![]() ![]() ![]() This resulted in a tendency not to label dysfunctional groups as such. This study found that instructors were consistent neither in what they noticed nor in how they made sense of what they perceived. The data was analysed to understand their professional vision (what they notice and how they make sense of it as well as consistency across instructors) for collaborative group projects. A web-based instrument captured quantitative and qualitative data during the first phase where instructors worked on their own and in the second phase where participants used a think aloud protocol while engaging in the same task. This mixed methods study asked instructors experienced in using group work to sequentially respond to weekly instalments of reflective journal entries representing a fictional member of a collaborative learning group working through a group project. This study investigated how instructors approach the task of diagnosing collaborative learning group dysfunction when presented with an opportunity and a request to do so. The results raise serious concerns about current methods and theory in the team conflict literature and suggest that researchers must go beyond team-level conceptualizations of conflict. Study 3, a field study of manufacturing teams, reveals that individual and dyadic task conflict origins positively predict team performance, whereas traditional intragroup task conflict measures negatively predict team performance. Study 2 further demonstrates that traditional psychometric intragroup conflict scales mask the existence of these various origins and trajectories of conflict. Instead, conflict more commonly originates and persists at individual, dyadic, or subgroup levels. Study 1, a qualitative study of narrative accounts, and Study 2, a longitudinal social networks study of student teams, reveal that fewer than 30 percent of teams experience team-level conflict. We consider four origi-nation points-an individual, dyad, subgroup, or team-and three evolutionary trajectories-conflict continuity, contagion, and concentration. These findings suggest important questions about the microfoundations of intragroup conflict: Where does conflict within teams originate? And how does it evolve over time? We address these and other questions in three abductive studies. But emerging evidence suggests that perceptions of intragroup conflict are often not uniform, shared, or static. Teams scholars have historically conceptualized and measured intragroup conflict at the team level. Through this framework, we aim to further our understanding of empowered team behavior between action that is virtuous, moral, and ethical and activity that threatens organizational values and goals. We provide a framework of four conditions that include Sophisticated, Suppressed, Contagion, and Impeded to discuss alignment between team ethical orientation and team empowerment. ![]() The purpose of this research is to contrast how teams founded on virtue-based ethics (such as diligence, integrity, honesty) can attenuate ethical dilemmas and negative organizational outcomes from team over-empowerment. Leveraging a virtue-based ethics lens of team empowerment, we provide a framework of team ethical orientation and over-empowerment using highly influential market research teams as a basis for our analysis. Few scholars have investigated the considerations of over-empowered teams (i.e., teams creating negative organizational outcomes from too much empowerment) from a non-consequential ethics approach. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |