Cross-functional bridge in dyadic relationship

A review of the literature on cross-functional integration (2010–2020): trends and recommendations

Purpose

Structural and technological changes are driving functional reorganization in many organizations. To date, there are very few articles that explicitly, consistently and cumulatively focus on cross-functional integration. This paper aims to review and explore the literature that does directly address cross-functional integration.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors conducted a literature review within the general management domain for the time frame 2010 to 2020 and identified 71 relevant articles that provide an overview of current practices and trends.

Findings

This conceptual paper reviews this identified literature and outlines key trends, noteworthy articles and a summary of relevant theories, and provides an overview of outcomes linked to cross-functional integration in the literature. The paper concludes with a set of recommendations for practitioners and an outline of potential research areas for academic researchers, including a call for more theory integration, building and testing in the area of cross-functionality.

Originality/value

This paper is the first of its kind to attempt to summarize the literature on cross-functionality (published between 2010 and 2020), a currently very fragmented field of study spread out across different management disciplines.

Understanding the relationship between mental models, conflict and conflict asymmetry

Purpose

– The purpose of this study is to test theoretically based hypotheses linking task and team-shared mental models (SMMs) with multiple dimensions of conflict and conflict asymmetry. SMMs are viewed as an underlying mechanism of team processes. While current research has begun to clarify their influence on functional team processes, their influence on dysfunctional processes is still unknown.

Design/methodology/approach

– The survey was administered to 17 graduate business classes working on intense semester-long group projects. A total of 295 individual responses were received which comprised 90 (N = 90) teams.

Findings

– Results suggest that team SMMs reduce all dimensions of conflict and relationship conflict asymmetry, while task SMMs increase all dimensions of conflict and relationship conflict asymmetry.

Research limitations/implications

– This study captured the influence of SMMs on conflict at one stage of group development. Future research should examine the impact of SMMs on conflict at multiple stages of group development.

Originality/value

– This study contributes to the literature on both mental models and conflict. In addition, based on our literature review, it was the first to empirically link SMMs and conflict asymmetry.