Trust in Teams - Annotated Bibliography Example

Trust in Teams Tutor Institution TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………3 2. Research Design………………………………………………………………4 3. Article Summary………………………………………………………………7 a. Sheila…………………………………………………………………..7 b. Sandra………………………………………………………………….8 c. Eduardo…………………………………………………………………9 4. Critique…………………………………………………………………………10 a. Sheila……………………………………………………………………10 b. Sandra………………………………………………………………….11 c. Eduardo………………………………………………………………..11 5. Appendix………………………………………………………………………13 a. Table 1: Sheila…………………………………………………………13 b. Table 2: Sandra………………………………………………………..14 c. Table 3: Eduardo………………………………………………………15 6. References…………………………………………………………………….16 Trust in Teams Introduction From an emotional point of view, Trust comes across as the act of having confidence in someone or something. It happens when we expose our vulnerabilities to someone or people in the belief that they will not take advantage of this (changingminds.org). Logically thinking, it involves calculation of the possibilities of los and gain, assessing the expected utility using factual performance data with a conclusion that the individual in question will act in a certain manner (changingminds.org). Having known this, as humans we require to trust in other people and to have other people trust in us. Trust acts as the unseen connection or bond that where we take the risks indicated above at many times in life. Trust occurs or is required in many dimensions in life such as in marriages between spouses and other emotional relationships, educational relationships where we trust the teachers, friendships, trust in government to act in the interest of the people and the like. One other dimension where trust is a vital component is in business circles. Article Critique When doing business, sometimes it is impossible to determine the outcomes of taking some ventures such as a business deal, an investment, a recruitment exercise and the like. With this uncertainty it becomes apparent that as businessmen, we put our trust in ourselves, what we are doing and in others. Still in business circles, trust is a fundamental factor that is heavily relied in when it comes to teamwork. To analyze the dynamics of trust in teamwork, this paper shall endeavor to perform a summary, analysis and critique of three research projects. Below are the summary titles of the three articles that are recently published shall provide the baseline for the critique; Sheila Simsarian Webber. Development of Cognitive and Affective Trust in Teams A, Longitudinal Study. SAGE Publications. 2010. Sandra Kiffin-Petersen. Trust; A Neglected Variable in Team Effectiveness Research. The Graduate School of Management, University of Western Australia, Crawley WA Eduardo Salas, Dana E. Sims and C. Shawn Burke. Is there a “Big Five” in Teamwork? University of Central Florida. SAGE Publications. 2011 The three articles were selected based on the common factor of trust between them and the lead article which is: Trust in Teams De Jong, B.A., & Elfring, T. (2010). How does trust affect the performance of ongoing teams? The mediating role of reflexivity, monitoring, and effort. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 535–549. Research Design In any type or form of intrinsic research, there is almost always the use of a detailed and or extensive research design. This thus underscores the importance of having a good research design in your study. A research design is chief to any research as it is the plan indicating how data for analysis will be collected and it includes several parts of characteristics. At this point of the analysis report, evaluation of the research designs used in carrying out the research projects highlighted above with particular attention to the following research design characteristics will be carried out: Research Objectives: This is where the analysis tries to identify what the researcher was aiming to achieve and whether or not it was achieved. Objectives must be clear and concise and must be attainable so that the research question or hypotheses are answered or confirmed respectively. They provide direction as to where the research is going. Theory/Framework Used to Develop the Hypotheses: Every research hypothesis proposed is usually a build up of one or more theories or frameworks used by the researcher and these frameworks will be studied from the articles to understand how the hypotheses proposed came about. A framework is essential in that it progressively chops away the unwanted elements in an effort to disambiguate the research into clear hypotheses. Hypothesis Tested: A hypothesis is usually a prediction of the outcomes of the study which involves the stating of an expected relationship between tow or more variables. The hypothesis statements in the three articles will be identified and examined to determine their relevance and correctness especially with regards to the study outcomes. Were the predictions correct, and if so, how does this contribute to the knowledge base of the particular research and analysis topic. Variables Included: A proper hypothesis must indicate at least two or more variables where variables represent the changing quantities or items that are connected in a cause effect manner. This means that when one variable changes, so does the other positively or negatively (science buddies p1). From this we find that there are three types of variables which the study will be looking for from the articles and these are the independent, dependent and controlled variables (science buddies p1). The critique will aim at discovering how these variables were applied in the hypothesis testing and whether they were correct. Still under this section, any variables controlled by the researcher will also be studied. Type of Research Design: Here the analysis shall try to examine the type of research design used by the researchers and why this is so. Sometimes a researcher may use more than one type of research design and this will also be identified. Research designs tell how a researcher conducted the research in terms of data collection, analysis, interpretation and the like. Data Collection Method: Unlike in the past, nowadays research projects may exploit modern day advancements such as technology in collecting data for the research. This is also another part that will be analyzed to discover what methods the researcher used in collecting data with justification Research Environment: At some point in research projects, researchers need to carry out testing and this requires certain environments according to the type and needs of the research. This environments will be valuated under this section indicating which ones were used in each study from the three above and why this is so. Research environments are basically the surroundings in which the study was carried out. However they may also denote the type of research. Time Dimension: This will aim at understanding whether the time dimension employed in each study was longitudinal or cross sectional with anecdotal justification. Findings: This comes towards the end of each research and shall also come towards the end of this critique. The aim will be to find out what the findings of the three studies were and whether they hypotheses proposed before were supported or not. Future Research Directions: Since a research project cannot be completely exhaustive, it is important for researchers to provide areas or sections that they feel will require future or further study. This will also be analyzed in the article critique. Limitations of the Study: The factors that limited the studies according to the researchers will be listed here or will be highlighted after sifting through each article. Article Summary Sheila Simsarian Webber. Development of Cognitive and Affective Trust in Teams A, Longitudinal Study. SAGE Publications. 2010. In this research article by Sheila Simsarian Webber the researcher endeavors to explore the dynamics of teamwork. In this same dimension she explores one major aspect of teamwork similar to what this article critique is about. This is trust. Her subjects are students who are involved in teams carrying out projects over the course of one semester in a school. She introduces them in the abstract. She delves deeper into the study of trust intrusively characterizing trust in two dimensions which are cognitive and affective trust. Here the two variables are introduced (Webber 2011). She also empirically examines the origin and development of trust that occurs in many dimensions and explores its unique background. This indicates that the study must have been empirical oriented such a filed study. Cognitive trust here, comes up as trust that is as a result of intellectual or logical thinking while affective trust comes out as trust that is as a result of an emotional sense or approach (Mary 1938). Her findings in the research indicates that during the founding and early days of a team, trust emerges as a one dimensional entity without splits and then over time, it now splits to allow emergence of the cognitive and affective components of it. Here, the study findings are highlighted. She also asserts in her research that there are unique factors that immensely affect trust from during its infant stages. Her final conclusion is that the two dimensions of trust have got unequal bearing on team performance so that affective trust has a stronger bearing on team performance in the positive sense as compared to cognitive trust. This could thus means that cohesiveness in a team is largely dependent on the emotional well being of the team players or members so that the motion drives them to trust each other rather than the logic thought that trust is needed. Sandra Kiffin-Petersen. Trust; a Neglected Variable in Team Effectiveness Research.The Graduate School of Management, University of Western Australia, Crawley WA. 2010 In this epistemic article, Mrs. Peterson explores the variables of trust within teams especially in the business or organizational environment. Just like Webber, Mrs. Peterson asserts the multi dimensional structure of trust deeming it to be both cognitive and affective. Her main concern in her research paper is that previous and continuing studies concerned with team work and its characteristics have often neglected the inclusion of trust as a chief player in team work effectiveness (Petersen 2010). This is an indirect stating of one of the objectives of the study. She asserts that there has been no empirical research to underscore the importance of trust in team work despite obvious evidence say from employees in organizations who state the reason for their refusal to participate in teamwork as being the lack of trust. Therefore the objectives of her study are to prove that there has been a stubborn neglect of inclusion of trust as a chief factor in teamwork and to elucidate the conceptualization of trust in work oriented teams and to propose a model that would clear out the smoke surrounding the role of trust in teamwork. The article also endeavors to synthesize the empirical evidence that connotes a relationship between trust and the many strategic determinants of team effectiveness; this serves to state the origins of the hypotheses used. Mrs. Peterson also clearly positions trust within team effectiveness models to create a balance and indicate the important role of trust. Finally the function of trust in teamwork is critiqued and further areas of study or research are proposed concerning this topic. Eduardo Salas, Dana E. Sims and C. Shawn Burke. Is there a “Big Five” in Teamwork? University of Central Florida. SAGE Publications. 