Tschan, Franziska

2008, Facchin, Stéphanie, Tschan, Franziska

In this dissertation I concentrate on some of the boundary conditions of reflexivity in teams. Research has shown that reflexivity (collectively reflecting on the teams’ objectives, strategies, and processes and adapting them accordingly) can enhance team performance and innovation. This effect, however, may have boundary conditions. Indeed, prior research has shown that the positive effects of reflexivity were often not straightforward, but depended on other variables. Given the many variables that moderate the relationship between reflexivity and team outcomes, it remains important to investigate under what conditions reflexivity really benefits teams. Therefore, I decided to study team reflexivity and take into account potential moderators, based on the assumption that reflexivity enhances performance and innovation if the reflection process is useful for the actual task or cooperation requirements. This dissertation is composed of a conceptual part (Chapter 1, 2, 3) and an empirical part (chapter 4, 5, 6) that present three papers each testing a specific aspect of the relationship between reflexivity and team performance and innovation. In all of the papers, the hypotheses were tested with field studies and the variables were evaluated with self-report questionnaires. A preliminary step in this dissertation was to validate the reflexivity scale for a French speaking sample. This first step enabled me to have an appropriate measure of reflexivity for the following next steps. The next steps represent the core project of this dissertation. The aim was first to test whether task reflexivity influences team performance and innovation more when teams need coordination because of task variety and when teams can implement the results of their reflection thanks to autonomy. And second, to test the relative importance of task reflexivity compared to transactive memory system, for team performance and innovation. In the first paper (chapter 4), two studies were conducted with 80 teams (320 participants) to validate the French version of reflexivity scale. In study 1, exploratory factor analysis revealed 3 factors which partially confirm the 2 factor structure expected from the original study (Carter & West, 1998). Two items of the original task reflexivity scale loaded on a third factor named ‘strategic reflexivity’. The three factor structure was replicated in study 2 with confirmatory factor analysis. Criterion validity is confirmed by correlations between reflexivity and team performance. Task, social and strategic reflexivity correlate with different aspects of team and individual performance. From these studies, it was concluded that the French version of the reflexivity scale is reliable and appropriate for evaluating team reflexivity. In the second paper (chapter 5), a study was conducted with 84 heterogeneous teams (334 participants) that performed a wide variety of tasks. First, I tested whether task reflexivity influences team performance more when teams need coordination because of task variety. Results indicated that task reflexivity improved team performance more when there was greater task variety. Second, I investigated whether the effects of task reflexivity on team innovation depend on the level of autonomy. Again, results showed that teams with greater autonomy benefited more from task reflexivity than teams with less autonomy. The results support my argument that task reflexivity benefits teams when teams perform non-routine tasks that may require more integration and coordination; and is most helpful when they are autonomous, and thus able to implement the results of their reflection. In the third paper (chapter 6), I surveyed 101 teams (420 participants) to test the relationships between explicit coordination (task reflexivity) and implicit coordination (transactive memory system). Results show that task reflexivity fostered team innovation and team performance. Transactive memory systems enhanced not only team performance but also innovation. As expected, task reflexivity and transactive memory did interact. Task reflexivity only enhanced team performance in teams with a less well developed transactive memory system (as evidenced by low level of specialization). Similar results were found for team innovation. Task reflexivity fostered team innovation in teams with a less well developed TMS (as evidenced by specialization and coordination) but high task reflexivity also impacted team innovation for teams with a good transactive memory system (as evidenced by high specialization and coordination). These results support the argument that task reflexivity is most helpful when a team has a poor transactive memory system that may require a reflection on who knows what. Second, the results supports the argument that task reflexivity also benefits team innovation when a team is highly specialized and coordinated and thus explicit reflection with specialized, diverse well coordinated team members, increases innovation. The primary contribution of this dissertation was to provide explanation for understanding the mixed results of task reflexivity on team performance. On one hand, this study highlights the importance of both task characteristics and enabling conditions of the effects of reflexivity on team performance and innovation; and on the other hand the importance of studying the relationship among explicit and implicit coordination mechanism on team outcomes. Future research should further address reflexivity and its boundary conditions.

2007, Gurtner, Andrea, Tschan, Franziska, Semmer, Norbert, Nägele, Christof

This study examines the effect of guided reflection on team processes and performance, based on West's (1996, 2000) concept of reflexivity. Communicating via e-mail, 49 hierarchically structured teams (one commander and two specialists) performed seven 15 min shifts of a simulated team-based military air-surveillance task (TAST) in two meetings, a week apart. At the beginning of the second meeting, teams were assigned either to a reflexivity (individual or group) or to a control condition. Results show that reflexivity enhanced performance, the link between reflexivity and team performance being mediated by communication and implementation of strategies as well as by similarity of mental models. Contrary to expectations, individual reflexivity was superior to group reflexivity. Additional analyses suggested that group reflexivity decreased the commanders' active behavior and increased discussion of strategies that were too general to be helpful. Results point to the usefulness of reflexivity as a generic intervention but underscore the importance of focusing on strategies that are task-specific. (c) 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

2006, Facchin, Stephanie, Tschan, Franziska, Gurtner, Andrea, Cohen, Dalia, Dupuis, Annick

Several studies found reflexivity -the extent to which team discuss objectives, strategies and processes and adapt them to changes- to be related to team efficacy. Two studies were conducted with 80 teams (320 participants) to validate French version of reflexivity scale. In study 1 exploratory factor analysis revealed 3 factors which partly confirms the 2 factor structure (task reflexivity and social reflexivity) expected from the original study (Carter and West, 1998). Two items of the original task reflexivity scale load on a third factor we named strategic reflexivity. The three factor structure was replicated in study 2 with confirmatory factor analysis. Criterion validity is proved by correlations between reflexivity and team performance. Task, social and strategic reflexivity correlate with different aspects of team effectiveness. The French version of reflexivity scale is reliable and appropriate for evaluating team reflexivity. (c) 2006 Association internationale de psychologie du travail de langue francaise. Publie par Elsevier Masson SAS. Tons droits reserves.