• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
PhD Proposal Defense Team Psychological Safety, Team Learning and Team Knowledge 20 September 2013
 

PhD Proposal Defense Team Psychological Safety, Team Learning and Team Knowledge 20 September 2013

on

  • 576 views

Presentation I used to present my proposal in front of the PhD committee at Bangkok University. My model links team psychological safety and team learning, with the creation of knowledge at the team ...

Presentation I used to present my proposal in front of the PhD committee at Bangkok University. My model links team psychological safety and team learning, with the creation of knowledge at the team level. Happy to say the proposal defense went very well !

Statistics

Views

Total Views
576
Views on SlideShare
566
Embed Views
10

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
9
Comments
0

2 Embeds 10

http://www.linkedin.com 9
https://www.linkedin.com 1

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    PhD Proposal Defense Team Psychological Safety, Team Learning and Team Knowledge 20 September 2013 PhD Proposal Defense Team Psychological Safety, Team Learning and Team Knowledge 20 September 2013 Presentation Transcript

    • The influence of team psychological safety on team knowledge creation: A comparative study between Thai and French teams Peter Cauwelier Proposal Defense 1September 20th, 2013
    • Knowledge is the critical asset giving organizations sustainable competitive advantage (Chen, D. H. C., & Dahlman, C. J., 2005), and teams are key units contributing to an organization’s performance (Edmondson, A. C. 2012). Learning leads to knowledge creation (Senge, P. 1994, Bennet, A. 2012, Kim, D.H. 2002). Different factors impact team learning (Decuyper, S., Dochy, F., & Van den Bossche, P. 2010), one of which is the level of psychological safety felt at the team level. Few researchers evaluate how teams actually create knowledge at the team level, and how factors like team psychological safety, as well as the actual team learning behaviors, influence this. 2 Problem Statement
    • 3 Objectives -> evaluate impact of team psychological safety and team learning behaviors, on the knowledge created at the team level -> evaluate nuances or differences between cultures in the model. Significance -> understand how team psychological safety impacts knowledge creation -> nuances in teams with different cultural backgrounds => allows organizations to develop/modify conditions to optimize knowledge creation in teams (and in the organization) Research Objectives
    • 4 Primary research question How do team psychological safety and team learning affect the creation of team knowledge ? Secondary research question How do the components of the model differ between cultures ? Research Questions
    • Literature review Definitions and Key Terms 5 Team a collection of individuals, interdependent in their tasks, sharing responsibility for outcomes, who see themselves and who are seen by others as an intact social entity embedded in a larger social system (Decuyper, S., et al. 2010) note - service or production teams, not action teams (Marks, et al. 2002) - established teams, not ad hoc teams Individual mental model (Kim, D. H. 2002) - a person’s view of the world - the context in which experiences are viewed and interpreted - defines how knowledge is created and applied Team mental model (Mohammed, S. et al. 2010): the mental models of the team members, about the task, the tools and technology, understanding of procedures and strategies, awareness of team roles and communication patterns, and knowledge of teammates’ skills and habits
    • Literature review Team Knowledge (selected references) 6 (Wildman, J. L., et al. 2012) (Cooke, N. J. et al. 2012) Shared cognition = static, from structure Team cognition = dynamic, from interactions Interactive Team Cognition (ITC) theory
    • 7 (Bennet, A. 2012) Literature review The Learning and Knowledge-Building Environment (selected references) (Stahl, G. 2000)
    • 7 bis Team learning FACTORS AFFECTING TEAM LEARNING (Decuyper et al., 2010) Shared mental models Team psychological safety Group potency or group efficacy Cohesion Team development and team learning dynamics Team leadership Interdependence Team structure Organizational strategy Team member systems thinking Literature review Team Learning (selected references)
    • 8 (Edmondson, A. C. 2003) Team psychological safety Team learning behavior Team performance Antecedents to team psychological safety: - Team leader behavior - Informal group dynamics - Trust and respect - Use of practice fields - Supportive organizational context Team learning behaviors - Feedback seeking - Help seeking - Speaking up about concerns/mistakes - Innovative behavior - Boundary spanning Team Psychological Safety = a shared belief held by members of a team that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking (Edmondson, A. C. 1999) Literature review Team Psychological Safety
    • The collective programming of the mind that distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from others Different frameworks and dimensions: Hofstede, Hall, Bond, GLOBE, Trompenaars, Gelfand Individualism versus collectivism “ the degree to which people’s self-image is defined in terms of I or we “ individualistic Literature review National Culture: individualistic versus collectivistic 0 20 40 60 80 100 collectivistic France 71 Thailand 20 1 (Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. 2010) 9
    • Research paradigm Critical Realism and Mixed Methods 10 Postpositivist view (Cooke, N. J. et al. 2012, Mohammed, S. et al. 2010) - observe and record learning behaviors - measure knowledge, and knowledge creation, via individual or team mental models Constructivist view (Jashapara, A. 2011, Bennet, A. 2012) - team learning is social in nature and depends on context and culture - knowledge is context sensitive and situation dependent Critical Realist view as Mixed Method approach validate model and hypothesis analyze underlying reasons and nuances
    • 11 Conceptual framework The Research Model
