Reflexivität in Teams

A growing number of studies have investigated the role of team reflexivity, that is the extent to which teams reflect upon and adapt their functioning. However, in spite the relevance of the concept, previous research revealed surprisingly heterogenous findings regarding the relationship between team reflexivity and outcomes. The main goals of this work were therefore to theoretically and empirically identify causes for this unclarity and develop alternative conceptualisations. As a first step, team reflexivity was conceptualized in the form of a framework that integrates four interacting but distinct reflexive processes. Focusing on the team reflection process, an extended multidimensional reflection measure REMINT (Reflection Measure for Individuals and Teams) was developed and validated. The measure allows to capture the relevant dimensions of quality and quantity of reflection and the underlying processes of information seeking and information evaluation, and offers a precise and at the same time economical examination of the team reflection process. Based on this differentiation, the results of two extensive consecutive studies revealed that is necessary to distinguish between the different forms of team reflection in order to understand the effects of team reflection on outcomes. Furthermore, results showed that this relationship is also depended on various contextual variables, such as previous team performance (feedback), time, or environmental conditions. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.Eine stetig wachsende Anzahl an Untersuchungen setzt sich mit der Rolle der Team Reflexivität auseinander, das heißt dem Ausmaß, innerhalb dessen Teams über ihre Aktivitäten reflektieren und sie anpassen. Trotz der Relevanz des Konzepts weißt die bisherige Forschung eine überraschend heterogene Befundlage hinsichtlich der Beziehung zwischen Teamreflexivität und Ergebniskriterien auf. Die Hauptziele dieser Arbeit waren daher, theoretisch und empirisch Ursachen für diese Unklarheit zu identifizieren und alternative Ansätze zu entwickeln. Als erster Schritt wurde Team Reflexivität daher in Form eines Frameworks konzipiert, das vier interagierende, aber unterschiedliche reflexive Prozesse integriert. Fokussierend auf den Teamreflexionsprozess, wurde eine erweiterte, multidimensionale Reflexionsskala REMINT (Reflection Measure for Individuals and Teams) entwickelt und validiert. Die Skala erlaubt es, die relevanten Dimensionen der Qualität und der Quantität von Team Reflexion, sowie die zugrundeliegenden Prozesse Informationssuche und der Informationsevaluation zu erfassen und bietet eine präzise und zugleich ökonomische Untersuchung des Team Reflexionsprozesses. Basierend auf dieser Differenzierung zeigten die Ergebnisse von zwei umfangreichen Folgestudien, dass es notwendig ist zwischen den verschiedenen Formen der Teamreflexion zu unterscheiden, um die Auswirkungen auf Ergebniskriterien zu verstehen. Darüber hinaus zeigten die Ergebnisse, dass diese Beziehung auch von verschiedenen Kontextvariablen abhängig ist, wie zum Beispiel vorangegangene Team Leistung (Feedback), Zeit, oder Umgebungsbedingungen. Theoretische und praktische Implikationen werden diskutiert

A meta‐analysis of change in applicants' perceptions of fairness

Using an event‐triggered multi‐stage framework, this random‐effects meta‐analysis examined the changes in applicants' perceptions of fairness between consecutive stages and throughout the entire personnel selection process. We integrated findings of studies with at least two measurement points, resulting in 45 effect sizes (overall N = 3,038). Trajectories of perceptions of fairness decreased nonlinearly across the process, with a steeper decrease for people who held high levels of initial fairness expectations. Unjust treatment produced a decrease in perceptions of fairness from pretest to posttest and an increase from posttest to postdecision. Furthermore, the length of the time interval moderated the changes in fairness perceptions between the posttest and postdecision stage. Practical implications and an agenda for future research are discussed

The shape of justice repair: asymmetric nonlinear retributive and restorative justice effects to unfair supervisor treatment

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of supervisor’s unfair treatment on follower’s retributive and restorative justice perceptions. The main goal is to find asymmetric nonlinear trajectories in the relationship between the severity of unfair treatment and employees’ orientation toward retributive/restorative justice. Design/methodology/approach: Using an experimental policy-capturing design that varied five levels of transgression severity (none to very high) within supervisor–subordinate relationship injustice situations, 168 employees rated their retributive/restorative justice preferences. Latent growth curve modeling was used to fit the overall patterns of change. Findings: As hypothesized, the trajectory of restorative justice was convex and progressed in a negative exponential shape, whereas the restorative justice trajectory was concave but followed a less steep positive exponential shape. Results show differing initial levels of restorative and retributive justice, with higher initial levels in retributive justice predicting a greater increase in retributive justice as treatment becomes less fair. Research limitations/implications: The main limitation is a threat to the external validity of the results. Scenario-based surveys may not fully generalize to actual organizational situations. Practical implications: These findings help managers to understand how unjust treatment can shape employees’ expectations and, thus, address it adequately. This is important to retain qualified personnel and to minimize workplace disengagement in the aftermath of poor treatment. Social implications: Restorative justice is of great importance for minor and moderate violations of justice. Originality/value: By illustrating different trajectories, this study extends research on restorative and retributive justice in organizations. The results help to understand when people expect restoration and are motivated to punish wrongdoers

Electrically controlled nuclear polarization of individual atoms

Nuclear spins serve as sensitive probes in chemistry1 and materials science2 and are promising candidates for quantum information processing3,4,5,6. NMR, the resonant control of nuclear spins, is a powerful tool for probing local magnetic environments in condensed matter systems, which range from magnetic ordering in high-temperature superconductors7,8 and spin liquids9 to quantum magnetism in nanomagnets10,11. Increasing the sensitivity of NMR to the single-atom scale is challenging as it requires a strong polarization of nuclear spins, well in excess of the low polarizations obtained at thermal equilibrium, as well as driving and detecting them individually4,5,12. Strong nuclear spin polarization, known as hyperpolarization, can be achieved through hyperfine coupling with electron spins2. The fundamental mechanism is the conservation of angular momentum: an electron spin flips and a nuclear spin flops. The nuclear hyperpolarization enables applications such as in vivo magnetic resonance imaging using nanoparticles13, and is harnessed for spin-based quantum information processing in quantum dots14 and doped silicon15,16,17. Here we polarize the nuclear spins of individual copper atoms on a surface using a spin-polarized current in a scanning tunnelling microscope. By employing the electron–nuclear flip-flop hyperfine interaction, the spin angular momentum is transferred from tunnelling electrons to the nucleus of individual Cu atoms. The direction and magnitude of the nuclear polarization is controlled by the direction and amplitude of the current. The nuclear polarization permits the detection of the NMR of individual Cu atoms, which is used to sense the local magnetic environment of the Cu electron spin.P.W., Y.B. and A.J.H. acknowledge support from Institute for Basic Science under IBS-R027-D1. P.W. acknowledges support from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation. A.F. acknowledges CONICET (PIP11220150100327 and PUE-22920170100089CO). J.L.L. thanks the ETH Fellowship program for financial support. J.F.-R. thanks FCT, under the project PTDC/FIS-NAN/4662/2014