A Nonlinear Dynamical System Perspective on Team Learning: The Role of Team Culture and Social Cohesion

This paper examines team learning within a nonlinear dynamical system (NDS) perspective. Research has successfully identified various conditions that promote learning behaviors in teams. In the present study, our focus is on the role played by team culture and by social cohesion as supporting conditions of team learning. Previous studies revealed that a culture oriented to learning tends to promote the adoption of team learning behaviors in the group. Results concerning the role played by social cohesion in team learning is, however, less clear. Indeed, while social cohesion might promote learning behaviors because it increases the willingness to work together and to help each other, high levels of social cohesion could also lead to uncritical acceptance of solutions. The complex relationship between social cohesion and team learning behaviors led us to study it under the NDS framework. Using the dynamic difference equation model, the present research proposes a cusp catastrophe model for explaining team learning, implementing the team culture as the asymmetry variable and social cohesion as bifurcation variable. The sample of the present research is constituted by 44 project workgroups, and data were collected at two moments of the life cycle (half-time and end) of teams, with single-item visual analogue scales. Results reveal that the cusp models are superior to the pre-post linear models by explaining a larger portion of the variance. In addition, the cubic term, the bifurcation effect and the asymmetry term are statistically significant. Social cohesion acts as a bifurcation factor, that is to say, beyond a certain threshold of social cohesion, groups that have the same cultural orientation might oscillate between two attractors, the modes of high and low learning behaviors respectively. These results suggest that a small variation of social cohesion causes the system to enter an area of unpredictability in terms of team learning, where sudden shifts in the outcomes might be expected. Leaders and members need to monitor the levels of social cohesion of the team, to avoid phenomena like groupthink, which jeopardizes the implementation of learning behaviors, such as the exploration of different opinions or error discussion.

[1]  R. Quinn Beyond Rational Management: Mastering the Paradoxes and Competing Demands of High Performance , 1991 .

[2]  L. Liebovitch,et al.  Chaos and Complexity in Psychology: Introduction to Nonlinear Dynamics and Complexity , 2008 .

[3]  Faculteit der Psychologie en Pedagogiek,et al.  Organizational Culture: The Focus Questionnaire , 1999 .

[4]  E. Schein Organizational Culture and Leadership , 1991 .

[5]  Michael J. Burke,et al.  On Average Deviation Indices for Estimating Interrater Agreement , 1999 .

[6]  P. Kirschner,et al.  Social and Cognitive Factors Driving Teamwork in Collaborative Learning Environments , 2006 .

[7]  R. Roe,et al.  Time and change in teams: Where we are and where we are moving , 2012 .

[8]  I. Janis Victims Of Groupthink , 1972 .

[9]  Adam J. Vanhove,et al.  Team Cohesion and Individual Well-Being: A Conceptual Analysis and Relational Framework , 2015 .

[10]  Bradford S. Bell,et al.  Team Learning: A Theoretical Integration and Review , 2012 .

[11]  C. Savelsbergh,et al.  The Development and Empirical Validation of a Multidimensional Measurement Instrument for Team Learning Behaviors , 2009 .

[12]  Dimitrios Stamovlasis,et al.  A Cusp Catastrophe Model for Team Learning, Team Potency and Team Culture. , 2016, Nonlinear dynamics, psychology, and life sciences.

[13]  B. Mullen,et al.  The relation between group cohesiveness and performance: An integration. , 1994 .

[14]  S. Guastello Managing Emergent Phenomena: Nonlinear Dynamics in Work Organizations , 2001 .

[15]  René Thom,et al.  Structural stability and morphogenesis - an outline of a general theory of models , 1977, Advanced book classics.

[16]  F. Dochy,et al.  Grasping the dynamic complexity of team learning: An integrative model for effective team learning in organisations , 2010 .

[17]  Pedro J. Ramos-Villagrasa,et al.  Teams as Complex Adaptive Systems: Reviewing 17 Years of Research , 2017, Small Group Research.

[18]  J Escartin,et al.  Modeling workplace bullying using catastrophe theory. , 2013, Nonlinear dynamics, psychology, and life sciences.

[19]  A. Carrón,et al.  The Development of an Instrument to Assess Cohesion in Sport Teams: The Group Environment Questionnaire , 1985 .

[20]  Sze-Sze Wong,et al.  Distal and Local Group Learning: Performance Trade-offs and Tensions , 2004, Organ. Sci..

[21]  Adamantios Diamantopoulos,et al.  Using single-item measures for construct measurement in management research Conceptual issues and application guidelines , 2009 .

[22]  Robert Gilmore,et al.  Catastrophe Theory for Scientists and Engineers , 1981 .

[23]  Artemis Chang,et al.  A Multidimensional Approach to the Group Cohesion-Group Performance Relationship , 2001 .

[24]  L. Festinger Informal social communication. , 1950, Psychological review.

[25]  A. Edmondson,et al.  6 Three Perspectives on Team Learning: Outcome Improvement, Task Mastery, and Group Process , 2007 .

[26]  Rok Skrinjar,et al.  Organizational Learning Culture - The Missing Link between Business Process Change and Organizational Performance , 2007 .

[27]  C. Earley,et al.  Creating hybrid team cultures: An empirical test of transnational team functioning. , 2000 .

[28]  E. Sundstrom,et al.  Work teams: Applications and effectiveness. , 1990 .

[29]  Piet G C Van den Bossche,et al.  When Leadership Powers Team Learning: A Meta-Analysis , 2018, Small group research.

[30]  Leisa D. Sargent,et al.  Does Diversity Affect Group Efficacy? , 2001 .

[31]  David E. Marra,et al.  Cusp catastrophe models for cognitive workload and fatigue in teams. , 2019, Applied ergonomics.

[32]  Humberto Rocha,et al.  A Cusp Catastrophe Model for Satisfaction, Conflict, and Conflict Management in Teams , 2018, ICCSA.

[33]  Stephen J. Guastello,et al.  Catastrophe modeling of equity in organizations , 1981 .

[34]  Daniel R. Ilgen,et al.  A century of work teams in the Journal of Applied Psychology. , 2017, The Journal of applied psychology.

[35]  John E. Mathieu,et al.  A Review and Integration of Team Composition Models , 2014 .

[36]  Nancy J. Cooke,et al.  Team coordination dynamics. , 2010, Nonlinear dynamics, psychology, and life sciences.

[37]  A. Edmondson Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams , 1999 .