Bio


Melissa Valentine is an Assistant Professor at Stanford University in the Management Science and Engineering Department, and co-director of the Center for Work, Technology, and Organization (WTO).

Prof Valentine's research focuses on understanding how new technologies change work and organizations. She conducts in-depth observational studies to develop new understanding about new forms of organizing. Her work makes contributions to understanding classic and longstanding challenges in designing groups and organizations (e.g., the role of hierarchy, how to implement change, team stability vs. flexibility) but also brings in deep knowledge of how the rise of information technology has made possible new and different team and organizational forms. Her most recent study examined how the deployment of new algorithms changed the organizational structure of a retail tech company.

Prof. Valentine has won awards for both research and teaching. She and collaborators won a Best Paper Award at the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems and the Outstanding Paper with Practical Implications award from the Organizational Behavior division of the Academy of Management. In 2013, she won the Organization Science/INFORMS dissertation proposal competition and received her PhD from Harvard University.

Academic Appointments


  • Assistant Professor, Management Science and Engineering

Honors & Awards


  • Best Paper Award, SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2017)
  • Graduate Teaching Award, Stanford Management Science & Engineering (2015)
  • Hellman Faculty Scholar, Stanford University (2014)
  • Winner, Dissertation Competition, INFORMS/Organization Science (2012)
  • Wyss Award for Excellence in Doctoral Research, Harvard Business School (2013)
  • Outstanding Paper with Practical Implications, Academy of Management (2012)
  • Susan Cohen Award for Doctoral Research, Center for Effective Organizations (2010)

Current Research and Scholarly Interests


Melissa Valentine is an Assistant Professor at Stanford University in the Management Science and Engineering Department, and co-director of the Center for Work, Technology, and Organization (WTO).

Prof Valentine's research focuses on understanding how new technologies change work and organizations. She conducts in-depth observational studies to develop new understanding about new forms of organizing. Her work makes contributions to understanding classic and longstanding challenges in designing groups and organizations (e.g., the role of hierarchy, how to implement change, team stability vs. flexibility) but also brings in deep knowledge of how the rise of information technology has made possible new and different team and organizational forms. Her most recent study examined how the deployment of new algorithms changed the organizational structure of a retail tech company.

Prof. Valentine has won awards for both research and teaching. She and collaborators won a Best Paper Award at the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems and the Outstanding Paper with Practical Implications award from the Organizational Behavior division of the Academy of Management. In 2013, she won the Organization Science/INFORMS dissertation proposal competition and received her PhD from Harvard University.

All Publications


  • Renegotiating Spheres of Obligation: The Role of Hierarchy in Organizational Learning ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY Valentine, M. 2017

    View details for DOI 10.1177/0001839217718547

  • WHEN EQUITY SEEMS UNFAIR: THE ROLE OF JUSTICE ENFORCEABILITY IN TEMPORARY TEAM COORDINATION ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL Valentine, M. 2018; 61 (6): 2081–2105
  • Inpatient Hospital Factors and Resident Time With Patients and Families PEDIATRICS Destino, L. A., Valentine, M., Sheikhi, F. H., Starmer, A. J., Landrigan, C. P., Sanders, L. 2017; 139 (5)

    Abstract

    To define hospital factors associated with proportion of time spent by pediatric residents in direct patient care.We assessed 6222 hours of time-motion observations from a representative sample of 483 pediatric-resident physicians delivering inpatient care across 9 pediatric institutions. The primary outcome was percentage of direct patient care time (DPCT) during a single observation session (710 sessions). We used one-way analysis of variance to assess a significant difference in the mean percentage of DPCT between hospitals. We used the intraclass correlation coefficient analysis to determine within- versus between-hospital variations. We compared hospital characteristics of observation sessions with ≥12% DPCT to characteristics of sessions with <12% DPCT (12% is the DPCT in recent resident trainee time-motion studies). We conducted mixed-effects regression analysis to allow for clustering of sessions within hospitals and accounted for correlation of responses across hospital.Mean proportion of physician DPCT was 13.2% (SD = 8.6; range, 0.2%-49.5%). DPCT was significantly different between hospitals (P < .001). The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.25, indicating more within-hospital than between-hospital variation. Observation sessions with ≥12% DPCT were more likely to occur at hospitals with Magnet designation (odds ratio [OR] = 3.45, P = .006), lower medical complexity (OR = 2.57, P = .04), and higher patient-to-trainee ratios (OR = 2.48, P = .05).On average, trainees spend <8 minutes per hour in DPCT. Variation exists in DPCT between hospitals. A less complex case mix, increased patient volume, and Magnet designation were independently associated with increased DPCT.

    View details for DOI 10.1542/peds.2016-3011

    View details for PubMedID 28557735

  • Team Scaffolds: How Mesolevel Structures Enable Role-Based Coordination in Temporary Groups ORGANIZATION SCIENCE Valentine, M. A., Edmondson, A. C. 2015; 26 (2): 405-422
  • Measuring Teamwork in Health Care Settings: A Review of Survey Instruments. Medical Care Valentine, M. A., Nembhard, I. M., Edmondson, A. C. 2015; 53 (4): e16-e30
  • Informal Peer Interaction and Practice Type as Predictors of Physician Performance on Maintenance of Certification Examinations JAMA SURGERY Valentine, M. A., Barsade, S., Edmondson, A. C., Gal, A., Rhodes, R. 2014; 149 (6): 597-603
  • Expert crowdsourcing with flash teams ACM User Interface Software and Technology Symposium Retelny, D., Robaszkiewisz, S., To, A., Lasecki, W., Patel , J., Rahmati, N., Doshi, T., Valentine, M., Bernstein, M. 2014: 75–85

    View details for DOI 10.1145/2642918.2647409

  • Informal Peer Interaction and Practice Type as Predictors of Physician Performance on Maintenance of Certification Examinations. JAMA surgery Valentine, M. A., Barsade, S., Edmondson, A. C., Gal, A., Rhodes, R. 2014; 149 (6): 597–603

    Abstract

    Physicians can demonstrate mastery of the knowledge that supports continued clinical competence by passing a maintenance of certification examination (MOCEX). Performance depends on professional learning and development, which may be enhanced by informal routine interactions with colleagues. Some physicians, such as those in solo practice, may have less opportunity for peer interaction, thus negatively influencing their examination performance.To determine the relationship among level of peer interaction, group and solo practice, and MOCEX performance.Longitudinal cohort study of 568 surgeons taking the 2008 MOCEX. Survey responses reporting the level of physicians' peer interactions and their practice type were related to MOCEX scores, controlling for initial qualifying examination scores, practice type, and personal characteristics.Solo practice and amount of peer interaction.Scores on the MOCEX and pass-fail status.Of the 568 surgeons in the study sample, 557 (98.1%) passed the examination. Higher levels of peer interaction were associated with a higher score (β = 0.91 [95% CI, 0.31-1.52]) and higher likelihood of passing the examination (odds ratio, 2.58 [1.08-6.16]). Physicians in solo (vs group) practice had fewer peer interactions (β = -0.49 [95% CI, -0.64 to -0.33), received lower scores (β = -1.82 [-2.94 to -0.82]), and were less likely to pass the examination (odds ratio, 0.22 [0.06-0.77]). Level of peer interaction moderated the relationship between solo practice and MOCEX score; solo practitioners with high levels of peer interaction achieved an MOCEX performance on a par with that of group practitioners.Physicians in solo practice had poorer MOCEX performance. However, solo practitioners who reported high levels of peer interaction performed as well as those in group practice. Peer interaction is important for professional learning and quality of care.

    View details for PubMedID 24872028