			Home About us Contact

Collaborative Behaviors (collaborative + behavior)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Business, Economics, Finance and Accounting	50%

Selected Abstracts

Cross-cultural Comparisons of Online Collaboration

JOURNAL OF COMPUTER-MEDIATED COMMUNICATION, Issue 1 2002
Kyong-Jee Kim
This study investigated two interconnected conferences formed by students and instructors from two different cultures,Finland and the United States,to discuss case situations or problems in school observations, in order to examine cross-cultural differences in online collaborative behaviors among undergraduate preservice teachers. A conference for Korean students in the following semester was added and analyzed for more diverse cross-cultural comparisons. In terms of the first part of this study, computer log data indicated that there were more cross-cultural postings in the Finnish conference by U.S. students than Finnish visitors within the U.S. conference. In addition, student postings made up nearly 80 percent of these discussions. Qualitative content analyses of computer transcripts were conducted to compare their collaborative behaviors with the conferences. Results revealed some cross-cultural differences in the participants' online collaborative behaviors. Korean students were more social and contextually driven online, Finnish students were more group-focused as well as reflective and, at times, theoretically driven, and U.S. students more action-oriented and pragmatic in seeking results or giving solutions. The U.S. and Finnish students spent much time sharing knowledge and resources and also providing cross-cultural feedback. Findings indicate that instructors who facilitate online collaboration among multicultural students need to be aware of cultural differences in the learners' online collaborative behaviors, and such differences need to be taken into account to foster online collaboration among culturally diverse learners. Some data from post-collaboration questionnaires, student interviews, and videoconferencing further informed these findings. [source]

Emotional intelligence and its relationship to transformational leadership and key project manager competences

PROJECT MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, Issue 2 2010
Nicholas Clarke
Abstract Key dimensions of project manager behaviors considered to be associated with successful project outcomes have included both appropriate collaborative behaviors and transformational leadership. More recently, emotional intelligence has been suggested as a unique area of individual differences that is likely to underpin sets of behaviors in this area. Based on a sample of 67 UK project managers, it was found that emotional intelligence ability measures and empathy explained additional variance in the project manager competences of teamwork, attentiveness, and managing conflict, and the transformational leadership behaviors of idealized influence and individualized consideration, after controlling for cognitive ability and personality. [source]

Structural and contextual correlates of charged behavior in product development teams

THE JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT, Issue 3 2001
Rajesh Sethi
Firms increasingly use cross-functional teams to develop new products, yet we know little about the processes that make teams excel. Although studies have focused on within-team processes like cooperation between and integration of individuals from various functional areas, some emerging literature suggests that the processes that make teams excel are richer and more complex than cooperation and integration. In order to capture the processes that lead to excellent market performance of new products, we introduce the concept of charged team behavior, the extent to which cross-functional product development teams are enthusiastically and jointly driven to develop superior new products. Charged team behavior captures not only the drive, commitment, and joy of team members, but also their collaborative behaviors to achieve an exceptional outcome. We propose and test a series of hypotheses concerning how charged behavior affects new product market performance and how charged behavior is, in turn, influenced by both team structural characteristics (physical proximity, team longevity, and outcome interdependence) and contextual factors (senior management encouragement to take risk, quality orientation, exposure to customer input, extent of competition, and interdepartmental connectedness). It is particularly important to examine the antecedents of charged behavior because there are concerns that some of the team-related factors generally considered to be useful for teams may not necessarily lead to charged teams. Data from new consumer product development teams is analyzed though structural equation modeling for hypothesis testing. We find evidence that highly charged teams are more likely to develop successful new products. Results also indicate that outcome interdependence, exposure to customer input, extent of competition, and interdepartmental connectedness are positively related to charged behavior. Physical proximity, team longevity, encouragement to take risk, and quality orientation do not improve teams' charged behavior. Data suggests that charged team behavior: 1) fully mediates the effects of outcome interdependence and interdepartmental connectedness on performance, 2) partially mediates the influence of exposure to customer input and the extent of competition on performance, and 3) does not mediate the effects of quality orientation and physical proximity on performance. Our study highlights the importance of creating highly charged product development teams in order to achieve exceptional performance. Further, our results indicate that some of the factors suggested by traditional social psychology research for enhancing team effectiveness (e.g., physical proximity and team longevity) may not necessarily create charged teams. Instead, charged teams need a special arrangement, in which members are accountable to the team and where their evaluations and rewards are also linked to the performance of the team. In addition, although a strong emphasis on quality is considered to be beneficial for new products, as our results indicate, such emphasis cannot create a charged atmosphere. Moreover, our research suggests that if the organization structure does not permit frequent contact between individuals across functional boundaries, the creation of a strongly charged team and development of a successful new product will be hindered. [source]