A Network‐Based Analysis of Team Coordination and Shared Cognition in Systems Engineering

What signal is your inspection team sending to each other? Using a shared collaborative interface to improve shared cognition and implicit coordination in error-detection teams

Purpose Severe misunderstandings have been proved to cause significant delays and financial overruns in large engineering projects with teams consisting of people from Western and Asian cultures. The purpose of this study was to determine if differences in shared cognition may explain some of the crucial misunderstandings in intercultural production teams. Design/methodology/approach The study has used systematizing the person–group relationship (SPGR) survey methodology, supported by interviews, to study mental models in six South Korean teams that also includes Norwegian engineers (52 individuals). In so doing, the study uses the theoretical framework of Healey et al. (2015), where X-mental representations involve actions that are automated and subconscious and C-mental representations involve actions that are verbalized reasonings and conscious. People may share mental models on the X-level without sharing on the C-level, depicting a situation where teams are coordinated without understanding why (surface discordance). Findings The findings of the study are that people with different cultural backgrounds in an intercultural team may learn to adapt to each other when the context is standardized, without necessarily understanding underlying meanings and intentions behind actions (surface discordance). This may create a perception about team members not needing to explicate opinions (sharing at the C-level). This in turn may create challenges in anomalous situations, where deliberate sharing of C-mental models is required to find new solutions and/or admit errors so that they may be adjusted. The findings indicate that the non-sharing of explicated reasonings (C-mental models) between Norwegians and Koreans contributed in sharing C-mental models, despite having an implicit agreement on how to perform standard tasks (sharing X-mental models). Research limitations/implications The study is limited to Norwegians and Koreans working in production teams. Future studies could benefit from more cultures and/or different team contexts. The authors’ believe that the findings may also concern other standardized environments and corroborate previous perspectives on intercultural teams needing to both train (develop similar X-mental representations) and reflect together (develop similar C-mental representations). Practical implications Based on our findings we suggest the using of cross-cultural training at a deeper level than previously suggested, training in both social interaction patterns as well as verbalizing logical reasoning together. This entails reaching a shared and joint understanding of not only actions but also values, feelings and teamwork functions. This can be enabled by group conversations and training in dynamic team patterns. Important is, however, that standardized contexts may dampen the perception of the need to do both. Originality/value The study contributes to current research on intercultural teams by focusing on a dual-mode perspective on shared cognition, relating these to contextual factors. In this, the authors’ answer the call in previous research for more information on contextual matters and a focus on interaction in intercultural teams. The study also shows how the differences between X-mental and C-mental shared mental models play out in a practical setting.

PurposeVirtual teams are on the rise and many companies are implementing them to compete for the most talented experts. However, the use of information and communication technology (ICT), on which virtual teams depend, often ends in communication chaos. Research has shown that shared mental models (SMM), which are knowledge structures on team level, enhance team communication. In teams, which use ICTs, shared mental models of ICTs (ICT SMM) seem to be important. However, few studies that investigated ICT SMM have used different measurements that restrict their generalization. The purpose of this study is to define ICT SMM as well as develop and validate an ICT SMM scale.Design/methodology/approachThis study used a cross-sectional questionnaire in two different samples (N1 = 117 students and N2 = 165 employees).FindingsThe results of item and factor analyses indicated that ICT SMM contain at least two facets, ICT functionalities and task-specific ICT use and are distinct from teamwork, taskwork and temporal SMM. The ICT SMM scale reached good validity and reliability. On an individual level, ICT SMM were positively associated with perceived team performance and coordination and negatively with ineffective communication, workload and frustration.Research limitations/implicationsFuture research using teams as sample to validate the ICT SMM scale seems to be promising.Originality/valueTo the best of authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that developed and validated a rating scale to measure SMM of ICT in different samples.

PurposeFrontline teams are at the centre of lean transformations, but the teams also transform as they implement lean. This study examines these changes and seeks to understand how lean relates to team psychological safety and learning.Design/methodology/approachThis research setting is the Romanian division of a leading European energy company. The authors collected team-level audit and survey data, which the authors used to test the effect of lean implementation on team psychological safety and learning. The authors’ team-level data are complemented with qualitative interviews conducted with team members and headquarters leaders.FindingsThe results of the regression analyses show that leanness is positively associated with team psychological safety, which is in turn positively associated with learning. Thus, this research provides evidence that leanness – mediated by team psychological safety – increases team learning.Practical implicationsLean changes team dynamics and learning positively by ensuring and promoting an emotionally sound work environment with clear team structures, an appropriate level of autonomy, and strong leadership.Originality/valueThis paper contributes evidence of important psychological mechanisms that characterise team-level lean implementation. Particularly, the authors highlight how team psychological safety mediates the relationship between leanness and team learning.

