Untitled

CONFERENCE
PROCEEDINGS
Published by
IATED Academy
www.iated.org
EDULEARN14 Proceedings
6th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies
July 7th-9th, 2014 — Barcelona, Spain
Edited by
L. Gómez Chova, A. López Martínez, I. Candel Torres
IATED Academy
ISBN: 978-84-617-0557-3
ISSN: 2340-1117
Depósito Legal: V-1602-2014
Book cover designed by
J.L. Bernat
All rights reserved. Copyright © 2014, IATED
The papers published in these proceedings reflect the views only of the authors. The
publisher cannot be held responsible for the validity or use of the information therein
contained. Some conference presentations may not be available for publication.
EDULEARN14
International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies
WELCOME INTRODUCTION
Dear EDULEARN14 participants,
It is truly a pleasure to welcome you all to EDULEARN14.
Today, we have the privilege of bringing together participants from more than 80
different countries. This will provide a platform for you to network with other
colleagues and learn from diverse views in the field of education and e-learning.
In one single place, you will be able to listen to delegates from all over the world,
establish new partnerships and present your projects in a multicultural atmosphere.
During this conference, many different educational topics will be addressed by
international experts. We encourage you to get the most out of this occasion and to
discover some of the latest educational innovations that will be presented in the
conference sessions.
Also, make sure to take some time to discover the wonderful city of Barcelona, its
cultural offer, sandy beaches and local gastronomy. Without doubt, Barcelona will be
the best complement to your conference experience.
Thank you for coming to EDULEARN14 and for contributing with your valuable
experiences.
EDULEARN14 Organising Committee
EDULEARN14
International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies
EDULEARN14 COMMITTEE AND ADVISORY BOARD
Aaron Doering
Agustín López
UNITED STATES Jose F. Cabeza
SPAIN Jose Luis Bernat
Ahmad Hammoud
LEBANON Joy Kutaka-Kennedy
Ahmad Shatila
LEBANON Kalaimagal Ramakrishnan
Amparo Girós
Ana Tomás
Andrea Dominguez
Anita Habók
Annemarie Westendorp
Antonio García
Barry Phillips
Benedikt Salzbrunn
Bernadette Byrne
Celeste Varum
Celia MacDonnell
Charles Elkabas
Chelo González
Christine Besnard
Clive Young
Cristiano Luchetti
Cristina Lozano
Cristina Sayuri Côrtes Ouchi
SPAIN Karen Roland
SPAIN Laura Bordi
UNITED STATES Leo Ricciardi
HUNGARY Liisa Uusimaki
NETHERLANDS Lorena López
SPAIN Luis Gómez Chova
UNITED KINGDOM Mª Jesús Suesta
AUSTRIA Manuela Repetto
UNITED KINGDOM Maria de Nazaré Ribeiro
PORTUGAL Maria Fabregas Janeiro
UNITED STATES Maria Porcel
CANADA Maria Schwarz-Woelzl
SPAIN Maria Susy Rogers
CANADA Mary Michele Baron
UNITED KINGDOM Mauricio Novoa
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES Mdutshekelwa Ndlovu
SPAIN Mónica Fernández
BRAZIL Monica Roose-van Duijn
Daria Cantù
ITALY Nadezda Rika
David Martí
SPAIN Noel Powell
David Webster
Denise Hope
UNITED KINGDOM Norma Barrachina
AUSTRALIA Olga Burukina
SPAIN
SPAIN
UNITED STATES
MALAYSIA
CANADA
FINLAND
UNITED STATES
SWEDEN
SPAIN
SPAIN
SPAIN
ITALY
BRAZIL
UNITED STATES / MEXICO
SPAIN
AUSTRIA
UNITED KINGDOM
CANADA
AUSTRALIA
SOUTH AFRICA
SPAIN
NETHERLANDS
LATVIA
SOUTH AFRICA
SPAIN
RUSSIAN FEDERATION
Douglas Baleshta
CANADA Olga Teruel
Eeva Kuoppala
FINLAND Olivier Marty
FRANCE
SPAIN Paolo Somigli
ITALY
Eladio Duque
Elena Ors
Elham Arabi
Evridiki Zachopoulou
SPAIN Patricia Reynolds
SINGAPORE Peggy (Margaret) Burrows
GREECE Peter Haber
Gary Tse
HONG KONG Peter Willmot
Grace Hoi Yee Wong
HONG KONG Petr Sudicky
Ida Cortoni
ITALY Rahimah Embong
Ignacio Ballester
SPAIN Richard Alo
Ignacio Candel
SPAIN
UNITED STATES
NEW ZEALAND
AUSTRIA
UNITED KINGDOM
CZECH REPUBLIC
MALAYSIA
UNITED STATES
SPAIN Rosa Karnita
UNITED KINGDOM
Irina Khoutyz
RUSSIAN FEDERATION Sergio Pérez
SPAIN
Irina Pervova
RUSSIAN FEDERATION Shani Hartley
AUSTRALIA
Ismael Serrano
SPAIN Sindy Riebeck
GERMANY
Iván Martínez
SPAIN Thomas Richter
Javier Domenech
SPAIN Todd Carney
Javier Martí
SPAIN Vassilis Argyropoulos
Joanna Lees
Joanne Davies
John Polesel
FRANCE Victor Fester
QATAR Xavier Lefranc
AUSTRALIA Zvi Koren
GERMANY
UNITED STATES
GREECE
NEW ZEALAND
FRANCE
ISRAEL
EDULEARN14
International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies
CONFERENCE SESSIONS
ORAL SESSIONS, 7th July 2014.
