ABSTRACT
Forming work teams involves matching people with complementary skills and personalities, but requires obtaining such data a priori. We introduce team dating, where people interact on brief tasks before working with a dedicated partner for longer, more complex tasks. We studied team dating through two online experiments. In Experiment 1, workers from a crowd platform independently wrote an ad slogan, discussed it with three consecutive people and evaluated their team date interactions. They then selected preferred teammates from a list showing average ratings for people they had dated and not dated. Results show that participants evaluated their dates based on evidence beyond externally judged slogan quality, and relied heavily on their dyad-specific judgments in selecting teammates. In Experiment 2, we replicated the individual and team dating tasks, and formed teams, either i) by honoring pairwise team dating preferences, ii) randomly from their pool of dates, or iii) randomly from those not dated. Results show that teams formed from preferred dates performed better on a final creative task compared to random dates or non-dates. Team dating provides a dynamic technique for forming ad hoc teams accounting for interpersonal dynamics. The initial interactions provided information that helped people select and work with an appropriate teammate.
- Justin S. Albrechtsen, Christian A. Meissner, and Kyle J. Susa. 2009. Can intuition improve deception detection performance? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 45, 4: 1052--1055.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Shoshana Altschuller and Raquel Benbunan-Fich. 2010. Trust, Performance, and the Communication Process in Ad Hoc Decision-Making Virtual Teams. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 16, 1: 27--47.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nalini Ambady, Frank J. Bernieri, and Jennifer A. Richeson. 2000. Toward a histology of social behavior: Judgmental accuracy from thin slices of the behavioral stream. Advances in experimental social psychology 32, 201--271.Google Scholar
- Nalini Ambady and Robert Rosenthal. 1992. Thin slices of expressive behavior as predictors of interpersonal consequences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin 111, 2: 256--274.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nalini Ambady and John Joseph Skowronski. 2008. First impressions. First Impressions 31, 1: 368.Google Scholar
- Linda Argote and Yuqing Ren. 2012. Transactive Memory Systems: A Microfoundation of Dynamic Capabilities. Journal of Management Studies 49, 1375--1382.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Murray R. Barrick, Greg L. Stewart, Mitchell J. Neubert, and Michael K. Mount. 1998. Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology 83, 3: 377--391.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robert Bolton and Dorothy Grover Bolton. 2009. People styles at work: Making bad relationships good and good relationships better. AMACOM, NY, NY, USA.Google Scholar
- William P. Bottom. 2004. Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment. Academy of Management Review 29, 4: 695--698.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kim T. Buehlman, John M. Gottman, and Lynn F. Katz. 1992. How a couple views their past predicts their future: Predicting divorce from an oral history interview. Journal of Family Psychology 5, 3-4: 295--318.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Thang Nguyen Bui and Curt Jones. 1992. Finding good approximate vertex and edge partitions is NP-hard. Information Processing Letters 42, 3: 153--159. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tiziana Casciaro and Miguel Sousa Lobo. 2005. Competent Jerks, Lovable Fools, and the Formation of Social Networks Competent Jerks, Lovable Fools, and the Formation of Social Networks. Harvard Business Review 83, 6: 92--99.Google Scholar
- Kevin Chai, Vidyasagar Potdar, and Tharam Dillon. 2009. Content quality assessment related frameworks for social media. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and in Bioinformatics), 791--805. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Susan E. Clark, Herbert H.; Brennan. 1991. Grounding in Communication. Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition: 127--149.Google Scholar
- D Clutterbuck. 2007. Coaching the team at work.Google Scholar
- Thomas G Cummings and Christopher G Worley. 2008. Organization Development and Change.Google Scholar
