Speaking Up in the Operating Room: How Team Leaders Promote Learning in Interdisciplinary Action Teams

ABSTRACT This paper examines learning in interdisciplinary action teams. Research on team effectiveness has focused primarily on single-discipline teams engaged in routine production tasks and, less often, on interdisciplinary teams engaged in discussion and management rather than action. The resulting models do not explain differences in learning in interdisciplinary action teams. Members of these teams must coordinate action in uncertain, fast-paced situations, and the extent to which they are comfortable speaking up with observations, questions, and concerns may critically influence team outcomes. To explore what leaders of action teams do to promote speaking up and other proactive coordination behaviours – as well as how organizational context may affect these team processes and outcomes – I analysed qualitative and quantitative data from 16 operating room teams learning to use a new technology for cardiac surgery. Team leader coaching, ease of speaking up, and boundary spanning were associated with successful technology implementation. The most effective leaders helped teams learn by communicating a motivating rationale for change and by minimizing concerns about power and status differences to promote speaking up in the service of learning.     

Do the Merits Matter More? The Impact of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act

This article examines the effect of the Private Securities LitigationReform Act of 1995 (PSLRA) on stockholder lawsuits. We explorethe role of restatements, earnings forecasts, and insider tradingin the filing and resolution of lawsuits for a sample of hightechnology firms. Consistent with our predictions, there isa post-PSLRA shift away from litigation based on forward-lookingearnings disclosures. Conversely, there is a significantly greatercorrelation between litigation and both earnings restatementsand abnormal insider selling after the PSLRA. Finally, we finda post-PSLRA increase in the likelihood of settlement for casesinvolving earnings restatements.     

When are contrarian profits due to stock market overreaction?

If returns on some stocks systematically lead or lag those ofothers, a portfolio strategy that sells 'winners' and buys 'losers'can produce positive expected returns, even if no stock's returnsare negatively autocorrelated as virtually all models of overreactionimply. Using a particular contrarian strategy we show that,despite negative autocorrelation in individual stock returns,weekly portfolio returns are strongly positively autocorrelatedand are the result of important cross-auto-correlations. Wefind that the returns of large stocks lead those of smallerstocks, and we present evidence against overreaction as theonly source of contrarian profits.     

Stock market prices do not follow random walks: evidence from a simple specification test

In this article we test the random walk hypothesis for weeklystock market returns by comparing variance estimators derivedfrom data sampled at different frequencies. The random walkmodel is strongly rejected for the entire sample period (1962-1985)and for all subperiods for a variety of aggregate returns indexesand size-sorted portfolios. Although the rejections are duelargely to the behavior of small stocks, they cannot be attributedcompletely to the effects of infrequent trading or time-varyingvolatilities. Moreover, the rejection of the random walk forweekly returns does not support a mean-reverting model of assetprices.     

Aid for developmentally disabled

The Institute for the Future is engaged in a project to explore effective and affordable uses of telecommunications systems to benefit developmentally disabled children and adults. The two-year study, funded by the Rehabilitation Services Administration of the US Department of Helath, Education and Welfare, began on 1 October 1978 under the overall leadership of the Alternate Media Center at New York Univerity. The Pediatric Service of Roosevelt Hospital in New York City and the American Association of University Affiliated Programs¹ in Washington DC make up the rest of the project team.     

Review of Secondary Mathematical Models of Predictive Microbiology

ABSTRACT

Predictive microbiology has been developed utilizing accurate and versatile mathematical models to predict microbial behavior during food processing instead of using traditional microbiological methods. Generally, mathematical models are classified into three types: primary, secondary, and tertiary models. Secondary model deals with the response of parameters appearing in primary modeling approaches as functions of one or more environmental conditions like temperature, pH, etc. Most of them have little or no microbiological basis, which makes interpretation of some model parameters difficult and sometimes their performance is not stable. This paper reviews the performance and development of secondary models and discusses their strengths and weaknesses, which may help future model development and application.     

Strategies of learning from failure

Many executives believe that all failure is bad (although it usually provides Lessons) and that Learning from it is pretty straightforward. The author, a professor at Harvard Business School, thinks both beliefs are misguided. In organizational life, she says, some failures are inevitable and some are even good. And successful learning from failure is not simple: It requires context-specific strategies. But first leaders must understand how the blame game gets in the way and work to create an organizational culture in which employees feel safe admitting or reporting on failure. Failures fall into three categories: preventable ones in predictable operations, which usually involve deviations from spec; unavoidable ones in complex systems, which may arise from unique combinations of needs, people, and problems; and intelligent ones at the frontier, where "good" failures occur quickly and on a small scale, providing the most valuable information. Strong leadership can build a learning culture-one in which failures large and small are consistently reported and deeply analyzed, and opportunities to experiment are proactively sought. Executives commonly and understandably worry that taking a sympathetic stance toward failure will create an "anything goes" work environment. They should instead recognize that failure is inevitable in today's complex work organizations.     

Is yours a learning organization?

An organization with a strong learning culture faces the unpredictable deftly. However, a concrete method for understanding precisely how an institution learns and for identifying specific steps to help it learn better has remained elusive. A new survey instrument from professors Garvin and Edmondson of Harvard Business School and assistant professor Gino of Carnegie Mellon University allows you to ground your efforts in becoming a learning organization. The tool's conceptual foundation is what the authors call the three building blocks of a learning organization. The first, a supportive learning environment, comprises psychological safety, appreciation of differences, openness to new ideas, and time for reflection. The second, concrete learning processes and practices, includes experimentation, information collection and analysis, and education and training. These two complementary elements are fortified by the final building block: leadership that reinforces learning. The survey instrument enables a granular examination of all these particulars, scores each of them, and provides a framework for detailed, comparative analysis. You can make comparisons within and among your institution's functional areas, between your organization and others, and against benchmarks that the authors have derived from their surveys of hundreds of executives in many industries. After discussing how to use their tool, the authors share the insights they acquired as they developed it. Above all, they emphasize the importance of dialogue and diagnosis as you nurture your company and its processes with the aim of becoming a learning organization. The authors' goal--and the purpose of their tool--is to help you paint an honest picture of your firm's learning culture and of the leaders who set its tone.