Yet we know that, overall, teams are fraught with failures to utilize their diverse set of knowledge, skills, and abilities and to perform as well as they could [6, 7].The potentially harmful consequences for patients cannot be ignored: poor teamwork—such as incomplete communication and failing to use available expertise—increases the risk of medical error and decreases quality of care [2-5].
Yet we know that, overall, teams are fraught with failures to utilize their diverse set of knowledge, skills, and abilities and to perform as well as they could [6, 7].Tags: Business Intelligence Research PaperAnti Abortion Research Paper EssaysResearch Papers IsraelLevine Case Studies In Global HealthEssays On GenderGood Essay TransitionsWar Is Not Justified EssayIdeas For An Argumentative Essay TopicsPope Pius Xii Holocaust Essay
In research and practice, a common belief is that teamwork is best when the team has the best—that is, the smartest—people; yet recent research challenges this assumption.
Following methods used in psychology to study individual intelligence, Woolley et al.
A common thread in this work is the idea that these group structures and processes associated with collective intelligence are enhancing the quality of information sharing in the team .
The speculation is that members who pick up on a wider variety of subtle cues, and teams that operate in a manner that incorporates multiple perspectives, will operate with more and better information than they would otherwise.
The average social perceptiveness of the team members is predictive of collective intelligence .
Second, in both laboratory and field studies, researchers have found that greater amounts of participation and more equal participation are associated with higher collective intelligence [8, 11].Members who know the team’s boundaries—that is, who else is assigned to the team—also know to whom they can go for information and with whom they should share their information .In this way, having a clear understanding of membership can increase the likelihood that people with relevant knowledge will be included in discussions, a necessary first step to ensuring that those people have opportunities to speak up.This article reviews research from the field of organizational behavior to shed light on group structures and processes that facilitate the use of available expertise for more effective decision making, negotiation, execution of tasks, creativity, and overall team performance.First, we highlight what it means to have a collectively intelligent team: one with the capability to perform well consistently across a range of tasks .As an example, there is evidence from the study of pediatric care that including patients’ families and nurses—who are often excluded from physicians’ rounds—provides meaningful benefits in the form of better diagnoses and care plan development because these individuals can contribute information not possessed by other team members that can be used in making care decisions [14, 15].In addition to gathering the right people on a team, those with relevant knowledge must speak up if their expertise is to be used effectively by the team.One obstacle is that members may not realize they have information worth sharing.For example, research on “the common knowledge effect” highlights the tendency for team members to focus on knowledge that is already commonly shared among group members.These patterns of interaction among team members allow teams to make good use of members’ expertise—a key reason teams could be effective in health care—but capitalizing on a team’s collective expertise is surprisingly difficult.The process of expertise use in teams is multifaceted.