Cross-level dynamics of collaboration and conflict in multi-party Systems : An empirical investigation using a behavioural simulation

Multiparty systems bring together various stakeholder parties and their representatives and offer a platform for sharing their diverse interests, knowledge and expertise in order to develop and realize joint goals. They display complex relational dynamics in which within-party interactions (interpersonal interactions within each stakeholder party) as well as between-party interactions (interactions between the stakeholder parties) intertwine to generate bottom-up and top-down influences. We investigate these influences in a behavioural simulation. Our results show that changes in task conflict at the stakeholder party level positively predict changes in perceived collaborativeness in the overall system, while changes in relationship conflict at the stakeholder party level positively predict changes in perceived conflictuality in the system. Moreover, we show that changes in perceived overall conflictuality leads to a proportional change in relationship conflict experienced within the stakeholder parties

Participation and goal achievement of multi-party systems dealing with complex problems: A natural experiment.

Multiparty collaborative systems often deal with wicked sustainability challenges. Previous research has emphasized the important role of stakeholder representation and participation in comprehensive sustainability decisions. We report the results of an empirical test of the effect of stakeholder participation on systemic goal achievement and on multiparty dynamics in a natural experiment, using the results obtained through two simulations in which 44 professionals participated. In one of the simulations a ‘party exclusion dynamic’ evolved. As the two simulations had a similar baseline, the same number of participants distributed in a similar manner among seven stakeholder parties in each simulation, we could test the effect of stakeholder participation on goal achievement and systemic dynamics, using the other simulation as a comparison. Our results show that stakeholder exclusion prevents systemic goal achievement, disrupts collaboration and induces systemic powerlessness

Participation and Goal Achievement of Multiparty Collaborative Systems Dealing with Complex Problems: A Natural Experiment

Multiparty collaborative systems often deal with wicked sustainability challenges. Previous research has emphasized the important role of stakeholder representation and participation in comprehensive sustainability decisions. We report the results of an empirical test of the effect of stakeholder participation on systemic goal achievement and on multiparty dynamics in a natural experiment, using the results obtained through two simulations in which 44 professionals participated. In one of the simulations a ‘party exclusion dynamic’ evolved. As the two simulations had a similar baseline, the same number of participants distributed in a similar manner among seven stakeholder parties in each simulation, we could test the effect of stakeholder participation on goal achievement and systemic dynamics, using the other simulation as a comparison. Our results show that stakeholder exclusion prevents systemic goal achievement, disrupts collaboration and induces systemic powerlessness

Participation and Goal Achievement of Multiparty Collaborative Systems Dealing with Complex Problems: A Natural Experiment

Multiparty collaborative systems often deal with wicked sustainability challenges. Previous research has emphasized the important role of stakeholder representation and participation in comprehensive sustainability decisions. We report the results of an empirical test of the effect of stakeholder participation on systemic goal achievement and on multiparty dynamics in a natural experiment, using the results obtained through two simulations in which 44 professionals participated. In one of the simulations a ‘party exclusion dynamic’ evolved. As the two simulations had a similar baseline, the same number of participants distributed in a similar manner among seven stakeholder parties in each simulation, we could test the effect of stakeholder participation on goal achievement and systemic dynamics, using the other simulation as a comparison. Our results show that stakeholder exclusion prevents systemic goal achievement, disrupts collaboration and induces systemic powerlessness

The effects of groups’ variety and disparity on groups’ cognitive complexity

This study examined the influence of group diversity conceptualized as disparity and as variety on group cognitive complexity. Data on individual cognitive complexity and group cognitive complexity were collected in 44 groups using a conceptual mapping technique. Also data on the quality of teamwork processes and satisfaction were collected using an individual questionnaire. The results indicate that (a) gender variety has a positive impact on group cognitive complexity, (b) cognitive disparity has a negative impact on group cognitive complexity, and (c) groups with a high average individual cognitive complexity have the highest cognitive complexity as a group only if the quality of their interactions is high

