• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >How do teams learn? Shared mental models and transactive memory systems as determinants of team learning and effectiveness.
【24h】

How do teams learn? Shared mental models and transactive memory systems as determinants of team learning and effectiveness.

机译：团队如何学习？共享的心理模型和交互式记忆系统是团队学习和效率的决定因素。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Shared mental models (SMM) and Transactive memory systems (TMS) have been advocated as the main team learning mechanisms. Despite multiple appeals for collaboration, research in both these fields has progressed in parallel and little effort has been made to integrate these theories. The purpose of this study was to test the relationship between SMM and TMS in a field setting and examine their influence on various team effectiveness outcomes such as team performance, team learning, team creativity, team members' satisfaction and team viability.;Contextual factors relevant to an organizational setting were tested and these included team size, tenure, country of origin, team reward and organizational support. Based on responses from 41 teams from 7 industries across two countries (US and India), results indicate that team size, country of origin and team tenure impact team performance and team learning. In addition, team reward and organizational support predicted team viability and satisfaction.;Results indicated that TMS components (specialization, coordination and credibility) were better predictors of team outcomes than the omnibus TMS construct. In particular, TMS credibility predicted team performance and creativity while TMS coordination predicted team viability and satisfaction. SMM was measured in two different ways: an average deviation index and a 6-item scale. Both methods resulted in a conceptually similar interpretation although average deviation indices provided slightly better results in predicting effectiveness outcomes.;TMS components moderated the relationship between SMM and team outcomes. Team performance was lowest when both SMM and TMS were low. However, contrary to expectations, high levels of SMM did not always result in effective team outcomes (performance, learning and creativity) especially when teams exhibited high TMS specialization and credibility. An interaction pattern was observed under conditions of low levels of SMM such that high TMS resulted in higher levels of team outcomes. The theoretical and practical implications of these results are discussed.
机译：共享心智模型（SMM）和交互式记忆系统（TMS）已被提倡为主要的团队学习机制。尽管呼吁合作，但在这两个领域的研究并行发展，为整合这些理论所做的努力很少。这项研究的目的是在现场环境中测试SMM和TMS之间的关系，并检查它们对各种团队效率结果的影响，例如团队绩效，团队学习，团队创造力，团队成员的满意度和团队生存能力。对组织环境的测试，包括团队规模，任期，原籍国，团队奖励和组织支持。根据来自两个国家（美国和印度）的7个行业的41个团队的反馈，结果表明团队规模，原籍国和团队任期会影响团队绩效和团队学习。此外，团队奖励和组织支持可以预测团队的生存能力和满意度。结果表明，与综合TMS构建相比，TMS组件（专业化，协调和信誉）是更好的团队成果预测指标。特别是，TMS信誉度可预测团队的绩效和创造力，而TMS协调度可预测团队的生存能力和满意度。 SMM以两种不同的方式进行测量：平均偏差指数和6项量表。尽管平均偏差指数在预测有效性结果方面提供了更好的结果，但是这两种方法在概念上都相似。TMS组件缓解了SMM与团队成果之间的关系。当SMM和TMS都较低时，团队绩效最低。但是，与预期相反，高水平的SMM并不总是会导致有效的团队成果（绩效，学习和创造力），尤其是当团队展现出较高的TMS专业性和信誉度时。在SMM较低的条件下观察到一种交互模式，因此高TMS导致较高的团队成果水平。讨论了这些结果的理论和实践意义。

著录项

  • 作者

    Nandkeolyar, Amit Kumar.;

  • 作者单位

    The University of Iowa.;

  • 授予单位 The University of Iowa.;
  • 学科 Business Administration Management.;Psychology Industrial.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2008
  • 页码 186 p.
  • 总页数 186
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号