TY - JOUR
AU - Frese, Michael
AB -  DAVID A. HARRISON* AND STEPHEN E. HUMPHREY Department of Management & Organization Smeal College of Business, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, U.S.A. Organizations are defined by people getting together – pooling their energy and resources – to achieve broad goals they could not have achieved on their own. To reach those broad goals, organizations attract members, form structures and systems, and create products, services, or knowledge to be delivered at particular points in time. Because of the complexity involved in creating such high-quality and timely deliverables, differentiation of individual roles within the organization’s structures and systems is necessary. Such role differentiation is also manifest in organizations. Jobs vary. Tasks vary. They do so in ostensibly orderly ways. Classic approaches to work design capture this variation and a priori specialization, induce its underlying dimensions, and connect those dimensions via perceptual and cognitive mechanisms to individual affective and behavioral outcomes (e.g., Hackman & Oldham, 1975, 1976, 1980; Sims, Szilagy, & Keller, 1976). Oh . . . and . . . welcome to Management 101. Bow Down To Sovereign Tasks This modular viewpoint is clearly part of the orthodoxy of traditional work design research (Hackman & Oldham, 1975, 
TI - Designing for diversity or diversity for design? Tasks, interdependence, and within‐unit differences at work
JF - Journal of Organizational Behavior
DO - 10.1002/job.608
DA - 2010-02-01
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/wiley/designing-for-diversity-or-diversity-for-design-tasks-interdependence-OiveEyf6r4
SP - 328
EP - 337
VL - 31
IS - 2‐3
DP - DeepDyve
ER -