Search results

Bandwagon refers to the adoption of popular ideas, thoughts, or practices. Although the inter-organizational (macro) dynamics of the phenomenon have been widely studied, its intra-organizational (micro) aspects have received limited attention. The paper presents a theoretical framework and a model that address intra-organizational aspects of bandwagon drawing on distributed cognition, social relationships, and other elements of the organizational structure such as culture and defensive routines. The analysis of simulated data from the model suggests that the phenomenon is likely to decrease with highly informal culture, promotion of advice taking and giving, low levels of distrust, strong social ties, and minimal defensive routines.

The purpose of this paper is to verify how distributed cognition enhances collaborative problem-solving in the context of projects.

Using qualitative research and in-depth interviews, a sample of 32 project managers with experience in traditional and agile methods acting in Brazil and internationally participated in the research process. The analysis process, utilising coding techniques, involved stages: open, axial, coding and selective coding. These stages encompassed the evaluation of categories based on a hierarchy, in order to determine an appropriate level of abstraction that properly explains theoretical findings.

The results indicate that distributed team cognition is significant for collaborative problem-solving. The data from the interviews allowed the proposal of a model of cognition, and the identification of the elements that support it.

Understand how aspects of distributed team cognition can impact the behaviours of the project professional and contribute to problem-solving in the project environment.

The elements observed affects the collaborative problem-solving by presenting a model of distributed cognition, which is composed by directed communication, collective interaction, trust building and collaborative behaviour.

In response to recent calls to better understand the brain’s role in organizational behavior, we propose a series of theoretical tests to examine the question “can brains manage?” Our tests ask whether brains can manage without bodies and without extracranial resources, whether they can manage in social isolation, and whether brains are the ultimate controllers of emotional and cognitive aspects of organizational behavior. Our analysis shows that, to accomplish work-related tasks in organizations, the brain relies on and closely interfaces with the body, interpersonal and social dynamics, and cognitive and emotional processes that are distributed across persons and artifacts. The results of this “thought experiment” suggest that the brain is more appropriately conceived as a regulatory organ that integrates top-down (i.e., social, artifactual and environmental) and bottom-up (i.e., neural) influences on organizational behavior, rather than the sole cause of that behavior. Drawing on a socially situated perspective, our analysis develops a framework that connects brain, body and mind to social, cultural, and environmental forces, as significant components of complex emotional and cognitive organizational systems. We discuss the implications for the emerging field of organizational cognitive neuroscience and for conceptualizing the interaction between the brain, cognition and emotion in organizations.

Secchi and Cowley (2016, 2018) propose a Radical approach to Organizational Cognition (ROC) as a way of studying cognitive processes in organizations. What distinguishes ROC from the established research on Organizational Cognition is that it remains faithful to radical, anti-representationalist principles of contemporary cognitive science. However, it is imperative for proponents of ROC to legitimize their approach by considering how it differs from the established research approach of Distributed Cognition (DCog). DCog is a potential contender to ROC in that it not only counters classical approaches to cognition but also provides valuable insights into cognition in organizational settings.

The paper adopts a conceptual/theoretical approach that expands Secchi and Cowley's introduction of ROC.

The paper shows that DCog research presupposes a task-specification requirement, which entails that cognitive tasks are well-defined. Consequently, DCog research neglects cases of organizational becoming where tasks cannot be clearly demarcated for the or are well-known to the organization. This is the case with the introduction of novel tasks or technical devices. Moreover, the paper elaborates on ROC's 3M model by linking it with insights from the literature on organizational change. Thus, it explores how organizing can be explored as an emergent phenomenon that involves micro, meso and macro domain dynamics, which are shaped by synoptic and performative changes.

The present paper explores new grounds for ROC by not only expanding on its core model but also showing its potential for informing organizational theory and radical cognitive science research.

This article presents a cognitive framework to study dynamic/adaptive aspects of a collection of popular fit measures used in organisation research, in an attempt to highlight what there is to be gained.

