Dream team or nightmare? Collaboration in project teams

Project teams are a contemporary organizing principle. They work on non-routine tasks. Team composition in project teams is often interdisciplinary (i.e., uniting team members from different departments or areas of expertise within an organization). Project teams face a number of challenges. In particular, collaborative task accomplishment is often accompanied by conflict in project teams. This chapter describes the specific challenges in project teams and showcases different approaches for conflict management and team development in project teams

A sequential analysis of procedural meeting communication: How teams facilitate their meetings

How do teams facilitate their own meetings? Unmanaged (or free) social interaction often leads to poor decision-making, unnecessary conformity, social loafing, and ineffective communication processes, practices, and products. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the potential benefits of procedural communication in team meetings. The role of procedural communication, defined as verbal behaviors that structure group discussion to facilitate goal accomplishment, was examined in 59 team meetings from 19 organizations. Meeting behaviors were videotaped and coded. Lag sequential analysis revealed that procedural meeting behaviors are sustained by supporting statements within the team interaction process. They promote proactive communication (e.g., who will do what and when) and significantly inhibit dysfunctional meeting behaviors (e.g., losing the train of thought, criticizing others, and complaining). These patterns were found both at lag1 and lag2. Furthermore, the more evenly distributed procedural meeting behaviors were across team members, the more team members were satisfied with their discussion processes and outcomes. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed

Promoting multifoci citizenship behavior: Time-lagged effects of procedural justice, trust, and commitment.

To explain why procedural justice leads to organisational citizenship behavior (OCB), both commitment and trust have been studied—but never concurrently. Moreover, as employees aim their behaviors toward distinct targets in the workplace, citizenship behaviors as well as commitment and trust should be considered as multifoci constructs. To address this, 204 industrial workers were surveyed over a period of three years. Data were analysed with Mplus using structural equation modeling. Our time-lagged findings show that procedural justice was linked to OCB, and that this link was mediated successively by trust and commitment. Moreover, we found target-specific effects: Procedural justice effects on organisational citizenship behavior were mediated by organisational trust and organisational commitment, whereas procedural justice effects on co-worker citizenship behavior were mediated by co-worker trust and co-worker commitment. These results underscore the importance of including multifoci trust for understanding the procedural justice–OCB link. We discuss theoretical implications for studying target-specific citizenship behaviors and their antecedents, and deduce practical implications for fostering multifoci citizenship behaviors

Using Motivational Interviewing to reduce threats in conversations about environmental behavior

Human behavior contributes to a waste of environmental resources and our society is looking for ways to reduce this problem. However, humans may perceive feedback about their environmental behavior as threatening. According to self-determination theory (SDT), threats decrease intrinsic motivation for behavior change. According to self-affirmation theory (SAT), threats can harm individuals’ self-integrity. Therefore, individuals should show self-defensive biases, e.g., in terms of presenting counterarguments when presented with environmental behavior change. The current study examines how change recipients respond to threats from change agents in interactions about environmental behavior change. Moreover, we investigate how Motivational Interviewing (MI) — an intervention aimed at increasing intrinsic motivation — can reduce threats at both the social and cognitive level. We videotaped 68 dyadic interactions with change agents who either did or did not use MI (control group). We coded agents verbal threats and recipients’ verbal expressions of motivation. Recipients also rated agents’ level of confrontation and empathy (i.e., cognitive reactions). As hypothesized, threats were significantly lower when change agents used MI. Perceived confrontations converged with observable social behavior of change agents in both groups. Moreover, behavioral threats showed a negative association with change recipients’ expressed motivation (i.e., reasons to change). Contrary to our expectations, we found no relation between change agents’ verbal threats and change recipients’ verbally expressed selfdefenses (i.e., sustain talk). Our results imply that MI reduces the adverse impact of threats in conversations about environmental behavior change on both the social and cognitive level. We discuss theoretical implications of our study in the context of SAT and SDT and suggest practical implications for environmental change agents in organizations

A Normative Pragmatic Theory of Exhorting

The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10503-018-9465-y.We submit a normative pragmatic theory of exhorting—an account of conceptually necessary and potentially efficacious components of a coherent strategy for securing a sympathetic hearing for efforts to urge and inspire addressees to act on high-minded principles. Based on a Gricean analysis of utterance-meaning, we argue that the concept of exhorting comprises making statements openly urging addressees to perform some high-minded, principled course of action; openly intending to inspire addressees to act on the principles; and intending that addressees’ recognition of the intentions to urge and inspire creates reasons for addressees to grant a sympathetic hearing to what the speaker has to say. We show that the theory accounts for the design of Abraham Lincoln’s Cooper Union address. By doing so we add to the inventory of reasons why social actors make arguments, continue a line of research showing the relationship of arguing to master speech acts, and show that making arguments can be an effective strategy for inspiring principled action

Developing the next generation of renewable energy technologies: an overview of low-TRL EU-funded research projects

A cluster of eleven research and innovation projects, funded under the same call of the EU’s H2020 programme, are developing breakthrough and game-changing renewable energy technologies that will form the backbone of the energy system by 2030 and 2050 are, at present, at an early stage of development. These projects have joined forces at a collaborative workshop, entitled ‘ Low-TRL Renewable Energy Technologies’, at the 10th Sustainable Places Conference (SP2022), to share their insights, present their projects’ progress and achievements to date, and expose their approach for exploitation and market uptake of their solutions

Observing culture: Differences in U.S.-American and German team meeting behaviors

Although previous research has theorized about team interaction differences between the German and U.S. cultures (e.g., Hofstede, 2001), actual behavioral observations of such differences are sparse. This study explores team meetings as a context for examining intercultural differences, analyzing a total of 5188 meeting behaviors in German and U.S. student teams. All teams discussed the same task to consensus. Results from behavioral process analyses showed that Germans focused significantly more on problem analysis, whereas U.S. students focused more on solution production. Moreover, U.S. teams showed significantly more positive socioemotional meeting behavior than German teams. Finally, German teams showed significantly more counteractive behavior such as complaining than U.S. teams. Theoretical and pragmatic implications for understanding these observable differences and for improving interaction in intercultural teams are discussed