2011 Eduardo, Sims and Burke also hold the opinion that much has not been successfully done in the field of research about teamwork. They believe that most of the researches that have been put across have thus been more theoretical than they have been practical. In this sense, it becomes nearly difficult of in fact almost impossible to apply the findings and proposals brought forward from these researches into real life situations concerning team work practically. This provides insight into possible points for the further research section. Their main objective in their research is to prove that it is possible to amalgamate all that researchers have done in the field of teamwork to come up with five core components which are: leadership, shared performance monitoring, adaptability, support behavior, adaptability and team direction. Their other objective was to examine how these main components cannot function solely but require support mechanisms such as shared mentalities, closed ring communication and common trust. They assert that these support mechanisms vary in their importance during the life span of the team. To them, trust is one component that has little variation of importance during the life of the team and that trust is required at all times in the life of the team. These last two statements indicate the origins for hypotheses. Therefore in this study also, we see that trust becomes an important element of teamwork and a dependent variable. Critique Sheila Simsarian Webber. Development of Cognitive and Affective Trust in Teams, a Longitudinal Study. SAGE Publications. 2010. In the above named research, the authors chose to use a descriptive research design which holds for the first objective of the study which was to prove that trust exists in a multi dimensional form. The description from this is satisfactory providing concise examples say like the affection members of a group have with each other which helps to build affective trust or the natural thought that group members have to trust each other for the success of the group which builds cognitive trust. For the second objective of the study which was to empirically examine the origins of trust and its development and the exploration of its background the research design does not hold much. This is because an empirical study requires a design that supports experimentation because it is practical. One of the qualities of a good research design is that it should be able to identify the problem clearly and justify why it was selected (McCall 1998). From this research we see that the researcher was able to come up with the objectives which are to address the problem at hand. The researcher chose this research area because there was the need to discover how trust works in teams. This meant observing how it develops from start to maturity and how it functions. There was the need to identify and valuate the factor that causes team cohesion and performance apart from the physical and practical factors and this was trust. Another quality of a functional or good research design is that it should be able to clearly and explicitly specify hypotheses central to the research problem. From this perspective the researcher was able to provide hypotheses that were both clear and testable and applicable to forecasting the outcome or results of the research. A research design should also be able to clearly describe the data which will be necessary for an adequate hypothesis testing process and the design should also explain how this data will be obtained (McCall 1998). Here we see that this issue was well handled in the empirical research. The methods of analysis employed in analyzing the data collected must also be described and explained in a research design. These methods are the ones that are used to determine whether the hypotheses are true of false. In this empirical research, these methods were fairly explained in the research design The main weakness of this study is that a descriptive research design was used and therefore the empirical data collected could only be described and not empirically analyzed. Also the study was carried out over a short period of time, that is, one school semester which is not sufficient to completely study the dynamics of teamwork with respect to trust. Therefore I feel that the design in this study could be improved by making it both descriptive and explanatory and by allowing it to support more secondary data collection with an expanded time frame of say a year or more. Sandra Kiffin-Petersen. Trust; A Neglected Variable in Team Effectiveness Research. The Graduate School of Management, University of Western Australia, Crawley WA Under this research study, an explanatory research design is used in an effort to explain the relationship between trust and team effectiveness. In this sense the study was aiming to explain why trust is a key factor or plays a major role in team effectiveness. This design is appropriate in achieving this main objective as at the end it helps understand why trust cannot be neglected in research studies concerning teamwork as has been the case before. This research relied mainly on content