Peter Cauwelier, Vincent Michel Ribiere and Alex Bennet
This paper aims to explore the impact of team psychological safety and team learning on the creation of team knowledge. When teams engage in learning, their interactions…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to explore the impact of team psychological safety and team learning on the creation of team knowledge. When teams engage in learning, their interactions contribute to improved performance. Very little research evaluates whether the learning also creates new knowledge related to the task or the team itself.
Design/methodology/approach
The proposed model is evaluated through a mixed method research design around a team problem-solving experiment. Task- and team-related team mental models are elicited using concept mapping and questionnaires and are measured before and after the experiment. The model is evaluated in engineering teams from the USA and France.
Findings
The findings confirm the proposed model; team psychological safety and team learning positively impact team knowledge creation for both task- and team-related knowledge.
Originality/value
This research has theoretical, methodological and practical implications. The team psychological safety model is expanded, team learning is evaluated from the team interactions instead of members’ self-assessments and team knowledge is measured dynamically. Developing team psychological safety and creating team learning opportunities positively impacts the team’s knowledge.
Details
Keywords
Peter Cauwelier, Vincent M. Ribière and Alex Bennet
The purpose of this paper was to evaluate if the concept of team psychological safety, a key driver of team learning and originally studied in the West, can be applied in teams…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper was to evaluate if the concept of team psychological safety, a key driver of team learning and originally studied in the West, can be applied in teams from different national cultures. The model originally validated for teams in the West is applied to teams in Thailand to evaluate its validity, and the views team members have on the antecedents of team psychological safety are analyzed.
Design/methodology/approach
The core of the sequential explanatory mixed method research was an experiment with nine teams from a single engineering organization (three teams from each the USA, France and Thailand). Team learning behaviors were analyzed from the conversations between team members. Team psychological safety was analyzed through a quantitative instrument and one-on-one structured interviews with each team member.
Findings
The results showed that the original model is confirmed for the teams from the USA and France but not confirmed for teams from Thailand. The thematic analysis of the one-on-one interviews highlights important differences between teams from the USA and France on the one hand and teams from Thailand on the other hand when it comes to the role of the team manager and the views that team members have on the diversity between them.
Originality/value
This research confirms that the concept of team psychological safety, and its impact on the way teams learn, needs to be adjusted if it is to be applied to teams in countries with national cultures different from those prevalent in the West. The implications are that researchers who develop theories in the social sciences field should evaluate how cultural differences impact their models, and that managers who implement learning and solutions should take national cultural differences into consideration.
Details
Keywords
Henrik Saabye, Daryl John Powell and Paul Coughlan
Being acquainted with both lean and action learning in theory and in practice, this study finds that the theoretical complementarity of these two research streams has…
Abstract
Purpose
Being acquainted with both lean and action learning in theory and in practice, this study finds that the theoretical complementarity of these two research streams has traditionally been underexploited. In this conceptual paper, this study aims to advance the theoretical understanding of lean by exploring the complementarity of lean thinking and action learning leading to a proposed integrated theory of these two research streams. Target audience is the operations management research community.
Design/methodology/approach
By deliberately adopting a process of theorising, this paper explores, reflects upon and combines individual experiences of researching, teaching and engaging in lean and action learning as operations management scholars.
Findings
Having taken a gemba walk through the literature and practices of lean and action learning, this study views and notices a systematic and complementary relationship between the two domains. The overlapping theoretical and practical complementarities of lean and action learning suggest that these two research streams are ripe for synthesis into an integrated theory. This finding provides an opportunity to (1) progress towards an integrative design of interventions leading to more sustainable lean system adoptions and (2) add new depth to our theoretical explanation of the success and failures of lean system adoptions.
Originality/value
This paper contributes an original integrated theory perspective on lean and action learning.