Communication Characteristics of Thai Effective Innovators: Team Building, Relationships, and Behaviors for Innovation Synthesizing
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This exploratory qualitative research was aimed to study the communication characteristics of effective innovators in innovation synthesizing teams in Thailand. From the patent-search database provided by the Department of Intellectual Property, multi-stage and purposive samplings were conducted to select 20 effective and renowned innovators with continuously successful innovations for in-depth interviews as the main research tool. Then thematic analysis was employed to analyze transcribed data. The results were divided into two main parts: 1) Relationship Structure: Innovation synthesizing team emphasized diversity among team members in terms of expertise to create new ideas for innovation, still shared attitudes and mindset, which enabled them to work well together,
were also focused. Each member was assigned a different role according to their abilities.
The relationship within the team was mainly task-oriented; 2) Group communication behaviors: The innovation team was open-minded in general, still groupthink behavior was found from time to time. Acceptable ideas needed to be supported by academic/solid evidence. Members of the team often worked together in informal sub-group setting as it allowed them to be more flexible and able to solve problems quickly. Information exchange and knowledge transfer behaviors occurred throughout the synthesizing process. In a larger team setting, problem solving and decision-making processes were conducted in arguing and reasoning fashions. After the processes, highly potential scenarios were proposed to the team leader for final decision.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
1) The content of article in HROD journal is the author’s wholly responsibility to research, analyze, summarize, compile, and reference data. The editorial department will not be responsible in anyway.
2) The submitted articles in HROD journal must be unpublished before and must not be currently under consideration for publication elsewhere. If it is detected for its repetition, the author must be responsible for infringement of copyright.
3) Authors will be asked to transfer copyright of the article to the Publisher. The article is prohibited to reproduce all or part of the text, unless allowed.
References
กรมทรัพย์สินทางปัญญา. (2563, 15 มิถุนายน). ระบบสืบค้นข้อมูลสิทธิบัตรออนไลน์. http://patentsearch.ipthailand.go.th
ปภัสสรา ภวภูตานนท์ ณ มหาสารคาม. (2545). การสื่อสารในกระบวนการตัดสินใจของทีมบริหารในองค์กรร่วมทุนระหว่างประเทศไทย-อเมริกันในประเทศไทย [วิทยานิพนธ์นิเทศศาสตรมหาบัณฑิต, จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย]. http://doi.org/10.14457/CU.the.2002.545
วิรยา ขุนพรหม. (2543). การสร้างแนวคิดเชิงทฤษฎีที่เกี่ยวกับความสามารถในการสื่อสารระดับกลุ่มในองค์กรไทย [วิทยานิพนธ์นิเทศศาสตรมหาบัณฑิต, จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย]. http://doi.org/10.14457/CU.the.2000.342
สำนักงานนวัตกรรมแห่งชาติ. (2563, 15 มิถุนายน). รางวัลนวัตกรรมแห่งชาติ. https://award.nia.or.th
Beckett, R., & Hyland, P. (2009). Effective communication in innovation processes. In K. Becker (Ed.), Enhancing the innovation environment: Proceedings of the 10th international CINet conference (pp. 96-106). CINet. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/27155/
Blasini, B., Dang, R. J., Minshall, T., & Mortara, L. (2017). The role of communicators in innovation clusters. In N. Pfeffermann & J. Gould (Eds.), Strategy and communication for innovation: Integrative perspectives on innovation in the digital economy (pp. 185-203). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49542-2_12
Bruhn, M., & Ahlers, G. M. (2017). Integrated communication in the innovation process—An approach to integrated innovation communication. In N. Pfeffermann & J. Gould (Eds.), Strategy and communication for innovation: Integrative perspectives on innovation in the digital economy (pp. 205-225). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49542-2_13
Chollathanrattanapong, J. (2022). The effects of transformational leadership on team innovation: The case of private universities in Thailand. Journal of Business Administration The Association of Private Higher Education Institutions of Thailand, 11(1), 91-105. https://so02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/apheitvu/article/view/254636
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95-S120. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2780243
Eppler, M. J., & McGrath, L. (2017). Pairwise communication for innovation at work. In N. Pfeffermann & J. Gould (Eds.), Strategy and communication for innovation: Integrative perspectives on innovation in the digital economy (pp. 91-111). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49542-2_7
Farace, R. V., Monge, P. R., & Russell, H. M. (1977). Communicating and organizing. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
Frey, L. R. (Ed.). (2003). Group Communication in Context: Studies of Bona Fide Groups (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Granovetter, M. (1983). The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. Sociological Theory, 1, 201-233. https://doi.org/10.2307/202051
Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380. https://doi.org/10.1086/225469
Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82-111. https://doi.org/10.2307/2667032
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. John Wiley & Sons Inc. https://doi.org/10.1037/10628-000
Hollingshead, A. B., Wittenbaum, G. M., Paulus, P. B., Hirokawa, R. Y., Ancona, D. G., Peterson, R. S., Jehn, K. A., & Yoon, K. (2005). A look at groups from the functional perspective. In M. S. Poole & A. B. Hollingshead (Eds.), Theories of small groups: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 21-62). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483328935
Infante, D. A., Rancer, A. S., & Womack, D. F. (2003). Building communication theory (4 ed.). Waveland Press.
