專案團隊成效的影響因素—從團隊認知及創新規範的角度出發

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：89

、訪客IP：3.143.237.140

姓名

林裕勛(Yu-Hsun Lin) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

資訊管理學系

論文名稱

專案團隊成效的影響因素—從團隊認知及創新規範的角度出發
(The Determinants of Performance Outcomes in Project Teams – The Roles of Team Cognition and Innovation Norms)

相關論文

★ 技術商品銷售之技術人員關鍵職能探討	★ 資訊委外之承包商能力、信任及溝通與委外成效關係之個案研究
★ 兵工技術軍官職能需求分析-以某軍事工廠為例	★ 不同楷模學習模式對VB程式語言學習之影響
★ 影響採購「網路資料中心產品」因素之探討	★ 資訊人員績效評估之研究—以陸軍某資訊單位為例
★ 高職資料處理科學生網路成癮相關因素及其影響之探討	★ 資訊服務委外對資訊部門及人員之衝擊-某大型外商公司之個案研究
★ 二次導入ERP系統之研究-以某個案公司為例	★ 資料倉儲於證券產業應用之個案研究
★ 影響消費者採用創新數位產品之因素---以整合式手機為例	★ 企業合併下資訊系統整合過程之個案研究
★ 資料倉儲系統建置之個案研究	★ 電子表單系統導入之探討 - 以 A 公司為例
★ 企業資訊安全機制導入與評估–以H公司為例	★ 從人力網站探討國內資訊人力現況–以104銀行資料為例

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

至系統瀏覽論文 ( 永不開放)

摘要(中)

本論文援引團隊認知和創新規範來探討專案團隊成效的成因。藉由將團隊認知概念操作化為交換記憶系統與集體心智，本論文檢視在專案團隊中，團隊認知如何發展；並探討團隊認知對創新規範的影響；以及團隊認知和創新規範兩者和團隊成效的關聯。縱斷面資料蒐集自38個跨學門的專案團隊，這些團隊由162位大二學生所組成，每個專案團隊都參與一個為期16周的宿舍更新競賽。研究獲致以下結論。首先，在團隊認知發展的過程中，交換記憶系統會影響集體心智。而集體心智影響創新規範的形成。集體心智與創新規範以下列三個方式影響團隊成效。首先，集體心智直接影響團隊成效的主觀團隊績效和客觀團隊績效。另外，創新規範對主觀團隊績效有顯著地影響，但對客觀團隊績效並無顯著地影響。最後，集體心智透過創新規範間接影響主觀團隊績效。藉由探討團隊認知的發展，以及其和創新規範與團隊成效兩者的關聯，本論文有利於學術界與實務界了解專案團隊之創新規範與團隊成效的成因。

摘要(英)

This dissertation investigates how performance outcomes form among project teams by examining team cognition and innovation norms. Conceptualizing team cognition in terms of the transactive memory system (TMS) and the collective mind, this dissertation proposes a theory of how team cognition develops on project teams. The relationship between team cognition and innovation norms is scrutinized, as is the impact of those norms on performance outcomes. Longitudinal data were collected from 38 interdisciplinary project teams composed of 162 sophomores participating in a 16-week dormitory remodeling campaign. The results support the following conclusions: 1) the development of team cognition is influenced by the TMS, which exerts its effect through the collective mind of each interdisciplinary project team; 2) the collective mind is involved in the process of forming innovation norms; and 3) the collective mind and innovation norms affect performance outcomes in several ways. First, the collective mind directly influences performance outcomes, including subjective and objective team performance. Second, innovation norms affect subjective team performance but do not influence objective team performance. Third, the collective mind facilitates subjective team performance via innovation norms. By relating team cognition to innovation norms and performance outcomes, this dissertation provides both academics and practitioners with insight into how innovation norms form and how project teams achieve their desired performance outcomes.