Learning Management Systems (LMS)
Open Educational Resources
Meet the Keynote
m-Learning Technologies for Education
Intercultural Issues in International Cooperation
Experiences in Primary and Secondary Education
Language Learning Innovations (1)
Diversity Issues
Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS)
Educational Software (1)
Pre-service and In-service Teacher Experiences (1)
Videos for Learning
University-Industry Cooperation
Emerging Technologies in Primary and Secondary Education (1)
Language Learning Technology (1)
Links between Education and Research
Technology-Enhanced Learning (1)
MOOCS: Massive Open Online Courses (1)
Pre-service and In-service Teacher Experiences (2)
e-Learning Projects and Experiences (1)
Training Educational Staff
STEM Experiences in Primary and Secondary Education
Language Learning Technology (2)
Experiences in Engineering Education (1)
Technology-Enhanced Learning (2)
MOOCS: Massive Open Online Courses (2)
Evaluation & Assessment of Student Learning
Learning Experiences in Higher and Further Education
Collaborative and Problem-based Learning
Experiences in Special Education
Language Learning Innovations (2)
Experiences in Engineering Education (2)
POSTER SESSIONS, 7th July 2014.
Learning Experiences in Education
Technology in Education and Educational Software
EDULEARN14
International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies
ORAL SESSIONS, 8th July 2014.
Emerging Technologies in STEM education
Educational Software (2)
Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs)
Web 2.0 and Social Networking (1)
International Cooperation Experiences
Experiences in Health & Life Sc. Education (1)
Innovations in Foreign Language Education
Pedagogical Innovations and Teaching Practices
Emerging Technologies in Education
Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia
e-Assessment
Web 2.0 and Social Networking (2)
Entrepreneurship and Employability Education
Experiences in Health & Life Sc. Education (2)
Language Learning Technology (3)
Pedagogical Innovations in Business & Management
Mobile and Tablet Technologies (1)
Game-based Learning
Online Assessment
Flipped Classroom
Curriculum Design and Development
Pedagogical and Technological Innovations in Education
Language Learning in Primary and Secondary Education
Experiences in Business & Management Education
Mobile and Tablet Technologies (2)
e-Learning Projects and Experiences (2)
Quality Assurance and Assessment of Student Learning
Distance Learning
Experiences in Research
Pedagogical Innovations in Learning and Teaching Methodologies
Emerging Technologies in Primary and Secondary Education (2)
Educational Management
Technology-Enhanced Learning (3)
e-Learning Projects and Experiences (3)
Quality Assurance / Standards and Accreditation
Enhancing the Learning Experience
STEM Education
Experiences in Education
Learning Experiences in Primary and Secondary Education
Global, Social and Legal Issues in Education
POSTER SESSIONS, 8th July 2014.