Kratzer, J., Leenders, R.T.A.J. and Van Engelen, J.M.L. (2005). Informal contacts and performance in innovation teams. International Journal of Manpower, 26(6), 513-528. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437720510625430
Li, D., Wei, Y. D., Miao, C., Wu, Y., & Xiao, W. (2019). Innovation, network capabilities, and sustainable development of regional economies in China. Sustainability, 11(17). https://doi.org/10.3390/su11174770
Monge, P. R., & Contractor, N. S. (2003). Theories of communication networks. Oxford University Press.
Monge, P. R., Cozzens, M. D., & Contractor, N. S. (1992). Communication and motivational predictors of the dynamics of organizational innovation. Organization Science, 3(2), 250-274. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.3.2.250
Morgan, G., & Sørensen, J. B. (2014). Unpacking the relationships between conflicts and team innovation: The role of conflict management styles. Management Decision, 52(5), 925–941.
Morgeson, F. P., DeRue, D. S., & Karam, E. P. (2010). Leadership in teams: A functional approach to understanding leadership structures and processes. Journal of Management, 36(1), 5–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496419827376
Nelson, R. E. (1989). The strength of strong ties: Social networks and intergroup conflict in organizations. The Academy of Management Journal, 32(2), 377-401. https://doi.org/10.2307/256367
Özmen, Ö., Yilmaz, L., & Smith, J. (2016). The impact of socio-technical communication styles on the diversity and innovation potential of global science collaboratories. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 22(4), 521-548. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10588-016-9213-5
Putnam, L. L., & Stohl, C. (1990). Bona fide groups: A reconceptualization of groups in context. Communication Studies, 41(3), 248-265. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510979009368307
Rafols, I., & Meyer, M. (2010). Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: Case studies in bionanoscience. Scientometrics, 82(2), 263-287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0041-y
Sarker, S. (2017). Knowledge Transfer and Collaboration in Distributed U.S.-Thai Teams. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00278.x
Sherif, M. (1958). Superordinate Goals in the Reduction of Intergroup Conflict. American Journal of Sociology, 63(4), 349-356. https://doi.org/10.1086/222258
Shin, S. J., & Zhou, J. (2003). Transformational leadership, conservation, and creativity: Evidence from Korea. Academy of Management Journal, 46(6), 703–714. https://doi.org/10.2307/30040662
Therawong, S. (2018). Causal relationship model of internal communication innovation in leading organizations of thailand [Doctoral dissertation, National Institute of Development Administration]. https://repository.nida.ac.th/bitstream/handle/662723737/6398/b208129.pdf
Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. A. C. (1977). Stages of small-group development revisited. Group & Organization Studies, 2(4), 419-427. https://doi.org/10.1177/105960117700200404
Van der Voet, J., & Steijn, B. (2020). Team innovation through collaboration: how visionary leadership spurs innovation via team cohesion. Public Management Review, 23(9), 1275–1294. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2020.1743344
Weick, K. (2005). Information Systems Approach to Organizations. In E. Griffin & G. McClish (Eds.), A First Look at Communication Theory (pp. 278-288). McGraw-Hill. https://www.afirstlook.com/docs/infosystems.pdf