The paper examines the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) in unexplored context of virtual project-based team learning. We built on relevant research developed a framework grounded in shared mental models (SMM) of AI. A multi-level, multi-stage model related AI SMM, AI interactivity, trust, and ethics to knowledge updates and learning intentions. A study of 344 graduate students in 48 online teams tested this model. Findings indicate that AI significantly improves learning outcomes in virtual teams, thus enriching the literature on human-agent teams (HATs) and virtual learning. The implications advocate for improved perceptions of AI attributes to maximize learning benefits.

Communication plays a pivotal role in design teams and can impact team dynamics and design outcomes. Understanding the relationships between design communication and design trajectory can significantly improve our ability to track and optimize design processes. While prior work has investigated design convergence, there is limited work on how team climate and communicative patterns impact the design process. This study investigates the interactions between team climate, communication, and design actions. We estimate team climate as an individual’s perception of their team’s psychological safety, or how comfortable they feel sharing thoughts and ideas freely. Design actions were measured using a behavioral coding schema and audio recordings of design team interactions. In this work, 28 participants and 5 design thinking experts engaging in a design thinking workshop were studied to understand the relationship between design communication, process, and team climate. Contrary to expectations, this mixed-methods study found no significant correlation between perceived psychological safety and design behaviors in engineering design teams, challenging prior research suggesting a positive link. This finding highlights the complexity of team dynamics and underscores the need for further exploration to understand how psychological safety, conversational behaviors, and design actions interact to shape collaborative processes and innovation in design teams.

An application of the Design Structure Matrix to Integrated Concurrent Engineering

The purpose of this research is to develop an understanding of followership behaviors in engineering design team situations by studying leadership behaviors. While leadership in engineering design teams has been studied from role, function or behavior, and individual characteristic perspectives, no studies are found that examined follower (helping) behavior in the context of an engineering design team. Understanding this behavior can lead to intervention strategies that might be employed to improve team dynamics and performance. To this end, a theoretical framework of follower behavior is defined based on a review of “helping behavior” from the literature. Characteristics of follower helping behavior include exhibiting citizenship, voluntary, extra-role, and not upsetting the status-quo. Specifically, a follower-leader is one who exhibits voluntary, “extra-role” (beyond expectation) behaviors in a professional setting done without upsetting the status-quo in a formal leadership setting. A model is developed that links leadership style, follower mindset, leader-follower relationship, influence tactics, follower behavior, and follower performance. The key behavior studied is helping behavior. This literature-based framework is exclusively based on survey study data. No research is found that focuses on studying the behaviors of followers from observational studies. Therefore, data presented from a previous protocol study is further reviewed in search of patterns of conversions of followers to leaders through behavior modeling. In the previous study, eight teams of four graduate engineering students were tasked with generating a function model for a design prompt. These teams were video recorded, and their behaviors coded for seven leadership actions. Of the eight design teams previously studied, there were 325 total leadership behaviors coded. A follower-to-leader behavior pattern was defined where a follower in one behavior immediately exhibited leadership behavior in the next coded activity. Of the activities coded, 131 (40.3%) possible follower helping actions have been identified. These are examined further to determine whether there is a correlation between the initial leadership behavior type and the following leadership behavior type. Patterns are also sought to determine how often the initial leader also changes to a follower in the subsequent activity. This study shows that there are follower patterns that are found in design activities. Further, these patterns are related back to the follower (helping) behavior model that is derived from the literature, specifically the influence tactics that include: inspirational appeals, consultation, supplication, and exemplification as well as the social exchange relationships of leader-member exchange (LMX), team-member exchange (TMX). Finally, this study provides suggestive evidence of patterns to motivate future systematic study of followership in engineering design.

