Skip to main content

Teamwork, Ethics, and the Quality of Working Life

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: International Handbooks of Quality-of-Life ((IHQL))

Abstract

In recent times, teamwork has emerged as a popular way of organizing work. Not only is teamwork presented as being more effective than the alternatives, but it is also commonly argued that it can improve the quality of our working lives because it acknowledges the human tendency toward cooperative behavior in groups. This chapter subjects teamwork, as particular configuration of the employment relationship, to ethical scrutiny. An ethical consideration of the employment relationship, taking its lead economics, usually focuses on the identification and enforcement of contractually binding obligations. Reflecting the methodological individualism of much of today’s economics, analytically, this commonly involves understanding the moral dimension of the dyadic relationship between employer and employee or “principal” and “agent.” With the rise of teamwork, however, this dyadic relationship becomes analytically less tractable. This is because, under conditions of teamwork, the contract is usually struck with the team as a whole, and as such, it is difficult to disaggregate the collective obligations of the team into a set of individual obligations. In light of this difficulty, this chapter considers some alternative ways of understanding the moral dimension of teamwork. These include, inter alia, Kantian and Aristotelian ethics, but the chapter concludes with a critical consideration of developments in genetic biology and the cognitive sciences that appear to support our understanding of teamwork as an extension of our human nature.

