Effect of lean implementation on team psychological safety and learning

Purpose The purpose of this paper was to evaluate if the concept of team psychological safety, a key driver of team learning and originally studied in the West, can be applied in teams from different national cultures. The model originally validated for teams in the West is applied to teams in Thailand to evaluate its validity, and the views team members have on the antecedents of team psychological safety are analyzed. Design/methodology/approach The core of the sequential explanatory mixed method research was an experiment with nine teams from a single engineering organization (three teams from each the USA, France and Thailand). Team learning behaviors were analyzed from the conversations between team members. Team psychological safety was analyzed through a quantitative instrument and one-on-one structured interviews with each team member. Findings The results showed that the original model is confirmed for the teams from the USA and France but not confirmed for teams from Thailand. The thematic analysis of the one-on-one interviews highlights important differences between teams from the USA and France on the one hand and teams from Thailand on the other hand when it comes to the role of the team manager and the views that team members have on the diversity between them. Originality/value This research confirms that the concept of team psychological safety, and its impact on the way teams learn, needs to be adjusted if it is to be applied to teams in countries with national cultures different from those prevalent in the West. The implications are that researchers who develop theories in the social sciences field should evaluate how cultural differences impact their models, and that managers who implement learning and solutions should take national cultural differences into consideration.

The study examined the moderating effect of reflective action team learning practices on the association between team psychological safety and knowledge acquisition and creation in teaching hospitals. The study population comprised trainees and health professional staff teams. Using a cross-sectional survey design and sampling frame of teaching hospitals, a sample of 132 respondents was selected. Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS) with a PROCESS macro procedure by Hayes was used for data analysis. Results indicated that reflective action team learning moderates the relationship between team psychological safety and knowledge acquisition. There was a statistically significant regression of team psychological safety and knowledge creation. The interaction effect between team psychological safety and reflective action team learning was significant. Thus, nurturing reflection-in-action team learning practice has high ramifications for knowledge acquisition and creation, which are prerequisites for clinical evidence-based practices

Researchers have identified team learning as an important predictor of team performance. In healthcare organizations, it is especially critical for care quality and hospital performance that teams engage in learning behaviors to reduce errors and improve service effectiveness. The main objective of this study is to examine the role of change-oriented leadership in the learning process and outcomes of healthcare teams. The sample comprises a total of 698 healthcare professionals working in 107 teams at different public hospitals throughout Spain. Members of teams were invited to participate voluntarily by completing an anonymous individual questionnaire. The results show a mediating effect of team learning on the relationship between change-oriented leadership and team performance and psychological safety and team performance. Our study contributes to the literature by investigating the role of change-oriented leadership in facilitating team learning behaviors. Moreover, this study advances our understanding of the mediators of the relationship between team leadership and outcomes by testing to assess whether specific change-oriented leader behaviors nurture psychological safety, team learning and, therefore, performance.

The aim of this study was to examine the impact of a telemedical robot on trauma intensive care unit (TICU) clinician teamwork (i.e., team attitudes, behaviors, and cognitions) during patient rounds. Thirty-two healthcare providers who conduct rounds volunteered to take surveys assessing teamwork attitudes and cognitions at three time periods: (1) the onset of the study, (2) the end of the 30-day control period, and (3) the end of the 30-day experimental period, which immediately followed the control period. Rounds were recorded throughout the 30-day control period and 30-day experimental period to observe provider behaviors. For the initial 30 days, there was no access to telemedicine. For the final 30 days, the rounding healthcare providers had access to the RP-7 robot (Intouch Health Inc., Santa Barbara, CA), a telemedical tool that can facilitate patient rounds conducted away from bedside. Using a one-tailed, one-way repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) to compare trust at Times 1, 2, and 3, there was no significant effect on trust: F(2, 14)=1.20, p=0.16. When a one-tailed, one-way repeated-measures ANOVA to compare transactive memory systems (TMS) at Times 1, 2, and 3 was conducted, there was no significant effect on TMS: F(2, 15)=1.33, p=0.15. We conducted a one-tailed, one-way repeated-measures ANOVA to compare team psychological safety at Times 1, 2, and 3, and there was no significant effect on team psychological safety: F(2,15)=1.53, p=0.12. There was a significant difference in communication between rounds with and without telemedicine [t(25)=-1.76, p<0.05], such that there was more task-based communication during telerounds. Telemedicine increased task-based communication and did not negatively impact team trust, psychological safety, or TMS during rounds. Telemedicine may offer advantages for some teamwork competencies without sacrificing the efficacy of others and may be adopted by intact rounding teams without hindering teamwork.