- Jared R Curhan and Alex Pentland. 2007. Thin Slices of Negotiation: Predicting Outcomes From Conversational/rDynamics Within the First 5 Minutes. Journal of Applied Psychology 92, 3: 802--811.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Petru L Curşeu, Patrick Kenis, Jörg Raab, et al. 2010. Composing Effective Teams through Team Dating. Organization Studies 31, 7: 873--894.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Erich C Dierdorff, Suzanne T Bell, and James A Belohlav. 2011. The power of "we": effects of psychological collectivism on team performance over time. The Journal of applied psychology 96, 2: 247--262.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Steven P Dow, Julie Fortuna, Dan Schwartz, Beth Altringer, Daniel L Schwartz, and Scott R Klemmer. 2011. Prototyping Dynamics: Sharing Multiple Designs Improves Exploration, Group Rapport, and Results. Acm: 1--10.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nicolas Ducheneaut, Nicholas Yee, Eric Nickell, and Robert J Moore. 2007. The Life and Death of Online Gaming Communities: A Look at Guilds in World of Warcraft. Distribution In Press,: 839--848. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jacqueline N W Friedman, Thomas F. Oltmanns, and Eric Turkheimer. 2007. Interpersonal perception and personality disorders: Utilization of a thin slice approach. Journal of Research in Personality 41, 3: 667--688.Google ScholarCross Ref
- James L Gibson, John M Ivancevich, James H Donnelly, and Robert Konopaske. 2012. Organizations Behavior, Structure, Processes.Google Scholar
- Alastair J Gill, Darren Gergle, Robert M French, and Jon Oberlander. 2008. Emotion rating from short blog texts. Proceeding of the twenty-sixth annual CHI conference on Human factors in computing systems CHI '08: 1121. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jerry W. Gilley, M. Lane Morris, Alina M. Waite, Tabitha Coates, and Abigail Veliquette. 2010. Integrated Theoretical Model for Building Effective Teams. Advances in Developing Human Resources 12: 7--28.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Miha Grčar, Dunja Mladenič, Blaz Fortuna, and Marko Grobelnik. 2006. Data Sparsity Issues in the Collaborative Filtering Framework. In Advances in Web Mining and Web Usage Analysis, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 58--76. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Martie G Haselton and David C Funder. 2006. The Evolution of Accuracy and Bias in Social Judgment. Evolution and social psychology, January: 15--37.Google Scholar
- Pamela J. Hinds and Mark Mortensen. 2005. Understanding Conflict in Geographically Distributed Teams: The Moderating Effects of Shared Identity, Shared Context, and Spontaneous Communication. Organization Science 16, 3: 290--307. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Pamela Hinds and Cathleen McGrath. 2006. Structures that work: Social structure, work structure and coordination ease in geographically distributed teams. 20th Anniversary ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, CSCW 2006, November 4, 2006 - November 8, 2006: 343--352. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Eric von Hippel and Georg von Krogh. 2013. Identifying viable "need-solution pairs": Problem solving without problem formulation. von Hippel, Eric von Krogh, Georg, January 2016: 1--28.Google Scholar
- Bob Hoffman. 2009. The ad contrarian. Fowler Digital Services.Google Scholar
- John R. Hollenbeck, D. Scott DeRue, and Rick Guzzo. 2004. Bridging the gap between I/O research and HR practice: Improving team composition, team training, and team task design. Human Resource Management 43, 353--366.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lawrence Holpp. 1999. Managing teams. McGrawHill, NY, NY, USA.Google Scholar
- Stephen E Humphrey, Frederick P Morgeson, and Michael J Mannor. 2009. Developing a theory of the strategic core of teams: a role composition model of team performance. The Journal of applied psychology 94, 1: 48--61.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa and Dorothy E. Leidner. 1999. Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams. Organization Science 10, 6: 791--815. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Brigitte Jordan and Austin Henderson. 1995. interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences 4, 1: 39--103.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Peter J. Jordan, Neal M. Ashkanasy, Charmine E J Härtel, and Gregory S. Hooper. 2002. Workgroup emotional intelligence. Scale development and relationship to team process effectiveness and goal focus. Human Resource Management Review 12, 195--214.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Malte Jung, Jan Chong, and Larry Leifer. 2012. Group hedonic balance and pair programming performance: affective interaction dynamics as indicators of performance. Proceedings of the 2012 ACM annual conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI '12, 829--838. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Malte Jung and Larry Leifer. 2011. A Method to Study Affective Dynamics and Performance in Engineering Design Teams. Internation Conference on Engineering Design, ICED'11.Google Scholar
