The degree of horizontal abnotivity as a determinant of experts’ teamwork
- Authors: Kashapov M.M.1, Angelova O.Y.2, Podolskaya T.O.2, Prokhorova M.V.2
-
Affiliations:
- Demidov Yaroslavl State University
- Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod
- Issue: Vol 45, No 1 (2024)
- Pages: 5-18
- Section: Social psychology
- URL: https://journals.rcsi.science/0205-9592/article/view/256435
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.31857/S0205959224010017
- ID: 256435
Cite item
Open Access
Access granted
Abstract
Actuality of the problem is conditioned by the necessity of searching new methods and techniques of organizational work in the high life speed environment and entropy of modern society. Objective is to identify the role and nature of the influence of horizontal abnotivity on the effectiveness and specificity of the perception of teamwork. Mechanism of horizontal abnotivity consists in revealing potential of equal in social and professional status of participants of cooperate activity and giving them support in self-realization and achieving success. The empirical investigation, in which 192 respondents took part, was carried out, by means of set of questionnaire techniques, that allow to collect general data about the respondents, evaluate the level of their horizontal abnotivity and involvement into teamwork, its peculiarities and efficiency in the participants’ conceptualization. By means of statistics methods and qualitative analysis the role of the horizontal abnotivity in determination efficiency and peculiarities of teamwork process was stated. Result of the study is the description of a new type of abnotivity, which assists in disclosing creative potential of equal in status participants of cooperate activity and offering them support in self-realization and achieving success. This type of abnotivity is called “horizontal”. It is stated that the level of expression of horizontal abnotivity impacts involvement of the subjects of professional activity into teamwork and determines its efficiency and peculiarities of its perception. For the first time principles of operation of horizontal abnotivity are described: the higher it is expressed the more often the subject of activity becomes a member of a team; the level of horizontal abnotivity expression of a subject of activity, included into a team, positively affects the evaluation of efficiency of its work, helping in revealing the abilities of each member. Conclusions: the main and additional roles, that moderately and highly abnotive subjects play in a team, differ. The degree of horizontal abnotivity determines efficiency and peculiarities of teamwork.
Full Text
About the authors
M. M. Kashapov
Demidov Yaroslavl State University
Author for correspondence.
Email: smk007@bk.ru
ScD (Psychology), Professor, Head of the Department of Pedagogy and Educational Psychology
Russian Federation, 150000, Yaroslavl, Respublikanskaya str., 108/1O. Yu. Angelova
Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod
Email: oangelova@mail.ru
PhD (Economics), Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of Information Technology and Instrumental Methods in Economics
Russian Federation, 603022, Nizhny Novgorod, Gagarin av., 23, bldg. 2T. O. Podolskaya
Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod
Email: podolskaya79@yandex.ru
PhD (Sociology), Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of University Management and Innovation in Education
Russian Federation, 603022, Nizhny Novgorod, Gagarin av., 23, bldg. 2M. V. Prokhorova
Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod
Email: personalgerente@mail.ru
PhD (Psychology), Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of Management Psychology
Russian Federation, 603022, Nizhny Novgorod, Gagarin av., 23, bldg. 2References
- Angelova O.Yu., Prohorova M.V., Podol’skaya T.O., Fortunatov A.N. Specificheskie aspekty formirovaniya professional’nyh planov odarennymi podrostkami. Yaroslavskaya psihologicheskaya shkola: istoriya, sovremennost’, perspektivy: sbornik materialov Vserossijskoj nauchnoj konferencii YArGU, 8–10 oktyabrya 2020 g. Ed. A.V. Karpov. Yaroslavl: YarGU: Filigran’, 2020. P. 333–336. (In Russian)
- Andreeva G.M., Bogomolova N.N., Petrovskaya L.A. Zarubezhnaya social’naya psihologiya XX stoletiya. Teoreticheskie podhody. Moscow: Aspekt Press, 2001. 286 p. (In Russian)
- Bedernikova I.V., Chugunova L.N. Faktory uspeshnoj komandnoj raboty. Vestnik SPbGU. 2010. Ser. 12. Vyp. 1. P. 222–227. (In Russian)