Pedagogical Innovations and Experiences
New Challenges in Education and Research
EDULEARN14
International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies
VIRTUAL SESSIONS
Academic Research Projects
Barriers to Learning and Diversity Issues
Blended and Distance Learning
Career Development and Training
Computer Supported Collaborative Work
Curriculum Design and Development
E-content Management and Development
e-Learning Projects and Experiences
Education, Development and Globalization
Educational Management
Educational Software & Serious Games
Educational Trends and Best Practice Contributions
Emerging Technologies in Education
Enhancing Learning and the Undergraduate Experience
Evaluation and Assessment of Student Learning
Experiences in Research
International Projects
Learning and Teaching Methodologies
Learning Experiences in Higher and Further Education
Learning Experiences in Primary and Secondary Education
Links between Education and Research
New Learning/Teaching Models
Pedagogical Innovations in Education
Pre-service and In-service Teacher Experiences
Quality Assurance/Standards and Accreditation
Special Education
Student Support in Education
Technology-Enhanced Learning
The Bologna Declaration and ECTS Experiences
EDULEARN14
International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies
ABOUT EDULEARN14 Proceedings CD
HTML Interface: Navigating with the Web browser
This CD includes all presented papers at EDULEARN14 conference. It has been
formatted similarly to the conference Web site in order to keep a familiar environment
and to provide access to the papers trough your default Web browser (open the file
named " EDULEARN14.html").
An Author Index, a Session Index, and the Technical Program are included in HTML
format on this disk to aid you in finding conference papers. Using these HTML files as
a starting point, you can access other useful information related to the conference.
The links in the Session List jump to the corresponding location in the Technical
Program. The links in the Technical Program and the Author Index open the selected
paper in a new window. These links are located on the titles of the papers and the
Technical Program or Author Index window remains open.
Full Text Search: Searching EDULEARN14 index file of cataloged PDFs
If you have Adobe Acrobat Reader version 6 or later (www.adobe.com), you can
perform a full-text search for terms found in EDULEARN14 proceedings papers.
Important: To search the PDF index, you must open Acrobat as a stand-alone
application, not within your web browser, i.e. you should open directly the file
"EDULEARN14.pdf" in the CD with your Adobe Acrobat or Acrobat Reader
application.
This PDF file is attached to an Adobe PDF index that allows text search in all PDF
papers by using the Acrobat search tool (not the same as the find tool). The full-text
index is an alphabetized list of all the words used in the collection of conference
papers. Searching an index is much faster than searching all the text in the documents.
To search the EDULEARN14 Proceedings index:
1. Open the Search PDF pane through the menu "Edit > Advanced Search" or click in the
PDF bookmark titled "SEARCH PAPERS CONTENT".
2. The "EDULEARN14_index.pdx" should be the currently selected index in the Search
window (if the index is not listed, click Add, locate the index file .pdx on the CD, and
then click Open).
3. Type the search text, click Search button, and then proceed with your query.
For Acrobat 9 and later:
1. In the “Edit” menu, choose “Search”. You may receive a message from Acrobat asking
if it is safe to load the Catalog Index. Click “Load”.
2. A new window will appear with search options. Enter your search terms and proceed
with your search as usual.
For Acrobat 8:
1. Open the Search window, type the words you want to find, and then click Use
Advanced Search Options (near the bottom of the window).
2. For Look In, choose Select Index.
3. In the Index Selection dialog box, select an index, if the one you want to search is
available, or click Add and then locate and select the index to be searched, and click
Open. Repeat as needed until all the indexes you want to search are selected.
4. Click OK to close the Index Selection dialog box, and then choose Currently Selected
Indexes on the Look In pop-up menu.
5. Proceed with your search as usual, selecting other options you want to apply, and click
Search.
For Acrobat 7 and earlier:
1. In the “Edit” menu, choose “Full Text Search”.
2. A new window will appear with search options. Enter your search terms and proceed
with your search as usual.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TEAMWORK COORDINATION AND
SUCCESS AT EDUCATIONAL CONTEXTS
Carmen de Pablos Heredero1, Sajid Haider1, Jenny Giuselli Torres de
Navarrete2, Antón García Martínez3
1
Rey Juan Carlos University (SPAIN)
Technical State University in Quevedo (ECUADOR)
3
SENESCYT, Prometeo, Quito (ECUADOR) / Cordoba University (SPAIN)
2
Abstract
Teamwork has emerged as a contemporary management technique, the no adoption of which has
been considered as a cause of failure to implement change initiatives in organizations. Studying
teamwork in relation to the implementation of organizational routines to improve results in on line
Educational Systems is important because many practices for improving e-learning systems cannot be
used without a collaborative teamwork. The relational coordination model is applied to measure
teamwork to a representative sample of lecturers and students that teach on e-learning based
systems in Spain and in this paper, the results are presented. Given the importance of interactions
among educational professionals, the model of relational coordination is well positioned to address
teamwork quality in the University contexts. However, to the researchers’ knowledge, this is the first
research applying relational coordination model in the context of organizational routines
implementation in e-learning processes.
Keywords: Innovation, technology, research projects.
