team identity
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

78
(FIVE YEARS 22)

H-INDEX

14
(FIVE YEARS 2)

2021 ◽  
pp. 204138662110613
Author(s):  
Fabiola H. Gerpott ◽  
Rudolf Kerschreiter

In this conceptual paper, we define a person's meeting mindset as the individual belief that meetings represent opportunities to realize goals falling into one of three categories: personal, relational, and collective. We propose that in alignment with their respective meeting mindsets, managers use specific leadership claiming behaviors in team meetings and express these behaviors in alignment with the meeting setting (virtual or face-to-face) and their prior experiences with their employees. Employees’ responses, however, are also influenced by their meeting mindsets, the meeting setting, and prior experiences with their managers. The interplay between managers’ leadership claiming behavior and their employees’ responses shapes leader–follower relations. Embedded in the team context, the emerging leader–follower relations impact the meaning of meetings. We outline match/mismatch combinations of manager–employee meeting mindsets and discuss the influence that a manager and employee can have on each other's meeting mindset through their behavior in a meeting. Plain Language Summary Have you ever had the experience of entering a team meeting and quickly realizing that your idea of how the meeting conversation should be approached did not align with your boss's understanding of the meeting purpose? This is indeed a common experience in meetings between managers and their employees. While we understand much about the communication dynamics that occur in meetings, we know less about what motivates people to communicate in certain ways in meetings. In this conceptual paper, we classify people's understanding of meetings as being driven by one of three purposes: [1] to strategically position and promote themselves (which reflects a personal meeting mindset), [2] to shape collaborations and to ensure reciprocation (which reflects a relational meeting mindset), or [3] to strengthen the team identity and increase the willingness to go the extra mile for the team (which reflects a collective meeting mindset). Meeting mindsets shape how people enact their leader or follower role in meetings—that is, how a manager exhibits leadership and how employees react. However, managers’ and employees’ meeting mindsets may not necessarily match, which can trigger tensions and may ultimately change the way in which managers or employees define the meaning of meetings. Our research helps managers to comprehend the reasoning behind their own and other people's meeting behavior and may promote reflection on one's leadership approach, particularly in a team meeting context. It can also help employees to grasp the power they can have in terms of actively shaping their managers’ meeting mindsets.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Nicholas Andrew Wilson

<p>In sports teams, the way in which leaders such as coaches and captains communicate with players is vital to the success of the team. However, despite extensive psychological and sociological research on sport, it has rarely been a site of linguistic research. Like many sports, rugby has many traditions and ideologies that influence the way in which teams form identities. This thesis explores the way in which leadership is enacted and group identity forged through communicative practice in a New Zealand rugby team. Using authentic interactions collected using an ethnographic methodology, an analysis is presented of how discourse strategies are negotiated within the team, establishing practices that signify membership of communities of practice (CofPs) and creating identities for individuals as leaders. Leadership discourse is itself viewed as a sociolinguistic practice and defines one of the CofPs within the team. Using the concepts of front and back-stage (Goffman 1959; Richards 2006) to describe different conceptual spaces in which interactions occur, I suggest that discourse in the rugby team is a spatialised practice; the performance of a particular style of leadership constructs the space in which it takes place as public or private, with each contributing to an effective leadership performance. The construction of leadership identity is analysed in terms of stance and indexicality, linking locally constructed identities and discourse strategies to macro identity categories and socio-cultural ideologies. One of the ways in which this is examined is through the role of ritual and formulaic language in the team, showing that while communicative practice is negotiated in the back stage, in the front stage its performance serves to construct team identity while aiming to motivate the players. Furthermore, the structural nature of the game of rugby (i.e. players’ positional requirements) is examined in relation to the different communicative strategies adopted by positionally segregated groups. It is suggested that these groups, although institutionally defined, create meaning for themselves as CofPs by negotiating a shared way of communicating in enacting their role in the team. In sum, this research uses CofP theory to examine how leaders emerge through their linguistic practices. Furthermore, it locates leadership as a spatialised practice and examines how leaders influence the discursive construction of group identity. Finally, the analysis also makes a valuable contribution to the field of sociolinguistic research on sport, a small yet growing area.</p>


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Nicholas Andrew Wilson

<p>In sports teams, the way in which leaders such as coaches and captains communicate with players is vital to the success of the team. However, despite extensive psychological and sociological research on sport, it has rarely been a site of linguistic research. Like many sports, rugby has many traditions and ideologies that influence the way in which teams form identities. This thesis explores the way in which leadership is enacted and group identity forged through communicative practice in a New Zealand rugby team. Using authentic interactions collected using an ethnographic methodology, an analysis is presented of how discourse strategies are negotiated within the team, establishing practices that signify membership of communities of practice (CofPs) and creating identities for individuals as leaders. Leadership discourse is itself viewed as a sociolinguistic practice and defines one of the CofPs within the team. Using the concepts of front and back-stage (Goffman 1959; Richards 2006) to describe different conceptual spaces in which interactions occur, I suggest that discourse in the rugby team is a spatialised practice; the performance of a particular style of leadership constructs the space in which it takes place as public or private, with each contributing to an effective leadership performance. The construction of leadership identity is analysed in terms of stance and indexicality, linking locally constructed identities and discourse strategies to macro identity categories and socio-cultural ideologies. One of the ways in which this is examined is through the role of ritual and formulaic language in the team, showing that while communicative practice is negotiated in the back stage, in the front stage its performance serves to construct team identity while aiming to motivate the players. Furthermore, the structural nature of the game of rugby (i.e. players’ positional requirements) is examined in relation to the different communicative strategies adopted by positionally segregated groups. It is suggested that these groups, although institutionally defined, create meaning for themselves as CofPs by negotiating a shared way of communicating in enacting their role in the team. In sum, this research uses CofP theory to examine how leaders emerge through their linguistic practices. Furthermore, it locates leadership as a spatialised practice and examines how leaders influence the discursive construction of group identity. Finally, the analysis also makes a valuable contribution to the field of sociolinguistic research on sport, a small yet growing area.</p>


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. e0250058
Author(s):  
Kerstin Sailer ◽  
Petros Koutsolampros ◽  
Rosica Pachilova

The impact of the physical workplace on behaviors and attitudes at work is a much-studied topic. Major research streams over the last decades investigated either satisfaction with offices in relation to physical comfort, or how layout decisions influenced interaction and collaboration in the workplace with a focus on open-plan offices. Rather little is known on the effect a workplace layout (such as its openness) has on perceptions of staff regarding teamwork, focused work and perceived productivity. We aim to close this gap by taking a differential approach which appreciates detailed variations within open-plan offices. Not every corner of an office is the same, so the question arises whether satisfaction with workspace differs depending on where someone is sitting. Bringing results of a staff survey in the UK headquarters of a global technology company together with a detailed analysis of spatial qualities at desks based on isovist and visual field analysis, we find that staff are less likely to rate their workplace environment favorably when they have higher numbers of desks within their own field of vision; and when they are facing away from the room with a relatively larger area behind their back compared to the area surrounding them. Aspects of teamwork that are negatively affected include sharing information with others, as well as team identity and cohesion. Focused work (concentration) and working productively are impacted even more so with the largest effect sizes throughout. These findings highlight the relevance of investigating detailed spatial qualities of micro-locations in workplace layouts. Our results also raise important questions regarding the current popular practice in workplace design of providing large open-plan offices for technology companies.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cassandra Estep

I investigate how auditors integrate information technology (IT) specialist input into internal control over financial reporting (ICFR) issue classifications. Given the ill-structured nature of evaluating ICFR issues and the impact of these issues on audit quality, combining knowledge from different perspectives is likely beneficial. Drawing on social identity theory, I predict and find that a weaker one-team identity between auditors and IT specialists yields benefits. Auditors with a weaker versus stronger team identity place more weight on IT specialist input for IT-related issues and differentially weight higher and lower quality input for non-IT issues. I also find that more severe ICFR issues drive the predicted results. My study provides insight into how team identity influences auditor integration of input from specialists. The implications of my study are of interest to researchers, regulators, and practitioners, especially as recent firm initiatives encourage a one-team view for auditors and IT specialists.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 317-339
Author(s):  
Timothy de Waal Malefyt ◽  
Johnson Peter

All major US sports are high in superstitions because motivation to win is high and the game outcome is uncertain; athletes purportedly engage in superstitious behavior to reduce anxiety, build individual confidence and cope with uncertainty. Sports is also a male domain, where men traditionally display individual, masculine achievement. We observe magic rituals practiced in a women’s college softball team not as a means to overcome anxiety or display individual prowess, but as a way to blend creative individuality into the unity of the social whole, which manifests as a social narrative of the team. We analyze individual and team magic in two forms –institutionalized magic and individual superstitions – which build idiosyncratic behavior into a collective team dynamic. As such, this essay shows how women use magical power collaboratively. Women on a college softball team partake in practical work and magic, such that participating in magic through empathy and sensing one another creates team identity, allowing the reimagination of forms and outcomes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document