Cooperative Learning

After the dot-com bust in 1999, IS organizations have been under pressure to be more productive and efficient which means that these departments have to develop, deliver and support information systems more responsively, with higher quality and with lower staff (Janz, 1999). IS organizations are unique in the sense that they use teams extensively in their operations e.g. JAD, RAD, programmer teams, etc. Hackman (1990) pointed out the cooperation is the key to a team's success and viability. This has further been validated by research that has found that cooperative learning behavior among the team members to be a significant predictor of group performance (Janz, 1999; Janz el. al., 2003).

Despite the importance of cooperative learning for successful implementation of self-managed work teams, there has been little research on what encourages this behavior among team members. This lack of research is surprising, since previous research has established the relationship between self-managing teams and higher work performance (Cohen and Ledford, 1994; Wall, Kemp, Jackson and Clegg, 1986; Beekun, 1989; Janz 1999). It is also known that IS organizations have not been very successful in the implementation of self-managing work teams (Zawacki, 1994). This study will make its contribution by determining the factors that encourage or influence cooperative learning behavior among IS development teams, thus creating a better understanding of how self-managed teams work. This will allow more effective and successful implementation of these teams which will result in the realization of the benefits associated with self-managed teams.

Background

Self- managing teams are defined as a group of independent individuals that can self-regulate their behavior on relatively whole tasks (Cummings and Griggs, 1977; Cohen et. al., 1996). The design of these work teams include a relatively whole task; members who each possess a variety of skills relevant to the group task; discretion over decisions such as schedule, assignments of members and methods of work (Cummings, 1978).

Self- managing or autonomous or composite work teams are a direct outcome of the socio-technical systems theory (Cummings, 1978). Other theories that have been used to explain self-managed team effectiveness include the work design theory (Hackman and Oldham, 1976) which focuses on task design, Self- Leadership theory which focuses on supervisory behaviors and theories of participative management which focuses on aspects of organizational context (Cohen et. al., 1996). It is clear that each of these theories emphasizes one predictor variable for group effectiveness.

Several researchers have proposed models for general group effectiveness. These models include several categories of predictors like work design, group characteristics and group processes (Cohen et. al., 1996). These models form the basis for determining effectiveness of self-managed teams as well (Cumming, 1981; Cohen, 1994; Hackman, 1986). Janz and Prasarnphanich (2003), suggested that organizational learning leads to improved work outcomes. Janz and Prasarnphanich (2003) used the cooperative learning as a form of organizational learning that focuses on learning, sharing and applying the learning to improve work outcomes. In an empirical study in 1999, Janz showed that cooperative learning influences the performance, effectiveness and satisfaction of team members of IS development teams.

Cooperative Learning theory

Cooperation, coordination and collective approaches are desirable in a team. Cooperative learning exists when team members work together to maximize their own knowledge and that of their teammates. It has been shown in several studies that cooperative learning among team members leads to higher work performance and worker satisfaction. There are three essential conditions for cooperative learning to exist: positive interdependence, promotive interaction and group process.

Positive interdependence refers to members of a group that are linked in such a way that each member feels that they cannot be successful unless all other members of the group are successful. A shared group goal that each group member identifies with and accepts is one way to achieve positive interdependence. As a by-product, if interdependence is structured in a positive manner, group members should also feel individually accountable to the group as well as for the group's work product.

Face-to-face promotive interaction is the degree to which members of the group identify the individual strengths and weaknesses in the group and seek to assist others in developing the skills necessary for the group to achieve its goal through explaining or teaching. Adequate social skills are a necessary prerequisite for effective promotive interaction.

Group process refers to groups periodically assessing: (a) those things it has done effectively; (b) those things it has done ineffectively; and (c) the measures the group might take to address the identified weaknesses.

This research on cooperative learning is done within the IS development context. As mentioned before, IS organizations are unique in several ways. Janz (1999), outlines the key characteristics of IS organizations that make them unique. These include:

1. IS work has been team based for a long time. The very nature of IS work in terms of complexity and size dictates the use of groups or teams.

2. The IS development process is unique enough in itself. It includes the translation of business requirements into IS language, elicit user requirements and then re-translate IS language into business terms.

3. The project orientation of IS development process provides a whole task, which promotes self-managed work teams but on the other hand the short nature of the projects works in the opposite direction. This conflict is unique to IS organizations.

4. IS organizations have been familiar with self-directed work. The rapid change in technology necessitates a certain degree of autonomy for the IS development teams. In a large number of instances supervisors are not familiar with technologies used by the teams to complete their tasks.

5. Prior research indicates that the implementation of self-managed teams is context specific and that research needs to be done within the specific context (Roberts and Glick, 1981).

Determinants of Cooperative learning and Hypothesis

Personality

The influence of personality on group