Coordination Experience and Team Performance: Evidence from the Electronic Games Industry

Leaders play a crucial role in implementing and sustaining changes in clinical practice, yet there is limited evidence on the strategies to engage them in team problem solving and communication. Examine the impact of an intervention focused on facilitating leadership during daily huddles on optimizing team-based care and improving outcomes. Cluster-randomized trial using intention-to-treat analysis to measure the effects of the intervention (n = 13 teams) compared with routine practice (n = 16 teams). Twenty-nine primary care clinics affiliated with a large integrated health system in the upper Midwest; representing differing practice types and geographic settings. Full-day leadership training retreat for team leaders to facilitate of care team huddles. Biweekly coaching calls and two site visits with an assigned coach. Primary outcomes of team development and function were collected, pre- and post-intervention using surveys. Patient satisfaction and quality outcomes were compared pre- and post-intervention as secondary outcomes. Leadership engagement and adherence to the intervention were also assessed. A total of 279 pre-intervention and 272 post-intervention surveys were completed. We found no impact on team development (- 0.98, 95% CI (- 3.18, 1.22)), improved team credibility (0.18, 95% CI (0.00, 0.35)), but worse psychological safety (- 0.19, 95% CI (- 0.38, 0.00)). No differences were observed in patient satisfaction; however, results were mixed among quality outcomes. Post hoc analysis within the intervention group showed higher adherence to the intervention was associated with improvement in team coordination (0.47, 95% CI (0.18, 0.76)), credibility (0.28, 95% CI (0.02, 0.53)), team learning (0.42, 95% CI (0.10, 0.74)), and knowledge creation (0.74, 95% CI (0.35, 1.13)) compared to teams that were less engaged. Results of this evaluation showed that leadership training and facilitation were not associated with better team functioning. Additional components to the intervention tested may be necessary to enhance team functioning. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT03062670. Registration Date: February 23, 2017. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03062670.

ABSTRACTResearch has identified the importance of knowledge coordination in high-performing teams. However, little is known on the processes through which these cognitive structures are developed, more specifically on the learning occurring as teams communicate and interact to build new team knowledge. In a multiple-measures experiment, 33 teams with no prior experience in flight simulations were assigned to newly formed dyads to complete 4 successive performance episodes of a flight simulation task, modeling a complex, fast-paced, and high workload task context. The study showed how team learning processes (i.e., team learning behaviors and team reflexivity), driven by task cohesion, and group potency supported coordination development, which in turn predicted team performance.

Expert team decision-making demonstrates that effective teams have shared goals, shared mental models to coordinate with minimal communication, establish trust through cross-training, and match task structures through planning. The key questions: Do best practices of human teams translate to hybrid human-AI agent teams, or autonomous agents alone? Is there a mathematical framework for studying shared goals and mental models? We propose factor graphs for studying multi-agent interaction and agile cooperative planning. One promising avenue for modeling interacting agents in real environments is with stochastic approaches, where probability distributions describe uncertainties and imperfect observations. Stochastic dynamic programming provides a framework for modeling multiple agents as scheduled and interacting Markov Decision Processes (MDPs), wherein each agent has partial information about other agents in the team. Each agent acts by accounting for both its objectives and anticipated behaviors of others, even implicitly. We have shown that Dynamic Programming, Maximum likelihood, Maximum entropy and Free-energy-based methods for stochastic control are special cases of probabilistic message propagation rules on modeled factor graphs. Now we show how multiple agents, modeled as multiple interacting factor graphs, exchange probability distributions carrying partial mutual knowledge. We demonstrate the ideas in contexts of moving agents on a discrete grid with obstacles and pre-defined semantic areas (grassy areas, pathways), where each subject has a different destination (goal). The scheduling of agents is fixed a priori or changes over time, and the forward-backward flow for each agent’s MDP is computed every time step, with additional branches that inject probability distributions into and from other agent MDPs. These interactions avoid collisions among agents and enable dynamic planning by agents, accounting for estimates of posterior probabilities of other agents states at future times, the precision and timing being adjustable. Simulations included limited interacting agents (three) on small rectangular discrete grid with starting points and destination goals, obstacles in various positions, narrow passages, small mazes, destinations that require coordination, etc. Solely due to probability distributions flowing in the interacting agent system, the solutions provided by the probabilistic model are interesting because agents that encounter potential conflicts in some regions autonomously adapt strategies, like waiting to let others pass, or taking different paths. The information available to each agent is a combination of rewards received from the environment and inferences about other agents. Previously, we described a scheme for a hierarchy (prioritized order) of agents and unique value function for each agent. Now, we propose a different, tunable interaction, wherein each agent dynamically transmits the posterior probability of its position at future time steps to other agents. The new framework allows flexibility in tuning the information that each agent has on others, ranging from complete knowledge of goals and positions about others out to a limited probabilistic awareness, both in precision and in time, for where others may be located at future time steps. This framework systematically addresses questions, such as the minimal amount of information needed for effective team coordination in the face of changes in goals, communication bandwidth, grid parameters and agent status.