This paper uses a distributed e-cognition (DEC) framework to examine the current organisational literature of fit measures.

This paper highlights that most measures have a rather narrow focus and do not address dynamic/adaptive aspects in complex social systems (e.g. organisations). To both provide a way to integrate fit measures and cover the cognition gap in this literature, this article highlights the need for a more sophisticated measure.

This paper provides a novel approach to examining organisational fit literature through a distributed (e)-cognitive framework.

The purpose of this study is to gain insight into the interaction-sensitive skills medical practitioners enact as they manage multiple organizational factors in the context of discharging patients.

For that purpose, we carried out a cognitive ethnographic study in a Danish hospital, where we video-recorded three pre-ward round meetings, five discharge conversations and conducted seven semi-structured interviews. Fieldnotes and interview transcripts were analyzed using the method Cognitive Task Analysis, and video-recordings were analyzed via the interactivity-based approach Cognitive Event Analysis.

Our findings show that practitioners coordinate multi-scalar resources (e.g. verbal patterns and cognitive artifacts) in order to discharge patients in a safe and integrated way, which we propose amounts to the social and intercorporeal ability to align simultaneously emerging factors, like organizational procedures in the hospital, artifacts in use, sociocultural resources and the individual medical expertise of the practitioner in the emerging social interaction with the patient. In pursing this claim, we investigate the linguistic and cognitive processes emerging in a single case study of a nurse who discharges a patient. We propose that the interaction-sensitive skill which enables the nurse to solve the task of discharging the patient can be characterized via hybrid cognition.

Thus, the value of the article is dual: On the one hand, it empirically contributes with knowledge of the complex organizational structures that constrains micro-level medical interactions in discharges, and on the other, the article contributes theoretically with a hybrid cognitive framework that allows organizational researchers to understand and assess complex cognitive and linguistic processes that goes into the social micro-coordination in complex organizational-medical task.

Though there is an increasing corpus of work on contemporary styles of leadership, studies on distributed leadership (DL) are still in the nascent stage. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to investigate how DL affects team effectiveness from the neglected perspectives of team cognition, team motivation and team coordination in startup companies using multi-level analysis.

The authors investigated the study variables through the lens of 42 teams in 18 startup organizations operating in India, representing an equitable distribution of the manufacturing and service sectors. M-plus was used to do statistical analysis on the multi-level model.

Drawing upon social exchange theory (SET), results indicated that DL had a favorable impact on team effectiveness and team cognitive processes, team motivation and team coordination mediates the association between DL and individual perceptions of team effectiveness.

Various studies have been carried out relating to leadership and how it impacts effectiveness. However, as far as the authors know, previous studies have failed to empirically address how DL drives team effectiveness by uncovering the mediating impact of team cognitive processes, team motivation and team coordination in the Indian startup context.

For organizational neuroscience to progress, it requires an overarching theoretical framework that locates neural processes appropriately within the wider context of organizational cognitive activities. In this chapter, we argue the case for building such a framework on two foundations: (1) critical realism, and (2) socially situated cognition. Critical realism holds to the importance of identifying biophysical roots for organizational activity (including neurophysiological processes) while acknowledging the top-down influence of higher-level, emergent organizational phenomena such as routines and structures, thereby avoiding the trap of reductionism. Socially situated cognition connects the brain, body, and mind to social, cultural, and environmental forces, as significant components of complex organizational systems. By focusing on adaptive action as the primary explanandum, socially situated cognition posits that, although the brain plays a driving role in adaptive organizational activity, this activity also relies on the body, situational context, and cognitive processes that are distributed across organizational agents and artifacts. The value of the framework that we sketch out is twofold. First, it promises to help organizational neuroscience become more than an arena for validating basic neuroscience concepts, enabling organizational researchers to backfill into social neuroscience, by identifying unique relations between the brain and social organization. Second, it promises to build deeper connections between neuroscience and mainstream theories of organizational behavior, by advancing models of managerial and organizational cognition that are biologically informed and socially situated.