Minority dissent, social acceptance in collaborative learning groups

The main aim of this paper is to test the extent to which social acceptance moderates the impact of minority dissent on group cognitive complexity (GCC). We hypothesize that divergent views expressed by a minority increase GCC especially when the group climate is open to divergent contributions (e.g., a socially accepting group climate). We also hypothesize that group size has a non-linear association with GCC in such a way that GCC increases as group size increases from low to average and then GCC decreases as group size further increases from average to high. We test these hypotheses in a sample of 537 students (258 women, with an average age of 23.37) organized in 92 groups that have worked together in the same group throughout the semester, and show that: (1) group size has a decreasing positive association with GCC, (2) both minority dissent and social acceptance are beneficial for GCC and (3) groups with the highest GCC are those that experience minority dissent and develop a socially accepting climate (in which group members can equally participate to the task), allowing the majority to process the dissenting views extensively

Career challenges in smart cities: A sociotechnical systems view on sustainable careers

Smart cities are a modern reality in an increasingly digitized and fast changing world; and, as multidimensional, multilayered and interconnected career ecosystems they bring a number of challenges for the development of sustainable careers. What are the systemic roots of these challenges, and how can we deal with them to support the emergence of sustainable careers? We draw on a sociotechnical approach, supplemented by a dynamic person–environment fit perspective, to describe two systemic challenges tied to the development of sustainable careers in smart cities, namely: (1) an unbalanced fit, in that the highly digitized context fits best with highly educated and information and communications technology (ICT) literate citizens working in knowledge intensive organizations; and (2) a volatility of fit, associated with the complex and fast-changing smart urban context. Based on the sociotechnical analysis, we put forth three suggestions for addressing these challenges and creating a sustainable career ecosystem focused on: (1) the continuous development of ICT literacy, knowledge, talents and skills; (2) citizen participation and career communities; and (3) network-centric organizing of sustainable careers that could alleviate some of the challenges associated with the parallel development of sustainable careers and smart cities

Socially rejected while cognitively successful? The impact of minority dissent on groups’ cognitive complexity

The impact of minority dissent on group-level outcomes is explained in the current literature by two opposing mechanisms: first, through cognitive gains due to a profound change induced by minority members in the individual cognitions of the majority members, and second, through socio-affective process losses due to social rejection and relationship conflict. Groups are most effective in information processing if they succeed in solving this opposition and reduce the negative impact of process losses. The present study addresses this opposition using an experimental design in which we crossed minority dissent (presence vs. absence of minority dissent) with change in membership (groups with vs. groups without change in membership) to determine which condition leads to the highest group cognitive complexity. Our results show that groups with a history of dissent and where the deviant left the group have the highest cognitive complexity, followed by groups that experienced dissent and where no change in group membership took place. The groups without a history of dissent have the lowest cognitive complexity

Decision rules and group rationality: cognitive gain or standstill?

Recent research in group cognition points towards the existence of collective cognitive competencies that transcend individual group members' cognitive competencies. Since rationality is a key cognitive competence for group decision making, and group cognition emerges from the coordination of individual cognition during social interactions, this study tests the extent to which collaborative and consultative decision rules impact the emergence of group rationality. Using a set of decision tasks adapted from the heuristics and biases literature, we evaluate rationality as the extent to which individual choices are aligned with a normative ideal. We further operationalize group rationality as cognitive synergy (the extent to which collective rationality exceeds average or best individual rationality in the group), and we test the effect of collaborative and consultative decision rules in a sample of 176 groups. Our results show that the collaborative decision rule has superior synergic effects as compared to the consultative decision rule. The ninety one groups working in a collaborative fashion made more rational choices (above and beyond the average rationality of their members) than the eighty five groups working in a consultative fashion. Moreover, the groups using a collaborative decision rule were closer to the rationality of their best member than groups using consultative decision rules. Nevertheless, on average groups did not outperformed their best member. Therefore, our results reveal how decision rules prescribing interpersonal interactions impact on the emergence of collective cognitive competencies. They also open potential venues for further research on the emergence of collective rationality in human decision-making groups