Leader Integrative Capabilities: A Catalyst for Effective Interdisciplinary Teams



This chapter adds to a growing body of literature that seeks to understand the role of leaders in disciplinary diverse teams, and extends research that documents the importance of leaders for enhancing team effectiveness. We propose that leaders with integrative capabilities will have greater success in helping disciplinary diverse teams overcome the obstacles of cross-boundary collaboration. We define leader integrative capability as a set of skills and behaviors that a team leader can use to bridge intellectual distance and enable knowledge sharing and integration. Throughout this chapter, we detail the integrative capabilities and behaviors that leaders can exhibit to enhance team members’ ability to recognize, share, and integrate their knowledge resources more effectively.


Leadership Team science Integrative capacity Teams 


  1. Amabile TM, Schatzel EA, Moneta GB, Kramer SJ. Leader behaviors and the work environment for creativity: perceived leader support. Leadersh Q. 2004;15(1):5–32. Scholar
  2. Amason AC, Sapienza HJ. The effects of top management team size and interaction norms on cognitive and affective conflict. J Manag. 1997;1997:495516.Google Scholar
  3. Ancona DG, Caldwell DF. Bridging the boundary: external activity and performance in organizational teams. Adm Sci Q. 1992;37:634–65.Google Scholar
  4. Antonakis J, House RJ. Instrumental leadership: measurement and extension of transformational–transactional leadership theory. Leadersh Q. 2014;25(4):746771.Google Scholar
  5. Ayoko OB, Konrad AM. Leaders’ transformational, conflict, and emotion management behaviors in culturally diverse workgroups. Equality Diversity Inclusion. 2012;31:694–724.Google Scholar
  6. Balakrishnan AD, Kiesler S, Cummings J, Zadeh R. Research team integration: what it is and why it matters. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW ‘11). New York, NY: ACM Press; 2011.Google Scholar
  7. Basadur M. Leading others to think innovatively together: creative leadership. Leadersh Q. 2004;15(1):103–21.Google Scholar
  8. Basu R, Green SG. Leader-member exchange and transformational leadership: an empirical examination of innovative behaviors in leader-member dyads. J Appl Soc Psychol. 1997;27(6):477–99.Google Scholar
  9. Börner K, Contractor N, Falk-Krzesinski HJ, Fiore SM, Hall KL, Keyton J, Uzzi B. A multi-level systems perspective for the science of team science. Sci Transl Med. 2010;2(49):49cm24-49cm24.Google Scholar
  10. Cannon-Bowers J, Salas E, Converse S. Shared mental models in expert team decision making. In: Castellan Jr NJ, editor. Individual and group decision making: current issues. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1993. p. 221–46.Google Scholar
  11. Carmeli A, Gittell JH. High-quality relationships, psychological safety, and learning from failures in work organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior. 2009;30(6):709–29.Google Scholar
  12. Carmeli A, Reiter-Palmon R, Ziv E. Inclusive leadership and employee involvement in creative tasks in the workplace: the mediating role of psychological safety. Creat Res J. 2010;22:250–60.Google Scholar
  13. Carmeli A, Sheaffer Z, Binyamin G, Reiter-Palmon R, Shimoni T. Transformational leadership and creative problem-solving: the mediating role of psychological safety and reflexivity. J Creat Behav. 2014;48:115–35.Google Scholar
  14. Carter SM, West MA. Reflexivity, effectiveness, and mental health in BBC-TV production teams. Small Group Res. 1998;29:583–601.Google Scholar
  15. Clegg C, Unsworth K, Epitropaki O, Parker G. Implicating trust in the innovation process†. J Occup Organ Psychol. 2002;75(4):409–22.Google Scholar
  16. Cronin MA, Weingart LR. Representational gaps, information processing, and conflict in functionally diverse teams. Acad Manag Rev. 2007;32:761–73.Google Scholar
