Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen
Design team performance is a complex phenomenon that involves person, behavior and environment parameters interacting with and influencing each other over time. In this chapter, we propose a quadratic model for team performance that allows for monitoring, improving, and reflecting on design teams at the individual, interactional and environmental levels. This model is an extension of Bandura’s theory of reciprocal causation and a synthesis of concepts from psychology, semiotics, improvisational theater, evolutionary biology, design thinking and innovation practice. We describe the development of the model based on cases of student behavior from a graduate level design course, and discuss its implications for design practice and design research.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Ahmed, S., Wallace, K. M., & Blessing, L. T. (2003). Understanding the differences between how novice and experienced designers approach design tasks. Research in Engineering Design, 14(1), 1–11. CrossRef
Atman, C. J., Adams, R. S., Cardella, M. E., Turns, J., Mosborg, S., & Saleem, J. (2007). Engineering design processes: A comparison of students and expert practitioners. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(4), 359–379. CrossRef
Baird, F., Moore, C. J., & Jagodzinski, A. P. (2000). An ethnographic study of engineering design teams at Rolls-Royce Aerospace. Design Studies, 21(4), 333–355. CrossRef
Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 2(1), 21–41. CrossRef
Bratman, M. (1987). Intention, plans, and practical reason. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Brereton, M., & McGarry, B. (2000, April). An observational study of how objects support engineering design thinking and communication: Implications for the design of tangible media. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 217–224). New York: ACM.
Cash, P. J., Hicks, B. J., & Culley, S. J. (2013). A comparison of designer activity using core design situations in the laboratory and practice. Design Studies, 34(5), 575–611. CrossRef
Chaiklin, S. (2003). The zone of proximal development in Vygotsky’s analysis of learning and instruction. In Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context (Vol. 1, pp. 39–64). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chakrabarti, A., & Blessing, L. T. (2014). An anthology of theories and models of design. London: Springer. CrossRef
Doorley, S., & Witthoft, S. (2011). Make space: How to set the stage for creative collaboration. Hoboken: Wiley.
Edelman, J., & Currano, R. (2011). Re-representation: Affordances of shared models in team-based design. In Design thinking (pp. 61–79). Berlin: Springer.
Edelman, J. A., Leifer, L., Banerjee, B., Sonalkar, N., Jung, M., & Lande, M. (2009). Hidden in plain sight: Affordances of shared models in team based design. DS 58-2: Proceedings of ICED 09, the 17th International Conference on Engineering Design, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Goodwin, C. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96(3), 606–633. CrossRef
Hatchuel, A., & Weil, B. (2003). A new approach of innovative design: An introduction to CK theory. DS 31: Proceedings of ICED 03, the 14th International Conference on Engineering Design, Stockholm.
Jablokow, K. W., & Booth, D. E. (2006). The impact and management of cognitive gap in high performance product development organizations. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 23(4), 313–336. CrossRef
Jung, M., Chong, J., & Leifer, L. (2012, May). Group hedonic balance and pair programming performance: Affective interaction dynamics as indicators of performance. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 829–838). New York: ACM.
Jung, M. F. (2011). Engineering team performance and emotion: Affective interaction dynamics as indicators of design team performance. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.
Jung, M. F. (2016). Coupling interactions and performance: Predicting team performance from thin slices of conflict. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 23(3), 18. CrossRef
Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (1993). The wisdom of teams: Creating the high-performance organization. Harvard Business Press.
Kichuk, S. L., & Wiesner, W. H. (1997). The big five personality factors and team performance: Implications for selecting successful product design teams. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 14(3), 195–221. CrossRef
Kress, G., & Schar, M. (2011). Initial conditions: The structure and composition of effective design teams. DS 68-7: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 11), Lyngby/Copenhagen, Denmark.
Leifer, L. (1998). Design-team performance: Metrics and the impact of technology. In Evaluating Corporate Training: Models and issues (pp. 297–319). New York: Springer. CrossRef
Nicolai, C., Klooker, M., Panayotova, D., Hüsam, D., & Weinberg, U. (2016). Innovation in creative environments: Understanding and measuring the influence of spatial effects on design thinking-teams. In Design Thinking Research (pp. 125–139). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Pressfield, S. (2002). The war of art: Break through the blocks and win your inner creative battles. New York: Black Irish Entertainment.
Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169. CrossRef
Schar, M. F. (2011). Pivot thinking and the differential sharing of information within new product development teams. PhD Dissertation. Stanford University.
Sonalkar, N., Jung, M., & Mabogunje, A. (2011). Emotion in engineering design teams. In Emotional Engineering (pp. 311–326). London: Springer. CrossRef
Sonalkar, N., Mabogunje, A., Hoster, H., & Roth, B. (2016). Developing Instrumentation for design thinking team performance. In Design Thinking Research (pp. 275–289). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Valkenburg, R., & Dorst, K. (1998). The reflective practice of design teams. Design Studies, 19(3), 249–271. CrossRef
Weinberg, U., Nicolai, C., Hüsam, D., Panayotova, D., & Klooker, M. (2014). The impact of space on innovation teams. 19th DMI: Academic design management conference design management in an era of disruption, London.
Wilde, D. J. (2008). Teamology: The construction and organization of effective teams. London: Springer.
- Quadratic Model of Reciprocal Causation for Monitoring, Improving, and Reflecting on Design Team Performance
Neuer Inhalt/© ITandMEDIA, Best Practices für die Mitarbeiter-Partizipation in der Produktentwicklung/© astrosystem | stock.adobe.com