| dc.description.abstract | The concept of team defines a group of people by design or by selection of behaviour in a collaborating working process. Overall, teams are supposed to perform with better outcome than individuals do. Scholars have voiced the need for more scientific research and documentation of how teams perform with higher efficiency and better effectiveness.
Mainly, scholars measure team-effectiveness and team-efficiency with surveys, observer ratings or behaviour counting. Observation of teams takes place in laboratories or in simulated training. This article claims to study teams in a natural environment, focusing on verbal behaviour in working projects. Stimulus change has impact on the ecological system of agents, strategies and the environment as a whole. An interpretation of team-behaviour will show that team science offers a broad span of antecedents that in turn may represent complex stimuli. A wide range of summary labels and conceptual models of teamwork make way to create operational variables that we can observe and manipulate. Measurement of team-efficiency and –effectiveness from contextual conditions developed from self-reports and observer-ratings, will be expanded with theory of contingency-formed learning by selection.
The scope of this trial is to investigate team-behaviour with individual utterances in a complex system of interacting behaviour, agents, and strategies. Through a bottom-up approach, I propose a measurement of team-behaviour as: complement, interlocked, vocal, verbal utterances with expanding consequences for the team. By manipulating problem solving strategies in complex situations and by self-organizing spontaneous orientation towards complex stimulus change, the teams demonstrate operant discrimination of intermediate responses. Through collaborating efforts the teams show an increased effect in frequency and multiple perspectives of proposals and objections. Interlocking team-behaviour and beneficial outcome find support from improvements of invoicing, but not from self-reported effects from team-meetings. Satisfying inter-observer-reliability was not established. Conclusions must be interpreted with caution. | en_US |
