Investigating voice in action teams : a critical review

Team communication is considered a key factor for team performance. Importantly, voicing concerns and suggestions regarding work-related topics—also termed speaking up—represents an essential part of team communication. Particularly in action teams in high-reliability organizations such as healthcare, military, or aviation, voice is crucial for error prevention. Although research on voice has become more important recently, there are inconsistencies in the literature. This includes methodological issues, such as how voice should be measured in different team contexts, and conceptual issues, such as uncertainty regarding the role of the voice recipient. We tried to address these issues of voice research in action teams in the current literature review. We identified 26 quantitative empirical studies that measured voice as a distinct construct. Results showed that only two-thirds of the articles provided a definition for voice. Voice was assessed via behavioral observation or via self-report. Behavioral observation includes two main approaches (i.e., event-focused and language-focused) that are methodologically consistent. In contrast, studies using self-reports showed significant methodological inconsistencies regarding measurement instruments (i.e., self-constructed single items versus validated scales). The contents of instruments that assessed voice via self-report varied considerably. The recipient of voice was poorly operationalized (i.e., discrepancy between definitions and measurements). In sum, our findings provide a comprehensive overview of how voice is treated in action teams. There seems to be no common understanding of what constitutes voice in action teams, which is associated with several conceptual as well as methodological issues. This suggests that a stronger consensus is needed to improve validity and comparability of research findings

Investigating voice in action teams: a critical review

Team communication is considered a key factor for team performance. Importantly, voicing concerns and suggestions regarding work-related topics—also termed speaking up—represents an essential part of team communication. Particularly in action teams in high-reliability organizations such as healthcare, military, or aviation, voice is crucial for error prevention. Although research on voice has become more important recently, there are inconsistencies in the literature. This includes methodological issues, such as how voice should be measured in different team contexts, and conceptual issues, such as uncertainty regarding the role of the voice recipient. We tried to address these issues of voice research in action teams in the current literature review. We identified 26 quantitative empirical studies that measured voice as a distinct construct. Results showed that only two-thirds of the articles provided a definition for voice. Voice was assessed via behavioral observation or via self-report. Behavioral observation includes two main approaches (i.e., event-focused and language-focused) that are methodologically consistent. In contrast, studies using self-reports showed significant methodological inconsistencies regarding measurement instruments (i.e., self-constructed single items versus validated scales). The contents of instruments that assessed voice via self-report varied considerably. The recipient of voice was poorly operationalized (i.e., discrepancy between definitions and measurements). In sum, our findings provide a comprehensive overview of how voice is treated in action teams. There seems to be no common understanding of what constitutes voice in action teams, which is associated with several conceptual as well as methodological issues. This suggests that a stronger consensus is needed to improve validity and comparability of research findings

Investigating voice in action teams : a critical review

Team communication is considered a key factor for team performance. Importantly, voicing concerns and suggestions regarding work-related topics—also termed speaking up—represents an essential part of team communication. Particularly in action teams in high-reliability organizations such as healthcare, military, or aviation, voice is crucial for error prevention. Although research on voice has become more important recently, there are inconsistencies in the literature. This includes methodological issues, such as how voice should be measured in different team contexts, and conceptual issues, such as uncertainty regarding the role of the voice recipient. We tried to address these issues of voice research in action teams in the current literature review. We identified 26 quantitative empirical studies that measured voice as a distinct construct. Results showed that only two-thirds of the articles provided a definition for voice. Voice was assessed via behavioral observation or via self-report. Behavioral observation includes two main approaches (i.e., event-focused and language-focused) that are methodologically consistent. In contrast, studies using self-reports showed significant methodological inconsistencies regarding measurement instruments (i.e., self-constructed single items versus validated scales). The contents of instruments that assessed voice via self-report varied considerably. The recipient of voice was poorly operationalized (i.e., discrepancy between definitions and measurements). In sum, our findings provide a comprehensive overview of how voice is treated in action teams. There seems to be no common understanding of what constitutes voice in action teams, which is associated with several conceptual as well as methodological issues. This suggests that a stronger consensus is needed to improve validity and comparability of research findings

Electroweak parameters of the Z0^0 resonance and the standard model

Media temporalities of the elderly : evolutions in stability This article shows the context of analysis and the first results of a research on media temporalities of the elderly. Several works have finely analysed the diversity of the media practices and studied meanings of media uses. I wish to continue these analyses by insisting on the evolutionary and dynamic aspect of the practices and temporalities of users having expanded, enhanced, so called "interactive" radio and especially television programming. A priori, the elderly, upon retirement, have a "full-time free time". Their media practices seem strongly influenced by their first experiments ; the appropriation of the various peripheral accessories which gradually came with the media, to the latest digital ones, seems to reinforce their habits of watching television. Their representations and relations with times and media are very far away from the image of television like omnipresent media or "devourer of time". Rather, their media practices are to be understood like a temporality of the occupation, according to the expression of Gerard Derèze, characterized by interest and utility. A particular glance at the users who do not carry out a systematic selection of the programs, accepting the unforeseen, highlights an approach of media and time that allow "useful encounter" which I would qualify in a first stage by : "chance and encounter" and "random and the following". The few points presented here make me assume that the global relation of the autonomous elderly persons to the media can evolve when confronted to their new temporal framework and the new program offer, whereas their representations and use of the media remain quite stable

Electroweak parameters of the Z0^0 resonance and the standard model

Media temporalities of the elderly : evolutions in stability This article shows the context of analysis and the first results of a research on media temporalities of the elderly. Several works have finely analysed the diversity of the media practices and studied meanings of media uses. I wish to continue these analyses by insisting on the evolutionary and dynamic aspect of the practices and temporalities of users having expanded, enhanced, so called "interactive" radio and especially television programming. A priori, the elderly, upon retirement, have a "full-time free time". Their media practices seem strongly influenced by their first experiments ; the appropriation of the various peripheral accessories which gradually came with the media, to the latest digital ones, seems to reinforce their habits of watching television. Their representations and relations with times and media are very far away from the image of television like omnipresent media or "devourer of time". Rather, their media practices are to be understood like a temporality of the occupation, according to the expression of Gerard Derèze, characterized by interest and utility. A particular glance at the users who do not carry out a systematic selection of the programs, accepting the unforeseen, highlights an approach of media and time that allow "useful encounter" which I would qualify in a first stage by : "chance and encounter" and "random and the following". The few points presented here make me assume that the global relation of the autonomous elderly persons to the media can evolve when confronted to their new temporal framework and the new program offer, whereas their representations and use of the media remain quite stable