Collaboration Guidelines to Transform Culture

Heslop, Benjamin; Bailey, Kylie; Paul, Jay P.; Drew, Antony; Smith, Roger

doi:10.24926/ijps.v3i3.137

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Postulated universality of PILAR (Heslop et al, 2016) extends to the instrument, conceptually allowing maintenance of reliability across varying contexts. Developing a valid and reliable measure of CoVi would be useful for detecting workplaces that suffer from poor collaboration, and our proposed Pillar-PP instrument is a contender.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are We Collaborating Yet? Employee Assessment of Peer’s Perceptions

Heslop¹,

Stojanovski²,

Paul³

et al. 2017

IJHRS

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Employers rarely utilise their employees" capacity to assess the collegiality and productivity of their own work unit, yet they are determinants of employee retention and profitability. One reason is the lack of a reliable, valid survey instrument to measure collaboration viability (CoVi), which we postulate is the construct that employees use to implicitly assess their work unit. Inherent weaknesses of own-perception and peer-assessment instruments prevent them reliably measuring CoVi. A novel method overcoming respective deficiencies by combining the strengths of both approaches is proposed that we term peer"s-perception. It is contended that such an instrument may be improved through formulation in accordance with a universal model of collaboration. The model chosen is PILAR as it encapsulates a variety of social and organisational psychology theories. Prospects, involved, liked, agency and respect constitute five Pillars of collaboration . Based on this review, we propose a peer"s-perception instrument (Pillar-PP) and that this instrument be formally evaluated.Keywords: productivity, psychological safety, cohesion, collaboration, peer"s-perception, PILAR Measuring Collaboration ViabilityCollaboration is a synergistic, voluntary combining of individual contributions for a collective goal (Hughes & Jones, 2011;Thomas et al., 2007). Viability of collaboration can be threatened, such as by interpersonal conflict, poor strategy, or selfish manoeuvring (Chen, Ünal, Leung, & Xin, 2016;Topping, 2010). Collaborators are instinctively wary of such behaviours, and monitor their threat to collective success. Upon sign of collaboration unviability, the member"s first recourse is to limit their ongoing investment, such as dedicating less time or money. Once perceived risks outweigh the likelihood of success, leaving the collaboration may be the only option, knowing that doing so may cause sacrificing investments already made (Kendall & Salas, 2015).It is desirable to ameliorate threats to collaboration before members curtail their participation, or withdraw completely, since either may become a self-fulfilling prophecy (Jehn & Mannix, 2001;Morgeson & DeRue, 2006). Reasons for collaboration breakdown highlighted by the literature are free-riders, interpersonal conflict and poor leadership (Kuhn, 2015), which may be ameliorated through retraining and changes to; roles, workflow processes, oversight systems, and delegation (Daley, 1992). To ensure that failing collaboration in the workplace may be identified and repaired, the present study seeks an instrument that can reliably measure collaboration viability (CoVi).The standard method of measuring constructs reminiscent of CoVi is to survey group members for their perceptions of the group, which this article terms own-perception (Edmondson, 1999). A second approach is peer-assessment, which is rarely used to measure CoVi, but offers certain advantages over own-perception. We examine the weaknesses and ISSN 2162-3058 2017 http://ijhrs.macrothink.org 177 strengths of ...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are We Collaborating Yet? Employee Assessment of Peer’s Perceptions

Heslop¹,

Stojanovski²,

Paul³

et al. 2017

IJHRS

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In encapsulating over 30 SGP theories, we believe that the PILAR model is likely to be substantively accurate, and therefore potentially useful as a brief, instructive overview of SGP theory for those wishing to improve their collaboration techniques. Nevertheless, before it becomes taught material (Heslop et al, 2016), it would be preferable to empirically and conceptually test PILAR.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The actor's behavior is dictated by the sum of forces, of which Lewin conceived five types: (a) social norms, (b) the wishes of others, (c) the actor's wishes, and circumstances that (d) prompt, or (e) prevent, action (Stivers & Wheelan, 1986). Lewin's force definitions are too vague and generic for developing an instructive model of collaboration (Heslop, Bailey, Paul, Drew, & Smith, 2016). We later investigated how explicit, yet universal, forces may have increased the reliability of a member's ability to detect collaboration viability (Heslop, Stojanovski, Paul, Iverson, & Bailey, 2018).…”

Section: History Of Collaboration Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

PILAR: A Model of Collaboration to Encapsulate Social Psychology

Heslop

Stojanovski

Paul

et al. 2018

Review of General Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents an iterative examination of a grounded theory of collaboration in conjunction with social psychology literature. The resulting PILAR (Prospects, Involved, Liked, Agency, Respect) model of collaboration encapsulates over 30 social and group psychology (SGP) theories, including social identity theory, social network analysis, and psychological safety. Selected works of the early 20th-century scholars Lewin, Moreno, Simmel, and Foucault resonate with the PILAR model. We considered that, in constructing a generalized model of collaboration made possible by the availability of modern SGP theory, PILAR may represent advancement toward accomplishing these early scholars’ original intent. To validate PILAR, we proposed an empirical investigation for its consistency with organizational psychology, positive psychology, and appreciative inquiry, and for testing whether learning PILAR may improve collaboration skills for individuals lacking empathy.

show abstract

“…One low-cost option is accurate online instruction presenting ancestral norms (Heslop, Bailey, Paul, Drew, & Smith, 2016).…”

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Self-Interested Learners Avoid Prosocial Learning?

Heslop¹,

Stojanovski²,

Paul³

et al. 2018

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article assumes that collaborators who adopt a positive-sum, prosocial perspective can build trust-based relationships, which is equivalent to collaborative ability (CA). To improve a collaborator’s CA, we anticipated that content based upon a model of positive-sum collaboration, founded upon ancestral behaviours presented as social norms, might alter a zero-sum, proself, collaborator’s perspective. However, we also postulated that learner’s willingness to engage in positive-sum content may rely on pre-existing prosociality. Intervention participant’s prosociality was assessed via self-assessment of their emotional intelligence (EQ), quality of life (QoL), and goal orientation (GO). Learner’s engagement in online content was assessed by the three stage reached: examine website front matter; examine website content; learn website content. Tukey’s multiple comparison showed a statistically significant difference between stages one and three, in the mean of respondent’s self-assessed QoL. This suggests that participants who wished to learn content had, on average, higher quality of life, and potentially therefore greater prosociality. In general, these findings support a claim that any intervention designed to increase individual prosociality may need to consider the target population’s reticence to engage.

show abstract

Collaboration Guidelines to Transform Culture

Cited by 5 publications

References 63 publications

Are We Collaborating Yet? Employee Assessment of Peer’s Perceptions

Are We Collaborating Yet? Employee Assessment of Peer’s Perceptions

PILAR: A Model of Collaboration to Encapsulate Social Psychology

Do Self-Interested Learners Avoid Prosocial Learning?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About