13–02 February 4, 2013 ESMT Working Paper THE UPWARD SPIRALS IN TEAM PROCESSES EXAMINING DYNAMIC POSITIVITY IN PROBLEM SOLVING TEAMS NALE LEHMANN-WILLENBROCK, VU UNIVERSITY AMSTERDAM MING MING CHIU, UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO – SUNY ZHIKE LEI, ESMT SIMONE KAUFFELD, TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITÄT BRAUNSCHWEIG ISSN 1866-3494 ESMT European School of Management and Technology Abstract The upward spirals in team processes: Examining dynamic positivity in problem solving teams Author(s):* Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock, VU University Amsterdam Ming Ming Chiu, University at Buffalo – SUNY Zhike Lei, ESMT Simone Kauffeld, Technische Universität Braunschweig Positivity in the workplace has been heralded to produce individual, social and organizational benefits. Although we know more about how positivity “broadens” and “builds” within individuals, little research has explicitly studied how positivity naturally occurs and dynamically unfolds in the flow of team interactions. This study aims to address this research gap by integrating existing knowledge on team processes with the notions of emotional cycles and “energy-in-conversation.” We observed meeting interactions of 43 frontline problem solving teams and analyzed a sample of 43,139 coded individual utterances from these teams. Using statistical discourse analysis (SDA) to model multi-level dynamics over time, we found that early positive and solution-focused interactions could send teams down a path of eliciting more “upward spirals”, thus more positivity. We also found that speaker switches added more positivity to team interactions both directly and by strengthening the positive effects of early positive and solution-focused interactions on subsequent positivity occurring in team interactions. Additionally and importantly, we found that overall positivity has positive implications for team performance. We discuss both theoretical and managerial implications of our findings. Keywords: Dynamic positivity, team processes, team interactions, problem- solving, dynamic multi-level modeling, statistical discourse analysis * Contact: Zhike Lei, ESMT, Schlossplatz 1, 10178 Berlin, Phone: +49 (0) 30 21231-1521, [email protected]. Copyright 2013 by ESMT European School of Management and Technology, Berlin, Germany, www.esmt.org. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, used in a spreadsheet, or transmitted in any form or by any means - electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise - without the permission of ESMT. Examining dynamic positivity in problem solving teams 2 “If you have zest and enthusiasm you attract zest and enthusiasm. Life does give back in kind.”- Norman Vincent Peale Introduction Organizations are affectively laden environments. Not only has popular literature pointed to a prominent role for positive emotions, or positivity, in a range of organizational and social processes (Fredrickson, 2001), but recent empirical research has also begun to validate intrapersonal and social benefits of positivity. For example, the broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions suggests and empirical findings show that positivity holds the promise of improving individual psychological wellbeing and physical health over time (e.g., Cohn, Fredrickson, Brown, Mikels, & Conway, 2009; Frederickson, 1998, 2000, 2004; Fredrickson, Cohn, Coffey, Pek, & Finkel, 2008; Waugh & Fredrickson, 2006). Similarly, the positive organizational psychology literature suggests that positivity in the workplace produces social and organizational benefits such as better conflict resolution, higher task quality, and more cooperation between team members (e.g., Bartel & Saavedra, 2000; Barsade, 2002). As modern organizations increasingly rely on streamlined team structures to accomplish critical operational and strategic goals, the upward spirals fueled by individual positivity propagate within work groups and teams. In spite of the high level of attention to how positivity “broadens” and “builds” within individuals, however, there has been only limited progress in understanding the role of positivity as an antecedent and consequence of team processes in the workplace. Notably, an emerging literature in the organizational behavior and psychology field has examined how emotions converge or become contagious to impact a number of work and team outcomes (see Barsade, 2002; Bartel & Saavedra, 2000; Hareli & Rafaeli, 2008; Hatfield, Cacioppo, & Rapson, 1994). This line of research, however, examines emotions and their contagion or convergence in general and does not pinpoint Examining dynamic positivity in problem solving teams 3 positivity as a distinct phenomenon in focus. Moreover, a recent coordination theory underscores “energy-in-conversation” (i.e., positive affective arousal people experience during conversations) as a critical coordination mechanism in organizations (Cooren, 2006; Quinn & Dutton, 2005). However, this model is silent on the processes and conditions of positive affective experiences naturally occurring and dynamically unfolding in the flow of team conversations. There is a dearth of research in realistic team settings in this direction. Our study addresses these empirical and theoretical gaps by integrating existing knowledge on team processes with the notions of emotional cycles and “energy-in- conversation”, with the goal of understanding more about positivity and its consequences during vital team interactions over time. We do so by examining meeting conversations in a sample of 43,139 coded individual utterances by a total of 259 technicians from 43 frontline problem solving teams in two German organizations. We take advantage of our longitudinal data to explore the temporal dynamics of positive affective experiences and their antecedents as well as consequences, using utterances that occur between team members as the critical level of analysis (guided by theoretical and computational considerations). We organize our paper as follows. First, we define the key constructs in our study and review relevant work concerning team processes and affective experiences, with a particular focus on energy-in-conversations and emotional cycles. Drawing on these streams in the literature, we develop testable hypotheses that integrate views on dynamic positivity occurring through team conversations over time. After describing a field study used to test these hypotheses, we present results that detail important boundary conditions and directions for future work on dynamic positivity in teams. We discuss both theoretical and managerial implications of our study results. Key constructs and theoretical underpinnings Defining positivity in teams In the social psychology and organizational literature, positivity has largely been Examining dynamic positivity in problem solving teams 4 defined as emotions or psychological states characterized by being positive, joyful, optimistic, constructive and laudable in research (Fredrickson, 1998; 2001; 2004; Walter & Bruch, 2008). Positivity has also been described as a particular form of energy, in terms of an affective experience described variously as energetic arousal (Thayer, 1989), emotional energy (Collins, 1993), subjective energy (Marks, 1977), positive affect (Watson, Clark & Tellegen, 1988), vitality (Ryan & Frederick, 1997), and zest (Miller & Stiver, 1997). Building on these existing conceptualizations, we define positivity in teams as one’s expressed and observable statements or acts during team interactions that are “constructive in intention or attitude,” “showing optimism and confidence,” and “expressing or implying affirmation, agreement, or permission” (Oxford English Dictionary, 1989). Essentially, we emphasize positivity as an observable, behavior-manifested concept in this paper, beyond the notion of individual internal states and a purely affect-based conceptualization. As such, we posit that positivity is not limited to being a noun, referring to established, fixed, or static individual feelings and experiences. Rather, positivity is a dynamic process that may involve a set of interdependent behaviors and acts of team members that build upon each other and change throughout member interactions. Just as Weick (1979) suggested that we should think more about ‘‘organizing’’ than ‘‘organizations’’ – more about verbs and less about nouns – we propose that positivity is not only a noun, but an adverb: any behavior and act can be carried out positively or negatively. This makes positivity a dynamic team process rather than an individual state. A dynamic, process-based conceptualization of positivity in teams impacts our current study in two noteworthy ways. First, our definition distinguishes positivity from concepts that refer to an individual’s positive personality or traits (e.g., positive affect; Watson et al., 1988) or positive psychological states (e.g., positive psychological capital, Luthans, Lebsack, & Lebsack, 2008). Nevertheless, our conceptualization of positivity as a process does not contrast with these perspectives in the literature, but rather extends the static, favorable Examining dynamic positivity in problem solving teams 5 features of positive emotional and psychological states to a dynamic context consisting of reoccurring member interactions. Second, positivity, like other human emotions (e.g., anger, excitement), is not only an intra-psychic experience (Frijda, 1988), but also subjective to social influence of interactions between team members. As such, we propose that positivity