analysis which is a powerful method of reviewing previous research concerning the research problem. This data collection method thus fits the study because one of its main objectives was to prove that the element of trust has been neglected in many similar studies concerning teamwork. The best way to do this was to employ content analysis. As a research design should also be able to explain the main methods of data analysis, in this research which was a secondary research, this principle was applied minimally by explaining how content collected by content analysis was summarized and conclusions drawn out of it. On the other hand, the main weakness of this research is that it relied heavily on secondary data collection methods such as content analysis to build up its body. This could easily require the researcher to prove their propositions and how they were tested. Therefore I would suggest that the design be improved by allowing it to include a practical approach to data collection in order to empirically prove that trust is key to team effectiveness. Eduardo Salas, Dana E. Sims and C. Shawn Burke. Is there a “Big Five” in Teamwork? University of Central Florida. SAGE Publications. 2011 In this study also, a descriptive research design was used to describe the relationship between the five components of teamwork and their support mechanisms. Description is important as it helps the reader understand what the elements under study are and why they are important or relevant to the study. An explanatory design was also used to explain how this relationship works. Explanation is equally important as after the reader has understood what the elements or variables in the research are, they now need to understand how they relate to each other and what are the expected outcomes as should be stated in the hypothesis. The use of both designs in the study proved appropriate as at the end hypotheses are not just stated but they are also described and explained. The only weakness of the design is that it required only the employment of content analysis and case studies which may defeat the ability to prove hypotheses put forward. This would thus be the area where I would recommend the design be improved to include. Appendix Sheila Simsarian Webber. Development of Cognitive and Affective Trust in Teams A, Longitudinal Study. SAGE Publications. 2010. Research Objectives Theory/Framework Used to Develop the Hypotheses Hypotheses Tested Variables Included (in each hypothesis) and the nature of the variables Researcher Control of Variables Type of Research Design Used To prove the multi dimensional existence of trust. Trust does not just exist as one entity but rather as two which are cognitive and affective and how these two work in teamwork To empirically examine the origins of trust and its development and explain its background. The research would actually perform a filed study to collect tangible data as proof of the importance of trust in teamwork That trust is a factor that exits between humans personally and generally and thus it is also a factor of teamwork. This is a presumption that acts as a theory that guided the creation of the hypothesis and identification of the variables. Theories of cognition and affection such as by Mary E Clarke Successful teamwork requires mutual trust-relational hypothesis Here, successful teamwork is not possible unless there is trust as a factor augmenting it. Cognitive trust-independent Affective teamwork-independent Cognitive trust and affective trust are variables that were tested in the hypothesis which resulted in proof that affective trust is a stronger at building team cohesiveness than cognitive trust. Intellect-mediating Logic-mediating Intellect and logic are variables that had an effect n whether a subject would display cognitive or affective trust. Time-controlled Trust was a factor that depended on time to determine its growth and multi dimensional existence Reifying was employed Descriptive research design Describes the nature of the relationship between the variables of trust and teamwork. Data Collection Method Research Environment Time Dimension Findings Future Research Directions Limitations of the Study Primary data collection The use of observation of students, interviews and questionnaires. The students of a college were studied over a period of a semester as they worked on several projects in teams. They were observed, interviews carried out and questionnaires also used to collect data in the field. Filed research-the study involved subjects as students of a school in the process of teamwork as they went about the team business in the field Longitudinal-as stated in the study topic The sub section of the longitudinal time was the time series as multiple observations were done over time of several units Trust is one dimensional at the onset of teamwork Trust changes into cognitive and affective dimensions over time Affective trust enhances better teamwork than cognitive trust Supports the hypothesis that successful teamwork depends on mutual trust Research on the counter effect of trust on team success if any Why is affective trust stronger in enhancing team cohesion than cognitive trust. The study was limited to a small group The study lasted a short while-one semester which may not be sufficient to fully prove the projected hypotheses. In this research, the researcher was able to apply the research design appropriately to achieve the goals of the study. The study was aiming at proving the multi dimensional existence of trust where the researcher observed the subjects and found that they tended to