Gorse, C; McKinney, I; Shepherd, A; Morley, D and Ellis, R (2006) Internal support mechanisms in groups and teams. In: Boyd, D (ed.) Proceedings of 22nd Annual ARCOM Conference, 4-6 September 2006, Birmingham, UK.
Abstract
Few studies have investigated the attributes of group interaction that are used to support individuals and help them contribute to the group product. This exploratory study, aims to help address this problem and looks at groups in various contexts, including construction, to establish what group members do to encourage and support their colleagues. Most studies that have examined support mechanism have done so in educational setting. Therefore, in grounding this work reference is made to educational research. The focus of the research is group interaction and attempts made to encourage others to participate in the group discussion. The observations focus on data collected from professionals attending management and design team meetings. Also, interaction behaviours and tendencies that produce positive social responses are discussed and explored. In the construction meeting, few attempts were made to actively encourage those reluctant to participate to engage in the group discussion. The findings show that those who did successfully draw members into active conversation used a combination of techniques to encourage participation.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | engagement; group dynamics; interaction; support |
| Index terms: | interaction, group dynamics, design team, exploratory study, support mechanism |
| Subjects: | behavioral psychology, sociology, research methods, professional practice, organization |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Organizational Design, Business Strategy, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here