  17. Cronin MA, Bezrukova K, Weingart LR, Tinsley CH. Subgroups within a team: the role of cognitive and affective integration. J Organ Behav. 2011;32:831–49.Google Scholar
  18. Cummings JN, Kiesler S. Coordination costs and project outcomes in multiuniversity collaborations. Res Policy. 2007;36:1620–34.Google Scholar
  19. Curşeu PL, Schruijer SG. Does conflict shatter trust or does trust obliterate conflict? Revisiting the relationships between team diversity, conflict, and trust. Group Dyn Theory Res Pract. 2010;14(1):66.Google Scholar
  20. Davis MH. Empathy: a social psychological approach. Madison, WI: Westview Press; 1996.Google Scholar
  21. Davis JP, Eisenhardt KM. Rotating leadership and collaborative innovation recombination processes in symbiotic relationships. Adm Sci Q. 2011;56(2):159–201.Google Scholar
  22. Dinh JE, Lord RG, Gardner WL, Meuser JD, Liden RC, Hu J. Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. Leadersh Q. 2014;25(1):36–62.Google Scholar
  23. van den Berg W, Curseu PL, Meeus MTH. Emotion regulation and conflict transformation in multi-team systems. Int J Confl Manag. 2014;25:171–88.Google Scholar
  24. Durham CC, Knight D, Locke EA. Effects of leader role, team-set goal difficulty, efficacy, and tactics on team effectiveness. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1997;72:203–31.Google Scholar
  25. Edmondson A. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Adm Sci Q. 1999;44:350–83.Google Scholar
  26. Falk-Krzesinski HJ, Börner K, Contractor N, Fiore SM, Hall KL, Keyton J, Uzzi B. Advancing the science of team science. Clin Transl Sci. 2010;3(5):263–6.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Faraj S, Sproull L. Coordinating expertise in software development teams. Manag Sci. 2000;46:1554–68.Google Scholar
  28. van Ginkel WP, van Knippenberg D. Group information elaboration and group decision making: the role of shared task representations. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 2008;105:82–97.Google Scholar
  29. van Ginkel WP, van Knippenberg D. Group leadership and shared task representations in decision making groups. Leadership Quarterly. 2012;23:94–106.Google Scholar
  30. van Ginkel W, Tindale RS, van Knippenberg D. Team reflexivity, development of shared task representations, and the use of distributed information in group decision making. Group Dyn Theory Res Pract. 2009;13:265–80.Google Scholar
  31. Gockel C, Brauner E. The benefits of stepping into others’ shoes: perspective taking strengthens transactive memory. Basic Appl Soc Psychol. 2013;35:222–30.Google Scholar
  32. Grant AM, Berry J. The necessity of others is the mother of invention: intrinsic and prosocial motivations, perspective-taking, and creativity. Acad Manag J. 2011;54:73–96.Google Scholar
  33. Gray B. Enhancing transdisciplinary research through collaborative leadership. Am J Prev Med. 2008;35:S124–32.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. Gross N, Kluge A. Predictors of knowledge-sharing behavior for teams in extreme environments: an example from the steel industry. J Cog Eng Decision Making. 2014;8:352–73.Google Scholar
  35. Gurtner A, Tschan F, Semmer NK, Nagele C. Getting groups to develop good strategies: effects of reflexivity interventions on team process, team performance, and shared mental models. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 2007;102:127–42.Google Scholar
  36. Hackman JR. From causes to conditions in group research. J Organ Behav. 2012;33:428–44.Google Scholar
  37. Hammond MM, Neff NL, Farr JL, Schwall AR, Zhao X. Predictors of individual-level innovation at work: a meta-analysis. Psychol Aesthet Creat Arts. 2011;5(1):90.Google Scholar