display more of the affective trust than cognitive trust. Within the limited time frame, the design was able to help the researcher prove the importance of trust in teams. This being an empirical study, the results could be easily analyzed to prove the hypotheses projected. The data collection methods employed under the research design were thus adequate despite the fact that the study had a limited time frame. Sandra Kiffin-Petersen. Trust; a Neglected Variable in Team Effectiveness Research.The Graduate School of Management, University of Western Australia, Crawley WA. 2010 Research Objectives Theory/Framework Used to Develop the Hypotheses Hypotheses Tested Variables Included (in each hypothesis) and the nature of the variables Researcher Control of Variables Type of Research Design Used To prove that trust has not been included in previous researches as a key factor in teamwork. This will help in strengthening the research by portraying it as a model research paper on trust in teamwork. Propose a model indicting the role of trust in teamwork. This opens the way for further research on the role of trust is teamwork. To clarify the conceptualization of trust in work oriented teams. This clearly identifies what trust does in a team and why it is thus important. Teamwork requires team cohesion which can be achieved through trust. This presumption thus helps the researcher identify what possible hypotheses to put across to indicate possible testing of trust as a variable. Teamwork theories such as by Tuckman Bruce: Tuckman's Stages of Group Development 1965 Trust is a key factor in teamwork-descriptive hypothesis Team effectiveness depends on trust-relational hypothesis Teamwork-Dependent. For teamwork to succeed there must be say mutual trust. Effectiveness-Dependent Without trust for example, members of a team may fall apart or into chaos which defeats the effectiveness of the team. Trust-Independent All other factors of teamwork depend on trust for their eventual success Reifying was employed Explanatory research design-Explains the relationship between team effectiveness and trust Data Collection Method Research Environment Time Dimension Findings Future Research Directions Limitations of the Study Secondary-content analysis The researcher relied mostly on previous works done by other researchers to carry out the research and also to prove the non inclusion of trust as a factor of teamwork which is one of the objectives of the study. Case studies This involved looking at real situations where teamwork is practiced either in theory or practice. Content analysis/no particular environment Cross-sectional It is an explanatory research meaning that it does not rely on particular time frames to perform the research. Researchers have neglected trust as a factor in studying teamwork Trust is key to team effectiveness Trust is a multi dimensional construct Trust is a personality composition variable as opposed to a team process variable Empirical research on the role of trust in team effectiveness. In this sense, the term empirical is used to connote practical field research with tangible findings that can be analyzed and interpreted to prove the concepts and theories proposed. The research was not empirical thus no non theoretical proof for hypotheses. Such methods as content analysis and case studies are indeed intrinsic and dynamic but do not transcend the borders of practical proof of research findings. By conducting a content analysis, the researcher was able to achieve most of the goals set out according to the research design. Sifting through numerous academic material affiliated to the research topic, the researcher was able to prove that trust as an element had been seriously neglected in studies conducted to analyze teamwork. From this thus the researcher was able yo substantiate the hypotheses in the research by proving the importance of trust in teams. After proving this importance, the research was able to achieve another objective of the study according to the research design by proposing a model that promotes the important role of trust in teamwork. As an explanatory research, the study explains the relationship between trust and teamwork effectiveness which is relational. Eduardo Salas, Dana E. Sims and C. Shawn Burke. Is there a “Big Five” in Teamwork? University of Central Florida. SAGE Publications. 2011 Research Objectives Theory/Framework Used to Develop the Hypotheses Hypotheses Tested Variables Included (in each hypothesis) and the nature of the variables Researcher Control of Variables Type of Research Design Used To prove that the amalgamation of many researches on teamwork can be used to substantiate the existence of 5 key components of teamwork such as leadership To examine the dependency of these components on support mechanisms such as mutual trust That teamwork depends on certain factors which are complimented by sub factors such as trust. This theory thus builds the hypotheses so that teamwork is dependent, its components dependent and their support mechanisms independent Teamwork depends on several factors such as leadership, performance monitoring, adaptability, support behavior, team direction etc-Relational hypothesis Teamwork components depend on support mechanisms-relational The five components of teamwork require the support mechanisms to function successfully Teamwork-independent Dependent and Independent leadership, performance monitoring, adaptability, support behavior, team direction Independent Support mechanisms-trust, shared mentalities, closed ring communication Reifying was employed Descriptive research