Engineering for Shared Understanding in Heterogeneous Work Groups - An Action Research Study at a German Automotive Company

Heterogeneity in work groups creates challenges to build a shared understanding among diverse group members and to integrate knowledge of different actors successfully. In an action research study with experience diverse tool and dye-makers at a German car manufacturing company, we developed a collaboration process design to systematically support heterogeneous groups in building a shared understanding of the sequence of activities in complex work processes. Participants showed the intended team learning behaviors and an increase in shared understanding.

[1]  Austin Tate,et al.  Knowledge Systems for Coalition Operations , 2013, IEEE Intell. Syst..

[2]  P. Winne,et al.  Handbook of educational psychology , 2015 .

[3]  P. Kirschner,et al.  Team learning: building shared mental models , 2011 .

[4]  Jan Marco Leimeister,et al.  Why Shared Understanding Matters -- Engineering a Collaboration Process for Shared Understanding to Improve Collaboration Effectiveness in Heterogeneous Teams , 2013, 2013 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[5]  Ruth Kanfer,et al.  Age and gender diversity as determinants of performance and health in a public organization: the role of task complexity and group size. , 2008, The Journal of applied psychology.

[6]  Henk G. Sol,et al.  Decision Enhancement for Sourcing with Shared Service Centres in the Dutch Government , 2012, 2013 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[7]  Robert O. Briggs,et al.  Collaboration Engineering: Foundations and Opportunities: Editorial to the Special Issue on the Journal of the Association of Information Systems , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[8]  S. Mohammed,et al.  Team mental models in a team knowledge framework: expanding theory and measurement across disciplinary boundaries , 2001 .

[9]  Maaike Kleinsmann,et al.  Understanding the complexity of knowledge integration in collaborative new product development teams: A case study , 2010 .

[10]  M. Baker.  A model for negotiation in teaching-learning dialogues , 1994 .

[11]  E. Salas,et al.  Reflections on shared cognition , 2001 .

[12]  Ingrid Mulder,et al.  Assessing group learning and shared understanding in technology-mediated interaction , 2002, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[13]  Nigel Shadbolt,et al.  Shared Understanding within Military Coalitions: A Definition and Review of Research Challenges , 2009 .

[14]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  Investigating Information Systems with Action Research , 1999, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[15]  Annemarie S. Palincsar,et al.  Group processes in the classroom. , 1996 .

[16]  Robert O. Briggs,et al.  On theory-driven design and deployment of collaboration systems , 2006, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[17]  Janice Langan-Fox,et al.  Mental models, team mental models, and performance: Process, development, and future directions , 2004 .

[18]  Judy McKay,et al.  The dual imperatives of action research , 2001, Inf. Technol. People.

[19]  James A. Pharmer,et al.  When Member Homogeneity is Needed in Work Teams , 2000 .

[20]  S. Mohammed,et al.  Metaphor No More: A 15-Year Review of the Team Mental Model Construct , 2010 .

[21]  Gwendolyn L. Kolfschoten,et al.  A Design Approach for Collaboration Processes: A Multimethod Design Science Study in Collaboration Engineering , 2009, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[22]  Gerhard Fischer,et al.  Symmetry of ignorance, social creativity, and meta-design , 2000, Knowl. Based Syst..

[23]  Yvonne Hsieh,et al.  Culture and Shared Understanding in Distributed Requirements Engineering , 2006, 2006 IEEE International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE'06).