    • 12 H0 Teams with higher team psychological safety engage in more team learning behavior than teams with lower team psychological safety H1 Teams with higher team learning behavior create more team knowledge than teams with lower team learning behavior P1 Teams with higher intensity and frequency of team learning behaviors have more and more meaningful occurrences of knowledge creation moments than teams with lower intensity and frequency of team learning behaviors H2 Teams with higher team psychological safety create more team knowledge than teams with lower team psychological safety H3 Psychological safety in teams in Thailand has a more pronounced effect on the creation of team knowledge than in France: H3a low psychological safety has a more negative impact on team knowledge creation for Thai teams in comparison with French teams H3b high psychological safety has a more positive impact on team knowledge creation for Thai teams in comparison with French teams P2 Elements affecting team psychological safety are different between cultures, and their relative importance is different Conceptual framework Hypotheses and propositions
    • 13 corrected page 93 Research Design Instruments and Measurement Results for each Construct
    • The research uses - established teams with 8 members - teams from engineering departments in 1 organization - total 6 teams, 3 from Thailand and 3 from France 2-part team challenge around problem solving: team psychological safety, team learning and team knowledge creation are measured before, during and after the challenge Glasstap® team challenges (1) A Welsh Holiday (2) Professor Warmkote’s Safe 14 Research Design Empirical Research pilot (1 team) update/ adjust experiment (6 teams)
    • 16 Data Collection Instruments Validity and Reliability
    • preparatory assessment T – 1 week T T + 3 weeks timeline team psychological safety task-related team knowledge team-related team knowledge main experiment post assessment team challenge #1 team learning overall team knowledge created team challenge #2 team learning assessment overall team knowledge created task-related team knowledge team-related team knowledge assessment task-related team knowledge team-related team knowledge Qualitative measurement Quantitative measurement Data Collection Sequence of Experiment and Assessments, and Instruments used 16
    • 17 Data Collection Concept-map based Mental Model / Construction of Shared Mental Model Methodology from Johnson T. E., & O'Connor, D. L. (2008) option 1 option 2
    • 18 Methodology from Johnson T. E., & O'Connor, D. L. (2008) A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O A B C D E FG H I J K L M NO Step 1 Determining key concepts around team problem solving, by subject matter experts and management -> ± 15 concepts Step 2 Elicitation of ICMM Individually Constructed Mental Models, with basic guidance and practice about concept maps Step 3 Analyzing and coding of the team’s different ICMM by researcher: identifying similarity of  concepts  links or or  clusters A F A F A F Data Collection Concept-map based Mental Model / Construction of Shared Mental Model
    • 19 Methodology from Johnson T. E., & O'Connor, D. L. (2008) Step 4 Determine which concepts, links, clusters are shared by the team members, with a threshold (ex. 75%) Step 5 Construction of the Analysis-Constructed Shared Mental Model AC-SMM, from the shared concepts, links and clusters Step 6 Compare changes in the AC-SMM over time A B C D G H I J K L N Data Collection Concept-map based Mental Model / Construction of Shared Mental Model
    • Timeline Q4 2013 Q1 2014 Q2 2014 Q3 2014 Q4 2014 Complete pilot run (1 team) Experiment (6 teams) Codification and Data Analysis Dissertation writing Dissertation submission 20
    • Setting of the experiment: - single multinational organization - Thailand and France - 8-member engineering teams Mixed method with 6 teams (3 from France, 3 from Thailand) Only team psychological safety as an element impacting team learning and team knowledge creation Additional research could validate this model by - studying other teams (size, team profession, organization, cultural make-up) - evaluating other impacts on learning and knowledge creation in teams 21 Limitations
    • Bennet, A. (2012). Information, Knowledge and Learning. In Bangkok. University (Ed.) Teaching session at PhD in KIM. Bangkok. Chen, D. H. C., & Dahlman, C. J., (2005). The Knowledge Economy, the KAM Methodology and World Bank Operations. Washington DC: The World Bank. Cooke, N. J., Gorman, J. C., Myers, C. W., & Durand, J. L. (2012). Interactive Team Cognition. Cognitive Science, 1-31. Decuyper, S., Dochy, F., & Van den Bossche, P. (2010). Grasping the dynamic complexity of team learning: an integrative model for effective team learning in organizations. Educational Research Review, 5, 111-133. Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383. Edmondson, A. C. (2003). Psychological Safety, Trust, and Learning in Organizations: A Group-level Lens. Boston: Harvard Business School. Edmondson, A. C. (2012). Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy: Jossey-Bass. Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, Intercultural Cooperation and Its Importance for Survival (3rd ed.): McGraw Hill. Jashapara, A. (2011). Knowledge Management An Integrated Approach (2 ed.). Essex: Pearson Education Limited. Johnson, T. E., & O'Connor, D. L. (2008). Measuring Team Shared Understanding Using the Analysis-Constructed Shared Mental Model Methodology. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 21(3), 113-134. Kim, D. H. (2002). Organizing for Learning: Strategies for Knowledge Creation and Enduring Change. Singapore: Cobee Publishing House. Marks, M. A., Sabella, M. J., Burke, C. S., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2002). The impact of cross-training on team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 3-13. Mohammed, S., Ferzandi, L., & Hamilton, K. (2010). Metaphor No More: A 15-Year Review of the Team Mental Model Construct. Journal of Management, 36(4), 876-910. Senge, P. M. 1994. The Fifth Discipline, New York NY, Doubleday Business. Stahl, G. (2000). A Model of Collaborative Knowledge-Building. Paper presented at the Fourth International Conference of the Learning Sciences, Mahwah, NJ, USA. Wildman, J. L., Thayer, A. L., Pavlas, D., Salas, E., Stewart, J. E., & Howse, W. R. (2012). Team Knowledge Research : Emerging Trends and Critical Needs. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 54(1). 22 References