Status: ongoing

Description

Multiple team membership (MTM) has become a prevalent phenomenon in project-based work. Mainly driven by efficiency reasons, most organizations rely on project-team structures with individuals being assigned to multiple projects simultaneously (O’Leary et al., 2011). Yet, an increasing number of project workers report that MTM leads to intensive pressure and stress, eventually resulting in poor well-being and burnout (Mortensen & Gardner, 2017; Pluut et al., 2014). Particularly high performing individuals are often deployed in many teams and thus are exposed to risks accompanied by this work setup (van de Brake et al., 2018). MTM as a concept is characterized by different team, team member, and task-related variables, as well as the interplay of these different variables resulting in time-sharing, multitasking, and context switching from a processual perspective. These multifaceted characteristics of multiteam-work hold various stressor-inducing demand conditions on the individual level. Results of a literature review on MTM research have revealed three categories of MTM-specific stressors: (1) multitasking, with task fragmentation and work interruptions as the most prominent demand conditions; (2) workload, referring to the overarching sum of challenges when working in two or more teams simultaneously; and (3) context, including role ambiguity as the most prominent stressor (Trautwein, 2023).
While MTM is omnipresent in the workplace, research on MTM is still in its early stages (Geraldi & Söderlund, 2018). Little is known about the challenges and difficulties of working in multi-project teams (Margolis, 2020). Initial MTM research has mainly focused on the organizational or system level, investigating efficiency and performance issues (e.g., Bertolotti et al., 2015), with employees being conceptualized as a resource to be maximized (Margolis, 2020). However, a sole efficiency orientation often turns out to be a short-term perspective. Employees’ well-being is vital to firms' sustainable development and long-term performance, both from an economic and social point of view (Di Fabio, 2017; Nielsen et al., 2017). Yet, considering the growing presence of stress-induced sickness in MTM work, multi-project workers might suffer from a crucial lack of resources to adequately manage the multiple demands, which eventually can outweigh any positive aspects of MTM. Thus, both researchers and practitioners call for investigating how multi-project workers respond to MTM-induced stress (e.g., Delisle, 2020) and how individuals and teams can be supported in multi-project work from an organizational perspective (e.g., Berger et al., 2022).
Given the research gap and the importance of the topic, the aim of this project is to uncover and explain strategies for mitigating stress and its’ negative effects in multiteam work. For this purpose, an embedded case study of an internationally leading manufacturing company based in Germany will be conducted corresponding to a multi-project organization in which employees are assigned to a variety of projects.

Involved Persons

• Yannik Trautwein, M.Sc.
• Prof. Dr. Marion Büttgen

References

• Berger, S., van de Brake, H. J., & Bruch, H. (2022). Resource leverage, resource depletion: A multilevel perspective on multiple team membership. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(2), 298–309. doi.org/10.1037/apl0000889

• Bertolotti, F., Mattarelli, E., Vignoli, M., & Macrì, D. M. (2015). Exploring the relationship between multiple team membership and team performance: The role of social networks and collaborative technology. Research Policy, 44(4), 911–924. doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.01.019

• Delisle, J. (2020). Working time in multi-project settings: How project workers manage work overload. International Journal of Project Management, 38(7), 419–428. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2020.04.001

• Di Fabio, A. (2017). The Psychology of Sustainability and Sustainable Development for Well-Being in Organizations. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1534. doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01534

• Geraldi, J. , & Söderlund, J. (2018). Project studies: What it is, where it is going. Interna- tional Journal of Project Management, 36 (1), 55–70 . doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.06.004

• Margolis, J. (2020). Multiple Team Membership: An Integrative Review. Small Group Research, 51(1), 48–86. doi.org/10.1177/1046496419883702

• Mortensen, M., & Gardner, H. K. (2017). The overcommitted organization. Harvard Business Review, 95(5), 58–65.

• Nielsen, K., Nielsen, M. B., Ogbonnaya, C., Känsälä, M., Saari, E., & Isaksson, K. (2017). Workplace resources to improve both employee well-being and performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Work & Stress, 31(2), 101–120. doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2017.1304463

• O’Leary, M., Mortensen, M., & Woolley, A. W. (2011). Multiple Team Membership: A Theoretical Model of its Effects on Productivity and Learning for Individuals and Teams. Academy of Management Review, 36(3), 461–478. doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2011.61031807

• Pluut, H., Flestea, A. M., & Curşeu, P. L. (2014). Multiple team membership: A demand or resource for employees? Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 18(4), 333–348. doi.org/10.1037/gdn0000016
  Trautwein, Y. (in press). Multiproject Work in Servitized Organizations – A Review and Framework of Stressors and Strains Emerging from Multiple Team Membership. In Bruhn, Hadwich (Hg.) in press – Gestaltung des Wandels im Dienstleistungsmanagement.

• van de Brake, H. J., Walter, F., Rink, F. A., Essens, P. J. M. D., & van der Vegt, G. S. (2018). The dynamic relationship between multiple team membership and individual job performance in knowledge-intensive work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(9), 1219–1231. doi.org/10.1002/job.2260