- David A Kenny and Lawrence La Voie. 1982. Reciprocity of interpersonal attraction: a confirmed hypothesis. Social Psychology Quarterly 45, 1: 54--58.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Yehuda Koren, Robert Bell, and Chris Volinsky. 2009. Matrix Factorization Techniques for Recommender Systems. Computer 42, 8: 42--49. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Michael W. Kraus and Dacher Keltner. 2009. Signs of socioeconomic status: A thin-slicing approach. Psychological Science 20, 1: 99--106.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Vincent Lenhardt. 2004. Coaching for meaning: The culture and practice of coaching and team building. Palgrave Macmillan, NY, NY, USA.Google Scholar
- Daniel Levi. Group dynamic for teams. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Lester Luborsky. 1996. Onset conditions for psychological and psychosomatic symptoms during psychotherapy: A new theory based on a unique data set. American Journal of Psychiatry 153, 7: 11--23.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Andy Luse, James C. McElroy, Anthony M. Townsend, and Samuel Demarie. 2013. Personality and cognitive style as predictors of preference for working in virtual teams. Computers in Human Behavior 29, 4: 1825--1832. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ioanna Lykourentzou, Angeliki Antoniou, Yannick Naudet, and Steven P. Dow. 2016. Personality Matters: Balancing for Personality Types Leads to Better Outcomes for Crowd Teams. CSCW 2016: 260--273. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Merce Mach, Simon Dolan, and Shay Tzafrir. 2010. The differential effect of team members' trust on team performance: The mediation role of team cohesion. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 83, 3: 771--794.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gretchen A. Macht, Robert M. Leicht, and David A. Nembhard. 2013. Emotional Intelligence, Communication, and Team Performance. Proceedings of the 2013 IIE Annual Conference, 2810--2819.Google Scholar
- Tammy L. Madsen, Jennifer Woolley, and Kumar Sarangee. 2012. Using Internet-based collaboration technologies for Innovation: crowdsourcing vs. expertsourcing. Boston.Google Scholar
- Thomas W. Malone. 2011. Solving Climate Change with Crowdsourcing. MIT Sloan Experts Blog.Google Scholar
- Ivan Markovsky. 2012. Low Rank Approximation Algorithms, Implementation, Applications. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ashley E Mason, David a Sbarra, and Matthias R Mehl. 2010. Thin-slicing divorce: thirty seconds of information predict changes in psychological adjustment over 90 days. Psychological science: a journal of the American Psychological Society / APS 21, 10: 1420--1422.Google Scholar
- Craig McGarty, Vincent Y. Yzerbyt, and Russell Spears. 2002. Social, cultural and cognitive factors in stereotype formation. Stereotypes as explanations: the formation of meaningful beliefs about social groups: 1--15.Google Scholar
- B Nardi and J Harris. 2010. Strangers and friends: Collaborative play in World of Warcraft. International Handbook of Internet Research: 395--410.Google Scholar
- Randolph M. Nesse. 2001. The Smoke Detector Principle - Natural Selection and the Regulation of Defensive Responses. In Unity of Knowledge -- The Convergence of Natural and Human Science. 75--85.Google Scholar
- Richard E Nisbett and Timothy Decamp Wilson. 1977. The Halo Effect: Evidence for Unconscious Alteration of Judgments. Journal of Feisonality and Social Psychology 35, 4: 250--256.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ranjani Prabhakaran, Adam E Green, and Jeremy R Gray. 2014. Thin slices of creativity: Using singleword utterances to assess creative cognition. Behavior research methods 46, 3: 641--6Google Scholar