  38. Hargadon AB. Firms as knowledge brokers: lessons in pursuing continuous innovation. Calif Manag Rev. 1998;40(3):209–27.Google Scholar
  39. Hargadon AB, Bechky BA. When collections of creatives become creative collectives: a field study of problem solving at work. Organ Sci. 2006;17(4):484500.Google Scholar
  40. Harrison DA, Price KH, Gavin JH, Florey AT. Time, teams, and task performance: changing effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on group functioning. Acad Manag J. 2002;45:1029–45.Google Scholar
  41. Harvey S. Creative synthesis: exploring the process of extraordinary group creativity. Acad Manag Rev. 2014;39(3):324–43.Google Scholar
  42. Hauschildt J, Kirchmann E. Teamwork for innovation–the ‘troika’of promotors. R&D Manag. 2001;31(1):41–9.Google Scholar
  43. Henderson RM, Clark KB. Architectural innovation: the reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Adm Sci Q. 1990:9–30.Google Scholar
  44. Hoegl M, Parboteeah KP. Team reflexivity in innovative projects. R&D Manag. 2006;36:113–25.Google Scholar
  45. Hoever IJ, van Knippenberg D, van Ginkel WP, Barkema HG. Fostering team creativity: perspective taking as key to unlocking diversity’s potential. J Appl Psychol. 2012;97:982–96.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Hogg MA, van Knippenberg D, Rast DE. Intergroup leadership in organizations: leading across group and organizational boundaries. Acad Manag Rev. 2012;37:232–55.Google Scholar
  47. Homan AC, Van Knippenberg D, Van Kleef GA, De Dreu CK. Bridging faultlines by valuing diversity: diversity beliefs, information elaboration, and performance in diverse work groups. J Appl Psychol. 2007;92(5):1189.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Ilgen DR, Hollenbeck JR, Johnson M, Jundt D. Teams in organizations: from input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annu Rev Psychol. 2005;56:517–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Jackson SE. Diversity in the workplace: human resources initiatives. Guilford Press; 1992.Google Scholar
  50. Jehn KA. A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Adm Sci Q. 1995;40:256–82.Google Scholar
  51. Jones BF. As science evolves, how can science policy? Innov Policy Econ. 2011;11:103–31.Google Scholar
  52. Kearney E, Gebert D. Managing diversity and enhancing team outcomes: the promise of transformational leadership. J Appl Psychol. 2009;94:77–89.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. van Kleef GA, de Dreu CK, Manstead AS. The interpersonal effects of anger and happiness in negotiations. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2004;86:57–76.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Kerr NL, Tindale RS. Group performance and decision making. Annu Rev Psychol. 2004;55(1):623–655.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Klein KJ, Ziegert JC. Toward a science of leader development. In: Day DV, Zaccaro SJ, Halpin SM, editors. Leader development for transforming organizations: growing leaders for tomorrow. New York, NY: Routledge; 2014. p. 359–82.Google Scholar
  56. Klein KJ, Knight AP, Ziegert JC, Lim B, Saltz JL. When team members’ values differ: the moderating role of team leadership. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 2011;114:25–36.Google Scholar
  57. Kleingeld A, van Mierlo H, Arends L. The effect of goal setting on group performance: a meta-analysis. J Appl Psychol. 2011;9:1289–304.Google Scholar
  58. van Knippenberg D, de Dreu CKW, Homan AC. Work group diversity and group performance: an integrative model and research agenda. J Appl Psychol. 2004;89:1008–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Konradt U, Schippers MC, Garbers Y, Steenfatt C. Effects of guided reflexivity and team feedback on team performance improvement: the role of team regulatory processes and cognitive emergent states. Eur J Work Organ Psy. 2015;24:777–95.Google Scholar
