This study explores team dynamics in research labs, focusing on the application of the transactive memory systems (TMS) approach to understand the collaboration within the design teams. Collaboration in design teams comprising individuals with diverse skills is crucial to success. Understanding team dynamics is crucial to improving coordination and communication within these design teams. To understand the team dynamics, a qualitative study was conducted in the authors’ research lab, where data on interactions between lab members were collected through surveys. Four categories of interaction-human-to-human, human-to-software, human-to-hardware, and human-to-analog were examined using a Design Structure Matrix (DSM) to identify collaboration patterns. The analysis revealed that most human-to-human interactions were centralised around the group leader, limiting collaboration among PhD students. Human-to-software interactions showed inefficiencies in software usage, while human-to-hardware and human-to-analog interactions did not present major concerns. The results suggest that leadership centrality and siloed work patterns hindered collaboration, even within interconnected research areas. Expanding the study to human-hardware and human-analog interactions provided a more holistic view of team dynamics. This study demonstrates the value of TMS in understanding and optimising collaboration within design teams, highlighting the importance of structured communication and balanced leadership for effective teamwork.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Exploring Research Lab Dynamics: Insights from Transactive Memory Systems (TMS) for Design Teams

  • Prajwal Prabhu,
  • Atharv Anant Athavale,
  • Vishal Singh

摘要

This study explores team dynamics in research labs, focusing on the application of the transactive memory systems (TMS) approach to understand the collaboration within the design teams. Collaboration in design teams comprising individuals with diverse skills is crucial to success. Understanding team dynamics is crucial to improving coordination and communication within these design teams. To understand the team dynamics, a qualitative study was conducted in the authors’ research lab, where data on interactions between lab members were collected through surveys. Four categories of interaction-human-to-human, human-to-software, human-to-hardware, and human-to-analog were examined using a Design Structure Matrix (DSM) to identify collaboration patterns. The analysis revealed that most human-to-human interactions were centralised around the group leader, limiting collaboration among PhD students. Human-to-software interactions showed inefficiencies in software usage, while human-to-hardware and human-to-analog interactions did not present major concerns. The results suggest that leadership centrality and siloed work patterns hindered collaboration, even within interconnected research areas. Expanding the study to human-hardware and human-analog interactions provided a more holistic view of team dynamics. This study demonstrates the value of TMS in understanding and optimising collaboration within design teams, highlighting the importance of structured communication and balanced leadership for effective teamwork.