Keywords

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.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   329.99
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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 62, 335–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alchian, A., & Demsetz, H. (1972). Production, information costs, and economic organization. American Economic Review, 62, 777–795.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andras, P., & Lazarus, J. (2003). Cooperation, risk and the evolution of teamwork. In:N. Gold (Ed.), Teamwork: Multi-Professional Perspectives (pp.56–77). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andras, P., & Lazarus, J. (2005). Cooperation, risk and the evolution of teamwork. In N. Gold (Ed.), Teamwork: Multi-disciplinary perspectives (pp. 56–77). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P., & Kalleberg, A. (2000). Manufacturing advantage: Why high performance work systems pay off. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Appelbaum, E., & Batt, R. (1994). The new American workplace. Ithaca, NY: ILR Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arce M, D. M., & Gunn, L. B. (2005). Working well with others: The evolution of teamwork. Public Choice, 123, 115–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barker, J. R. (1993). Tightening the iron cage: Concertive control in self-managing teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 408–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barker, J. R. (1999). The discipline of teamwork: Participation and concertive control. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barley, S. R. (1990). The alignment of technology and structure through roles and networks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 61–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bendix, R. (1974). Work and authority in industry: Ideologies of management in the course of industrialization. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casson, M. (1991). The economics of business culture. Game theory, transactions costs, and economic performance. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A. E. (2001). What really matters in a job? Hedonic measurement using quit data. Labour Economics, 8, 223–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coase, R. (1937). The nature of the firm. Economica, 4, 386–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coletti, A. L., Sedatole, K. L., & Towry, K. L. (2005). The effect of control systems on trust and cooperation in collaborative environments. The Accounting Review, 80, 477–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., & Greenberg, J. (2003). Organizational justice: A fair assessment of the state of the literature. In J. Greenberg (Ed.), Organizational behavior: The state of the science (pp. 165–210). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Confer, J. C., Easton, J. A., Fleischman, D. S., Goetz, C. D., Lewis, D. M. G., Perilloux, C., & Buss, D. M. (2010). Evolutionary psychology: Controversies, questions, prospects, and limitations. American Psychologist, 65(2), 110–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cotton, J. L. (1993). Employee involvement: Methods for improving performance and work attitudes. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dayan, M., & Di Benedetto, C. A. (2008). The impact of procedural and interactional justice perceptions on teamwork quality. The Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 23, 566–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dierdorff, E. C., Bell, S. T., & Belohlav, J. A. (2011). The power of “we”: Effects of psychological collectivism on team performance over time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 247–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • du Gay, P. (2000). In praise of bureaucracy: Weber – organization – ethics. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emery, F. E., & Thorsrud, E. (1976). Democracy at work: The report of the Norwegian industrial democracy program. Leiden, The Netherland: Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R. A. (1930). The genetical theory of natural selection. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folbre, N. (2009). Greed, lust & gender: A history of economic ideas. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. B. (1978). Job satisfaction as an economic variable. American Economic Review, 68, 135–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gandz, J., & Bird, F. G. (1996). The ethics of empowerment. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 383–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gouldner, A. (1955). Metaphysical pathos and the theory of bureaucracy. The American Political Science Review, 49, 496–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grenier, G. (1989). Inhuman relations: Quality circles and anti-unionism in American industry. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hackman, J. R. (2002). Leading teams: Setting the stage for great performances. Boston: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haidt, J. (2007). The new synthesis in moral psychology. Science, 316, 998–1002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haidt, J., & Joseph, C. (2008). The moral mind: How five sets of innate intuitions guide the development of many culture-specific virtues, and perhaps even modules. In P. Carruthers, S. Laurence, & S. Stich (Eds.), The innate mind: Foundations for the future (Vol. 3, pp. 367–392). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, W. D. (1964). The genetical theory of social behavior: I and II. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7, 383–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henrich, J., Ensminger, J., McElreath, R., Barr, A., Barrett, C., Bolyanatz, A., Cardenas, J. C., Gurven, M., Gwako, E., Henrich, N., Lesorogol, C., Marlowe, F., Tracer, D., & Ziker, J. (2010). Markets, religion, community size, and the evolution of fairness and punishment. Science, 327, 1480–1484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henrich, N., & Henrich, J. (2007). Why humans cooperate: A cultural and evolutionary explanation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homans, G. (1950). The human group. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • House, R. J., & Kerr, S. (1973). Organizational independence, leader behavior, and managerial practices: A replicated study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 58, 173–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iaffaldano, M. T., & Muchinski, P. M. (1985). Job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 251–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingham, A. G., Levinger, G., Graves, J., & Peckham, V. (1974). The Ringelmann effect: Studies of group size and group performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 371–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jehn, K. A., & Bendersky, C. (2003). Intragroup conflict in organizations: A contingency perspective on the conflict-outcome relationship. In B. Staw & R. Kramer (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 26, pp. 189–244). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jehn, K., & Mannix, E. A. (2001). The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 238–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koford, K., & Penno, M. (1992). Accounting, principal-agent theory, and self-interested behavior. In N. E. Bowie & R. E. Freeman (Eds.), Ethics and agency theory: An introduction (pp. 127–142). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korsgaard, M. A., Brodt, S. E., & Sapienza, H. J. (2003). Trust, identity and attachment: Promoting individuals’ cooperation in groups. In M. West, D. Tjosvold, & K. Smith (Eds.), International handbook of organizational teamwork and cooperative working (pp. 113–130). Chichester, UK: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kravitz, D. A., & Martin, B. (1986). Ringelmann rediscovered: The original article. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 936–941.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawler, E. E. (1992). The ultimate advantage: Creating the high-involvement organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCall, J. J., & Werhane, P. H. (2009). Employment at will and employee rights. In G. G. Brenkert & T. L. Beauchamp (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of business ethics (pp. 602–627). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • McCloskey, D. (2010). Bourgeois dignity: Why economics can’t explain the modern world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. C., & Form, W. H. (1951). Industrial sociology: The sociology of work organizations. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohr, W. L., & Mohr, H. (1983). Quality circles: Changing images of people at work. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, G. E. (1903). Principia ethica. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholson, N. (1997). Evolutionary psychology: Toward a new view of human nature and organizational society. Human Relations, 50, 1053–1078.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholson, N. (2000). Executive instinct: Managing the human animal in the information age. New York: Crown Business Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholson, N. (2005). Objections to evolutionary psychology: Reflections, implications and the leadership exemplar. Human Relations, 58, 393–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholson, N., & White, R. (2006). Darwinism: A new paradigm for organizational behavior? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 111–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noe, T. H., & Rebello, M. J. (1994). The dynamics of business ethics and economic activity. American Economic Review, 84, 531–547.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. (2001). Upheavals of thought: The intelligence of emotions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pelz, D. C. (1951). Leaders within a hierarchical organization. Journal of Social Issues, 7, 49–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, R., & White, B. D. (1999). The evolution of social structure: Why biology matters. Academy of Management Review, 24, 843–853.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Post, J. F. (1995). Naturalism. In R. Audi (Ed.), The Cambridge dictionary of philosophy (pp. 517–518). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1972). A theory of justice. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richerson, P., & Boyd, R. (2005). Not by genes alone: How culture transformed human evolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberson, Q. (2006). Justice in teams: The activation and role of sensemaking in the emergence of justice climates. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100, 177–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roethlisberger, F. J., & Dickson, W. J. (1939). Management and the worker. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D. M., Hornung, S., & Kim, T. G. (2009). Testing idiosyncratic deal propositions: Timing, content, and the employment relationship. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74, 338–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandel, M. J. (2009). Justice: What’s the right thing to do? New York: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schluchter, W. (1996). Paradoxes of modernity: Culture and conduct in the theory of Max Weber. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sewell, G. (1998). The discipline of teams: The control of team-based industrial work through electronic and peer surveillance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 397–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sewell, G. (2005). Doing what comes naturally? Why we need a practical ethics of teamwork. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16, 202–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sewell, G., & Barker, J. R. (2006). Coercion versus care: Using irony to make sense of organizational surveillance. Academy of Management Review, 31, 934–961.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slocum, J. W., & Sims, H. P. (1980). A typology for integrating technology, organization, and job design. Human Relations, 33, 193–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sumner, L.W. (1996). Welfare, happiness and ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, C. (1991). The dialogical self. In D. R. Hiley, J. F. Bohman, & R. Shusterman (Eds.), The interpretive turn: Philosophy, science, culture (pp. 304–314). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tjosvold, D. (2006). Defining conflict and making choices about its management: Lighting the dark side of organizational life. International Journal of Conflict Management, 17, 87–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1990). The past explains the present: Emotional adaptations and the structure of ancestral environments. Ethology and Sociobiology, 11, 418–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: EP and the generation of culture (pp. 19–136). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2002). On the universality of human nature and the uniqueness of the individual: The role of genetics and adaptation. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 187–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Towry, K. L. (2003). Control in a teamwork environment – The impact of social ties on the effectiveness of mutual monitoring contracts. The Accounting Review, 78(4), 1069–1095.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trivers, R. (1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 46, 35–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaughan, D. (1999). The dark side of organizations: Mistake, misconduct, and disaster. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 271–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, C. N. (1977). Relationships among pay, race, sex, occupational prestige, supervision, work autonomy, and job satisfaction in a national sample. Personnel Psychology, 30, 437–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (1962). Basic concepts in sociology. London: Peter Owen.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, M. A., Tjosvold, D., & Smith, K. G. (2003). Teamwork and cooperation: Fundamentals of organizational effectiveness. In M. A. West, D. Tjosvold, & K. G. Smith (Eds.), International handbook of organizational teamwork and cooperative working (pp. 3–8). Chichester, UK: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, M. A. (2004). Effective teamwork: Practical lessons from organizational research (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and antitrust implications. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, E. O. (1978). Man: From sociobiology to sociology. In A. L. Caplan (Ed.), The sociobiology debate (pp. 227–238). New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Graham Sewell Ph.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sewell, G. (2012). Teamwork, Ethics, and the Quality of Working Life. In: Reilly, N., Sirgy, M., Gorman, C. (eds) Work and Quality of Life. International Handbooks of Quality-of-Life. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4059-4_18

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics