Analysis of Collective Action Regulation and Cooperation- Relevant Attitudes in Industrial Group Work

One current response to group work is that in publications addressed to management, work designers, and corporate consultants, the main interest seems to lie in process-related support of cooperation (e.g., training and moderating of group processes), in order to enable or select cooperation-oriented workers (e.g., Salas, Cooke, & Rosen, 2008; Tannenbaum, Salas, & Cannon-Bowers, 1996). It is argued that this imbalance in application corresponds to an overemphasis in basic research concerning the development of groupdynamic constructs and methods (e.g., process losses, intergroup conflicts), as opposed to the development of a task-related methodology (cf. Scholl, 1997) which focuses upon the creation of cooperation-promoting organizational structures such as collective self-regulation or autonomy (Rasmussen & Jeppesen, 2006; Ulich, 2005) as a prerequisite to successful group work. The present article was developed on the background of the thesis that a neglect of structural aspects of group work with primary consideration of process and personality variables could lead to both problematic attempts of application in practice and theoretical deficiencies. Concerning the former problem, it is doubtful, whether, for example, collective autonomy, common task orientation, cooperative attitudes or participatory behavior can be tapped sufficiently valid by means of only a few questionnaire items. In their research review, Paris, Salas, and Cannon-Bowers (2000, p. 1056) conclude that there is yet no „... sound, validated and systematic methodology“ available for analyzing team tasks as a prerequisite to measure team performance (cf. also Brauner & Scholl, 2000; Salas et al., 2008). In the following, concepts, measurement methods, and findings of two studies will be presented that emphasize the importance of „objective“ orgaabstract In this article, a conceptual framework of collective action regulation in industrial work groups will be presented which is based on action regulation theory and related approaches. We state that collective regulation requirements resulting from collective planning and decision-making autonomy of work groups will be positively associated with the group members’ common task orientation, cooperative attitudes, work means and stores of knowledge (collective objectifications) developed and shared by the group members. Further, we report the results of a first test of the inter-rater reliability of a measurement method based on a condition-related observation interview that can be used to analyze and evaluate the structure of collective action regulation in industrial work groups considering psychological criteria for quality of work life. Findings of two cross-sectional field studies testing the hypothetical framework are reported. In total, 31 groups from three enterprises (automotive industry, engine manufacturing, tool manufacturing) in three German-speaking countries were analyzed using semi-standardized observation-interviews. Furthermore, 233 members from 28 of these groups in various production departments were interviewed applying standardized self-report scales. Results show that a high level of required planning and decision-making, together with joint thinking and communication, is positively associated with several cooperation-supporting attitudes as well as with the number of collective objectifications. Though, findings concerning a hypothesized relation between collective regulation requirements and common task orientation are inconsistent. High time pressure seems to act as a moderator.