1
INTRODUCTION
Empirical research suggests that organizational routines have a substantial effect on final results at elearning activities. However, the implementation of organizational routines does not take place in
vacuum. E-learning professionals from different specialties participate in a complex, multidisciplinary,
and time sensitive process of education which requires a collaborative teamwork between various
parts [1].
E-learning literature highlights the need for collaborative teamwork for achieving best results in the
teaching and learning process. Although the importance of organizational routines and collaborative
teamwork have been well recognized in e-education literature, little attention has been given to study
the relationship between these two factors. The present research intends to examine this relationship
through the application of relational coordination model [2], [3] as a measure of teamwork quality that
can be in later analysis applied to the success of e-learning contexts.
“Relational coordination is a mutually reinforcing process of interaction between communication and
relationships carried out for the purpose of task integration” [3], pp, 301. Shared knowledge, shared
goals and mutual respect are the relationship dimensions, while frequent, timely, accurate, and
problem-solving communications are the communication dimensions of relational coordination. Figure
1 shows the relational and communication dimensions of relational coordination and indicates the
interaction between them.
3URFHHGLQJVRI('8/($51&RQIHUHQFH
WKWK-XO\%DUFHORQD6SDLQ
,6%1
Figure 1: Dimensions of relational coordination [4]
Source: Gittell et al. [4]
In order to conceptualize teamwork quality as relational coordination among team members, this
paper takes insights from [3] and [4]. [3] was of the view “If groups are sets of organizational members
who must work interdependently to achieve a task designated by the organization, and coordination is
the management of interdependence, then coordination is arguably a central element of what effective
groups do.” As teamwork is the ability of a group of people to work together, it can be argued that
groups working on interdependent activities are in fact doing teamwork. If coordination is what the
groups do and teamwork is also what the groups do, then teamwork will be reflected by the
coordination in a team. According to Gittell’s distinct point of view, relational coordination refers to the
interactions among participants [3], p. 1410. As the quality of teamwork has also been called as the
quality of interactions in teams [5], p. 436), the researcher argues that the level of relational
coordination among the members involved in reperfusion process will reflect the quality of their
teamwork.
More specifically, according to Gittell’s [3] point of view, “the process of interactions among [group or
team] participants has been recognized as a more spontaneous form of coordination—also referred as
‘teamwork’]—and can be conceived as relational coordination (p.1410). From our way of thinking, the
coincidence of [3], and [5] point of view on the interactions among participants—i.e. one side of
research calls the quality of interactions as teamwork quality, while the other calls the quality of
interactions as relational coordination [3]—, affirm that relational coordination manifests the teamwork
quality in teams. In this sense, teamwork quality is a multidimensional construct at a continuum of
willingness and commitment of team members to share collective goals [6] and knowledge [7], have a
mutual respect for other team members [8],[2],[3],[4] and communicate effectively [8]. These
explanations suggest that relational coordination is well positioned to explain the quality of teamwork.
In the following paragraphs, a relationship between each individual dimension of relational
coordination and the implementation of organizational routines is discussed.
2
2.1
RELATIONSHIP DIMENSIONS
Shared knowledge
The quality of teamwork is indicated by the presence in participants the attitude toward the exchange
of ideas and knowledge sharing [9]. [2], [3] notion of relational coordination posits that the participants
working on a work process need to know how their tasks fit together with the tasks of others so that
the impact of one’s action on the others’ actions could be determined. [2] idea coincides with [10]
‘team knowledge’ in which task domains are translated into shared mental models, the procedure are
conceptualized in a shared understanding [5], and there exists a specific knowledge about the task
related behaviors of other team members [11]. A common understanding in team members about how
to execute the next task in an interrelated work process and recognize process related disruptions [6]
is an important determinant of teamwork quality [5], [6].
Knowledge sharing has taken attention in e-learning literature after a recent shift away from individual
behavior change theories [12], and increasing attention toward organizational level intervention [13].
Knowledge management [14] and organizational learning [15] theories are taking ground for empirical
research in e-learning contexts. The personal knowledge approach to knowledge management
recommends that for organizational learning to be flourished, individuals should be encouraged to
share knowledge.
It is generally maintained that the knowledge in education is characterized by proliferation of
information, fragmentation, distribution, and high context dependency. There exists complexity in
managing healthcare knowledge especially when care providers face uncertainty, rapid change and
time constraints [16], [3], [17]. The need for applying specialized skills and knowledge in a timely
manner [18], p. 1156) requires the organizations to develop a knowledge sharing climate [7].
The notion of knowledge sharing is having importance in education literature under the umbrella of
‘communities of practice’. The concept of communities of practice (CoP), were originally introduced in
Education and Management literature. Using a knowledge management perspective for improving the
implementation of organizational routines, [19] emphasize on developing a collaborative culture of
knowledge sharing for improvement in the implementation of these routines.
These ideas can be extended to the implementation of evidence based practices/strategies for
reducing door to balloon time.
In e-learning contexts, knowledge sharing is important among the participants involved in the process,
and is more than just communicating.
2.2
Shared goals
The importance of shared goal (or goal sharing) for achieving best results in e-learning literature has
long been discussed. Goal sharing refers to the members’ priority to team’s common task [20], [21]
over other obligations [5]. In the absence of such priorities negative outcomes are expected from a
work process as the participants tend to pursue their individual functional goals without taking in
account the super-ordinate goal of the whole process [22]. Collaborative approaches in e-learning
environments emphasize on sharing responsibility and building a consensus among team members
towards achieving a common goal [23], [24]. Working together toward a prioritized common goal
reflects the team members’ shared vision which has been considered as a prescription for `effective
multi-professional teamwork’ [25]. Although teamwork is a process of achieving a common goal, the
existence of cognitions, attitudes and behaviors in team members toward a shared effort for a
collective team goal is important for teamwork quality [6]. Shared goal as an indicator of teamwork
quality provides basis for effective relationships in organizations. Building such relations positively
affects the implementation [26].
Moreover, effective implementation of organizational routines is dependent on the sharing of common
goal among all involved. From an organizational culture perspective, organizations with a culture of
sharing common values and goals are most likely to succeed in their implementation efforts [27]. The
PRISM model (A Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model), developed by [28]
recognizes organizational culture with shared goals as an important organizational characteristic for
the implementation of evidence based practices.
2.3
Mutual respect
In order to achieve better quality of teamwork, team members working to achieve a common goal
should have mutual respect for each other [5]. More precisely, the members working on a same work
process should display respect for other participants’ work [29], take into account others’ ideas,
display a contributive behavior [5], and value the contributions of others [3].
Mutual respect is especially important for a work process in which many professionals with highly
specialized skills, and different occupational identities and status are involved [29]. Mutual respect in
this case is important because the differences in status and occupational identities serve as a source
of pride, as well as a source of invidious comparison [29]. People working on e-learning programs
have different status and occupational identities. However, every one’s work is important for achieving
good results. The existence of distinct occupational identities creates a potential for divisive
relationships, and can hamper the coordination process if disrespect takes place over mutual respect.
Implementation of organizational routines requires collaborative relationships among all involved [30].
[8] state that collaborative relationships, among other factors, depend on mutual respect. People
working on a process of implementing organizational routines require positive interactions for success.
However, such interactions require a sense of mutual respect [32]. In an ethnographic study on the
dynamics of interactions between organizational routines developers and trainers, and organizations
and providers that deliver them, [31] identified mutual respect among participants as a primary factor
for the successful implementation of the most efficient model. So building a culture of mutual respect
is an important facilitator theme for the implementation of organizational routines oriented to results.
3
COMMUNICATION DIMENSIONS: FREQUENT, TIMELY, ACCURATE, AND
PROBLEM-SOLVING COMMUNICATION
Communication has been seen as an important means of information exchange [31]. The Information
Engineering approach takes communication as a linear transmission of information within an already
established social context. Social construction approach to communication posits that communication
has the ability not only to transmit information but also to create the dynamic context in which people
work [33]. [34] describes that “communication is not just a tool that groups use; groups are best
regarded as a phenomenon that emerges from communication”. Thus, being an important means of
information exchange [31], communication has been considered an important component of teamwork
quality [5]. In other words, the quality of communication in teams indicates the quality of teamwork
among participants. The quality of communication, as addressed by [3], is the frequency, timeliness,
accuracy, and problem-solving nature of communication.
3.1
Frequent communication
Frequent communication refers to the extensiveness of the communication among the members of a
team [5]. Frequent communication develops familiarity and helps to build relationships among the
team members. This extensive type of communication enhances the quality of teamwork through its
ability to respond rapidly to new information by minimizing delays [3], [29], [35].
3.2
Timely communication
Lack of timeliness indicates the poor quality of communication [29]. Along with other established
objectives like cost and quality, achieving time objective is fundamental to team performance [36],
[37]. E-learning processes that involve strict time constraints require fast response [8], and are less
likely to reach time objective if lack timely communication among the participants involved. The extent
to which the team members are able to communicate in a timely fashion will indicate the quality of
teamwork in work process. It implies that in order to implement well designed e-learning processes,
organizational change will be required to meet the challenge of improving information infrastructure for
establishing effective and timely communication among e-learning actors.
3.3
Accurate communication
E-learning organizations facing high velocity environment need to operate error free [17]. A rapid
response to a training problem based on false information can bring negative outcomes. Focus on the
accuracy of communication is essential for reducing the occurrence of potential errors [3]. The
importance of accurate communication for task group effectiveness has been recognized in [37]. It
implies that accurate communication is an important component of teamwork quality. Theoretical
models developed for predicting the successful implementation of organizational routines have
highlighted the importance of accurate communication.
3.4
Problem solving communication
Work processes that involve interdependent activities require joint problem solving for the problems
occurred [3]. Problem solving requires the members to interact positively for achieving quality
teamwork through problem solving communication [38], [39], [5]. Problem solving communication can
be considered as an important indicator of teamwork quality because it avoids the negative cycle of
blaming and information hiding, keeping the focus instead on continuous improvement and learning
[4], p. 155. Non blaming culture and openness of communication have been considered important
components of positive interpersonal relationships and the quality of communication, which are
important components of teamwork quality [5]. So, problem solving is an effective interpersonal skill
for effective teamwork [40], [41].
Implementation process is composed of a set of generic activities that occur across an entire problemsolving sequence [42], p. 320. [43] describe that problem solving in total quality management (TQM)/
continuous quality improvement (CQI) implementation usually consists of teamwork to identify the
problem, generate ideas for solutions, evaluate alternatives, and reach consensus decision making (p.
3). Using the same sense for the implementation of organizational routines, these issues need to be
communicated among the participants involved in implementation process. [44] describe that
developing problem solving competence in professionals is important for the implementation of the
evidence based practice model. [45] also suggest that implementation needs frequent problemsolving.
Based on existing literature, following tables summarize the dimensions of relational coordination as
indicator of teamwork quality and the effect of relational coordination on the implementation of
organizational routines consecutively.
Table 1. Relational coordination as an indicator of teamwork quality (Haider, 2013)
Shared knowledge
Cook et al., 2000; Hoegl and Gemuenden, 2001; Sapsed et al., 2002; Hoegl
et al., 2003; Faraj and Xiao, 2006; Radaelli et al.2011
Shared goals
Hackman, 1987; Campion et al., 1993; Bradley et al., 2001; Hoegl and
Gemuenden, 2001 Bradley et al., 2006ª; Curry et al., 2011
Mutual respect
Seaburn et al., 1996; Hoegl and Gemuenden, 2001; Palinkas et al., 2009
Frequent
communication
Hoegl and Gemuenden, 2001
Timely
communication
Accurate
communication
Problem
solving
communication
Schrader and Goepfert, 1996; Gemuenden and Lechler, 1997
O’Reilly et al., 1977 Faraj and Xiao, 2006
Rubinstein 2000, Stevenson and Gilly, 1993 Bradley 2006a; Hoegl and
Gemuenden, 2001 Stevens and Campion, 1999; Jackson et al., 2006
Table 2. The effect of relational coordination on the implementation of Organizational routines (Haider,
2013)
Shared knowledge
Sandars and Heller, 2006; Barwick et al., 2009; Mendel et al. 2008
Shared goals
Wright, 2001Nah and Leu, 2001; Felstein and Glasgow, 2008
Mutual respect
Friedman and Drews, 2005; Brown et al., 2008; Palinkas et al. 2009
Frequent
communication
Hoegl and Gemuenden, 2001; Balas et al., 2012
Timely
communication
Accurate
communication
Problem solving
communication
Faraj and Xiao, 2006; Williams et al., 1999
Lekan et al., 2010
Bryson and Bromiley, 1993; Huq and Martin, 2000 Sanares and Heliker,
2002; Metz et al., 2007
REFERENCES
[1]
De Pablos Heredero, C.; García Martínez, A.; Perea Muñoz, J.M. (2013). The importance of
coordination of quality at Universities: an intercontinental comparison in Science Faculties.
Comunicación presentada en el congreso Internacional de la Asociación Latinoamericana de
Tecnología 2013, ALTEC 2013, Porto, Octubre.
[2]
Gittell, J.H., K. Fairfield, B. Bierbaum, W. Head, R. Jackson, M. Kelly, R. Laskin, S. Lipson, J.
