated Commons Dilemma’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(5), 1044–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kreps, D. (1990) A Course in Micro-economic Theory (New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf).Google Scholar
  30. Mackie, G. (1997) ‘The Intrinsic Credibility of Social Contracts: Communication and Commitment in Social Dilemma Experiments’, Paper delivered at the Cooperative Reasoning Seminar, University of Oxford mimeo.Google Scholar
  31. Magjuka, R. and Baldwin, T. (1991) ‘Team-based employee involvement programs: Effects of design and administration’, Personnel Psychology 44(4), 793–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Marschak, J. and Radner, R. (1972) Economic Theory of Teams (Yale Univ Press, New Haven).Google Scholar
  33. McCrae, R. R. and John, O. P. (1992) ‘An Introduction to the Five Factor Model and its Applications’, Journal of Personality 60, 175–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Meyerson, D., Weick, K. E., and Kramer, R. M. (1996) Swift trust and temporary groups. In R. M. Kramer and T. R. Tyler (eds), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 166–195). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Oakes, P., Haslam, A., and Turner, J. (1994) Stereotyping and Social Reality (Blackwell: Oxford).Google Scholar
  36. Orr, S. (2001) ‘The economics of shame in work groups: How mutual monitoring can decrease cooperation in teams’, Kyklos 54, 49–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rabbie, J. and Horwitz, M. (1969) ‘Arousal of Ingroup-Outgroup Bias by a Chance Win or Loss’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 13(3), 269–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rabbie, J. M., Schot, J. C. and Visser, L. (1989) ‘Social identity theory: A conceptual and empirical critique from the perspective of a behavioural interaction model’, Advances in group processes, 11, 139–174.Google Scholar
  39. Rasmusen, E. (1987) ‘Moral Hazard in Risk-Averse Teams’, RAND Journal of Economics, Vol. 18 (3) pp. 428–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Regan, D. (1980) Utilitarianism and Co-operation (Oxford University Press: Oxford).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ridley, M. (2000) The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature (London: Penguin).Google Scholar
  42. Sandel, M. (1982) Liberalism and the Limits of Justice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  43. Sober, E. and Wilson, D. (1998) Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior (Cambridge Ma.: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
  44. Sugden, R. (1993) ‘Thinking as a Team: Towards an Explanation of Nonselfish Behavior’, Social Philosophy and Policy 10, 69–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Strotz, R. H. (1955–6) ‘Myopia and Inconsistency in Dynamic Utility Maximization’, Review of Economic Studies 23, 165–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tajfel, H. (1970) ‘Experiments in intergroup discrimination’, Scientific American 223, 96–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S., and Wetherell, M. (1987) Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory (Blackwell, Oxford).Google Scholar
  48. Vega-Redondo, F. (1996) Evolution, Games and Economic Behaviour (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Von Neuman, J. and Morgenstern, O. (1944) Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
  50. West, M. A. (2002) ‘Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups’, Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51, 355–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wilson, W. and Katayani, M. (1968) ‘Intergroup Attitudes and Strategies in Games Between Opponents of the Same or of a Different Race’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 9, 24–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Natalie Gold 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Natalie Gold

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations