Effects of guided reflexivity and team feedback on team performance improvement: The role of team regulatory processes and cognitive emergent states
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology , Volume 24 - Issue 5 p. 777- 795
The effectiveness of decision-making teams depends largely on the quality of information processing. Prior research has shown that guided team reflexivity and team feedback are important means of advancing team information processing and outcomes. However, the nature of the relationships, and how these relate to team regulatory processes, cognitive emergent states, and ultimately team performance, is currently poorly understood. Drawing on reflexivity and team information-processing theory, we proposed and found that teams that received guided team reflexivity or a combination of both guided reflexivity and feedback showed higher levels of actual reflection than teams that received neither a reflexivity intervention nor feedback. Conditional process analysis showed that the effects of team reflection on team performance improvement were mediated by a path from shared team mental models to shared task mental models and to adaptation. Finally, we also expected that team reflection would be lower in virtual teams than in face-to-face teams. These hypotheses were tested experimentally among 98 student teams that communicated either face-to-face or virtual (via chat) while completing a collective decision-making task. The information distribution among team members constituted a hidden profile. The results supported all our hypotheses, except for the one relating to virtuality.
|, , , , , ,|
|ERIM Top-Core Articles|
|European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology|
|Organisation||Department of Technology and Operations Management|
Konradt, U, Schippers, M.C, Garbers, Y, & Steenfatt, C. (2015). Effects of guided reflexivity and team feedback on team performance improvement: The role of team regulatory processes and cognitive emergent states. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(5), 777–795. doi:10.1080/1359432X.2015.1005608