Dimensions of success - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1
Slide2

Dimensions of success

(Li et al, 2013; Salas et al, 2005; Wenger, 1999)Slide3

Integrating dimensions of success

(de Dreu

et al, 2008;

Schippers et al, 2012; Schippers et al, 2014)

HighStalemates, indecisionDebateIgnoring others’ ideasFacipulatingAdvocacy, deceptionWillingness to disagree IndependenceIndividual reflectionProblem solvingDialogueInformation poolingCollaborative reasoningAttention to others’ ideasGroup reflexivityLowSocial loafingInflexible forcing, vetoingMaintaining harmony Mutual enhancementGroup centredness Directive leadershipPressure on deviantsPro selfPro social

Social Motivations

Knowledge MotivationsSlide4

Supporting

success across process dimensions

High

e

pistemicPro socialPerson-basedNeed for cognition (+)Openness to experience (+)Need for closure (-)Pro social orientation (+)Agreeableness (+)Disposition to trust (+)Cultural collectivism (+)Situation-basedAccountability to process (+)Preference diversity (+)Strong minorities (+)Time pressure/urgency (-)Environmental noise (-)Autocratic leadership (-)Cooperative reward system (+)Instructions to cooperate (+)Pro social norms, climate (+)Collective identity (+)Anticipated future interactions (+)Past cooperation (+)Slide5

Provisional progression of group work

(Bedwell

et al, 2013,

Johnson & Johnson, 1999)Slide6

Levels of Support for TeamworkSlide7

Activity

Divide yourselves into groups of three or more.

As a group, review the sample team assignment provided on the table.

As a group, visually represent your understanding of the process student teams use to travel from the instructions for this team assignment to handing it in. Slide8

Process QuestionsSlide9

Adding Details to

Our Process MapsSlide10

Common Team Process PrinciplesSlide11

Teamwork as Problem-solvingSlide12

Teamwork as ResearchSlide13

Scaffolding TeamworkSlide14

Dialogue…Slide15

Final session…

Session 3 – November 30, 10:30-12:00 am

Team assignments

OutcomesAssessmentsSlide16

References

Bedwell

, W., L., Wildman, J. L., Diaz Granados, D., Salazar, M., Kramer, W. S., & Salas, E. (2012). Collaboration at work: An integrative multilevel conceptualization.

Human Resource Management Review,

22(2), 128–145. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2011.11.007De Dreu, C. K., Nijstad, B. A., & van Knippenberg, D. (2008). Motivated information processing in group judgment and decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12(1), 22-49.Edmondson, A. C., Dillon, J. R., & Roloff, K. S. (2007). Three perspectives on team learning. The Academy of Management Annals, 1(1), 269–314. doi:10.1080/078559811Gergen, K. (2009). An Invitation to Social Construction (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd.Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Making cooperative learning work. Theory Into Practice, 38(2), 67.Li, A., Cropanzano, R., & Bagger, J. (2013). Justice climate and student justice climate: A closer look. Small Group Research, 44, 563–592. doi:10.1177/1046496413498119Slide17

Michaelsen

, L. K., Knight, A. B., & Fink, L. D. (2002).

Team-based learning : A transformative use of small groups

. Westport, Conn: Praeger.

Pardy, M. (2015). Student success on student learning teams at Royal Roads University (Masters Thesis, Royal Roads University, Victoria, Canada). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10170/845. Salas, E., Sims, D. E., & Burke, C. S. (2005). Is there a “Big Five” in teamwork? Small Group Research, 36(5), 555–599. doi:10.1177/1046496405277134Schippers, M. C., Edmondson, A. C., & West, M. A. (2014). Team reflexivity as an antidote to team information-processing failures. Small Group Research, 45(6), 731-769.Schippers, M. C., West, M. A., & Dawson, J. F. (2012). Team reflexivity and innovation: The moderating role of team context. Journal of Management, 41(3), 769-788Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press