In this chapter, we investigate whether and how leader interpersonal affect regulation influences team psychological safety through the emotional tone of the team. Drawing on data from 206 members of 51 teams in a natural resource extraction organization, we examine how leaders’ affect-improving and affect-worsening regulation strategies shape high-activated team affective tone and, in turn, psychological safety. Team members rated their leaders’ affect regulation behaviors, the team’s emotional tone, and psychological safety. Using structural equation modeling, we found that leader affect-improving strategies were positively associated with team psychological safety, and this relationship was mediated by high-activated positive affective tone (indirect effect = 0.21, p &amp;lt; 0.05). Although affect-worsening strategies were significantly related to high-activated negative affective tone (β = 0.36, p &amp;lt; 0.01), the latter was not associated with psychological safety (β = 0.07, p &amp;gt; 0.05). These findings offer new insights into the affective mechanisms through which leaders shape team dynamics. However, the cross-sectional, self-report design and use of a modified psychological safety scale (excluding negatively worded items) may have limited the detection of certain effects. Practically, the results highlight the value of training leaders in specific affect-improving behaviors rather than focusing solely on broad leadership styles. This work contributes to a deeper understanding of how affect regulation links leadership behavior to team psychological safety.

Purpose: We attempted to explain how the interactions between members influence the psychological safety of a team using social network analysis by proposing a model based on social contagion in which the psychological safety of the central node has a key role in the psychological safety of the whole team. Design/methodology/approach: We present a theoretical paper which crosses theory about social network analysis, psychological safety and social contagion. Findings and Originality/value: We suggest that there are two groups of variables that mediate this relationship. The first group concerns the characteristics of the node and is composed by the proximity to the node’s personal characteristics and the value of the central node as a source of information. Second, we advance that there are two dimensions at the level of tie properties that mediate the influence of a central node on team psychological safety – tie strength and friendship level. Finally, the interacting opportunities- a variable at context level - is considered to affect the strength of the ties. We also advance some variables that mediate the influence of the psychological safety of a central node on the psychological safety of the team. Originality/value: To the best of our knowledge there is no significant research using social network analysis to explain the process by which a team becomes psychologically safe. On the other hand, because psychological safety tends to be a team construct it is important to understand how team dynamics, evidenced by social network analysis, influence the formation of psychological safety through contagion processes.

This article investigates when and how teams engage in team learning behaviours (TLB). More specifically, it looks into how different leadership styles facilitate TLB by influencing the social conditions that proceed them. 498 healthcare workers from 28 nursery teams filled out a questionnaire measuring the concepts leadership style, TLB, social cohesion and team psychological safety. Analysis was performed using structural equation modelling. The results of this cross-sectional study show that transformational leadership predicts TLB better then laissez-faire leadership, because transformational leadership is primarily related to team psychological safety and only secondarily to social cohesion while for laissez-faire leadership it works the other way around. Transformational leadership matters because it facilitates psychological safety in the team.

