2016
DOI: 10.1080/1359432x.2016.1160058
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Short-term and long-term relationships between reflection and performance in teams: evidence from a four-wave longitudinal study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
21
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 56 publications
1
21
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A possible explanation for this finding is that well-performing teams have less motivation to increase their quality (i.e., depth) of reflection than teams that see themselves as performing less well. Therefore, the quality of reflection may be instrumental in helping teams achieve their goals because it helps to reduce goal discrepancy, whereas for teams that are focusing on the quantity of reflection, goal discrepancy is no longer an issue (for a similar argumentation, see Konradt & Eckardt, 2016).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A possible explanation for this finding is that well-performing teams have less motivation to increase their quality (i.e., depth) of reflection than teams that see themselves as performing less well. Therefore, the quality of reflection may be instrumental in helping teams achieve their goals because it helps to reduce goal discrepancy, whereas for teams that are focusing on the quantity of reflection, goal discrepancy is no longer an issue (for a similar argumentation, see Konradt & Eckardt, 2016).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Research suggests that team reflexivity (TR)-defined as a team's conscious reflection on their objectives, strategies, and processes (West, 2000)-is an important team process fostering adaptation and information processing (Konradt, Otte, Schippers, & Steenfatt, 2015;Schippers, Edmondson, & West, 2014). Although considerable theory and research links TR to adaptive team performance (Konradt et al, 2015;Konradt & Eckardt, 2016;Vashdi, Bamberger, & Erez, 2013), this work suffers from three major limitations especially related to action teams.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Third, prior research on the role of TR in team performance relies heavily on self-report questionnaires for data collection (e.g., Konradt & Eckardt, 2016;Schippers et al, 2015;Shin, 2014), which represents a methodological limitation especially for assessing TR during stressful performance events. Beyond common downsides of questionnaires (e.g., response bias, diverging understanding of items), items assessing TR (e.g., "We reflect on the way of communication"; Schippers, Den Hartog, & Koopman, 2007) often fail to capture specific behaviors teams engage in while reflecting.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The autoregressive paths and both the forward and reciprocal causation cross-lagged paths were specified between Wave 1 and Wave 2/Wave 3 and between Wave 2 and Wave 3 (Finkel, 1995;Reitz et al, 2015;Reitz et al, 2016). This full specification of the model allowed us to comprehensively study the development of the relationship between exclusion and resignation, focusing both on the short-and long-term cross-lagged effects (Hawkley et al, 2010; see also Konradt & Eckardt, 2016). We started performing (a) a baseline model specifying the autoregressive and correlation paths, and we proceeded comparing the baseline model with larger model additionally estimating (b) the forward causation paths (i.e., perceived exclusion predicts future resignation), (c) the reverse causation paths (i.e., resignation predicts future perceived exclusion), and (d) the reciprocal causation paths.…”
Section: Statistical Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%