- Ray Reagans, Linda Argote, and Daria Brooks. 2005. Individual Experience and Experience Working Together: Predicting Learning Rates from Knowing Who Knows What and Knowing How to Work Together. Management Science 51, 6: 869--881. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Daniela Retelny, Sébastien Robaszkiewicz, Alexandra To, et al. 2014. Expert Crowdsourcing with Flash Teams. Proceedings of the 27th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology - UIST '14: 75--85. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Frank E. Saal, Ronald G. Downey, and Mary a. Lahey. 1980. Rating the ratings: Assessing the psychometric quality of rating data. Psychological Bulletin 88, 2: 413--428.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kai Sassenberg, Kai J Jonas, James Y Shah, and Paige C Brazy. 2007. Why some groups just feel better: the regulatory fit of group power. Journal of personality and social psychology 92, 2: 249--267.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Frank L. Schmidt and John E. Hunter. 1998. The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology: Practical and Theoretical Implications of 85 Years of Research Findings. Psychological Bulletin 124, 2: 262--274.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robert Sedgewick and Kevin Wayne. 2011. Algorithms. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Herbert A. Simon. 1956. Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review 63, 2: 129--138.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Scott A. Snook and Jeffrey T. Polzer. 2004. The Army Crew Team (Case 9-403-131). Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
- Kristin Stecher and Scott Counts. 2008. Thin slices of online profile attributes. proc. ICWSM: 127--135.Google Scholar
- Michael J. Stevens and Michael A. Campion. 1999. Staffing work teams: Development and validation of a selection test for teamwork settings. Journal of Management 25, 2: 207--228.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Paul E Stillman, Thomas Gilovich, and Kentaro Fujita. 2014. Predicting group outcomes from brief exposures. Social Cognition 32, 1: 71--82.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Fons Trompenaars and Charles Hampden-Turner. 1993. Riding the waves of culture: Understanding cultural diversity in business. Long Range Planning 26, 5: 153.Google Scholar
- Mary Ann C. Tuckman, Bruce W.Jensen. 1977. Stages of small-group development revisited. Group & Organisation Management 2, 4: 419--427.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman. 1974. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185, 4157: 1124--1131.Google Scholar
- Helen J. Wall, Paul J. Taylor, John Dixon, Stacey M. Conchie, and David A. Ellis. 2013. Rich contexts do not always enrich the accuracy of personality judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 49, 6: 1190--1195.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mj Waller, G. Sohrab, and Bw Ma. 2013. Beyond 12 Angry Men Thin-Slicing Film to Illustrate Group Dynamics. Small Group Research 44, 4: 446--465.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Xinyu Wang, Zhou Zhao, and Wilfred Ng. 2016. USTF: A Unified System of Team Formation. IEEE Transactions on Big Data 2, 70--84.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Daniel M Wegner, T. Giuliano, and P. T. Hertel. 1985. Cognitive interdependence in close relationships. Compatible and incompatible relationships: 253--276.Google Scholar
- Miaomiao Wen, Keith Maki, Xu Wang, Steven Dow, James D. Herbsleb, and Carolyn Penstein Rosé. 2016. Transactivity as a Predictor of Future Collaborative Knowledge Integration in Team-Based Learning in Online Courses. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Educational Data Mining, 533--538.Google Scholar
- J. M. Wilson, M. Boyer O'Leary, a. Metiu, and Q. R. Jett. 2008. Perceived Proximity in Virtual Work: Explaining the Paradox of Far-but-Close. Organization Studies 29, 7: 979--1002.Google ScholarCross Ref
- David J. Woehr and Allen I. Huffcutt. 1994. Rater training for performance appraisal: A quantitative review. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 67: 189--205.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Team Dating Leads to Better Online Ad Hoc Collaborations
Recommendations
A study of user behavior on an online dating site
ASONAM '13: Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and MiningOnline dating sites have become popular platforms for people to look for potential romantic partners. It is important to understand users' dating preferences in order to make better recommendations on potential dates. The message sending and replying ...
Comments