Exploration versus exploitation: Emotions and performance as antecedents and consequences of team decisions

Abstract

We analyze performance and emotions as antecedents and consequences of team strategic decisions to explore a new routine versus exploiting an existing one. In a laboratory study, we examine team decision making over time and draw causal inferences about the relationships among team emotions, team performance, and explore–exploit decisions. We use self‐report data to measure team emotions, and validate results with psychophysiological data. We find that declines in performance increase the likelihood that teams decide to explore new routines rather than exploit existing ones. We also find a marginal positive effect of positive emotions, as measured by both self‐report and psychophysiological data, on team decisions to explore a new routine. Further, teams successful at implementing new routines report increased positive emotions, as measured by the self‐report data. This relationship is fully mediated by performance change. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Physiological evidence of interpersonal dynamics in a cooperative production task

“…[23] in which teams of three persons worked on an interdependent, sequential task (folding specific origami models). The measures used in the study were heart rate (from electrocardiogram), electrodermal activity, and facial electromyography of zygomaticus major and corrugator supercilii, which are all widely used psychophysiological indicators of emotion [13,[24][25][26][27].…”

“…The measures used in the study were heart rate (from electrocardiogram), electrodermal activity, and facial electromyography of zygomaticus major and corrugator supercilii, which are all widely used psychophysiological indicators of emotion [13,[24][25][26][27]. The main finding in [23]was that declines in performance increased the probability that teams would adopt a new routine. They also found a marginal positive effect of positive emotions on team decisions to adopt a new routine, i.e., both average valence from self-report data and average level of zygomaticus major activity recorded at the beginning of the experiment had a positive relation to the team's adoption of a new routine.…”

“…We will analyze the data from the previous experiment [23] to test our two main hypotheses: i) that pairs of people from the same team (true dyads) have higher synchrony than pairs of people taken from different teams (pseudo dyads); and ii) that synchrony is positively correlated with the perceived quality of cooperation and liking. Furthermore, since the previous experiment included a team decision, we will iii) explore whether team members who display high synchrony are more or less willing to adopt a new routine than those who are less synchronous.…”

“…Furthermore, since the previous experiment included a team decision, we will iii) explore whether team members who display high synchrony are more or less willing to adopt a new routine than those who are less synchronous. However, since we are looking at synchrony, we can only study such decisions at the dyad level, and therefore cannot directly compare our results to the study by Håkonsson et al [23].…”

“…The data for our analyses come from the study by Håkonsson et al [23], who adapted an experimental task from Kane, Argote, and Levine [28]. In the experiment, team members were required to construct as many origami sailboats as possible during five four-minute production periods.…”