關鍵字(中)

★ 團隊認知
★ 團隊績效
★ 交換記憶系統
★ 集體心智
★ 創新規範
★ 成效

關鍵字(英)

★ innovation norms
★ team cognition
★ team performance
★ performance outcomes
★ transactive memory system (TMS)
★ collective mind

論文目次

論文提要 i
Abstract ii
致謝辭 iii
Table of Contents iv
Figures v
Tables vi
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Research Motivations 1
1.2 Research Questions 3
2. Conceptual Background 4
2.1 The concept of innovation 4
2.2 Innovation norms 5
2.3 Team cognition 7
2.4 Team performance as a team-based innovation outcome 12
3. Research Framework and Hypotheses 14
3.1 Research Framework 14
3.2 Hypotheses Development 15
4. Research Method 21
4.1 Design 21
4.2 Participants 23
4.3 Task and Material 23
4.4 Procedure 24
4.5 Measurement 25
5. Results and Discussion 29
5.1 Testing the measurement model 30
5.2 Testing the structural model 32
5.3 Model comparison 34
5.4 Discussion 36
6. Conclusion 38
6.1 Managerial Implications 40
6.2 Limitations and Future Research 41
References 44
Appendix 53
Appendix A. Scale items associated with specific constructs 53
Appendix B. Questionnaire 55
Appendix C. Factor loadings and t-values of measurement items 57
Appendix D. Coefficients and t-values for hypothesis testing 58
Figures
Figure 1. Research framework 14
Figure 2. Analysis results of structural equation model 33
Figure 3. Analysis results of competing Model 1 34
Figure 4. Analysis results of competing Model 2 35
Tables
Table 1. Components of team cognition 8
Table 2. Dimensions of team cognition components 11
Table 3. An example of division of labor in the participating teams 22
Table 4. Measurement constructs 26
Table 5. Descriptive statistics and Cronbach’s alphas 29
Table 6. Latent variable correlations 31
Table 7. Item cross-loadings 32
Table 8. Summary of hypothesis testing results 36