Despite the growing popularity of new product development across organizational boundaries, the processes, mechanisms, or dynamics that leverage performance in interorganizational (I-O) product development teams are not well understood. Such teams are staffed with individuals drawn from the partnering firms and are relied on to develop successful new products while at the same time enhancing mutual learning and reducing development time. However, these collaborations can encounter difficulties when partners from different corporate cultures and thought worlds must coordinate and depend on one another and often lead to disappointing performance. To facilitate collaboration, the creation of a safe, supportive, challenging, and engaging environment is particularly important for enabling productive collaborative I-O teamwork and is essential for learning and time efficient product development. This research develops and tests a model of proposed factors to increase both learning and time efficiency on I-O new product teams. It is argued that specific behaviors (caring), beliefs (psychological safety), task-related processes (shared problem solving), and governance mechanisms (clear management direction) create a positive climate that increases learning and time efficiency on I-O teams. Results of an empirical study of 50 collaborative new product development projects indicate that (1) shared problem solving and caring behavior support both learning and time efficiency on I-O teams, (2) team psychological safety is positively related to learning, (3) management direction is positively associated with time efficiency, and (4) shared problem solving is more strongly related to both performance dimensions than are the other factors. The factors supporting time efficiency are slightly different from those that foster learning. The relative importance of these factors also differs considerably for both performance aspects. Overall, this study contributes to a better understanding of the factors that facilitate a favorable environment for productive collaboration on I-O teams, which go beyond contracts or top-management supervision. Establishing such an environment can help to balance management concerns and promote the success of I-O teams. The significance of the results is elevated by the fragility of collaborative ventures and their potential for failure, when firms with different organizational cultures, thought worlds, objectives, and intentions increasingly decide to work across organizational boundaries for the development of new products.

Power hierarchy is a recently growing topic among scholars. Although the previous literature has emphasized the importance of understanding power hierarchy in teams and demonstrated the negative consequences of power struggles among team members in team performance, it neglected to explore how power struggles impact other team functioning and outcomes. Drawing on social information processing theory and the team learning behavior model discussed, this study proposes that power struggles send aggressive social information to team members, and such social information negatively influences team learning. Social information emitted by power struggles undermines psychological safety and creates hostility and interpersonal tensions, which reduce team members’ providing new ideas and information sharing. In addition, this study proposes a positive relationship between team learning and team innovation since team learning provides two key conditions (i.e., active knowledge integration and appropriate team climate) for successful team innovation. Lastly, this study suggests the mediating role of team learning between power struggles and team innovation. Using a sample of 99 teams from two organizations in Korea, this study tested the proposed model. In sum, this study found that (1) power struggles are negatively related to team learning, (2) team learning is positively related to team innovation, and (3) team learning mediates the relationship between power struggles and team learning.

The impact of multiple project team membership on individual and team learning: A micro-meso multi-level empirical study

This paper presents a network‐based approach for analyzing team coordination and shared cognition in engineering design teams. The research setting is an Integrated Concurrent Engineering (ICE) laboratory in which teams of approximately 20 engineers are collocated to conduct rapid conceptual design of scientific spacecraft. A design structure matrix (DSM) of expected interactions is constructed from technical information flow data, and DSM representations of reported interactions are created using survey data from 10 ICE design teams. A comparative analysis of expected and reported interactions is used to calculate a metric of team coordination called socio‐technical congruence (STC). To examine shared cognition, pairwise shared mental models (SMMs) are measured using pre‐ and post‐session surveys on system design drivers. Shared knowledge networks (SMMs as edges) are constructed, and team learning is measured as the change in network structure over time. Analysis reveals statistically significant correlations between team learning and each of three technical attributes (system development time, launch mass, and mission concept maturity) and between team learning and team coordination. These results indicate that team members learn most from each other when working on difficult or unfamiliar problems and when expected and reported interactions are aligned. The paper concludes that team coordination and the design product in ICE are not necessarily directly related to each other but that both are related to shared cognition. Although this study focuses on conceptual design, it lays the foundation for future work examining the role of team coordination and shared cognition in full‐scale system development programs.

