Advertisement

Using Kinaesthetic Exertion to Engender Team Psychological Safety in UK Higher Education

  • Ashley J. B. RobertsEmail author
  • Ioanna Iordanou
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Business, Arts and Humanities book series (PSBAH)

Abstract

This chapter is based on educating UK Undergraduate Business School students with the opportunities afforded by an Open Space Learning (OSL) environment. Our use of the Arts-based Intervention (ABI) of physical performance challenges normative Business School pedagogy that has been claimed to reduce students to becoming “voracious copy machines” (Beghetto and Kauffman 2009, p. 300).

References

  1. Adler, N. J. (2006). The Arts and Leadership: Now That We Can Do Anything, What Will We Do? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(4), 486–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amabile, T. M. (1998). How to Kill Creativity. Harvard Business Review, 76(September–October), 77–87.Google Scholar
  3. Antonacopoulou, E. P. (2008). On the Practise of Practice In-tensions and Ex-tensions in the Ongoing Reconfiguration of Practice. In D. Barry & H. Hansen (Eds.), Handbook of New Approaches to Organization Studies (pp. 112–131). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Antonacopoulou, E. P. (2014). The Experience of Learning in Space and Time. Prometheus, 32(1), 83–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Antonacopoulou, E. P., & Sheaffer, Z. (2014). Learning in Crisis: Rethinking the Relationship Between Organizational Learning and Crisis Management. Journal of Management Inquiry, 23(1), 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baer, M., & Frese, M. (2003). Innovation Is Not Enough: Climates for Initiative and Psychological Safety, Process Innovations, and Firm Performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(1), 45–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baker, D. F., & Baker, S. J. (2012). To “Catch the Sparkling Glow”: A Canvas for Creativity in the Management Classroom. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11(4), 704–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bales, R., & Strodtbeck, F. (1951). Phases In-group Problem Solving. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 4(4), 485–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barry, D., & Meisiek, S. (2010). The Art of Leadership and its Fine Art Shadow. Leadership, 6(3), 295–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2009). Intellectual Estuaries: Connecting Learning and Creativity in Programs of Advanced Academics. Journal of Advanced Academics, 20, 296–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The Location of Culture. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1982). Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theory and Methods. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  13. Bradley, B. H., Klotz, A. C., Postlethwaite, B. E., Hamdani, M. R., & Brown, K. G. (2011). Reaping the Benefits of Task Conflict in Teams: The Critical Role of Team Psychological Safety Climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(1), 151–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bruner, J. (1982). Play, Thought and Language. Peabody Journal of Education, 60(3), 60–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Burgess, R. G. (1984). In the Field. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Clark, A. (1997). Being There: Putting Brain, Body, and World Together Again. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  17. Creed, D. W. E., & Miles, R. E. (1995). Trust in Organizations: A Conceptual Framework Linking Organizational Forms, Managerial Philosophies, and the Opportunity Cost of Controls. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in Organizations: Frontiers in Theory and Research (pp. 16–38). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Csíkszentmihályi, M. (1999). Implications of a System’s Perspective for the Study of Creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Cunliffe, A. L. (2002). Reflexive Dialogical Practice in Management Learning. Management Learning, 33(1), 35–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Daniels, H. (Ed.). (2001). Vygotsky and Pedagogy. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. De Jong, B. A., & Elfring, T. (2010). How Does Trust Affect the Performance of On-going Work Teams? The Mediating Role of Reflexivity, Monitoring, and Effort. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 535–549. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dewey, J. (1997). Experience and Education. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  23. Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Edmondson, A. C. (2004). Psychological Safety, Trust, and Learning in Organizations: A Group-Level Lens. In R. M. Kramer & K. S. Cook (Eds.), Trust and Distrust in Organizations: Dilemmas and Approaches (pp. 239–272). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  25. Edmondson, A. C., & Mogelof, J. P. (2006). Explaining Psychological Safety in Innovation Teams. In L. Thompson & H. Choi (Eds.), Creativity and Innovation in Organizational Teams (pp. 109–136). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  26. Eggers, J. T. (2011). Psychological Safety Influences Relationship Behavior. Corrections Today, 73, 60–61.Google Scholar
  27. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  28. Freire, P., & Shor, I. (1987). A Pedagogy of Liberation: Dialogues on Transforming Education. New York: Bergin and Garvey.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gardner, H. (1985). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic.Google Scholar
  30. Garvin, D. A., Edmondson, A. C., & Gino, F. (2008). Is Yours a Learning Organization? Harvard Business Review, 86(March), 109–116.Google Scholar
