IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v7y2018i3p49-d137205.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The PILAR Model as a Measure of Peer Ratings of Collaboration Viability in Small Groups

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin Heslop

    (School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan 2308, Australia)

  • Kylie Bailey

    (School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan 2308, Australia)

  • Jonathan Paul

    (School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan 2308, Australia)

  • Elizabeth Stojanovski

    (School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan 2308, Australia)

Abstract

The PILAR ( prospects, involved, liked, agency, respect ) model provides a dynamical systems perspective on collaboration. Two studies are performed using peer assessment data, both testing empirical support for the five Pillars that constitute members’ perceptions of collaboration viability (CoVi). The first study analyses peer assessment data collected online from 458 first-year engineering students (404 males; 54 females). A nine-item instrument was inherited from past year’s usage in the course, expanded with four additional items to elaborate upon the agency and liked Pillars. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted on student responses to test whether they thematically aligned to constructs consistent with the five Pillars. As anticipated, twelve of the thirteen items grouped into five components, each aligned with a Pillar, providing empirical evidence that the five Pillars represent perceptions of collaboration. The second study replicated the first study using a retrospective analysis of 87 items included in the Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness (CATME) peer assessment tool. The associated factor analyses resulted in five components and conceptual alignment of these components with Pillars was evident for three of five CATME components. We recommend a peer assessment instrument based upon PILAR as potentially more parsimonious and reliable than an extensive list of behaviours, such as employed by CATME. We also recommend including items that target inter-rater bias, which is aligned with the liked Pillar, that instruments such as CATME exclude.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin Heslop & Kylie Bailey & Jonathan Paul & Elizabeth Stojanovski, 2018. "The PILAR Model as a Measure of Peer Ratings of Collaboration Viability in Small Groups," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-14, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:7:y:2018:i:3:p:49-:d:137205
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/7/3/49/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/7/3/49/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ruth Wageman & Frederick M. Gordon, 2005. "As the Twig Is Bent: How Group Values Shape Emergent Task Interdependence in Groups," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(6), pages 687-700, December.
    2. Schlösser, Thomas & Dunning, David & Johnson, Kerri L. & Kruger, Justin, 2013. "How unaware are the unskilled? Empirical tests of the “signal extraction” counterexplanation for the Dunning–Kruger effect in self-evaluation of performance," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 85-100.
    3. Wilson, David Sloan & Ostrom, Elinor & Cox, Michael E., 2013. "Generalizing the core design principles for the efficacy of groups," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 90(S), pages 21-32.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Araceli Martin-Candilejo & Francisco J. Martin-Carrasco & Ana Iglesias & Luis Garrote, 2023. "Heading into the Unknown? Exploring Sustainable Drought Management in the Mediterranean Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-18, December.
    2. Bindewald, Eckart, 2017. "A survey suggests individual priorities are virtually unique: Implications for group dynamics, goal achievement and ecology," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 362(C), pages 69-79.
    3. Gowdy, John & Krall, Lisi, 2013. "The ultrasocial origin of the Anthropocene," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 137-147.
    4. Rieger, Verena & Klarmann, Martin, 2022. "The effect of cooperative team culture on innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 1256-1271.
    5. Feld, Jan & Sauermann, Jan & de Grip, Andries, 2017. "Estimating the relationship between skill and overconfidence," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 18-24.
    6. Salter, Alexander William & Tarko, Vlad, 2017. "Polycentric banking and macroeconomic stability," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(2), pages 365-395, June.
    7. Robert J. DiNapoli & Carl P. Lipo & Terry L. Hunt, 2021. "Triumph of the Commons: Sustainable Community Practices on Rapa Nui (Easter Island)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-23, November.
    8. Li Zhao & Wei Li & Hongru Zhang, 2022. "Career Adaptability as a Strategy to Improve Sustainable Employment: A Proactive Personality Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-20, October.
    9. Kawamura, Tetsuya & Mori, Tomoharu & Motonishi, Taizo & Ogawa, Kazuhito, 2021. "Is Financial Literacy Dangerous? Financial Literacy, Behavioral Factors, and Financial Choices of Households," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    10. John Gowdy & Lisi Krall, 2014. "Agriculture as a major evolutionary transition to human ultrasociality," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 179-202, July.
    11. Mark Van Vugt, 2017. "Evolutionary psychology: theoretical foundations for the study of organizations," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 6(1), pages 1-16, December.
    12. Paul Dragos Aligica & Vlad Tarko, 2014. "Institutional Resilience and Economic Systems: Lessons from Elinor Ostrom’s Work," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 56(1), pages 52-76, March.
    13. De Stobbeleir, K. & Buyens, D., 2008. "The feedback-seeker in his social labyrinth: the mediating role of goals and cooperative norms in linking empowering leadership to feedback-seeking behavior," Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School Working Paper Series 2008-13, Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School.
    14. Peter J. Baldacchino & Chantelle Camilleri & Simon Grima & Frank H. Bezzina, 2017. "Assessing Incentive and Monitoring Schemes in the Corporate Governance of Maltese Co-operatives," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(3A), pages 177-195.
    15. Schlauch, Michael, 2014. "The Integrative Analysis of Economic Ecosystems: Reviewing labour market policies with new insights from permaculture and systems theory," MPRA Paper 53757, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Dennis J. Snower, 2020. "The Socio-Economics of Pandemics Policy," CESifo Working Paper Series 8314, CESifo.
    17. Sarker, Ashutosh & Ikeda, Toru & Abe, Takaki & Inoue, Ken, 2015. "Design principles for managing coastal fisheries commons in present-day Japan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 32-38.
    18. María del Carmen Triana & Kwanghyun Kim & Seo‐Young Byun & Dora María Delgado & Winfred Arthur, 2021. "The Relationship Between Team Deep‐Level Diversity and Team Performance: A Meta‐Analysis of the Main Effect, Moderators, and Mediating Mechanisms," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(8), pages 2137-2179, December.
    19. Dunkel, Curtis S. & Nedelec, Joseph & van der Linden, Dimitri, 2023. "Reevaluating the Dunning-Kruger effect: A response to and replication of Gignac and Zajenkowski (2020)," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    20. Figge, Frank & Thorpe, Andrea Stevenson & Good, Jason, 2021. "Us before me: A group level approach to the circular economy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:7:y:2018:i:3:p:49-:d:137205. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.