- Belbin R.M. Tipy rolej v komandah menedzherov. Moscow: HIPPO, 2003. 232 p. (In Russian)
- Gol’man T.I., Arhipova I.V., Bejti V. Vliyanie social’nyh kommunikacij na effektivnost’ upravlencheskoj deyatel’nosti. Missiya konfessij. 2020. V. 9. № 2 (43). P. 252–254. (In Russian)
- Dikaya L.G., Mahnach A.V., Laktionova A.I. Individual’nye i social’no-psihologicheskie faktory zhiznesposobnosti professional. Social’nye i gumanitarnye nauki na Dal’nem Vostoke. 2018. V. XV. Vyp. 4. P. 137–146. (In Russian)
- Zhuravlev A.L., Zhalagina T.A., Zhuravleva E.A. Vzaimodejstvie sub”ekta truda i organizacionnoj sredy kak predmet psihologicheskogo issledovaniya v usloviyah global’nyh izmenenij (vmesto vvedeniya). Sub”ekt truda i organizacionnaya sreda: problemy vzaimodejstviya v usloviyah globalizacii. Eds. A.L. ZHuravlev, T.A. Zhalagina, E.A. Zhuravleva, T.I. Korotkina. Tver: Tverskoj gos. un-t, 2019. P. 4–10. (In Russian)
- Zhuravlev A.L. Kollektivnyj sub”ekt: osnovnye priznaki, urovni i psihologicheskie tipy. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal. 2009. V. 30. № 5. P. 72–80. (In Russian)
- Zverev D.A., Shtroo V.A. Spros na treningovye uslugi po komandoobrazovaniyu v sovremennyh rossijskih organizaciyah. Social’naya psihologiya i obshchestvo. 2019. V. 10. № 1. P. 182–198. (In Russian)
- Kashapov M.M. Abnotivnost’ kak harakteristika professionalizacii myshleniya pedagoga. Vestnik Udmurtskogo universiteta. Seriya Filosofiya. Psihologiya. Pedagogika. 2019. V. 2. Vyp. 2. P. 137–147. (In Russian)
- Kashapov M.M. Psihologiya tvorcheskogo myshleniya: uchebnoe posobie. Moscow: INFRA-M, 2017. 436 p. (In Russian)
- Kashapov M.M. Resursnaya gotovnost’ pedagoga k rabote s odarennymi obuchaemymi. Chelovecheskij faktor: social’nyj psiholog. 2019. № 2 (98). P. 90–101. (In Russian)
- Kenig O., Shattenhofer K. Vvedenie v gruppovuyu dinamiku. Moscow: Institut konsul’tirovaniya i sistemnyh reshenij, 2014. 176 p. (In Russian)
- Polevaya M.V., Dzapalla S., Kamneva E.V. Upravlenie talantami: traktovka, sistematizaciya, opyt. Upravlencheskie nauki. 2018. V. 8. № 4. P. 104–111. (In Russian)
- Rubinshtejn S.L. Princip tvorcheskoj samodeyatel’nosti. Voprosy psihologii. 1986. № 4. P. 101–108. (In Russian)
- Sidorenkov A.V., Borohovskij E.F. Svyaz’ formal’nyh harakteristik rabochih grupp s ih sub”ektivno ocenivaemoj effektivnost’yu. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal. 2020. V. 41. № 1. P. 18–30. (In Russian)
- Sidorenkov A.V., Mondrus A.L. Empiricheskoe obosnovanie modeli gruppovoj splochennosti. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal. 2012. V. 33. № 2. P. 45–58. (In Russian)
- Chernov E.S. Osnovnye faktory sozdaniya uspeshnoj komandy v organizacii. Ekonomika i menedzhment innovacionnyh tekhnologij. 2014. № 1. [online]. URL: https: ekonomika.snauka.ru/2014/01/3462 (date of access: 12.06.2021). (In Russian)
- Shadrikov V.D., Mazilov V.A., Slepko Yu.N. Psihologiya pedagogicheskih sposobnostej: monografiya. Yaroslavl: RIO YAGPU, 2021. 219 p. (In Russian)
- Belbin R.M. A reply to the Belbin Team-Role Self-Perception Inventory by Furnham, Steele and Pendleton. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 1993. V. 66. № 3. P. 259–260.
- Cooren F. et al. Communication, organizing and organization: An overview and introduction to the special issue. Organization studies. 2011. V. 32. № 9. P. 1149–1170.
- Hoegl M., Gemuenden H.G. Teamwork quality and the success of innovative projects: A theoretical concept and empirical evidence. Organization science. 2001. V. 12. № 4. P. 435–449.
- Kang M., Sung M. How symmetrical employee communication leads to employee engagement and positive employee communication behaviors: The mediation of employee-organization relationships. Journal of Communication Management. 2017. V. 21. № 1. P. 82–102.
- Littlejohn S.W. Theories of human communication. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1992. 417 p.
- Mendo-Lázaro S., Polo del Rio M.I., Iglesias D., Felipe-Castano E., del Barco B.L. Construction and validation of a measurement instrument for attitudes towards teamwork. Frontiers in psychology. 2017. V. 8. Art. 1009. P. 1–10.
- Schoeneborn D. Organization as communication: A Luhmannian perspective. Management Communication Quarterly. 2011. V. 25. № 4. P. 663–689.
- Steiner I.D. Group Process and Productivity. N.-Y.: AcademicPress, 1972. 204 p.
- Stoica M.M. The Internal Communication-The Road to a Performing Organization. EIRP Proceedings. 2021. V. 16. № 1. P. 224–232.
Supplementary files