參考文獻

Aboelela, S.W., Larson, E., Bakken, S., Carrasquillo, O., Formicola, A., Glied, S. A., et al. (2007). Defining interdisciplinary research: Conclusions from a critical review of the literature. Health Services Research, 42(1), 329-346.
Akgun, A. E., Byrne, J., Keskin, H., Lynn, G. S., & Imamoglu, S. Z. (2005). Knowledge networks in new product development projects: a transactive memory perspective. Information & Management, 42(8), 1105-1120.
Akgun, A. E., Byrne, J. C., Keskin, H., & Lynn, G. S. (2006). Transactive memory system in new product development teams. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 53(1), 95-111.
Alterman, R., & Garland, A. (2001). Convention in joint activity. Cognitive Science, 25(4), 611–657.
Austin, J. R. (2000). Knowing what and whom other people know: linking transactive memory with external connections in organizational groups. Academy of Management Proceedings, (0896-7911), F1-F6.
Burke, C. S., Sims, D. E., Lazzara, E. H., & Salas, E. (2007). Trust in leadership: A multi-level review and integration. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(6), 606-632.
Caldwell, D. F., & O'Reilly, C. A. (2003). The determinants of team-based innovation in organizations. Small Group Research, 34(4), 497-517.
Cannon Bowers, J. A., & Salas, E. (2001). Reflections on shared cognition. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(2), 195-202.
Chin, W. W. (1998). Issues and opinion on structural equation modeling. MIS Quarterly, 22(1), vii-xvi.
Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23(3), 239-290.
Chou, H.W. & Lin, Y.H. (2010). The Development of Teamwork Norms:The Roles of Task-knowledge Coordination and Team Boundary Spanning. In J. Sanchez & K. Zhang (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2010 (pp. 1652-1659). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/35789.
Chou, H. W., Lin, Y. H. & Chou, S. B., Collective Efficacy and Performance in Strategic Decision-Making Teams: The Role of Team Cognition, Social Behavior and Personality, forthcoming.
Crowston, K., & Kammerer, E. E. (1998). Coordination and collective mind in software requirements development. IBM Systems Journal, 37(2), 227-245.
DeChurch, L. A., & Mesmer-Magnus, J. R. (2010). The cognitive underpinnings of team effectiveness: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 32-53.
Druskat, V. U., & Pescosolido, A. T. (2002). The content of effective teamwork mental models in self-managing teams: Ownership, learning and heedful interrelating. Human Relations, 55(3), 283-314.
Engelmann, T., Dehler, J., Bodemer, D., & Buder, J. g. (2009). Knowledge awareness in CSCL: A psychological perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(4), 949-960.
Feldman, D. C. (1984). The development and enforcement of group norms. The Academy of Management Review, 9(1), 47-53.
Fiore, S. M. (2008). Interdisciplinarity as teamwork: How the science of teams can inform team science. Small Group Research, 39(3), 251-277.
Forbes, D. P., & Milliken, F. J. (1999). Cognition and corporate governance: Understanding boards of directors as strategic decision-making groups. The Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 489-505.
Fornell, C., & Larcker D.F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
George, J. M. (1990). Personality, affect, and behavior in groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(2), 107-116.
Hair, J. F. , Black, B., Babin, B., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate Data Analysis (6 ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hoegl, M., & Gemuenden, H. G. (2001). Teamwork quality and the success of innovative projects: A theoretical concept and empirical evidence. Organization Science, 12(4),435-449.
Jackson, P., & Klobas, J. (2008). Transactive memory systems in organizations: Implications for knowledge directories. Decision Support Systems, 44(2), 409-424.
James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1984). Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(1), 85–98.
Joreskog, K. G., & Wold, H. O. A. (1982). Systems under indirect observation: Causality, structure, prediction. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Jung, D. I., & Avolio, B. J. (2000). Opening the black box: An experimental investigation of the mediating effects of trust and value congruence on transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of organizational Behavior, 21(8), 949-964.
Kanawattanachai, P., & Yoo, Y. (2007). The impact of knowledge coordination on virtual team performance over time. MIS Quarterly, 31(4), 783-808.
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7(3), 77–124.
Lewis, K. (2003). Measuring transactive memory systems in the field: Scale development and validation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 587-604.
Lewis, K. (2004). Knowledge and performance in knowledge-worker teams: A longitudinal study of transactive memory systems. Management Science, 50(11), 1519-1533.
Lewis, K., Belliveau, M., Herndon, B., & Keller, J. (2007). Group cognition, membership change, and performance: Investigating the benefits and detriments of collective knowledge. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 103(2), 159-178.
Lewis, K., Lange, D., & Gillis, L. (2005). Transactive memory systems, learning, and learning transfer. Organization Science, 16(6), 581-598.
Liang, D. W., Moreland, R., & Argote, L. (1995). Group versus individual training and group performance: The mediating role of transactivememory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(4), 384 –393.
