Team sensemaking, in many ways, is more critical than individual sensemaking. It poses additional coordination requirements and it offers additional ways for sensemaking to break down. It is more difficult to accomplish, and it may be a larger contributor to accidents than failures at the individual level. In this article, we describe team sensemaking as a macrocognitive function -the sensemaking that has to be performed by a team rather than by individuals. Team sensemaking is defined as the process by which a team manages and coordinates its efforts to explain the current situation and to anticipate future situations, typically under uncertain or ambiguous conditions. We describe emergent strategies for accomplishing different aspects of team sensemaking and describe emergent requirements for sensemaking at the team level. We use an example to illustrate team sensemaking in action and its emergent strategies and requirements. Finally, we identify some research methods for studying team sensemaking.
In challenging cases, surgeons continually assess whether the patient's best interests might be served by converting a laparoscopic case to an open-incision one. Converting in many ways widens the scope and quality of perceptual information available to the surgeon. This research focused on surgical decision making in the context of the decision to convert. A cognitive task analysis effort, involving field observations and a research study, was undertaken to elicit information about decisions made during surgery. Ten experienced (staff) and ten senior resident surgeons were shown videotape from a difficult laparoscopic surgery case. The surgeons responded to structured questions at critical points in the procedure and also provided running commentary as the operation unfolded. Approximately half of the surgeons decided that the case should be converted to an open procedure at some point during the operation. The verbal protocols were analyzed to identify differences as a function of expertise (staff vs. resident) and of the conversion decision (opener vs. nonopener). Staff surgeons expressed awareness of boundary conditions to safe operation more frequently. Further, there was evidence of inappropriately high levels of confidence, yet little evidence of self-criticism (metacognition), among residents who chose not to open.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.