  60. Konradt U, Otte K, Schippers MC, Steenfatt C. Reflexivity in teams: a review and new perspectives. J Psychol. 2016;150:153–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Kozlowski SWJ, Chao GT. Macrocognition, team learning, and team knowledge: origins, emergence, and measurement. In: Salas E, Fiore SM, Letsky MP, editors. Theories of team cognition: cross-disciplinary perspectives. New York, NY: Routledge; 2012. p. 19–48.Google Scholar
  62. Kozlowski SW, Ilgen DR. Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams [monograph]. Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2006;7:77–124.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Langfred CW. The downside of self-management: a longitudinal study of the effects of conflict on trust, autonomy, and task interdependence in self-managing teams. Acad Manag J. 2007;50:885–900.Google Scholar
  64. Lee P, Gillespie N, Mann L, Wearing A. Leadership and trust: their effect on knowledge sharing and team performance. Manag Learn. 2010;41:473–91.Google Scholar
  65. Lewis K, Belliveau M, Herndon B, Keller J. Group cognition, membership change, and performance: investigating the benefits and detriments of collective knowledge. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 2007;103:159–78.Google Scholar
  66. Lovelace K, Shapiro DL, Weingart LR. Maximizing cross-functional new product teams’ innovativeness and constraint adherence: a conflict communications perspective. Acad Manag J. 2001;44:779–93.Google Scholar
  67. Lyubovnika J, Legood A, Turner N, Mamakouka A. How authentic leadership influences team performance: the mediating role of team reflexivity. J Bus Ethics. in press.Google Scholar
  68. Mainemelis C, Kark R, Epitropaki O. Creative leadership: a multi-context conceptualization. Acad Manag Ann. 2015;9(1):393–482.Google Scholar
  69. Mannix EA, Neale MA, Goncalo JA, editors. Creativity in groups. Bingley, England: Emerald Group; 2009.Google Scholar
  70. Marks MA, Mathieu JE, Zaccarro SJ. A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Acad Manag Rev. 2001;26:356–76.Google Scholar
  71. Meng J, Fulk J, Yuan YC. The roles and interplay of intragroup conflict and team emotion management on information seeking behaviors in team contexts. Commun Res. 2015;42:675–700.Google Scholar
  72. Miller CC, Burke LM, Glick WH. Cognitive diversity among upper-echelon executives: implications for strategic decision processes. Strateg Manag J. 1998;19:39–58.Google Scholar
  73. Millikin JP, Hom PW, Manz CC. Self-management competencies in selfmanaging teams: their impact on multi-team system productivity. Leadership Quarterly. 2010;21:687–702.Google Scholar
  74. Moreland R. Transactive memory and job performance: helping workers learn who knows what. In: Thompson LL, Levine JM, Messick DM, editors. Shared cognition in organizations: the management of knowledge. New York, NY: Psychology Press; 1999. p. 3–32.Google Scholar
  75. Moreland RL, Thompson L. Transactive memory: learning who knows what in work groups and organizations. In: Levine JM, Moreland RL, editors. Small groups: key readings. New York, NY: Psychology Press; 2006. p. 327–46.Google Scholar
  76. Morgeson FP, DeRue DS, Karam EP. Leadership in teams: a functional approach to understanding leadership structures and processes. J Manag. 2010;36:5–39.Google Scholar
  77. Mumford MD. Where have we been, where are we going? Taking stock in creativity research. Creat Res J. 2003;15(2–3):107–20.Google Scholar
  78. Mumford MD, Scott GM, Gaddis B, Strange JM. Leading creative people: orchestrating expertise and relationships. Leadersh Q. 2002;13(6):705–50.Google Scholar
  79. National Research Council. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science. Washington. DC; The National Academies Press. 2015.