Improving team interactions in engineering to model gender inclusivity has been at the forefront of many initiatives in both academia and industry. However, there has been limited evidence on the impact of gender-diverse teams on psychological safety. This is important because psychological safety has been shown to be a key facet for the development of innovative ideas, and has also been shown to be a cornerstone of effective teamwork. But how does the gender diversity of a team impact the development of psychological safety? The current study was developed to explore just this through an empirical study with 38 engineering design student teams over the course of an 8-week design project. These teams were designed to be half heterogeneous (either half-male and half-female, or majority male) or other half homogeneous (all male). We captured psychological safety at five time points between the homogenous and heterogenous teams and also explored individual dichotomous (peer-review) ratings of psychological safety at the end of the project. Results indicated that there was no difference in psychological safety between gender homogenous and heterogenous teams. However, females perceived themselves as more psychologically safe with other female team members compared to their ratings of male team members. Females also perceived themselves to be less psychologically safe with male team members compared to male ratings of female team members, indicating a discrepancy in perceptions between genders. These results point to the need to further explore the role of minoritized groups in psychological safety research and to explore how this effect presents itself (or is covered up) at the team level.

Team psychological safety fosters interpersonal risk-taking and constructive debate. Yet, how psychological safety develops in diverse teams needs to be explained. I apply collective regulatory lenses to shed light on how collective prevention focus (status quo) and collective promotion focus (growth) uniquely affect team psychological safety. I believe promotion focus makes it easier to attain psychological safety, while prevention focus makes it harder. Under a collective promotion lens, teams seek growth. Under a collective prevention lens, teams desire protection and not making things any worse. A pilot study of 76 students in 17 student project teams provided initial support for individual relationships in my model. In Study 2, an experiment, I manipulated team regulatory foci in three tasks (building towers, selling a house, negotiating a salary). I did not find significant mean group differences in psychological safety between promotion (n = 17) and prevention (n = 15) teams; yet, promotion teams experienced greater team viability in the final activity. In Study 3, I employed an experimental vignette method that suggested leadership conditions (e.g., leader humility vs transactional leadership) created differences in regulatory foci and subsequent differences in psychological safety with 343 working professionals in 7 scenarios.

With the increasing interest in the concept of justice in the group behavior literature, the procedural justice (PJ) climate attracts many researchers and practitioners from different fields. Nevertheless, the PJ climate is rarely addressed in the new product development (NPD) project team literature. Specifically, the technology and innovation management (TIM) literature provides little about what the PJ climate is, its nature and benefits, and how it works in NPD project teams. Also, few studies investigate the antecedents and consequences of the PJ climate in NPD teams enhancing the understanding of this concept from a practical perspective. This paper discusses the PJ climate theory in a NPD team context and empirically demonstrates how team members' positive collective perceptions of a PJ climate can be developed and how a PJ climate influences a project's performance in NPD teams. In particular, team culture values including employee orientation, customer orientation, systematic management control, innovativeness, and social responsibility were investigated as antecedents, and team learning, speed to market, and market success of new products were studied as outcomes of PJ climate in this paper. By studying 83 NPD project teams it was found on the basis of using partial least squares (PLS) method that (1) the level of employee, customer and innovativeness orientation as well as systematic management control during the project had a positive impact on developing a PJ climate in an NPD team; (2) a PJ climate positively affects team learning and product development time (i.e., speed to market); and (3) team learning and speed to market mediate the relations between the PJ climate and new product success (NPS). Based on the findings, this paper suggests that managers should enhance the PJ climate and team culture in the project team to enhance team learning and to develop products faster. In particular, managers should (1) open a discussion forum among people and create a dialogue for people who disagree with the other project team members rather than dictating or emposing others ideas to them, (2) facilitate information searching and collecting mechanisms to make decisions effectively and to clarify uncertainties, and (3) allow team members to challange project‐related ideas and decisions and modify them with consensus. Also, to enhance the PJ climate during the project, managers should (1) respect and listen to all team members' ideas and try to understand why they are sometimes in opposition, (2) define team members' task boundaries and clarify project norms and project goals, and (3) set knowledge‐questioning values by facilitating team members to try out new ideas and seek out new ways to do things.

The authors of this study examined the influence of transactive memory systems (TMSs) on team performance and team cohesion, as mediated by team psychological safety. Using a sample of 178 undergraduate students representing 27 service-management teams in a real-life restaurant setting with real-world consequences, TMS exhibited significant positive relationship with team performance and team cohesion. Team psychological safety was found to mediate the relationship between TMS and team outcomes. Based on the findings, theoretical and practical implications are discussed.