Use of Technology in the Study of Team-Interaction and Performance

Abstract

Direct observation of groups is labor-intensive. As a result, current research on small groups often relies on retrospective ratings. Recent developments in sensor-technology have eased data gathering, leading to a renewed interest in direct observation of groups. Sensor technology has potential, but also limitations; research has been technology- and data-driven with less recognition of the large body, and long history, of research and theory building. We review the literature on technology in small group research, argue for more interdisciplinary research and propose combining sensor technology with methods of interaction analysis, and the theories that underlie them, developed prior to 1980.

Promoting the Effectiveness of School-Based Leadership Teams in the U.S. Context

“…One possible reason for this trend of within-team homogeneity might be the studies’ exclusive reliance on interviews, surveys, and observations to collect data. These data collection methods mainly involve asking participants’ general perceptions in a retrospective manner or relying on one researcher’s overall observations around team behaviors (Sjøvold et al, 2022). Thus, the methods have limitations in capturing individual members’ moment-to-moment actions/interactions, as well as tracking processes of connecting numerous deviations in members’ actions/interactions to team performance (Sjøvold et al, 2022).…”

“…These data collection methods mainly involve asking participants' general perceptions in a retrospective manner or relying on one researcher's overall observations around team behaviors (Sjøvold et al, 2022). Thus, the methods have limitations in capturing individual members' moment-tomoment actions/interactions, as well as tracking processes of connecting numerous deviations in members' actions/interactions to team performance (Sjøvold et al, 2022). Recent literature suggested that individuals in a team engage differently in and make sense of team processes (actions and interactions) and emergent states (Alshamsi et al, 2015(Alshamsi et al, , 2016van Knippenberg & Mell, 2016).…”

“…Yet, the more contemporary research has illuminated limitations of the IPO model and Hackman’s work, noting that this dominant approach limits nuanced understanding around the dynamic nature of team effectiveness. The limitations include assuming a team as a closed system, suggesting a single-path linearity from input to outcome, and treating team process as a black box (Ilgen et al, 2005; Kozlowski & Ilgen, 2006; Mathieu et al, 2008; Sjøvold et al, 2022). In complementing these limitations, the IPO model was adjusted and extended to further stress (a) a multilevel system, in which a team is nested, (b) interplay of team processes, effectiveness, and contexts, and (c) other temporal elements (e.g., emergent states; Ilgen et al, 2005; Kozlowski & Ilgen, 2006; Mathieu et al, 2008; Sjøvold et al, 2022).…”