Abstract
In today’s competitive environment, companies rely increasingly on teams and their flexibility. While effectively working teams may accomplish great results, ineffective teams may fall short of their potential and can even be a risk for the organization. Little is known about the socio-cognitive processes of team decisions and particularly the emergence of knowledge from individual to team level. This study addresses this process by analyzing team cognition as an emergent property. The here presented research approach allows for a deeper analysis of the underlying processes. A laboratory experiment provides information about quantitative patterns of individual and team cognition. For the analysis of these patterns, we introduce the team cognition matrix. By applying this format to the results of the laboratory experiment, this study identifies four categories of typical emergent team cognition structures. These four categories are the basis for a simple decision algorithm that was analyzed in an agent-based model. The resulting simulation shows that 67% of all simulated group decisions are very close to the empirical group decisions (ranking position distances ≤3) and 89% are close on a medium range (ranking position distances ≤6). The article contributes to the current literature by showing an innovative research approach that further is applied to open up the black box of successful team behavior beyond well-known static attributes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The time limits for the game rounds are set according to the team building game.
- 2.
Further adaptations could include another individual ranking after the group discussion to analyze the change of individual decisions and explicate the hidden knowledge that was not part of the group ranking.
- 3.
In total 390 matrices for 15 items and 26 groups.
- 4.
In further research, we aim to consider alternative selection strategies, such as choosing the individual ranking position that appears most frequently within the consensus range.
References
Attanasi, G., Hopfensitz, A., Lorini, E., Moisan, F.: Social connectedness improves co-ordination on individually costly, efficient outcomes. Eur. Econ. Rev. 90, 86–106 (2016)
Bacharach, M.: Beyond Individual Choice: Teams and Frames in Game Theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2006)
Colman, A.M., Pulford, B.D., Rose, J.: Collective rationality in interactive decisions: evidence for team reasoning. Acta Psychol. 128(2), 387–397 (2008)
Cooke, N.J., Gorman, J.C., Myers, C.W., Duran, J.L.: Interactive team cognition. Cogn. Sci. 37(2), 255–285 (2013)
Cooke, R.A., Kernaghan, J.A.: Estimating the difference between group versus individual performance on problem-solving tasks. Group Organ. Stud. 12(3), 319–342 (1987)
Crusius, J., van Horen, F., Mussweiler, T.: Why process matters: a social cognition perspective on economic behavior. J. Econ. Psychol. 33(3), 677–685 (2012)
Delgado, P.M.I., Martínez, A.M.R., Martínez, L.G.: Teams in organizations: a review on team effectiveness. Team Perform. Manag. Int. J. 14(1/2), 7–21 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1108/13527590810860177
DeVilliers, R., Woodside, A.G., Marshall, R.: Making tough decisions competently: assessing the value of product portfolio planning methods, devil’s advocacy, group discussion, weighting priorities, and evidenced-based information. J. Bus. Res. 69(8), 2849–2862 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.054
Esser, J.K.: Alive and well after 25 years: a review of groupthink research. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 73(2), 116–141 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1998.2758
Grand, J.A., Braun, M.T., Kuljanin, G., Kozlowski, S.W., Chao, G.T.: The dynamics of team cognition: a process-oriented theory of knowledge emergence in teams. J. Appl. Psychol. 101(10), 1353 (2016)
Janis, I.L.: Victims of Groupthink: a Psychological Study of Foreign-Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Houghton-Mifflin, Boston (1972)
Janis, I.L.: Groupthink. Houghton-Mifflin, Boston (1982)
Katzenbach, J.R., Smith, D.K.: The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High-Performance Organization. Harvard Business Review Press, Boston (2015)
Klingert, F.M.A., Meyer, M.: Effectively combining experimental economics and multi-agent simulation: suggestions for a procedural integration with an example from prediction markets research. Comput. Math. Organ. Theory. 18(1), 1–28 (2012)
Knox, G.: Lost-at-sea – team building game (2016). Retrieved 28 Nov 2016, from http://insight.typepad.co.uk/insight/2009/02/lost-at-sea-a-team-building-game.html
Macal, C.M.: Everything you need to know about agent-based modelling and simulation. J. Simul. 10(2), 144–156 (2016)
Reader, T.W.: Team decision making. In: The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of the Psychology of Team Working and Collaborative Processes, pp. 271–296. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, West Sussex (2017)
Rousseau, V., Aubé, C., Savoie, A.: Teamwork behaviors: a review and an integration of frameworks. Small Group Res. 37(5), 540–570 (2006)
Schulz-Hardt, S., Jochims, M., Frey, D.: Productive conflict in group decision making: genuine and contrived dissent as strategies to counteract biased information seeking. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 88(2), 563–586 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-5978(02)00001-8
Secchi, D.: A case for agent-based models in organizational behavior and team research. Team Perform. Manag. Int. J. 21(1/2), 37–50 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-12-2014-0063
Smaldino, P.E., Calanchini, J., Pickett, C.L.: Theory development with agent-based models. Organ. Psychol. Rev. 5(4), 300–317 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386614546944
Smith, E.B., Rand, W.: Simulating macro-level effects from micro-level observations. Manag. Sci. 64, 5405–5421 (2017)
Verderber, K.S., Verderber, R.F., Sellnow, D.D.: Communicate!. Cengage Learning, Boston, MA (2013)
Woolley, A.W., Chabris, C.F., Pentland, A., Hashmi, N., Malone, T.W.: Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science. 330(6004), 686–688 (2010)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Lorscheid, I., Meyer, M. (2020). (Ir-)Rationality of Teams: A Process-Oriented Model of Team Cognition Emergence. In: Verhagen, H., Borit, M., Bravo, G., Wijermans, N. (eds) Advances in Social Simulation. Springer Proceedings in Complexity. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34127-5_26
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34127-5_26
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-34126-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-34127-5
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)