  80. Nembhard IM, Edmondson AC. Making it safe: the effects of leader inclusiveness and professional status on psychological safety and improvement efforts in health care teams. J Organ Behav. 2006;27:941–66.Google Scholar
  81. Nishii LH, Mayer DM. Do inclusive leaders help to reduce turnover in diverse groups? The moderating role of leader–member exchange in the diversity to turnover relationship. J Appl Psychol. 2009;94(6):1412.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Ocker RJ, Huang H, Benbunan-Fich R, Hiltz SR. Leadership dynamics in partially distributed teams: an exploratory study of the effects of configuration and distance. Group Decis Negot. 2011;20:273–92.Google Scholar
  83. Okhuysen GA, Eisenhardt KM. Integrating knowledge in groups: how formal interventions enable flexibility. Organ Sci. 2002;13:370–86.Google Scholar
  84. Paulus PB, Coskun H. Creative collaboration, group creativity, and team innovation. In: Levine J, editor. Group processes. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2012. p. 215–39.Google Scholar
  85. Paulus PB, Nijstad BA. Group creativity: an introduction. In: Paulus PB, Nijstad BA, editors. Group creativity: innovation through collaboration. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2003. p. 3–11.Google Scholar
  86. Perry-Smith JE, Shalley CE. The social side of creativity: a static and dynamic social network perspective. Acad Manag Rev. 2003;28(1):89–106.Google Scholar
  87. Perry-Smith JE. Social yet creative: the role of social relationships in facilitating individual creativity. Acad Manag J. 2006;49:85–101.Google Scholar
  88. Piccolo RF, Colquitt JA. Transformational leadership and job behaviors: the mediating role of core job characteristics. Acad Manag J. 2006;49(2):327340.Google Scholar
  89. Saporito B. The conspiracy to end cancer: a team-based, cross-disciplinary approach to cancer research is upending tradition and delivering results faster. Time Magazine. 2013, April;1.Google Scholar
  90. Salas, E., Dickinson, T. L., Converse, S. A., & Tannenbaum, S. I. (1992). Toward an understanding of team performance and training.Google Scholar
  91. Salazar MR, Lant TK, Fiore SM, Salas E. Facilitating innovation in diverse science teams through integrative capacity. Small Group Res. 2012;43:527–58.Google Scholar
  92. Schippers MC, den Hartog DN, Koopman PL, van Knippenberg D. The role of transformational leadership in enhancing team reflexivity. Hum Relat. 2008;61:1593–616.Google Scholar
  93. Schippers MC, West MA, Dawson JF. Team reflexivity and innovation: the moderating role of team context. J Manag. 2015;41:769–88.Google Scholar
  94. Schulz-Hardt S, Brodbeck FC, Mojzisch A, Kerschreiter R, Frey D. Group decision making in hidden profile situations: dissent as a facilitator for decision quality. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2006;91:1080–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. Scott SG, Bruce RA. Determinants of innovative behavior: a path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Acad Manag J. 1994;37(3):580607.Google Scholar
  96. Shin SJ, Zhou J. Transformational leadership, conservation, and creativity: evidence from Korea. Acad Manag J. 2003;46(6):703–14.Google Scholar
  97. Shin SJ, Zhou J. When is educational specialization heterogeneity related to creativity in research and development teams? Transformational leadership as a moderator. J Appl Psychol. 2007;92(6):1709.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. Simons TL, Peterson RS. Task conflict and relationship conflict in top management teams: the pivotal role of intragroup trust. J Appl Psychol. 2000;85:102–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. Slyngstad DJ, DeMichele G, Salazar MR. Team performance in knowledge work. The Wiley Blackwell handbook of the psychology of team working and collaborative processes; 2017. p. 43–71.Google Scholar
  100. Smith KG, Collins CJ, Clark KD. Existing knowledge, knowledge creation capability, and the rate of new product introduction in high-technology firms. Acad Manag J. 2005;48:346–57.Google Scholar
  101. Stasser G. Information salience and the discovery of hidden profiles by decision-making groups: a “thought experiment.”. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1992;52:156–81.Google Scholar
  102. Stasser G, Stewart DD, Wittenbaum GM. Expert roles and information exchange during discussion: the importance of knowing who knows what. J Exp Soc Psychol. 1995;31:244–65.Google Scholar