Lin, Y.H. & Chou, H.W. (2009). Exploring the formation of collective efficacy in college student learning teams. In T. Bastiaens et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2009 (pp. 2863-2870). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/32891.
London, M., Polzer, J. T., & Omoregie, H. (2005). Interpersonal congruence, transactive memory, and feedback processes: An integrative model of group learning. Human Resource Development Review, 4(2), 114-135.
Mayor, M. (Ed.) (2009), Longman dictionary of contemporary English (Fifth edition), Harlow, UK: Person Education Limited. ISBN: 9781408215333.
Madhavan, R., & Grover, R. (1998). From embedded knowledge to embodied knowledge: new product development as knowledge management. The Journal of Marketing, 62(4), 1-12.
McAllister, D. J. (1995). Affect-and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. The Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24-59.
Michinov, N., & Michinov, E. (2009). Investigating the relationship between transactive memory and performance in collaborative learning. Learning and Instruction, 19(1), 43-54.
Mohr, L. B. (1969). Determinants of innovation in organizations. American Political Science Review, 63(1), 111-126.
Moreland, R. L. (1999). Transactive memory: Learning who knows what in work groups and organizations. In L. L. Thompson, J. M. Levine, & D. M. Messick (Eds.), Shared cognition in organizations: The management of knowledge. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Moreland, R. L., & Myaskovsky, L. (2000). Exploring the performance benefits of group training: Transactive memory or improved communication? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 117–133.
Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric Theory. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Olson, E. M., Walker, O. C., & Ruekert, R. W. (1995). Organizing for effective new product development: the moderating role of product innovativeness. The Journal of Marketing, 59(1), 48-62.
O’Reilly, C., & Flatt, S. (1989, August). Executive team demography, organizational innovation, and firm performance. Paper presented at the 49th annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Washington, DC.
Prichard, J. S., & Ashleigh, M. J. (2007). The effects of team-skills training on transactive memory and performance. Small Group Research, 38(6), 696-726.
Pearsall, M. J., Ellis, A. P. J., & Stein, J. H. (2009). Coping with challenge and hindrance stressors in teams: Behavioral, cognitive, and affective outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 109(1), 18-28.
Rau, D. (2005). The influence of relationship conflict and trust on the transactive memory: Performance relation in top management teams. Small Group Research, 36(6), 746-771.
Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Will, A. (2005). Smart PLS 2.0 (beta). Hamburg, Germany: University of Hamburg.
Robinson, S. L. (1996). Trust and breach of the psychological contract. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(4), 574-599.
Ryle, G. (1949). The Concept of Mind. Chicago, IL: Univ. Chicago Press.
Shaw, M. E. (1981). Group Dynamics (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Schmickl, C., & Kieser, A. (2008). How much do specialists have to learn from each other when they jointly develop radical product innovations? Research Policy, 37(3),473-491.
Sethi, R., Smith, D. C., & Park, C. W. (2001). Cross-functional product development teams, creativity, and the innovativeness of new consumer products. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(1), 73-85.
Shen, Y., & Gallivan, M. (2008). The Influence of Subgroup Dynamics on Knowledge Coordination in Distributed Software Development Teams: A Transactive Memory System and Group Faultline Perspective. In M. Barrett, E. Davidson, C. Middleton & J. DeGross (Eds.), Information Technology in the Service Economy: Challenges and Possibilities for the 21st Century (Vol. 267, pp. 103-116): Springer Boston.
Smith-Jentsch, K. A., Campbell, G. E., Milanovich, D. M., & Reynolds, A. M. (2001). Measuring teamwork mental models to support training needs assessment, development, and evaluation: two empirical studies. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(2), 179-194.
Tasa, K., Taggar, S., & Seijts, G. H. (2007). The development of collective efficacy in teams: A multilevel and longitudinal perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 17-27.
Vissers, G., & Dankbaar, B. (2002). Creativity in multidisciplinary new product development teams. Creativity and Innovation Management, 11(1), 31-42.
Wegner, D. M. (1987). Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. In B. Mullen & G. R. Goethals (Eds.), Theories of group behavior (pp. 185-205). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Wegner, D. M. (1995). A computer network model of human transactive memory. Social Cognition, 13(3), 319-339.
Wegner, D. M., Erber, R., & Raymond, P. (1991). Transactive memory in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(6), 923-929.
Weick, K. E., & Roberts, K. H. (1993). Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(3), 357-381.
Roberts, M. L., & Wortzel, L. H. (1979). New life-style determinants of women's food shopping behavior. Journal of Marketing, 43(3), 28-39.
Yoo, Y., & Kanawattanachai, P. (2001). Developments of transactive memory systems and collective mind in virtual teams. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9(2), 187-208.
Zand, D. E. (1972). Trust and managerial problem solving. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(2), 229-239.

指導教授

周惠文(Huey-Wen Chou)

審核日期

2011-8-29

推文