[ad_1]
Analyze peer posts and provide a response with a new academic peer reviewed article. This is the feedback instructor provided so please adhere to their feedback as well:
The discussion board should be a “conversation” between you and your colleagues. I know you are sticking to third-person voice, but for the discussion board only, its OK to create a friendlier tone for this class. For example, instead try:
“Hi Lois,
I see how you reflected upon certain aspects of….”
Instead of
“In the post, Jackson reflects…..”
Post 1 – Author: Kyle
Accountability and Innovation in Teams
Increasingly teams and team deliverables are the norm in the business world, and at the same time, innovation is key to surviving in the information age (Drach-Zahavy & Somech, 2001). The logical question is, how can organizations foster innovation. Heterogeneity in team composition has been shown to improve innovation because it provides a diversity of viewpoints and creates healthy conflict (Peterson & Thonpson, 1997). Interestingly this relationship is impacted by the team structure and whether they are accountable to a shared supervisor or each other. Teams of strangers tend to outperform teams of friends when reporting to a supervisor (Peterson & Thompson, 1997). This is supported by Drach-Zahavy & Somech (2001) found that diversity increases innovation. One might conclude that innovative teams should constantly be in flux to prevent the team from becoming too cohesive. Overly cohesive groups have a tendency to focus on relationships, which can lead to groupthink or the Abilene Paradox.
In my experience working in the incubator team at my company, I can see the interplay between cohesion and innovation play out. The mediator is actually accountability. Teams that focus on cohesion tend to help each other out by removing accountability. We make excuses for each other and water down expectations to make sure that our friends are successful. No one wants to throw a teammate under the bus in front of the boss. I have watched this play out over and over. A team that must work together over the long term will degrade accountability in favor of a comfortable working environment. This is where I love my current position. I am actually a contractor, and I see my role as being the voice of the customer. I am new and a relative outsider to the organization, so I have no allegiance internally. This has given me free rein to kill sacred cows and shake up the organization for the benefit of both the customer and the product. To some, I am a voice of reason. To others, I am a traitor. In the end, I have an ethical duty to help the company create a better product and a moral duty to the patients. I am happy that I have found a way to serve both.
Post 2 – Author: James
Transactive Memory Systems
It may be surprising to learn that most supercomputers are made up of fairly mundane processors (many even use less-powerful graphical processing units instead of computational processing units). The super element is added by the connections between the processors and the ability to share the workload across the group of processors, massive cooling systems to deal with heat dissipation, and other practical challenges (Biryaltsev et al., 2017). Somewhat analogous to this, teams of human beings seek to leverage the full capabilities of every individual within the group to achieve optimal performance. One potential way to move toward this goal is the application of a transactive memory system. The purpose of this paper is to briefly explore the elements of transactive memory systems (TMS) and their impact on team performance, concluding with a practical example.
Discussion
Overview of Transactive Memory System
A TMS is a shared cognitive system or device that helps a group benefit from the unique knowledge other individuals in the group possess. Since every individual has specialized knowledge, such a system enables people within the group to supplement their own knowledge by their awareness and access to the knowledge of others (Liao et al., 2012). The TMS framework is composed of three basic elements related to information processing these include encoding, storing, and retrieving the information related to the unique knowledge possessed by team members (Zhou & Pazos, 2020). Some studies indicate that TMS can enhance group task performance since it extracts more benefit for the team from the specialization of the different team members (Peltokorpi, 2008).
Impact on Perceptions and Team Performance
It seems intuitive that a TMS should increase the performance of any team that is able to effectively leverage the system. However, empirical research about the impact of TMS on team performance is mixed. Laboratory studies indicate more significant benefits than more practical/real-world studies (Liao et al., 2012). The empirical study by Zhou and Pazos (2020) considered TMS impact on team performance, including behavioral and affective outcomes. Their study concluded that TMS is more likely to produce positive affective outcomes than behavioral or performance changes/increases. While such a system can increase the perception of the groups capabilities in the minds of its members and increase positive perspectives, the study indicated it is often more difficult to link specific and quantifiable performance improvements resulting from TMS implementation (Zhou & Pazos, 2020).
Example Experience
While not directly labeled a TMS, the US Armys after action review systems have similar foundational principles and desired outcomes. The after action review is a short meeting to be implemented after all missions within the Army. Every mission, event, or system should be reviewed and analyzed by the group that participated. Then lessons learned, including things to be sustained as well as things needing improvement, can be extracted. Similar to the idea of a TMS, the lessons learned can then be recorded and shared/accessed by other individuals and teams. Similar to the TMS, the after action review system can fall short of what might be expected from this knowledge sharing. Applying the main elements of TMS to the shortfalls of the after action review system, there are often shortfalls and problems with the encoding, storing, and retrieving of the information especially as the database grows larger.
Conclusion
This brief exploration of the elements TMS indicated potentially positive impacts on team performance, sometimes hindered by frictions of real-world application. Both Liao et al. (2012) and Zhou and Pazos (2020) indicated that laboratory studies of TMS impacts are more likely to produce positive performance increases than real-world empirical studies. There was, however, a positive affective component from TMS that does provide some level of benefit. It seems that just as with supercomputers, the challenges of maximizing the knowledge of all the individual members may be hindered by communication and implementation issues. The example of the after action review system in the Army demonstrates some of the same challenges for implementation. However, striving to maximize the benefits of all the knowledge within the organization remains a worthwhile pursuit.
[ad_2]
Source link