Siliski, T. Thornhill, J. Zuckerman. (2000). Impact of relational coordination on quality of care,
postoperative pain and functioning, and the length of stay: A nine hospital study of surgical
patients. Medical Care 38(8), pp. 807-819.
[3]
Gittell, J. H. (2002). Coordinating mechanisms in care provider groups: Relational coordination
as a mediator and input uncertainty as a moderator of performance effects. Management Sci.
48, pp. 1408–1426.
[4]
Gittell, J.H., Weinberg, D., Pfefferle, S., Bishop, C. (2008). “Impact of relational coordination on
job satisfaction and quality of care: A study of nursing homes,” Human Resource Management
Journal, 18(2), pp. 154-170.
[5]
Hoegl, M., Gemuenden, H.G. (2001). Teamwork quality and the success of innovative projects:
a theoretical concept and empirical evidence. Organization Science 12 (4), pp. 435–449.
[6]
Hoegl, M.; Parboteeah, K.P. and Gemuendenc, H.G. (2003). When teamwork really matters:
task innovativeness as a moderator of the teamwork–performance relationship in software
development projects, Journal Engineering and Technology Management. 20, pp. 281–302.
[7]
Radaelli, G. Mura, M. Spiller, N. (2011). Intellectual capital and knowledge sharing: the
mediating role of organizational knowledge-sharing climate Knowledge Management Research
& Practice, 4, pp. 342-352.
[8]
Seaburn, D.B., Lorenz, A.D., Gunn, W.B. Jr., Gawinski, B.A., & Mauksch, L.B. (1996). Models of
Collaboration, New York: Basic Books.
[9]
Hoegl, M.; Parboteeah, K.P. and Gemuendenc, H.G. (2003). When teamwork really matters:
task innovativeness as a moderator of the teamwork–performance relationship in software
development projects, Journal Engineering and Technology Management. 20, pp. 281–302.
[10]
Cooke, N.J., Salas, E., Cannon-Bowers, and J.A. & Stout, R.J. (2000). Measuring Team
Knowledge. Human Factors, 42, pp.1-151.
[11]
Sapsed, J., Bessant, J., Partington, D., Tranfield, D., and Young, M. (2002). Teamworking and
Knowledge Management: A Review of Converging Themes, International Journal of
Management Reviews, 4, 1, pp. 71-85.
[12]
Godin G, Belanger-Gravel A, Eccles M, Grimshaw J (2008). Healthcare professionals' intentions
and behaviours: a systematic review of studies based on social cognitive theories. Implement
Science, 3:36.
[13]
De Pablos Heredero C.; Diaz OCampo, E.; Perea Muñoz, J., García Martínez, A. (2014). The
influence of relational coordination in the position of universities in the quality rankings at
Ecuador, Inted conference, Valencia, March, 2014.
[14]
Nonaka, I. (1991). "The knowledge creating company". Harvard Business Review 69 (6 Nov–
Dec): 96–104. http://hbr.harvardbusiness.org/2007/07/the-knowledge-creating-company/es.
[15]
Argyris, C. and Schön, D.A. (1978). Organizational Learning, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Bessant, J. and Francis, D. (1999), “Developing strategic continuous improvement capability”,
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 19, 11, pp. 1106-19.
[16]
Faraj, S., Sproull. L. (2000). Coordinating expertise in software development teams.
Management Sci. 46(12), pp.1554–1568.
[17]
Faraj, S. and Xiao, Y. (2006). Coordination in fast response organizations, Management
Science, 52, 8, pp. 1155–1169.
[18]
Faraj, S., Sproull. L. (2000). Coordinating expertise in software development teams.
Management Sci. 46(12), pp. 1554–1568.
[19]
Sandars, J., Heller. R. (2006). Improving the implementation of evidence-based practice: a
knowledge management perspective, Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 12 , 3, pp. 341–
346.
[20]
Hackman, J. R. (1987). The design of work teams. J. W. Lorsch, ed. Handbook of
Organizational Behavior. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 67–102.
[21]
Campion, M. A., Medsker, G.J., and Higgs, A.C. (1993). Relations between work group
characteristics and effectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel
Psych. 46(4), pp. 823–850.
[22]
March, J.G.; Simon H.A. (1958). Organizations. New York: Wiley.
[23]
Mailick, M. D., Ashley, A. A. (1981). Politics of interprofessional collaboration: Challenge to
advocacy. Social Casework, 62, pp. 131-137.
