Performance in Collaborative Activity: Contribution of Intersubjectivity Theory

Collaboration at work is a key component for activities in complex socio-technical systems. Reviewing the scientific literature showed that collaborative work activity has been well characterized, showing that perspective-taking is a crucial feature, but no study quantifies what makes the performance of collaborative activity. Analyzing performance during work activity inevitably refers to Cognitive Task Analysis paradigm (CTA). Based on digital ethnography and Intersubjectivity Theory, the study was undertaken in a nuclear power plant where cooperative activities were analyzed using a CTA process tracing method: whilst performing their activity, workers wore a miniature camera at the eye-level to record their activity from the first-person perspective and were then involved in a reflexive analysis of the activity. Results led to introduce the concept of “coherent perspective-taking” and demonstrated that it was the main variable explaining collaborative performance for cooperative activities. The related theoretical process is discussed and organizational factors favoring coherent perspective-taking are identified.

[1]  Michael Waldman,et al.  Performance, Career Dynamics, and Span of Control , 2019, Journal of Labor Economics.

[2]  Philippe Fauquet-Alekhine,et al.  Risk Assessment for Subjective Evidence-based Ethnography Applied in High Risk Environment: Improved Protocol , 2018, Advances in Research.

[3]  S. Lahlou,et al.  The Square of PErceived ACtion model (SPEAC model) applied in digital ethnography for work activity analysis: performance and workers’ perception , 2017 .

[4]  Philippe Fauquet-Alekhine.  Subjective ethnographic protocol for work activity analysis and occupational training improvement , 2016 .

[5]  Philippe Fauquet-Alekhine,et al.  Foreign Migration of Brands Discussed under the Light of Intersubjectivity Perspective: Illustration with a Case of Food Products , 2016 .

[6]  Iryna Filippava,et al.  Goal Directed Action , 2015 .

[7]  Elizabeth O. Hayward,et al.  The impact of individual, competitive, and collaborative mathematics game play on learning, performance, and motivation , 2013 .

[8]  Wei Peng,et al.  The influence of competition, cooperation, and player relationship in a motor performance centered computer game , 2012, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[9]  M. Deutsch.  Cooperation and competition , 2011, The International Encyclopedia of Biological Anthropology.

[10]  Sophie Le Bellu.  Capitalisation des savoir-faire et des gestes professionnels dans le milieu industriel : mise en place d'une aide numérique au compagnonnage métier dans le secteur de l'énergie. , 2011 .

[11]  Valery Nosulenko,et al.  Cognition et communication: Un paradigme de recherche et d’application , 2011 .

[12]  S. Lahlou.  How can we capture the subject’s perspective? An evidence-based approach for the social scientist , 2011 .

[13]  Alex Gillespie,et al.  Exchanging Social Positions: Enhancing perspective taking within a cooperative problem solving task , 2011 .

[14]  Frederick M. Kaiser.  Interagency Collaborative Arrangements and Activities: Types, Rationales, Considerations (Interagency Paper, Number 5, June 2011) , 2011 .

[15]  G. Mead,et al.  The Social Self. , 2011, Psychiatry.

[16]  S. Lahlou,et al.  Capter et transférer le savoir incorporé dans un geste professionnel , 2010 .

[17]  H. Barkema,et al.  Fostering team creativity: perspective taking as key to unlocking diversity's potential. , 2010, The Journal of applied psychology.

[18]  Valery Nosulenko,et al.  Mesurer les activités numérisées par leur qualité perçue , 2008 .

[19]  Frank R. Tortorella,et al.  The Performance Management System: Applying and Evaluating a Pay‐for‐Performance Initiative , 2007, Journal of healthcare management / American College of Healthcare Executives.

[20]  Paul J. Feltovich,et al.  Common Ground and Coordination in Joint Activity , 2005 .

[21]  Gavriel Salvendy,et al.  The cognitive task analysis methods for job and task design: review and reappraisal , 2004, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[22]  Andrea Omicini,et al.  Coordination And Collaboration Activities In Cooperative Information Systems , 2004, Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst..

[23]  Saadi Lahlou,et al.  Un Cadre Méthodologique Pour le Design des Environnements Augmentés , 2002 .

[24]  Saadi Lahlou,et al.  Observing Cognitive Work in Offices , 1999, CoBuild.

[25]  B. Nardi.  Studying context: a comparison of activity theory, situated action models, and distributed cognition , 1995 .

[26]  Christian Heath,et al.  Tasks-in-interaction: paper and screen based documentation in collaborative activity , 1992, CSCW '92.

[27]  Christian Heath,et al.  Collaborative Activity and Technological Design: Task Coordination in London Underground Control Rooms , 1991, ECSCW.

[28]  Clarence A. Ellis,et al.  Concurrency control in groupware systems , 1989, SIGMOD '89.

[29]  B. Lomov.  The Problem of Activity in Psychology , 1982 .

[30]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Instructional Goal Structure: Cooperative, Competitive, or Individualistic , 1974 .

[31]  C. K. Grant,et al.  On Using Language , 1956 .

[32]  G. Ichheiser.  Structure and Dynamics of Interpersonal Relations , 1943 .

[33]  M. Sams,et al.  Event-related potentials during individual, cooperative, and competitive task performance differ in subjects with analytic vs. holistic thinking. , 2018, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[34]  M. Sams,et al.  Differences of the brain activity in individual, competitive and cooperative behavior between subjects with analytic and holistic cognitive styles , 2016 .

[35]  David W. Johnson,et al.  A Theory of CooperATion And CompeTiTion , 2014 .

[36]  E. Samoylenko,et al.  Psychological Methods for the Study of Augmented Environments , 2009 .

[37]  A. Gillespie.  The intersubjective dynamics of trust, distrust, and manipulation , 2007 .

[38]  Barry Gerhart,et al.  Personnel psychology: performance evaluation and pay for performance. , 2005, Annual review of psychology.

[39]  M. Stanne,et al.  Does competition enhance or inhibit motor performance: a meta-analysis. , 1999, Psychological bulletin.

[40]  Jakob Bardram,et al.  Designing for the Dynamics of Work Activities Cooperative , 1998 .

[41]  R. Arvey,et al.  Performance evaluation in work settings. , 1998, Annual review of psychology.

[42]  Patrick M. Wright,et al.  Productivity and extra-role behavior: The effects of goals and incentives on spontaneous helping. , 1993 .

[43]  Michael E. Bratman,et al.  Shared Cooperative Activity , 1991 .

[44]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on achievement: A meta-analysis. , 1981 .

[45]  R. Rommetveit.  On Message Structure: A Framework for the Study of Language and Communication , 1976, Dance Research Journal.

[46]  R. Laing,et al.  Interpersonal perception : a theory and a method of research , 1966 .

[47]  G. Mead,et al.  The Mechanism of Social Consciousness , 1912 .

[48]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Distributed cognition: an alternative framework for analysing and explaining collaborative working , 1994, J. Inf. Technol..