Group and Interpersonal Communication Research Lab at Cornell
  • Home
  • News
  • People
  • Research Projects
  • Want to Join the Lab?
  • Blog
  • Papers
  • Our Collaborators
  • Links

"Team Player" Across Cultures - Dom, Alston, and Ruoxi

10/28/2020

 
After reading the journal article “We want a team player: A formative cross-cultural investigation in the United States, China, and South Korea” (Park, Lee, Westerman, & Guan, 2019) with the GRIP lab, Dominique, Ruoxi, and Alston discuss their thoughts on the paper.

In this article, the researchers found that people who belong to different cultural groups may consider a team player’s responsibilities differently. For example, U.S Americans and Chinese participants were shown to prefer a balance between task and social roles, whereas Korean participants were shown to prioritize tasks over social roles. A reason for this, as attributed by the authors, is that different cultures may emphasize tasks and social roles differently (Park et al., 2019).

Ruoxi thinks the implications of this study could be furthered by follow-up studies on the effect that heterogeneous perception of team player’s responsibilities might have on multicultural teams. Since many companies, and even school projects, incorporate peer reviews in evaluating individual teammate member’s contribution, the result of this study might have practical implications on how to conduct these peer reviews in multicultural teams. For instance, Ruoxi wonders if a multicultural team receives vague instructions on how to evaluate teammates, diversity within the team might decrease over time as members who hold different standards of performance receive an unfavorable evaluation from the majority of the team. Ruoxi recognizes that this hypothesis might be a long shot from the current study as many other factors, such as whether people contribute to teamwork in accordance with their own conception of a good teammate or the groups’ expectations, need to be tested. Nonetheless, her general hope is to see future studies complement the current research with more data on the relationship between cultural identity and group dynamics, backed by specific behaviors of the people studied in supplement to the interviews.

Alston is skeptical about the findings because he thinks it is problematic for the authors to overgeneralize the populations of people who are involved. People in the United States, Korea, and China are most likely all very different in the way they interact with their teams. Therefore, he thinks that it is quite unfair to attribute a certain characteristic to a whole group of people. Not only can overgeneralization result in the formation of stereotypes of individuals, but it can also deter people from branching out and trying new ways to work with their teams.

Dominique agrees with Alston that the authors did overgeneralize about the way each culture typically views “team player” performance. She thinks it would be interesting to expand this study, and see how diverse teams should interact with each other.  With increased globalization and the increased use of virtual meetings, it is likely that more work teams will become more diverse and have people from different backgrounds and different cultures. If the study is true in their assumption that some cultures view the term “team player” in different ways than understanding that impact could benefit many work teams.

As for the implications of the study, we agree that this article reinforces the importance of having more diverse teams. From our experiences, we saw that groups work best when individual team members have different leadership styles. For example, if everyone in the group wants to constantly lead the discussion, they might clash in an argument. Therefore, if the results of the article were to be more credible, it would imply that we should encourage more diverse teams even more heavily.

On Demographic Heterogeneity - Tianke and Katherine

10/1/2020

 
After reading "Tensions Between Diversity and Shared Leadership: The Role of Team Political Skill" (Xu, Chiu, & Treadway, 2019) with the GRIP Lab, Tianke and Katherine discuss their thoughts on the paper.

Tianke and Katherine are really glad to have been part of the discussion about the function of “demographic heterogeneity” on shared leadership in teams. In their article, Xu et al. argue that demographic diversity — in gender and race specifically — inhibits people’s motivation to share leadership roles with others. Since people with similar backgrounds are more likely to identify with their team, they are more likely to hold shared group values and engage in a higher magnitude of shared leadership. On the other hand, people who have different backgrounds tend to be less inclined to share leadership with others in their group (Xu et al., 2019). 

Katherine thinks some parts of the article to be valid and relatable to her own experiences and observations. Over the course of her life, she has gravitated toward people who were similar to her. However, she believes that some parts of the article may be overgeneralizations. There are many forms of diversity, including age, major, socioeconomic status, and political ideology. She wonders what the results of a study that examined these other forms of diversity while controlling for ethnicity and gender would look like.

