[
Aubé, C., & Rousseau, V. (2005). Team Goal Commitment and Team Effectiveness: The Role of Task Interdependence and Supportive Behaviors. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 9(3), 189–204. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.9.3.189
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Aubé, C., Rousseau, V., & Tremblay, S. (2011). Team size and quality of group experience: The more the merrier? Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 15(4), 357–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025400
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In Klein, K. J. and Kozlowski, S. (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations (pp 349–381), Pfeiffer.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bryman, A., Cramer, D., De Barros, A. F., Lopes, D., & De Lima, L. P. (2004). Análise de dados em ciências sociais: introdução às técnicas utilizando o SPSS para Windows (3rd ed.). Celta Editora.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Burke, M. G., Finkelstein, L. M., & Dusig, M. S. (1999). On Average Deviation Indices for Estimating Interrater Agreement. Organizational Research Methods, 2(1), 49–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442819921004
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., & Higgs, A. C. (1993). Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology, 46(4), 823–847. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1993.tb01571.x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Chen, J., Neubaum, D. O., Reilly, R. B., & Lynn, G. S. (2015). The relationship between team autonomy and new product development performance under different levels of technological turbulence*. Journal of Operations Management, 33–34(1), 83–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2014.10.001
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cohen, S. M., & Ledford, G. E. (1994). The Effectiveness of Self-Managing Teams: A Quasi-Experiment. Human Relations, 47(1), 13–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872679404700102
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cohen, S. M., & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What Makes Teams Work: Group Effectiveness Research from the Shop Floor to the Executive Suite. Journal of Management, 23(3), 239–290. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639702300303
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Devine, D. J., & Philips, J. A. (2001). Do Smarter Teams Do Better. Small Group Research, 32(5), 507–532. https://doi.org/10.1177/104649640103200501
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gamero, N., González-Romá, V., & Peiró, J. M. (2008). The influence of intra-team conflict on work teams’ affective climate: A longitudinal study. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 81(1), 47–69. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317907x180441
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Haas, M. R. (2010). The Double-Edged Swords of Autonomy and External Knowledge: Analyzing Team Effectiveness in a Multinational Organization. Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 989–1008. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.54533180
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hoegl, M., & Parboteeah, P. (2006). Autonomy and team-work in innovative projects. Human Resource Management, 45(1), 67–79. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20092
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hüffmeier, J., & Hertel, G. (2011). Many cheers make light the work: how social support triggers process gains in teams. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 26(3), 185–204. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683941111112631
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hülsheger, U. R., Anderson, N., & Salgado, J. (2009). Team-level predictors of innovation at work: A comprehensive meta-analysis spanning three decades of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(5), 1128–1145. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015978
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ilgen, D. R., Hollenbeck, J. R., Johnson, M. K., & Jundt, D. K. (2005). Teams in Organizations: From Input-Process-Output Models to IMOI Models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56(1), 517–543. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070250
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Janz, B. D., Colquitt, J. A., & Noe, R. A. (1997). Knowledge worker team effectiveness: the role of autonomy, interdependence, team development, and contextual support variables. Personnel Psychology, 50(4), 877–904. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb01486.x.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jassawalla, A.R. & Sashittal, H.C. (2006). Collaboration in Cross-Functional Product Innovation Teams, in Beyerlein, M.M., Beyerlein, S.T. and Kennedy, F.A. (Ed.), Innovation through Collaboration: Advances in Interdisciplinary Studies of Work Teams Vol. 12 (pp. 1–25), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kirkman, B. L., Rosen, B., Tesluk, P. E., & Gibson, C. B. (2004). The impact of team empowerment on virtual team performance: the moderating role of face-to-face interaction. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 175–192. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159571
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing the Effectiveness of Work Groups and Teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7(3), 77–124. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00030.x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Langfred, C. W. (2000). The paradox of self-management: individual and group autonomy in work groups. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21(5), 563–585. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-1379(200008)21:5
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Langfred, C. W. (2005). Autonomy and Performance in Teams: The Multilevel Moderating Effect of Task Interdependence. Journal of Management, 31(4), 513–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206304272190
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Leach, D., Wall, T. D., Rogelberg, S. G., & Jackson, P. (2005). Team Autonomy, Performance, and Member Job Strain: Uncovering the Teamwork KSA Link. Applied Psychology, 54(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2005.00193.x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.83
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Manz, C. C., & Sims, H. P. (1987). Leading Workers to Lead Themselves: The External Leadership of Self-Managing Work Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32(1), 106. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392745
]Search in Google Scholar
[
McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and Performance (Vol. 14). Prentice Hall.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Moe, N. B., Šmite, D., Paasivaara, M., & Lassenius, C. (2021). Finding the sweet spot for organisational control and team autonomy in large-scale agile software development. Empirical Software Engineering, 26(5). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-021-09967-3
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Paolucci, N., Dimas, I. D., Zappala, S., Lourenço, P. B., & Rebelo, T. (2018). Transformational Leadership and Team Effectiveness: The Mediating Role of Affective Team Commitment. Revista De Psicología Del Trabajo Y De Las Organizaciones, 34(3), 135–144. https://doi.org/10.5093/jwop2018a16
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pearce, J. M., & Ravlin, E. C. (1987). The Design and Activation of Self-Regulating Work Groups. Human Relations, 40(11), 751–782. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872678704001104
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pessoa, C. C., Dimas, I. D., Lourenço, P. B., & Rebelo, T. (2018). Liderança transformacional e a eficácia grupal: o papel mediador dos comportamentos de suporte. Estudos De Psicologia, 35(1), 15–28. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-02752018000100003
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of Method Bias in Social Science Research and Recommendations on How to Control It. Annual Review of Psychology, 63(1), 539–569. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Robert, L. P., & You, S. (2018). Are you satisfied yet? Shared leadership, individual trust, autonomy, and satisfaction in virtual teams. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 69(4), 503–513. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23983
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Rico, R., De La Hera, C. M. A., & Tabernero, C. (2011). Work team effectiveness, a review of research from the last decade (1999-2009). Psychology in Spain, 15, 57–79. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=4027052
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Rousseau, V., & Aubé, C. (2010). Team Self-Managing Behaviors and Team Effectiveness: The Moderating Effect of Task Routineness. Group & Organization Management, 35(6), 751–781. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601110390835
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tardy, C. H. (1985). Social support measurement. American Journal of Community Psychology, 13(2), 187–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00905728
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wang, Y. (2018). An Overview of the Team Interaction Process. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 06(12), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2018.612001
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Van Beveren, P., Dimas, I. D., Lourenço, P. B., & Rebelo, T. (2017). Psychometric properties of the Portuguese version of the Global Transformational Leadership (GTL) scale. Revista De Psicología Del Trabajo Y De Las Organizaciones, 33(2), 109–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rpto.2017.02.004
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Van Zijl, A., Vermeeren, B., Koster, F., & Steijn, B. (2019). Towards sustainable local welfare systems: The effects of functional heterogeneity and team autonomy on team processes in Dutch neighbourhood teams. Health & Social Care in the Community, 27(1), 82–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.12604
]Search in Google Scholar