This research investigates engineering design teams’ performance of a concept selection task in three meeting spaces: face-to-face, 2D online and 3D virtual world. Cisco Systems’ WebEx and Sun Microsystems’ Wonderland were used as the 2D online meeting space and the 3D virtual world, respectively. Twenty-four two-person design teams were formed and randomly assigned to one of the three meeting spaces. The teams performed a cell-phone concept selection task in the meeting space to which they were assigned. Four dependent variables were measured: task completion time, team satisfaction, self-evaluated process quality and expert-evaluated process quality. Following data collection, one-way ANOVA was used to analyze each variable to determine the differences, if any, among the meeting spaces. ANOVA results did not support rejection of the null hypothesis for any variable. These results suggest that 3D virtual worlds support design concept selection as well as 2D online meeting spaces and that both of these te...

The push and pull provided by information technology and rapidly changing business demands have led to virtual work becoming increasingly important in organizations. Virtual work can take various forms, from telecommuting to global project development teams. In virtual organizations and communities, individuals can be part of groups that have no physical co-location, and often do not meet, except virtually. Increased globalization, tightened traveling budgets, and heightened security awareness foster the growth of virtual environments. This mini-track focuses on issues related to challenges presented by and effectiveness of virtual work, teams, organizations, and communities. We sought papers addressing these issues from an organizational, managerial, team, community, or individual perspective, as well as papers on enabling technologies and their use in this environment. The resulting twelve papers published in the HICSS-38 proceedings investigate a variety of important topics of interest to researchers and practitioners. Walther, Bunz, and Bazarova address the development of trust in virtual groups. They propose communication rules based on social information processing theory, and empirically test them. Keim and Weitzel also explore trust development in establishing successful virtual partnerships. Factors influencing performance of virtual teams are of critical interest to researchers and practitioners. Staples and Cameron report results from a field study examining relationships between team performance and interpersonal skills, team size, and turnover. DeLone, Espinosa, Lee, and Carmel present a conceptual framework for global IS development project success. They conduct interviews with global project managers to validate the framework. Role coordination -preventing the emergence of individual roles and building shared team interaction mental models -is an important aspect of task performance in teams. Sutanto, Phang, Kuan, Kankanhalli, and Tan investigate this phenomenon in two global virtual teams and offer suggestions on how effective role coordination can be achieved. Galvin, McKinney, and Chudoba also investigate individuals’ integration with the team in pursuit of common objectives, proposing a model to help better understand the process of transformation from being individually centric to being team centric. Zhang, Fjermestad, and Tremain analyze and identify drawbacks and inconsistencies in previous empirical literature on leadership style in the virtual team context. They develop propositions for future research. Misiolek and Heckman examine leadership behavior in virtual teams by observing a virtual collaboration exercise and developing insights into how leadership behaviors emerge and are distributed. Addressing an increasingly important virtual team structure, Mark and Abrams investigate largescale group-to-group collaboration. They examine how interactions differ between collocated and distributed settings in a design team. Results indicate that subgroup interactions occurred differently within sites compared to across sites. DeLuca and Valacich examine communication media choice in virtual groups in two organizations. Results support Media Synchronicity Theory. Bhappu and Crews explore effects of communication media and conflict on team identification in diverse teams and suggest ways diverse teams can manage intra-group conflict. Chidambaram and Carte also examine virtual teams with diverse membership. They propose a model that describes how collaborative technologies can help leverage positive aspects of diversity and limit negative aspects; they then test the model in a longitudinal field study.

ABSTRACTFor a variety of reasons, collaborative learning teams, project teams or design teams are now a part of undergraduate engineering education. In response, the current education-related literature is flourishing with team-type topics that include when and why teams, team dynamics, and how to structure teams. Almost non-existent, however, are discussions about the role and impact of the faculty member in and on student teams.Extrapolating from the professional project management literature, project and team success is heavily influenced by positive management. Businesses that fail to train and reinforce positive management run unacceptable risks. The risks to us as educators, who use teams in less than ideal situations, include a lack of learning, project failure, and dysfunctional teams that foster an aversion to teams. This is in direct contrast to what we hoped and what we have been asked to do, which is to provide an understanding about the power of teams, to develop teaming skills, to enable design successes, and to enhance the learning.Proper management of student teams requires skills and strategies that are much different from those that most faculty members are experienced with. The strategies include planning for and implementing an understood work process, providing a suitable organization compatible to that process, structuring and communicating with the team, and holding the individual accountable. The skills start with two risk taking beliefs: (1) you do not have to have all the answers and (2) it is not you against them, but about you with them. With the right attitude, the skills of leading by example, guiding towards peak performance, and managing for optimal team experiences follow.