[24]
Ellingson, L.L. (2002). Communication, Collaboration, and Teamwork among Health Care
Professionals, A Quarterly Review of Communication Research (ISSN: 0144-4646), 21, 3, pp.
1-43.
[25]
Freeman, M., Miller, C and Ross, N. (2000). The impact of individual philosophies of teamwork
on multi-professional practice and the implications for education, Journal of Interprofessional
Care, 14, 3, pp. 237-247.
[26]
Damschroder, L., Aron, D., Keith, R., Kirsh, S., Alexander, J., & Lowery, J. (2009). Fostering
implementation of health services research findings into practice: A consolidated framework for
advancing implementation science. Implementation Science, 4, p.50.
[27]
Nah, F.F., Lau, J.L. (2001). Critical factors for successful implementation of enterprise systems,
Business Process Management Journal, 7, 3, pp. 286-296.
[28]
Felstein, A.C., Glasgow. R.E. (2008). A Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability
Model (PRISM) for Integrating Research Findings into Practice, The Joint Commission Journal
on Quality and Patient Safety, 34, 4, pp. 228-243.
,
[29]
Gittell, J.H. (2011). “New directions for relational coordination theory,” in Oxford Handbook of
Positive Organizational Scholarship, eds. K.S. Cameron and G. Spreitzer. Oxford University
Press.
[30]
Dopson, S., Fitzgerald, L. (2006). The role of the middle manager in the implementation of
evidence-based health care, Journal of Nursing Management 14, pp. 43–51.
[31]
Palinkas, L. A., Aarons, G. A., Chorpita, B. F., Hoagwood, K., Landsverk, J., & Weisz, J. R.
(2009). Cultural exchange and the implementation of evidence-based practices: Two case
studies. Research on Social Work Practice, 19(5), pp. 602-612.
[32]
Pinto, M. B., Pinto, J. K. (1990). Project team communication and cross-functional cooperation
in new program development. J. Product Innovation Management 7, pp. 200–212.
[33]
Gergen, K. J. (1994). Realities and relationships: Soundings in social construction. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
[34]
Frey, L. R. (1994). Group communication in context: Studies of natural groups. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[35]
Balas, M.C., Vasilevskis, E.E., Burke, W.J. et al. (2012). Critical Care Nurses' Role in
Implementing the ''ABCDE Bundle'' Into Practice, Critical Care Nurse, 32, pp. 35-47.
[36]
Schrader, S.; Goepfert, J. (1996). Structuring manufacturer-supplier interaction in new product
development teams: An empirical analysis. H. G. Gemuenden, T. Ritter, A.
[37]
Gemuenden, H. G., and Lechler, T. (1997). Success factors of project management: The critical
few. Reviewed paper, Portland Internat. Conf. Management of Eng. Tech. Portland, Oregon
July 27–31.
[38]
Rubinstein, S. (2000). The impact of co-management on quality performance: The case of the
Saturn Corporation. Indust. Labor Relations Rev. 53(1), pp. 197-220.
[39]
Stevenson, W., Gilly, M.C. (1993). Problem solving networks in organizations: Intentional design
and emergent structure. Social Sci. Res. 22, pp. 92-113.
[40]
Stevens. M. J., and Campion, M. A. (1999). Staffing work teams: Development and validation of
a selection test for teamwork setting. Journal of Management, 25, pp. 207-228.
[41]
Jackson, S.E., Chuang, C.H., Harden, E.E. and Jiang, Y. (2006). Toward developing Human
Resource Management systems for knowledge-intensive teamwork, Personnel and Human
Resources Management, Vol.15, pp. 17-70.
[42]
Bryson, John M. and Philip Bromiley (1993). Critical Factors Affecting the Planning and
Implementation of Major Projects, Strategic Management Journal, 14(5), pp. 319-337.
[43]
Huq, Z. and Martin, T.N. (2000). Workforce Cultural Factors in TQM/CQI Implementation in
Hospitals, Health Care Management Review, 25(3), pp. 80-93.
[44]
Sanares D., Heliker D (2002). Implementation of an evidence-based nursing practice model:
disciplined clinical inquiry, Journal of Nursing Staff Development 18, pp. 233–238.
[45]
Metz, A.J.R., Blasé, K., & Bowie, L. (2007b). Implementing evidence-based practices: Six
“drivers” of success, Research-to-Results brief. Washington, DC: Child Trends.
[46]
Haider, S. (2013). The implementation of evidence based practices in primary angioplasty.
Doctoral Dissertation, URJC, Madrid.