Tianke, on the other hand, feels strongly that diverse groups work best together. He believes that humans are meant to experience new ideas, to meet new people, to embrace new ideologies and perspectives, and to grow. To do that, they need to encounter demographic heterogeneity in their lives. In a group work setting, this demographic diversity matures discussion, helping the group draw a fuller picture of the world by combining the perspectives of many people’s eyes.

Katherine and Tianke both also had some reflections about Zoom breakout rooms. Katherine believes that through random allocation, breakout rooms eliminate personal biases in creating groups, so everyone has the chance to interact with people they might never have otherwise. However, she has found, in general, that communication through a screen is more awkward and uncomfortable than communication in person, that it is harder to develop and maintain connections with other people, especially when some of them turn their cameras off. Although diversity is promoted, Katherine wonders if the tempering effects of political skill could be hindered. She also wonders how relationships forged solely through on-screen calls would carry over in real-life –– whether they’ll grow weaker or stronger.

Tianke, on the other hand, recently had an experience that showed more promise for relationships within heterogeneous groups, even those in virtual environments. This past Friday, he organized an event called “Space Gathering,” where he invited eight of his friends who didn’t know each other beforehand to a Zoom meeting where they had a dialogue for two hours. He purposely selected the participants to promote diversity, as there was a mix of genders, majors, personality types, and nationalities. He designed several group activities to see if connections could be made among these “familiar” strangers. To maximize heterogeneity for each team, he pre-arranged breakout rooms so that every person would meet two people who have different backgrounds with them. After each person shared two identities and real stories behind, Tianke told the groups to use generative and reflective listening skills to validate each others’ stories and feelings so that each person could be heard.

As Xu et al. suggest in their article, people are disinclined to share leadership roles with dissimilar others. Tianke expected his friends’ discussion to go into a dead end; however, that was not the case. During the debrief, people shared that their natural curiosity towards those who were different inspired them to explore the others’ stories, experiences, and ideas.

“As a person who always interacts with people who are similar to me and who usually stays in my comfort zone, I was really excited to listen to people’s diverse experiences and imagine their living environments,” one participant reflected. “I agree,” replied another participant. “My desire to connect with people dissimilar to me, along with our shared curiosity, made us consciously active when engaging in conversation, motivating us to seek an optimal solution using group efforts.”

Virtual Teamwork During COVID-19 - Winny and Carina

9/24/2020

 
Winny, a returning Research Assistant, and Carina, a new Research Assistant joining the GRIP Lab this semester, offer their perspectives on these unprecedented times, and how new online formats may influence what virtual teamwork looks like.

How does virtual team differ from in-person group work? Does the lack of physical presence and interaction affect online teamwork attitudes and teammates' perceptions of each other?  Can virtual teamwork actually be more efficient than in-person meet-up? Six months into the pandemic, we are, and probably many others, are suffering from Zoom fatigue. Without a vaccine, online collaboration is going to continue for the foreseeable future, but it may be here to stay even after the pandemic. Many companies, especially in the tech industry, are thinking of allowing their employees to continue working from home after the pandemic. Remote work and online collaboration may be the future of work. These new collaborations will inevitably lead to new environmental stressors. Without a shared physical space, people’s access to resources will be variable and unequal.

With the end of the pandemic nowhere in sight, all of us are forced to adjust to this new normal. With little physical intimacy and few facial and body language cues, remote work can lead to fatigue, boredom and a lack of focus. To maximize student engagement, more and more professors are adopting a discussion-based approach -- incorporating music, polls as well as shortening their lectures to give more time to students to discuss amongst themselves. At an individual level, to reduce Zoom fatigue, we should always leave time between video meetings to stretch, walk around, and have a drink. To enhance productivity at the team level, we will probably need to take a more active stance and be even more attentive to each other’s needs so no one feels left out of the conversation. There is no perfect solution, and we have to be adaptable as we go.

​We are living through a historical time that brings tremendous suffering but also unique learning opportunities. Luckily, what we had and will personally experience will provide rich details and insights into both the strengths and weaknesses of virtual teamwork. On a positive note, Zoom meetings may actually promote more group diversity. The randomization of Zoom breakout rooms eliminates the formation of in-groups and provides an open space allowing people of different personalities and backgrounds to mingle.

Group Projects: An Opportunity for Collaboration or an Excuse for Free-loading?

