Search results

The reliance on teams in today’s work environment underscores the importance of understanding how teams function. To better understand teams, one must be able to measure team dynamics or interaction. The purpose of this chapter is to outline an unobtrusive approach to measuring team dynamics from verbal communications.

The basic premise of this approach is that the words we use provide insight into how we feel and think at any given time. The methodology described in this chapter employs a lexical analytic approach to examining team dynamics. To best accomplish this, we first identify the principal features or dimensions of teamwork and then we propose lexical measures that may map to these processes.

This approach can be employed to track team functioning over time “at a distance” without interrupting task performance.

This chapter describes an approach to measuring relevant teamwork dimensions through verbal content. This approach has the potential to give us direct, unobtrusive insight into the emotional and cognitive states of teams. It is original in its examination of how team dynamics can be indexed in speech.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the effects of cement‐ and earth‐plastered straw bale walls against the appropriate vertical loads.

The effects of contact between two common types of plasters and the stacked straw bale by the optimal design analysis have been assessed in this work with the use of finite element method.

Cement‐ and earth‐plastered straw bale walls have shown adequate resistance against the appropriate vertical loads and showed that the earth‐plaster can bear higher stress than the cement plastered straw bale. There is the implication that the collapse or response of the earth‐straw bale wall will be significantly higher compared to that of cement‐straw bale wall.

The stress stability obtained of the analytical walls is adequate after using the best fit variables for the wall height and thickness.

The paper shows that the allowable stresses of 70.14 kN/m² for cement plastered straw bale wall and 73.14 kN/m² for earth‐plastered straw bale wall are higher than the calculated stress values using SAP2000 of 18.836 and 64.2 kN/m² for cement plastered straw bale wall, respectively.

This chapter reviews 30 years of Advances in Group Processes. Its primary purpose is to study the part the series has played in the advances in the study of group processes that have taken place between 1984 and 2014.

This chapter places the 30 years of Advances in Group Processes in the context of the changes that took place between small groups research in the 1950s and group processes research in the 1980s and beyond.

Analyzing the policies of Advances in Group Processes and its contents, this chapter reflects on its role in the advances in group processes that have taken place since the 1980s. Between 1950 and 1980, small group research reinvented, reconceptualized, and reinvigorated itself as group process research. Between the two periods, small group research, its applied research, and its research programs became increasingly theory-driven and its concept of the group and its levels increasingly analytic. As a consequence of these changes, the concept of the field itself became increasingly analytic. The changes between the two periods in its theory, research, application, programs, and in its concept of the group and the way the field was conceptualized led to marked advances in group process research in the 90s and beyond – to more theory, more impact of it on application, and more, and more cumulative, growth of it. Advances in Group Processes was at once a reflection of the changes that took place between the two periods and a driving force in the advances in group processes research that have taken place ever since.

Advances in Group Processes is a fundamental resource for the development of theory and research on small groups and group processes. This chapter provides an overview of its contributions and places them in the context of the development of the field as a whole.

The primary purpose of this chapter is to assess the effects of twenty-five years of the Group Processes Conference on advances in the study of group processes that have taken place between 1988 and 2014.

This chapter places the twenty-five years of the Group Processes Conference in the context of the changes that have taken place between small groups research in the 1950s and group processes research in the 1980s and beyond.

Between the 1950s and 1980s small groups research reinvented, reconceptualized, and reinvigorated itself as group processes research. In this period, small groups research, its applied research, and its research programs became increasingly theory-driven, and its concept of the group and its levels increasingly abstract, general, and analytic. As a consequence of these changes, the concept of the field itself became increasingly analytic. The Group Processes Conference was at once a reflection of these changes and a driving force in the subsequent advances in group processes research. It both quickened and amplified the effects of individual-level factors and of thirty years of Advances in Group Processes on the transformation of the field and was also, like Advances in Group Processes, a driving force in the subsequent advances in group processes research. The present chapter concludes with an analysis of the mechanisms of the effects of the Group Processes Conference on group processes research.

The program for the twenty-fifth year of the Group Processes Conference celebrates its effects on the field of group processes research.

Progress meetings provide a central forum for requesting and exchanging the information necessary for the successful completion of construction projects. Although common to the majority of projects, little is known about the interaction between participants during these meetings. Reviews appropriateness of methodologies for the study of group interaction and discusses the problems encountered when piloting them. The review led to a focus on Bales’ interaction process analysis (IPA) as an appropriate methodology for observing, analysing and interpreting social interaction in small groups. Pilot testing and subsequent use found the method to be reliable and robust. Bales’ IPA was used to categorise and quantify communication acts of 30 site‐based progress meetings. Results indicate that the management and design team interaction is subject to interaction norms: this is predominantly task‐based, but subject to outbursts of emotional interaction, which was found to be very influential on the groups’ behaviour.

This study examined the impact of resonance expressed by the positive emotional attractor (PEA) and dissonance represented by the negative emotional attractor (NEA) created by medical students during diagnostic encounters with standardized patients (SPs) (laypeople) from the clinical skills exam (CSE). Secondary data were collected from 116 videotaped CSE encounters between SPs and medical students. Associations among the PEA and NEA states, and medical student effectiveness measured by SP, faculty, and differential diagnosis scores using moderated multiple regression analysis were determined. Results suggest that the PEA and NEA are powerful conditions for determining medical student effectiveness in clinical encounters.

Basic science, sometimes called “curiosity-driven research” at the National Science Foundation and other places, starts with a question that somehow stays in the mind, nagging for an answer. Such questions really are “puzzles”; they arise in an intellectual field or context, asking someone to fit pieces to an improving but incomplete picture of the social world. What makes a worthwhile puzzle is a missing part in understanding the picture, or a new piece of knowledge that does not seem to fit among other parts. Sometimes creative theorists can imagine a solution to one of the holes in the puzzle. If they are also empirical scientists, they devise ways to get evidence bearing on their ideas, and some of those ideas survive to give more complete and detailed pictures of the world. This chapter is the story of puzzles and provisional solutions to them, developed by dozens of men and women investigating status processes and status structures, using a coherent perspective, for over half a century.¹

This chapter is about how leaders attempt to move from traditional to shared leadership and why they often cannot. We develop a new theoretical framework to examine whether leaders are willing to shift control from themselves to their followers and thus promote shared leadership in their teams. We argue that control shifts, while necessary for shared leadership, are particularly difficult for leaders to enact. This is because leadership is often closely bound with power and status in the organization, a reality of organizational life that is often overlooked in the quest for new forms of leadership, such as shared leadership. Our contribution lies in examining leaders’ ability to enact shared leadership through the lenses of primary and secondary control, and situating control shift in the context of global leadership including selected cultural dimensions, complexity, and paradoxes.

Among the many influences on group decision making efficacy that have been identified by group researchers, the process that a group follows in arriving at a decision is widely regarded as one of the most important. This chapter reviews the research on group decision making processes for the purpose of explicating (a) the nature of group process, (b) the factors that influence group process, (c) the role that communication plays in group process, and (d) the influence of group process on decision making efficacy. The chapter concludes with suggestions for future research.