What makes an effective team? The role of trust (dis)confirmation in team development

Yang, Inju

doi:10.1016/j.emj.2014.04.001

Cited by 28 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 145 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Positive expectations are beliefs that the actions of another will be beneficial, favorable, or at least not detrimental [26]. Vulnerability implies that there is something of importance to be lost and involves taking a risk; indeed, risk is also a commonly cited component of trust [17, 18, 21, 22, 24, 27–33]. Thus, because trust in general can be defined as a willingness to be vulnerable to the actions of another party, trust at any level (e.g.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This information forms the basis for discussions regarding trainee competence and attainment of specific educational milestones.Shared Mental Model [42, 43]The shared knowledge and organized understanding of the information and resources used by the group, tasks and problems faced by the group, and individual group members’ imported informationDeveloping a shared model of trainee competence is critical for these committee decisions. Sources of shared information include written evaluations, results of knowledge exams, conversations amongst faculty members with their own experiences with the trainees, etc.Potential for Future Interactions and Relationships [33]A person’s early feelings about group members can create a sense of optimism about the potential of the relationshipNew committee members may be more willing to cooperate with other members given the potential of building stronger future relationships.Political Skill [44]A social effectiveness construct defined as the ability to effectively understand others at work and to use such knowledge to influence others to act in ways that enhance one’s personal and/or organizational objectivesA committee member who has particularly strong opinions about a trainee may be more persuasive (and potentially trusted as well) based upon his or her degree of political skill.Relational Identity Orientation [45]One’s conception of his/her relatedness to other individualsCommittee members with a high relational identity orientation may take great steps to build relationships within the group and will likely be more trusted as well.Need for Affiliation [33]An overlapping common factor among group members that motivates them to view each other as trustworthyThis collective need helps a committee build a shared level of trust amongst members and within the group.Standing in the Group [38]A person’s inclusion or membership in a group (e.g. power or hierarchy differentials)An individual’s position, whether specified (e.g.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Trust in Group Decisions: a scoping review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Trust is a critical component of competency committees given their high-stakes decisions. Research from outside of medicine on group trust has not focused on trust in group decisions, and “group trust” has not been clearly defined. The purpose was twofold: to examine the definition of trust in the context of group decisions and to explore what factors may influence trust from the perspective of those who rely on competency committees through a proposed group trust model. Methods The authors conducted a literature search of four online databases, seeking articles published on trust in group settings. Reviewers extracted, coded, and analyzed key data including definitions of trust and factors pertaining to group trust. Results The authors selected 42 articles for full text review. Although reviewers found multiple general definitions of trust, they were unable to find a clear definition of group trust and propose the following: a group-directed willingness to accept vulnerability to actions of the members based on the expectation that members will perform a particular action important to the group, encompassing social exchange, collective perceptions, and interpersonal trust. Additionally, the authors propose a model encompassing individual level factors (trustor and trustee), interpersonal interactions, group level factors (structure and processes), and environmental factors. Conclusions Higher degrees of trust at the individual and group levels have been associated with attitudinal and performance outcomes, such as quality of group decisions. Developing a deeper understanding of trust in competency committees may help these committees implement more effective and meaningful processes to make collective decisions. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12909-019-1726-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trust in Group Decisions: a scoping review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Issues are less likely to arise if members have task and role clarity, recognise their interdependence, feel a shared responsibility and value others’ contributions ( Yang, 2014 ). Team- and trust-building activities that prompt self-monitoring and reflection on behaviour and interpersonal relations may help.…”

Section: Literature Review: Challenges Of Temporary Teamsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Team- and trust-building activities that prompt self-monitoring and reflection on behaviour and interpersonal relations may help. During team formation, members can be encouraged to share their values and expectations and agree group norms, highlighting and valuing both commonalities such as team membership and goals, and distinct sub-group identities ( Kreindler et al , 2012 ; Yang, 2014 ).…”

Section: Literature Review: Challenges Of Temporary Teamsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How hospital survey teams function

Boyd

Ross

Robertson

et al. 2018

JHOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to understand how inspection team members work together to conduct surveys of hospitals, the challenges teams may face and how these might be addressed.Design/methodology/approachData were gathered through an evaluation of a new regulatory model for acute hospitals in England, implemented by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) during 2013-2014. The authors interviewed key stakeholders, observed inspections and surveyed and interviewed inspection team members and hospital staff. Common characteristics of temporary teams provided an analytical framework.FindingsThe temporary nature of the inspection teams hindered the conduct of some inspection activities, despite the presence of organisational citizenship behaviours. In a minority of sub-teams, there were tensions between CQC employed inspectors, healthcare professionals, lay people and CQC data analysts. Membership changes were infrequent and did not appear to inhibit team functioning, with members displaying high commitment. Although there were leadership authority ambiguities, these were not problematic. Existing processes of recruitment and selection, training and preparation and to some extent leadership, did not particularly lend themselves to addressing the challenges arising from the temporary nature of the teams.Research limitations/implicationsConducting the research during the piloting of the new regulatory approach may have accentuated some challenges. There is scope for further research on inspection team leadership.Practical implicationsIssues may arise if inspection and accreditation agencies deploy temporary, heterogeneous survey teams.Originality/valueThis research is the first to illuminate the functioning of inspection survey teams by applying a temporary teams perspective.

show abstract

“…Butchibabu and Sparano-Huiban [9] found that ways of team communication have lots of things to the level of team performance, and during communication, actual needs of team members should get more concern instead of simple exchange of information. Yang [10] pointed out that team trust is a vital factor in team performance, but whether it could be used in multiple SCRUM project still remain to be confirmed. Peltokorpi and Hasu [11] suggest that the impact of team innovation on team performance is increasing.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%