Skip to main content
View expanded cover

Advances in Social Simulation pp 273–286Cite as

(Ir-)Rationality of Teams: A Process-Oriented Model of Team Cognition Emergence

  • 559 Accesses

Part of the Springer Proceedings in Complexity book series (SPCOM)

Abstract

In today’s competitive environment, companies rely increasingly on teams and their flexibility. While effectively working teams may accomplish great results, ineffective teams may fall short of their potential and can even be a risk for the organization. Little is known about the socio-cognitive processes of team decisions and particularly the emergence of knowledge from individual to team level. This study addresses this process by analyzing team cognition as an emergent property. The here presented research approach allows for a deeper analysis of the underlying processes. A laboratory experiment provides information about quantitative patterns of individual and team cognition. For the analysis of these patterns, we introduce the team cognition matrix. By applying this format to the results of the laboratory experiment, this study identifies four categories of typical emergent team cognition structures. These four categories are the basis for a simple decision algorithm that was analyzed in an agent-based model. The resulting simulation shows that 67% of all simulated group decisions are very close to the empirical group decisions (ranking position distances ≤3) and 89% are close on a medium range (ranking position distances ≤6). The article contributes to the current literature by showing an innovative research approach that further is applied to open up the black box of successful team behavior beyond well-known static attributes.

Keywords

  • Team performance
  • Decision dynamics
  • Interactive team cognition
  • Laboratory experiments
  • Agent-based modeling

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-34127-5_26
  • Chapter length: 14 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   219.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-030-34127-5
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Learn about institutional subscriptions
Fig. 26.1
Fig. 26.2
Fig. 26.3
Fig. 26.4
Fig. 26.5
Fig. 26.6
Fig. 26.7
Fig. 26.8

Notes

  1. 1.

    The time limits for the game rounds are set according to the team building game.

  2. 2.

    Further adaptations could include another individual ranking after the group discussion to analyze the change of individual decisions and explicate the hidden knowledge that was not part of the group ranking.

  3. 3.

    In total 390 matrices for 15 items and 26 groups.

  4. 4.

    In further research, we aim to consider alternative selection strategies, such as choosing the individual ranking position that appears most frequently within the consensus range.

References

  1. Attanasi, G., Hopfensitz, A., Lorini, E., Moisan, F.: Social connectedness improves co-ordination on individually costly, efficient outcomes. Eur. Econ. Rev. 90, 86–106 (2016)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  2. Bacharach, M.: Beyond Individual Choice: Teams and Frames in Game Theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2006)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  3. Colman, A.M., Pulford, B.D., Rose, J.: Collective rationality in interactive decisions: evidence for team reasoning. Acta Psychol. 128(2), 387–397 (2008)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  4. Cooke, N.J., Gorman, J.C., Myers, C.W., Duran, J.L.: Interactive team cognition. Cogn. Sci. 37(2), 255–285 (2013)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  5. Cooke, R.A., Kernaghan, J.A.: Estimating the difference between group versus individual performance on problem-solving tasks. Group Organ. Stud. 12(3), 319–342 (1987)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  6. Crusius, J., van Horen, F., Mussweiler, T.: Why process matters: a social cognition perspective on economic behavior. J. Econ. Psychol. 33(3), 677–685 (2012)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  7. Delgado, P.M.I., Martínez, A.M.R., Martínez, L.G.: Teams in organizations: a review on team effectiveness. Team Perform. Manag. Int. J. 14(1/2), 7–21 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1108/13527590810860177

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  8. DeVilliers, R., Woodside, A.G., Marshall, R.: Making tough decisions competently: assessing the value of product portfolio planning methods, devil’s advocacy, group discussion, weighting priorities, and evidenced-based information. J. Bus. Res. 69(8), 2849–2862 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.054

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  9. Esser, J.K.: Alive and well after 25 years: a review of groupthink research. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 73(2), 116–141 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1998.2758

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  10. Grand, J.A., Braun, M.T., Kuljanin, G., Kozlowski, S.W., Chao, G.T.: The dynamics of team cognition: a process-oriented theory of knowledge emergence in teams. J. Appl. Psychol. 101(10), 1353 (2016)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  11. Janis, I.L.: Victims of Groupthink: a Psychological Study of Foreign-Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Houghton-Mifflin, Boston (1972)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Janis, I.L.: Groupthink. Houghton-Mifflin, Boston (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Katzenbach, J.R., Smith, D.K.: The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High-Performance Organization. Harvard Business Review Press, Boston (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Klingert, F.M.A., Meyer, M.: Effectively combining experimental economics and multi-agent simulation: suggestions for a procedural integration with an example from prediction markets research. Comput. Math. Organ. Theory. 18(1), 1–28 (2012)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  15. Knox, G.: Lost-at-sea – team building game (2016). Retrieved 28 Nov 2016, from http://insight.typepad.co.uk/insight/2009/02/lost-at-sea-a-team-building-game.html

  16. Macal, C.M.: Everything you need to know about agent-based modelling and simulation. J. Simul. 10(2), 144–156 (2016)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  17. Reader, T.W.: Team decision making. In: The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of the Psychology of Team Working and Collaborative Processes, pp. 271–296. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, West Sussex (2017)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  18. Rousseau, V., Aubé, C., Savoie, A.: Teamwork behaviors: a review and an integration of frameworks. Small Group Res. 37(5), 540–570 (2006)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  19. Schulz-Hardt, S., Jochims, M., Frey, D.: Productive conflict in group decision making: genuine and contrived dissent as strategies to counteract biased information seeking. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 88(2), 563–586 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-5978(02)00001-8

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  20. Secchi, D.: A case for agent-based models in organizational behavior and team research. Team Perform. Manag. Int. J. 21(1/2), 37–50 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-12-2014-0063

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  21. Smaldino, P.E., Calanchini, J., Pickett, C.L.: Theory development with agent-based models. Organ. Psychol. Rev. 5(4), 300–317 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386614546944

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  22. Smith, E.B., Rand, W.: Simulating macro-level effects from micro-level observations. Manag. Sci. 64, 5405–5421 (2017)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  23. Verderber, K.S., Verderber, R.F., Sellnow, D.D.: Communicate!. Cengage Learning, Boston, MA (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Woolley, A.W., Chabris, C.F., Pentland, A., Hashmi, N., Malone, T.W.: Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science. 330(6004), 686–688 (2010)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Applied Sciences Europe, Hamburg, Germany

    Iris Lorscheid

  2. Hamburg University of Technology, Institute of Management Accounting and Simulation, Hamburg, Germany

    Matthias Meyer

Authors
  1. Iris Lorscheid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matthias Meyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Iris Lorscheid .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University, Kista, Sweden

    Dr. Harko Verhagen

  2. Norwegian College of Fishery Science, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway

    Dr. Melania Borit

  3. Linnaeus University Centre for Data Intensive Sciences and Applications, Växjö, Sweden

    Prof. Giangiacomo Bravo

  4. Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden

    Dr. Nanda Wijermans

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Lorscheid, I., Meyer, M. (2020). (Ir-)Rationality of Teams: A Process-Oriented Model of Team Cognition Emergence. In: Verhagen, H., Borit, M., Bravo, G., Wijermans, N. (eds) Advances in Social Simulation. Springer Proceedings in Complexity. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34127-5_26

Download citation