  103. Stokols D, Harvey R, Gress J, Fuqua J, Phillips K. In vivo studies of transdisciplinary scientific collaboration: lessons learned and implications for active living research. Am J Prev Med. 2005;28:202–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. Taylor A, Greve HR. Superman or the fantastic four? Knowledge combination and experience in innovative teams. Acad Manag J. 2006;49(4):723–40.Google Scholar
  105. Tekleab AG, Quigley NR, Tesluk PE. A longitudinal study of team conflict, conflict management, cohesion, and team effectiveness. Group Org Manag. 2009;34:170–205.Google Scholar
  106. Tierney P. LMX and creativity. The Oxford Handbook of Leader-Member Exchange 2015 175.Google Scholar
  107. Tjosvold D, Hui C, Yu Z. Conflict management and task reflexivity for team in role and extra-role performance in China. Int J Confl Manag. 2003;14:141–63.Google Scholar
  108. Tjosvold D, Tang MML, West M. Reflexivity for team innovation in China: the contribution of goal interdependence. Group Org Manag. 2004;29:540–59.Google Scholar
  109. Tjosvold D, Yu Z. Group risk taking: the constructive role of controversy in China. Group Org Manag. 2007;32(6):653–74.Google Scholar
  110. Van Knippenberg D, Sitkin SB. A critical assessment of charismatic— transformational leadership research: Back to the drawing board? Acad Manag Ann. 2013;7(1):1–60.Google Scholar
  111. Von Glinow M, Shapiro DL, Brett JM. Can we talk, and should we? Managing emotional conflict in multicultural teams. Acad Manag Rev. 2004;29:578–92.Google Scholar
  112. Weingart LR, Weldon E. Processes that mediate the relationship between a group goal and group member performance. Hum Perform. 1991;4(10):33–54.Google Scholar
  113. Weldon E, Yun S. The effects of proximal and distal goals on goal level, strategy development, and group performance. J Appl Behav Sci. 2000;36:336–44.Google Scholar
  114. West MA. Reflexivity and work group effectiveness: a conceptual integration. In: West MA, editor. Handbook of work group psychology. New York, NY: Wiley; 1996. p. 555–79.Google Scholar
  115. Widmer PS, Schippers MC, West MA. Recent developments in reflexivity research: a review. Psychol Everyday Activity. 2009;2:2–11.Google Scholar
  116. Williams HM, Parker SK, Turner NIH. Perceived dissimilarity and perspective taking within work teams. Group Org Manag. 2007;32:569–97.Google Scholar
  117. Williams KY, O’Reilly CA III. Demography and diversity in organizations. Res Organ Behav. 1998;20:77–140.Google Scholar
  118. Winter SJ, Berente N. A commentary on the pluralistic goals, logics of action, and institutional contexts of translational team science. Transl Behav Med. 2012;2(4):441–5.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  119. Woolley AW, Gerbasi ME, Chabris CF, Kosslyn SM, Hackman JR. Bringing in the experts: how team composition and collaborative planning jointly shape analytic effectiveness. Small Group Res. 2008;39:352–71.Google Scholar
  120. Wu D, Liao Z, Dai J. Knowledge heterogeneity and team knowledge sharing as moderated by internal social capital. Soc Behav Pers. 2015;43:423–36.Google Scholar
  121. Wuchty S, Jones BF, Uzzi B. The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science. 2007;316(5827):1036–8.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  122. Zaccaro SJ, Rittman AL, Marks MA. Team leadership. Leadership Quarterly. 2001;12:451–83.Google Scholar
  123. Zaccaro SJ, Heinen B, Shuffler M. Team leadership and team effectiveness. In: Salas E, Goodwin GF, Burke CS, editors. Team effectiveness in complex organizations: cross-disciplinary perspectives and approaches. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis; 2009. p. 83–111.Google Scholar
  124. Zerhouni E. Medicine: the NIH roadmap. Science. 2003;302(5642):63–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  125. Zhang Y, Fang Y, Wei K, Chen H. Exploring the role of psychological safety in promoting the intention to continue sharing knowledge in virtual communities. Int J Manag. 2010;30:325–436.Google Scholar
  126. Zhang X, Cao Q, Tjosvold D. Linking transformational leadership and team performance: a conflict management approach. J Manag Stud. 2011;48:1586–611.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Paul Merage School of BusinessUniversity of CaliforniaIrvineUSA
  2. 2.Claremont Graduate UniversityClaremontUSA
  3. 3.Lubin School of BusinessPace UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations