2. Questions from Lane Sherman’s Session Managing conflict (quick resolution)? Strategies for team effectiveness? Assessing teams?

3. Icebreaker

4. Teamwork at RRU (Gergen 2009; Michaelson et al, 2002) LTM – Philosophy Program - Outcome Course - Activity

5. Based on research from 2015 How can the Coaching and Counselling Centre better understand how stakeholders define ‘success’ in student teams and subsequently improve its ability to provide support to these learning teams? What are the attributes and processes of teamwork in the context of a successful student- learning team at RRU?

6. Inquiry Approach Qualitative Approach – Action research engagement (ARE) (Rowe et al, 2013) Participants – 19: 10 BAPC students, 3 BAPC admin/faculty, 6 support services professionals (CTET, Student Services) Method – Qualitative, (Survey, Focus Groups) Data Analysis – Iterative (Descriptive → Thematic)

7. Descriptive Summary of Findings

8. Making Sense of Team Success

9. Dimensions of success (Li et al, 2013; Salas et al, 2005; Wenger, 1999) Outcomes (Performance) Social processes (communication, respect, celebration) Knowledge processes (learning, reflecting)

10. Integrating dimensions of success (de Dreu et al, 2008; Schippers et al, 2012; Schippers et al, 2014) HighStalemates, indecision Debate Ignoring others’ ideas Facipulating Advocacy, deception Willingness to disagree Independence Individual reflection Problem solving Dialogue Information pooling Collaborative reasoning Attention to others’ ideas Group reflexivity Low Social loafing Inflexible forcing, vetoing Maintaining harmony Mutual enhancement Group centredness Directive leadership Pressure on deviants Pro selfPro social Social Motivations Knowledge Motivations

11. Supporting success across process dimensions High epistemicPro social Person- based Need for cognition (+) Openness to experience (+) Need for closure (-) Pro social orientation (+) Agreeableness (+) Disposition to trust (+) Cultural collectivism (+) Situation- based Accountability to process (+) Preference diversity (+) Strong minorities (+) Time pressure/urgency (-) Environmental noise (-) Autocratic leadership (-) Cooperative reward system (+) Instructions to cooperate (+) Pro social norms, climate (+) Collective identity (+) Anticipated future interactions (+) Past cooperation (+)

12. 4 Square

13. From groups to teams Typology of group work (Bedwell et al, 2013) Provisional progression of group work (Johnson & Johnson, 1999) CoordinationCooperationCollaboration Teamwork Cooperation Coordination

14. Provisional Answers Managing conflict Aligning teams across dimensions Team effectiveness Promoting high epistemology, pro social Assessing teams HE/Pro Social = exceeds expectations

15. Dialogue…

16. Next sessions… Session 2 – November 2, 9:00-10:30 am Learning in community – knowledge processes and team success Designing for successful learning Session 3 – November 30, 10:30-12:00 am Team assignments Outcomes Assessments

17. References Bedwell, W., L., Wildman, J. L., Diaz Granados, D., Salazar, M., Kramer, W. S., & Salas, E. (2012). Collaboration at work: An integrative multilevel conceptualization. Human Resource Management Review, 22(2), 128–145. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2011.11.007 De Dreu, C. K., Nijstad, B. A., & van Knippenberg, D. (2008). Motivated information processing in group judgment and decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12(1), 22-49. Edmondson, A. C., Dillon, J. R., & Roloff, K. S. (2007). Three perspectives on team learning. The Academy of Management Annals, 1(1), 269–314. doi:10.1080/078559811 Gergen, K. (2009). An Invitation to Social Construction (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Making cooperative learning work. Theory Into Practice, 38(2), 67. Li, A., Cropanzano, R., & Bagger, J. (2013). Justice climate and student justice climate: A closer look. Small Group Research, 44, 563–592. doi:10.1177/1046496413498119

18. Michaelsen, L. K., Knight, A. B., & Fink, L. D. (2002). Team-based learning : A transformative use of small groups. Westport, Conn: Praeger. Pardy, M. (2015). Student success on student learning teams at Royal Roads University (Masters Thesis, Royal Roads University, Victoria, Canada). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10170/845. Salas, E., Sims, D. E., & Burke, C. S. (2005). Is there a “Big Five” in teamwork? Small Group Research, 36(5), 555–599. doi:10.1177/1046496405277134 Schippers, M. C., Edmondson, A. C., & West, M. A. (2014). Team reflexivity as an antidote to team information-processing failures. Small Group Research, 45(6), 731-769. Schippers, M. C., West, M. A., & Dawson, J. F. (2012). Team reflexivity and innovation: The moderating role of team context. Journal of Management, 41(3), 769-788 Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press

19. Teams as Communities of Practice CoP Construct (Wenger, 1998) Practice (doing) Meaning (knowing) Community (belonging) Team Construct Performance Knowledge Processes Social Processes