高新技术企业中的团队反思:量表开发与两层次验证

科研管理 ›› 2012, Vol. ›› Issue (10): 26-37,105.

高新技术企业中的团队反思:量表开发与两层次验证

张文勤¹, 孙锐²

1. 南京财经大学工商管理学院, 江苏南京 210046;
2. 中国人事科学研究院, 北京 100101

收稿日期:2011-03-13 修回日期:2011-10-19 出版日期:2012-10-27 发布日期:2012-10-22
基金资助:
教育部人文社会科学研究项目(10YJC630390);国家自然科学基金项目(71102148;71172109);江苏高校优势学科建设工程项目资助。

The structure and measurement of team reflexivity in high technology firms

Zhang Wenqin¹, Sun Rui²

1. School of Business Administration, Nanjing University of Finance and Economics, Nanjing 210046, China;
2. Chinese Academy of Personnel Science, Beijing 100101, China

Received:2011-03-13 Revised:2011-10-19 Online:2012-10-27 Published:2012-10-22

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 团队反思是影响团队创新与团队效能的一个关键因素。本研究通过借鉴国外相关研究结论、国内企业访谈与小组讨论,编制了高新技术企业中团队反思问卷。对预试成员样本数据的探索性因素分析表明,团队反思为三因素结构,即任务反省、过程反省与行动调整;对正式研究成员样本数据的验证性因素分析证实了结构模型的合理性;对所有团队样本数据的两层次验证性因素分析表明,团队反思的三因素结构在个体层次与团队层次均得到了验证。团队层次数据的描述性分析以及团队反思与团队创新的关系分析表明,团队反思量表具有较好的信度和效度。

关键词: 团队反思, 团队反省, 行动调整, 两层次验证

Abstract: Team reflexivity has been identified as a possible important determinant of team effectiveness. The structure of team reflexivity was explored in China, and the Team Reflexivity Scale (TRS) was developed. After looking up key papers from the cited references, interviews and survey were conducted to obtain items for the TRS. And then, empirical and statistical methods were employed to assess the structure and psychometric properties of the TRS. The exploratory factor analysis shows that team reflexivity contains three dimensions. The three dimension constructs are confirmed by using a confirmatory factor analysis on the confirmation sample with 352 staffs. In both samples, three factors of reflexivity are identified. They are labeled task reflection, process reflection, and action adaptation. And then, the two-level structure of TRS is assessed by means of Multi-level Confirmatory Factor Analysis (MCFA) on all samples, indicating that the three dimension constructs of team reflexivity could be used both at individual and team levels. Statistics from individual and team level shows good psychometric properties for the scale in both studies. It is concluded that the scale forms a valid instrument to assess team reflexivity in high technology firms.

Key words: team reflexivity, team reflection, action adaptation, two-level CFA

中图分类号:

F270

张文勤, 孙锐. 高新技术企业中的团队反思:量表开发与两层次验证[J]. 科研管理, 2012, (10): 26-37,105.

Zhang Wenqin, Sun Rui. The structure and measurement of team reflexivity in high technology firms[J]. Science Research Management, 2012, (10): 26-37,105.

参考文献

[1] Edmondson, A. C. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1999,44: 350-383.
[2] West, M. A. Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups [J]. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 2002,51: 355-424.
[3] Hackman, J. R. Groups that work (and those that don’t) [M]. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990.
[4] Sicotte. H, Langley. A. Integration mechanisms and R&D project performance [J]. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 2001,17: 1-37.
[5] West, M. A. Reflexivity and work group effectiveness: A conceptual integration. In West M A.(Ed.), Handbook of work group psychology [M]. Chichester, England: Wiley, 1996.
[6] West, M. A. Reflexivity, revolution and innovation in work teams. In M. M. Beyerlein, D. A. Johnson, & S. T. Beyerlein (Eds.), Product development teams (Vol. 5, pp. 1 29) [M]. Stamford, CT: JAI Press. 2000.
[7] 张文勤,石金涛. 团队反思的影响效果与影响因素分析 [J]. 外国经济与管理, 2008(4): 59-64.
[8] Edmonson, A. C. The local and variegated nature of learning in organizations: A group-level perspective [J]. Organization Science, 2002, 13: 128-146.
[9] Gurtner, A., Tschan, F., Semmer, N., & Nagele, C.. Getting groups to develop good strategies: Effects of reflexivity interventions on team process, team performance, and shared mental models [J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2007, 102: 127-142.
[10] West, M. A., Hirst G, Richter A, Shipton H. Twelve steps to heaven: Successfully managing change through developing innovative teams [J].European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 2004, 13: 269-299.
[11] Tjosvold, D., Chun, H., Ziyou, Y. Conflict management and task reflexivity for team in-role and extra-role performance in China [J]. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 2003, 14: 141-163.
[12] Swift, T. A., West, M. A. Reflexivity and group processes: Research and practice. Sheffield: The ESRC Centre for Organization and Innovation, 1998.
[13] Argyris, C. Learning and teaching: a theory of action perspective [J]. Journal of Management Education, 1997, 21: 9-27.
[14] Nielson, R. P. Woolman’s "I am we" triple-loop action-learning: Origin and application in organization ethics [J]. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1993, 29, 117-138.
[15] Gollwitzer, P. M.. The volitional benefits of planning. In P. M. Gollwitzer, & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action: Linking cognition and motivation to behavior [M]. New York: Guilford Press, 1996.
[16] Carter, S., West, M. A. Reflexivity, effectiveness, and mental health in BBC-TV production teams [J]. Small Group Research, 1998, 29: 583-601.
[17] Schippers, M. C., Den, H. D., Koopman, P. L., Wienk J A. 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: 779-802.
[18] Tjosvold, D., Tang, M., & West, M. A. Reflexivity for team innovation in China: The contribution of goal interdependence [J]. Group and Organization Management, 2004,29: 540-559.
[19] Hoegl, M., Parboteeah, K. P., Team reflexivity in innovative projects [J]. R&D Management, 2006, 36: 113-125.
[20] Dreu, D. Team innovation and effectiveness: The importance of minority dissent and reflexivity [J]. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,2002, 11, 285-298.
[21] Somech, A. The effects of leadership style and team process on performance and. innovation in functionally heterogeneous teams [J]. Journal of Management, 2006, 32: 132 157.
[22] Dreu, D., Carsten, K. W. Cooperative outcome interdependence, task reflexivity, and team effectiveness: A motivated information processing perspective [J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2007,92: 628-638.
[23] Schippers, M. C., Deanne, N., Hartog, D. Reflexivity in teams: A measure and correlates [J].Applied Psychology: An International Review, 2007, 56: 189-211.
[24] Widaman, K. F. Common Factor Analysis Versus Principal Component Analysis: Differential Bias in Representing Model Parameters [J]. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1993, 28: 263-311.
[25] James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. Rwg: an assessment of within group interrater agreement [J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1993, 78, 306-309.
[26] Bartko, J. J. On various intraclass correlation reliability coefficients [J]. Psychological bulletin, 1976, 83:762-765.
[27] James, L. R. Agregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement [J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1982, 67: 219-229.
[28] Lovelace, K., Shapiro, D. L., & Weingart, L. R. Maximizing cross-functional new product teams’ innovativeness and constraint adherence: A conflict communications perspective [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2001, 44: 779-793.
[29] 温忠麟,侯杰泰,马什赫伯特.结构方程模型检验:拟合指数与卡方准则 [J].心理学报, 2004(2): 186-194.
[30] Dyer, N. G., Hanges, P. J., & Hall, N. G. Applying multilevel confirmatory factor analysis techniques to the study of leadership [J]. Leadership Quarterly, 2005, 16: 149-167.
[31] Muthen, B. O.. Multilevel covariance structure analysis [J]. Sociological Methods and Research, 1994,22:376-398.
[32] Du, T. M., & Du, T. S. Interactive LISREL: User’s Guide [M]. Lincolnwood, IL: SSI, 2001.
[33] Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical and statistical consideration [J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1986, 51: 1173-1182.