MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409345493 · doi:10.1177/01672533241290939

Enhancing team building in project-oriented organizations: An arts-based approach

2024· article· en· W4409345493 on OpenAlexaff
Faranak Mahmoudpour, Aryan Gholipour, Maria Carmen Galang

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Systems Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCreativity in Education and Neuroscience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe artsBusinessKnowledge managementProcess managementComputer scienceVisual artsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: This study investigates the impact of an arts-based approach on team building within project-oriented organizations, focusing on Solico Kalleh Food Industry Group. Objective: The research aims to evaluate how artistic interventions affect team dynamics, including formation, conflict resolution, and overall performance. Methods: An arts-based research methodology was employed, assessing variables such as forming, storming, norming, performing, internal factors, and external factors. A paired t -test analysis was conducted to evaluate the impact of these interventions. Results: The results indicated a statistically significant positive effect on the storming variable, suggesting improved team dynamics and conflict resolution. However, decreases were observed in norming, performing, internal factors, and external factors, indicating the need for careful application of artistic methods. The forming variable showed a slight non-significant increase. Conclusions: The study highlights the potential of arts-based approaches to enhance creativity, cohesion, and conflict resolution in team building. However, strategic and nuanced implementation is necessary to balance the impact on team dynamics throughout the project lifecycle. Future research should refine these strategies for optimized integration, ultimately enriching organizational dynamics and fostering successful project outcomes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.348 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Systems ManagementSame topicCreativity in Education and NeuroscienceFrench-language works237,207