Functional versus dysfunctional team change: Problem diagnosis and structural feedback for self-managed teams

Johnson, Michael D.; Hollenbeck, John R.; DeRue, D. Scott; Barnes, Christopher M.; Jundt, Dustin K.

doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.03.006

Cited by 29 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While some studies found positive effects on idea quality [94] or satisfaction [59,61,66,69,89,94], other studies revealed that structuring interventions might have no effect or even have negative effects on idea quality [38,69,92] or satisfaction [89,91]. Past research reported similarly mixed findings regarding outcomes such as performance [4,32,50,61,80,91], decision quality [38,59,66,89,93], learning [52], and consensus [32,38,69,89,92].…”

Section: Structuring Interventions For Convergencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Structuring interventions are bundles of instructions, based on human or information technology (IT), for team members to engage in productive actions and to restrict unproductive actions during the execution of a collaborative activity [18]. Such interventions have also been referred to as facilitation [4,93], feedback [49,50,52], or coaching [91]. Structuring interventions can be directed at the process [89], the task [30], or how to use supporting technology [41].…”

Section: Structuring Interventions For Convergencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, most past studies have focused on structuring interventions that were targeted at the collaboration process as a whole, not solely on the convergence activity. For example, past research has examined convergence (1) in connection with generation and evaluation [38,89,93,94], (2) in larger collaboration settings considering additional activities such as problem analysis, organization, and building commitment [4,32,54,66], or (3) did not specify distinct collaboration activities [50,52,59,61,80,91]. When applied to multiple activities or to the collaboration process as a whole, the structuring intervention is not conceptually connected to a specific activity outcome.…”

Section: Structuring Interventions For Convergencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Beyond Brainstorming: Exploring Convergence in Teams

Seeber¹,

Vreede²,

Maier³

et al. 2017

Journal of Management Information Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collaborative brainstorming is often followed by a convergence activity where teams extract the most promising ideas on a useful level of detail from the brainstorming results. Contrary to the wealth of research on electronic brainstorming, there is a dearth of research on convergence. We used experimental methods for an in-depth exploration of two facilitation-based interventions in a convergence activity: attention guidance (focusing participants on procedures to execute a convergence task) and discussion encouragement (engaging participants in conversations to combine knowledge on ideas). Our findings show that both attention guidance and discussion encouragement are correlated with higher convergence quality. We argue that attention guidance's contribution is in its support of coordination, information processing, and goal specification. Similar, we argue that discussion encouragement's contribution is in its stimulation of idea clarification and idea combination. Contrary to past research, our findings further show that satisfaction was higher after convergence than after brainstorming.KEY WORDS AND PHRASES: attention guidance, brainstorming, collaboration, collaborative brainstorming, discussion encouragement, idea convergence, idea quality, idea selection, ideation, satisfaction, team, teamwork.Increased market competition, fast technological developments, and the dynamic environment in which organizations function set increasingly challenging requirements on an organization's ability to solve problems and make decisions. To address such challenges, organizations rely on the collaborative development of ideas, in both small teams and large crowds [39,45]. Since the 1950s, a vast body of literature has developed on brainstorming or ideation, spanning different disciplines such as psychology, information systems, and management [30,67,76]. This research shows that under a variety of conditions, teams using collaboration technologies and techniques may produce more ideas of higher quality than individuals who do not use such support [30,31,37,76].However, brainstorming by itself is insufficient for organizational value creation. It is an early step in a collaborative idea development process but does not produce a single final solution or decision [42,45]. In fact, most brainstorming techniques and technologies aim to generate high volumes of ideas to increase the likelihood that some promising ideas will be part of the results [15]. There are many examples of high brainstorming productivity: a team of end-user representatives working with information systems (IS) professionals can generate hundreds of user stories in a matter of hours [26]. A team of military decision makers can identify dozens of possible courses of action in response to an external event or threat [12]. Emergency 940 SEEBER, MAIER, DE VREEDE, AND WEBER response workers can easily collect hundreds of ideas to bring relief to areas that have been struck by natural disaster [84]. Brainstorming productivity gets even more pronounced...

show abstract

Section: Structuring Interventions For Convergencementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Structuring Interventions For Convergencementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Structuring Interventions For Convergencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Beyond Brainstorming: Exploring Convergence in Teams

Seeber¹,

Vreede²,

Maier³

et al. 2017

Journal of Management Information Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, guided reflexivity has been associated with improved team processes and outcomes (Vashdi, Bamberger, Erez, & Weiss-Meilik, 2007). Team feedback may help make teams aware of information gaps and thus alter team processes (Johnson, Hollenbeck, DeRue, Barnes, & Jundt, 2013). Prior research shows that even simple interventions (a formal instruction to "stop and think") can improve team processes and performance (Okhuysen, 2001) and that reflexivity may occur naturally at a team's midpoint (Gersick, 1989).…”

Section: Interventions To Improve Team Reflexivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Team Reflexivity as an Antidote to Team Information-Processing Failures

Schippers

Edmondson²,

West

2014

Small Group Research

173

246

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article proposes that team reflexivity-a deliberate process of discussing team goals, processes, or outcomes-can function as an antidote to team-level biases and errors in decision making. We build on prior work conceptualizing teams as information-processing systems and highlight reflexivity as a critical information-processing activity. Prior research has identified consequential information-processing failures that occur in small groups, such as the failure to discuss privately held relevant information, biased processing of information, and failure to update conclusions when situations change. We propose that team reflexivity reduces the occurrence of information-processing failures by ensuring that teams discuss and assess the implications of team information for team goals, processes, and outcomes. In this article, we present a model of team information-processing failures and remedies involving team reflexivity, and we discuss the conditions under which team reflexivity is and is not likely to facilitate performance.

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, it is unlikely that every team needs to interact with the leadership constellation to the same extent. For example, self-managing teams (Druskat & Wheeler, 2003;Johnson, Hollenbeck, DeRue, Barnes, & Jundt, 2013) may require less, or looser, leadership. On the other hand, some teams may need tighter leadership around establishing clear goals and work structuring (Morgeson et al, 2010), both of which may be important considerations in interprofessional teams where practitioners are interdependent and bring different work approaches to bear on client care.…”

Section: Leadership Constellationsmentioning

confidence: 99%