4/29/2019

 
Picture
Picture

Group projects are a divisive topic amongst students. The phrase has some singing from the rooftops and others running for the hills. But, why is this teaching tool so polarizing? Deanika and Julian, both juniors in CALS, give their take on the matter.


Deanika:
I don't have any classes that involve group work this semester, and honestly I'm kind of sad about it. Unpopular opinion, but I love working in teams. I haven't experienced the unfortunate situation of "free-loaders" or unresponsive members that conveniently only contribute once group evaluations start circulating. On the contrary, all of my groups in the past have involved dedicated members interested in collaboration and producing a final product that reflects a diversity in thought and an array of unique perspectives. I see group work as a well-oiled machine. Deadlines are met, communication flows smoothly, and everyone contributes in a valuable way. To me, I enjoy working in teams because I find that "bouncing ideas" off of others is a good way to fuel meaningful discussions, which can take interesting and new turns that may have not been explored through individual work. Maybe I've just picked the right classes or gotten lucky with group assignments, but whatever the case, I must say, I'm a fan of teams.

Julian:
My experiences with group projects at Cornell range from tolerable to unbearable. To me, the most important part of a successful group project is having a defined structure. One way this can be achieved is for the group to draft a team charter at the outset of the project. The team charter outlines expectations for how the group interacts and the expectations of each member. I had a class in the fall that had a semester-long group project. The professor had each team complete a team charter when we were halfway through the project. This was ineffective because norms were already established in our group. My team members slacked and I did the majority of the work. One of my semester-long group projects sophomore year was much better. The professor provided structure by requiring the group to meet with a TA several times throughout the process. These meetings kept us on track and receiving feedback from the teaching team was incredibly helpful to track our progress. I’m currently working on a one-time group project in which there is no structure. We did not create a team charter, we do not have any meetings planned, and we’re receiving no feedback from the professor. One of my team members responded to our group chat with, “What is this for? I’m in Alaska.” It’s my worst nightmare, but I find solace in the fact that I’m taking the class pass-fail.

So, is it all luck? As students, should we just cross our fingers and hope to get groups like Deanika’s? But, what if we end up like Julian? Do we just bite our tongues and grind out the entire assignment?

Our thoughts: No!!

There needs to be greater standardization in group projects, so as to ensure more consistent experiences across the board. We believe this can be achieved through efforts on both the professor’s side as well as the student’s. Drawing back on what Julian said, professors should have students charter the workload in order to ensure personal accountability. This diminishes the likelihood of free-loading in that an individual will be held responsible for specific aspects of the project. Therefore, if these aspects are incomplete or done poorly, that person alone will face the consequences. Additionally, professors should periodically check in with teams to ensure that the group is making progress. On the student’s side, the active group members should work to make sure that each individual feels valued. Most of the times, students slack-off because they feel their opinions will not be well-received. This can be accomplished by reaching out to more passive group members individually and specifically asking them to contribute. Keeping a positive attitude is also critical in ensuring that all feel welcome and in keeping tension at bay. When it comes down to it, group success stems from how the mindsets of each individual member come together to form a cohesive goal. If there are discrepancies in thought, this will hinder group success and likely lead to an ineffective end product. Therefore, the last component necessary to achieve optimal group project conditions is communication. This tool, when used effectively, creates an intra-group dialogue aimed at unifying the team so that everyone is on the same page.

Welcome!

3/16/2019

 
Picture
Welcome to the Group and Interpersonal Communication Lab (GRIPLab) blog!  We are excited to expand our lab’s effort by merging current knowledge in the field with outreach. We will post ideas and tips on managing groups and group projects.  These posts are based on what we’ve learned from our own data and experiences, and from reading literature relevant to teamwork from a wide variety of fields. You will read our thoughts about topics ranging from group identity and environmental sustainability, to gender identity and teamwork in virtual environments, to college student group projects, and many more!  We hope faculty and students alike will benefit from reading some of our insights, and that you will find some useful information to help you in whatever group situations you encounter.
 
Did you know that the average Cornell student has a class group project every semester, and will have been involved in 9 different group experiences by the time of graduation? Our first blog post will feature a debate by Deanika Lontoc-Preuss and Julian Robison on the (de)merits of group projects. Stay tuned!

    Archives

    October 2020
    September 2020
    April 2019
    March 2019

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.