基于激发型信息处理的视角,探讨了合作目标互依性、知识共享和团队反思与科研团队创造力之间的关系,构建了相应的概念模型。运用结构方程模型和225个有效科研团队样本对所提出的假设进行检验。实证研究结果表明,合作目标互依性对科研团队创造力有积极影响;知识共享与团队反思在合作目标互依性与科研团队创造力之间具有完全中介效应,而知识共享对团队反思有正向促进作用。研究结果打开了合作目标影响科研团队创造力的信息处理黑箱,扩展了激发型信息处理视角在团队创造力研究领域中的应用。
Abstract
From a motivated information processing perspective, knowledge sharing as social processing of information and team reflection as cognitive processing of information in the creative process of research team are put forward. A framework that consists of cooperative goal interdependence, knowledge sharing, team reflection, and team creativity is established to describe the effect of cooperative goal interdependence on the creativity of research team. The structural equation modeling is used to analyze the survey data of 225 effective research teams, some conclusions are drawn as follows: Firstly, cooperative goal interdependence has a positive effect on the creativity of research team. Secondly, knowledge sharing and team reflection are found to play a complete mediative role on the relationship between cooperative goal interdependence and team creativity. Thirdly, knowledge sharing has a positive effect on team reflection. These findings make the contribution for opening the black box involving information processing mechanism through which cooperative goal affects the creativity of research team and have extended the applications of motivated information processing perspective to the field of team creativity.
关键词
合作目标互依性 /
团队创造力 /
知识共享 /
团队反思 /
激发型信息处理视角
Key words
cooperative goal interdependence /
team creativity /
knowledge sharing /
team reflection /
motivated information processing perspective
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1] 孙雍君. 科技团体创造力研究的理论背景分析[J]. 科学学研究, 2003, 21(5): 461-466.
[2] Tjosvold D. Cooperative and competitive goal approach to conflict: Accomplishments and challenges[J]. Applied Psychology. 1998, 47(3): 285-313.
[3] Tjosvold D., Tang M., & West M. Reflexivity for team innovation in China: The contribution of goal interdependence[J]. Group & Organization Management. 2004, 29 (5): 540-559.
[4] Baer M., Leenders R., & Oldham G., et al. Win or lose the battle for creativity: the power and perils of intergroup competition[J]. The Academy of Management Journal. 2010, 53 (4): 827-845.
[5] Lu J., Tjosvold D., & Shi K. Team training in China: Testing and applying the theory of cooperation and competition[J]. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 2010, 40(1): 101-134.
[6] 王黎萤, 陈劲. 国内外团队创造力研究述评[J]. 研究与发展管理. 2010, 22(4): 62-68.
[7] De Dreu C., Nijstad B., & van Knippenberg D. Motivated information processing in group judgment and decision making[J]. Personality and Social Psychology Review. 2008, 12 (1): 22-49.
[8] Huang C. Knowledge sharing and group cohesiveness on performance: An empirical study of technology R&D teams in Taiwan[J]. Technovation. 2009, 29(11): 786-797.
[9] West M. A. Reflexivity and work group effectiveness: A conceptual integration.West M. A., (eds.). Handbook of work group psychology[M]. Chichester, England: Wiley, 1996: 555-579.
[10] De Dreu C. Cooperative outcome interdependence, task reflexivity, and team effectiveness: A motivated information processing perspective[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2007, 92 (3): 628-637.
[11] Schippers M., Den Hartog D., & Koopman P., et al. Diversity and team outcomes: The moderating effects of outcome interdependence and group longevity and the mediating effect of reflexivity[J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2003, 24 (6): 779-802.
[12] Hoegl M., & Parboteeah K. Team reflexivity in innovative projects[J]. R&D Management. 2006, 36(2): 113-125.
[13] Kurt L. Field Theory and experiment in social psychology: Concepts and methods [J]. The American Journal of Sociology. 1939, 44(6): 868-896.
[14] West M. A. Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: A integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups[J]. Applied Psychology: An International Review. 2002, 51(3): 355-424.
[15] Wang Z., Chen Y., & Tjosvold D., et al. Cooperative goals and team agreeableness composition for constructive controversy in China[J]. Asia Pacific Journal of Management. 2010, 27 (1): 139-153.
[16] Liao L. Knowledge-sharing in R&D departments: A social power and social exchange theory perspective[J]. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. 2008, 19 (10): 1881-1895.
[17] 高祥宇, 卫民堂, 李伟. 人际信任对知识转移促进作用的研究[J]. 科研管理. 2005, 26(6): 106-114.
[18] 班杜拉·A 著, 林颖 译. 思想和行动的社会基础-社会认知论[M]. 上海:华东师范大学出版社, 2001.
[19] Nonaka I., & Konno N. The concept of "Ba": building a foundation for knowledge creation[J]. California Management Review. 1998, 40(3): 40-54.
[20] Quinn J., Anderson P., & Finkelstein S. Managing professional intellect: making the most of the best[J]. Harvard Business Review. 1996, 74(2): 71-80.
[21] 侯泰杰, 温忠麟, 成子娟. 结构方程模型及其应用[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2004
[22] 徐淑英, 樊景立.b组织与管理研究的实证方法[M]. 北京:北京大学出版社,2008.
[23] Troyer L, & Youngreen R. Conflict and creativity in groups[J]. Journal of Social Issues. 2009, 65 (2): 409-427.
[24] 高鹏, 张凌, 汤超颖, 李媛. 信任与建设性争辩对科研团队创造力影响的实证研究[J]. 中国管理科学. 2008, 16(S1): 561-565.
[25] 王端旭, 薛会娟. 交互记忆系统与团队创造力关系的实证研究[J].科研管理. 2011,32(1): 122-127.
[26] 王黎萤, 陈劲. 研发团队创造力的影响机制研究——以团队共享心智模型为中介[J]. 科学学研究. 2010, 28(3): 420-428.
PDF(1618 KB)