design-describes the relationship between key components of teamwork and teamwork, key components of teamwork and support mechanisms Explanatory-Explains how all the above interrelations work Both designs were thus used which augments the study by filling the gap left by the lack of employment of empirical methods for research. Data Collection Method Research Environment Time Dimension Findings Future Research Directions Limitations of the Study Secondary-content analysis The research mainly relied on pats researches to collect and analyze relevant data in order to come up with the findings and conclusions. Content analysis/no particular environment. The study might have been carried out anywhere because there was no particular field work or laboratory work employed in the study. Cross-sectional It is an explanatory research No particular time frames that are part of or positively or negatively affect the research. Team work has five chief components- leadership, performance monitoring, adaptability, support behavior, team direction These components depend on support mechanisms- trust, shared mentalities, closed ring communication Support mechanisms vary in importance according to the team’s life span and the team’s assigned task. How to put into practice research findings on teamwork What or how trust plays its role as a support mechanism for the five components of teamwork. The study was not empirical thus no factual proof. Very little was done in the direction of trust as a particular or key factor in team work. Using a descriptive research design, the researcher in this study was aiming to prove that the many studies carried out concerning teamwork can be analyzed and narrowed down to five key components which are also depended upon other components in order to work effectively. The data was collected from secondary sources as described in the research design so that these sources were analyzed to come up with the prior conclusion. The main limitation of this study was the fact that it was purely from secondary research meaning that empirical data was not collected and used. An empirical research would have provided strong support for the hypotheses proposed and thus the study would have been more factual. Conclusion The main objective of this research article critique was to analyze how research protocols should be applied. One chief area of concern was hoe the research design is formulated and implemented as the backbone or guide to the overall research. To do this critique, three research articles were identified and used and several findings were obtained. Generally, the researches were able to apply their respective research designs appropriately according to the type of research. The main problems were stated and explained. The objectives were measurable and realistic. Such aspects as bias were minimal as in the second research by Kiffin Sandra, the researcher was sure that they were correct by asserting ion the objectives and hypotheses that trust was a neglected factor in researches concerning teamwork which showed bias. The researches were thus able to overcome their shortcomings to come up with reasonable findings depending on the data collection methods applied. One notable factor was however that a quantitative research is able to state and prove hypotheses better than a qualitative research as it occurs in real time and empirical data is collected, analyzed and measured conclusions drawn from it. Bibliography Jones, G. R. and George, M. J. (1998). The Experience and Evolution of Trust: Implications for Cooperation and Teamwork. The Academy of Management Review Vol. 23, No. 3. pp. 531-546 Mary E. C. (1938). Cognition and Affection in the Experience of Value. Journal of Philosophy 35 (1):5-18. Moye, M. & Henkin, A.(2006) Exploring associations between employee empowerment and interpersonal trust in managers. Journal of Management Development (England), Vol. 25 (2), 101-117. Designated outstanding research article for 2006. McCall, C. (1998). How to write research designs and research reports: (CSU) Social Science Research and Instructional Council. California: Carlifornia State University. Park, S., Henkin, A. & Egley, R. (2005). Teacher team commitment, teamwork and trust: Exploring associations. Journal of Educational Administration,43(5), 462-479. Petersen, K.S (2010). Trust; a Neglected Variable in Team Effectiveness Research. The Graduate School of Management. University of Western Australia: SAGE Publications. Salas, E., Sims, D. E., and Burke, C. S. (2011). Is there a “Big Five” in Teamwork? University of Central Florida. SAGE Publications. Webber, S. S. (2011). Development of Cognitive and Affective Trust in Teams A Longitudinal Study. Suffolk University. Science Buddies. (2010). Variables and Hypothesis. Pdf. Changing Minds. (2011). What is Trust? Retrieved from http://changingminds.org/explanations/trust/what_is_trust.htm Free books on line. (2010), Hypothesis resting and characteristics. Retrieved form http://free-books-online.org/mathematics/business-mathematics-statistics/research-methods-business-mathematics-statistics/hypothesis-testing-characteristics/ Sridhar, M. S. (2010). Research Methodology Part 7. Bangalore: ISRO Satellite center. Steinfield, J. (2010). Trust, Integrity, Teamwork and Other Core Value B.S. CBS Interactive. Swan, W. A. (2008). The three main types of data collection. Retrieved from http://scienceray.com/technology/information/the-three-main-types-of-data-collection-tools/ Tubbs, S. (2010). Improving Trust for Leaders. Retrieved from http://businessthinker.com/improving-trust-for-leaders/ Read More