  31. Gibson, C. B., & Gibbs, J. L. (2006). Unpacking the Concept of Virtuality: The Effects of Geographic Dispersion, Electronic Dependence, Dynamic Structure, and National Diversity on Team Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(3), 451–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hackman, J. R. (1987). The Design of Work Teams. In J. W. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Behaviour (pp. 315–342). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  34. Handy, C. (1995). Trust and the Virtual Organization. Harvard Business Review, 73(May–June), 107–120.Google Scholar
  35. Jackson, N., Oliver, M., Shaw, M., & Wisdom, J. (Eds.). (2006). Developing Creativity in Higher Education: The Imaginative Curriculum. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological Conditions of Personal Engagements and Disengagement at Work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724.Google Scholar
  37. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  38. Lambert, C. (2007). Exploring New Learning and Teaching Spaces. Warwick Interactions Journal, 30, 1–6.Google Scholar
  39. Lawler, E. E. (1992). The Ultimate Advantage: Creating the High Involvement Organization. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  40. May, D. R., Gilson, R. L., & Harter, L. (2004). The Psychological Conditions of Meaningfulness, Safety, and Availability and the Engagement of the Human Spirit at Work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77(1), 11–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Moingeon, B., & Edmondson, A. C. (1998). Trust and Organizational Learning. In N. Lazaric & E. Lorenz (Eds.), Trust, Learning, and Economic Expectations. London: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  42. Monk, N., Chillington Rutter, C., Neelands, J., & Heron, J. (2011). Open Space Learning: A Study in Trans-disciplinary Pedagogy. London: Bloomsbury.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mueller, F., Agamanolis, S., & Picard, R. (2003). Exertion Interfaces: Sports Over a Distance for Social Bonding and Fun. In Proceedings of CHI 2003 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, April 5–10, Ft. Lauderdale, FL (www.oxfordictionaries.com).
  44. Robinson, K. (2001). Out of Our Minds: Learning to be Creative. Oxford: Capstone.Google Scholar
  45. Rocco, E. (1998). Trust Breaks Down in Electronic Context but Can Be Repaired by Some Initial Face-to-Face Contact. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, April 18–23, Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
  46. Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Cramer, C. (1998). Not So Different After All: A Cross-discipline View of Trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Savin-Baden, M. (2008). Learning Spaces: Creating Opportunities for Knowledge Creation in Academic Life. Maidenhead and New York: McGraw Hill/Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Schein, E. H. (1996). Culture: The Missing Concept in Organization Studies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(2), 229–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schulte, M., Cohen, N. A., & Klein, K. J. (2012). The Co-evolution of Network Ties and Perceptions of Team Psychological Safety. Organization Science, 23(2), 564–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Seltzer, K., & Bentley, T. (1999). The Creative Age: Knowledge and Skills for the New Economy. London: DEMOS.Google Scholar
  51. Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  52. Spreitzer, G. M., Noble, D. S., Mishra, A. K., & Cooke, W. N. (1999). Predicting Process Improvement Team Performance in an Automotive Firm: Explicating the Roles of Trust and Empowerment. In E. Mannix & M. Neale (Eds.), Research on Managing Groups and Teams (Vol. 2, pp. 71–92). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  53. Starkey, K., & Tempest, S. (2009). The Winter of Our Discontent: The Design Challenge for Business Schools. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8(4), 576–586.Google Scholar
  54. Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1999). The Concept of Creativity: Prospects and Paradigms. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity (pp. 3–15). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Taylor, S. S. (2008). Theatrical Performance as Unfreezing: Ties That Bind at the Academy of Management. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17(4), 398–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Taylor, S., & Ladkin, D. (2009). Understanding Arts-Based Methods in Managerial Development. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8(1), 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Tjosvold, D. (1991). An Enduring Competitive Advantage. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  58. Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A Relational Model of Authority in Groups. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 115–191.Google Scholar
  59. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). The Role of Play in Development. In Mind in Society (M. Cole, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Wells, G. (2008). Dialogic Inquiry: Towards a Socio-cultural Practice and Theory of Education (Learning in Doing: Social, Cognitive & Computational Perspectives). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  61. West, M. A. (1990). The Social Psychology of Innovation in Groups. In M. A. West & J. L. Farr (Eds.), Innovation and Creativity at Work: Psychological and Organizational Strategies (pp. 309–333). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  62. Whitebread, D., & Pino Pasternak, D. (2010). Metacognition, Self-Regulation and Meta-Knowing. In K. Littleton, C. Wood, & J. Kleine Staarman (Eds.), International Handbook of Psychology in Education (pp. 673–711). Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
  63. Zack, M. H., & McKenney, J. L. (1995). Social Context and Interactions in On-going Computer-Supported Management Groups. Organization Science, 6(4), 394–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of WarwickCoventryUK
  2. 2.Oxford Brookes UniversityOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations