Debriefs: Teams Learning From Doing in Context

被引:104
作者
Allen, Joseph A. [1 ]
Reiter-Palmon, Roni [1 ]
Crowe, John [1 ]
Scott, Cliff [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Nebraska, Dept Psychol, 6001 Dodge St, Omaha, NE 68182 USA
[2] Univ N Carolina, Commun Studies, Charlotte, NC 28223 USA
关键词
debriefs; after-action reviews; huddles; team learning; sensemaking; CREW RESOURCE-MANAGEMENT; AFTER-ACTION REVIEWS; PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY; MEDICAL-EDUCATION; MODERATING ROLE; EVENT REVIEWS; WORK TEAMS; METAANALYSIS; REFLEXIVITY; PERFORMANCE;
D O I
10.1037/amp0000246
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Debriefs are a type of work meeting in which teams discuss, interpret, and learn from recent events during which they collaborated. In a variety of forms, debriefs are found across a wide range of organizational types and settings. Well-conducted debriefs can improve team effectiveness by 25% across a variety of organizations and settings. For example, the U.S. military adopted debriefs decades ago to promote learning and performance across the various services. Subsequently, debriefs have been introduced in the medical field, the fire service, aviation, education, and in a variety of organizational training and simulation environments. After a discussion of various purposes for which debriefs have been used, we proceed with a historical review of development of the concepts and use in industries and contexts. We then review the psychological factors relevant to debrief effectiveness and the outcomes for individuals, teams, and organizations that deploy debriefs. Future directions of particular interest to team researchers across a variety of psychological disciplines are presented along with a review of how best to implement debriefs from a practical perspective.
引用
收藏
页码:504 / 516
页数:13
相关论文
共 81 条
[21]  
Crowe J, 2014, RES MANAG GROUP TEAM, V16, P205, DOI 10.1108/S1534-085620140000016009
[22]  
Darling M.J., 2001, REFLECTIONS, V3, P64, DOI DOI 10.1162/15241730152695252
[23]   A Quasi-Experimental Study of After-Event Reviews and Leadership Development [J].
DeRue, D. Scott ;
Nahrgang, Jennifer D. ;
Hollenbeck, John R. ;
Workman, Kristina .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 2012, 97 (05) :997-1015
[24]   Quantity and quality: Increasing safety norms through after action reviews [J].
Dunn, Alexandra M. ;
Scott, Clifton ;
Allen, Joseph A. ;
Bonilla, Daniel .
HUMAN RELATIONS, 2016, 69 (05) :1209-1232
[25]   HELPING TEAMS TO HELP THEMSELVES: COMPARING TWO TEAM-LED DEBRIEFING METHODS [J].
Eddy, Erik R. ;
Tannenbaum, Scott I. ;
Mathieu, John E. .
PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, 2013, 66 (04) :975-1008
[26]   Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams [J].
Edmondson, A .
ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, 1999, 44 (02) :350-383
[27]   Psychological Safety: The History, Renaissance, and Future of an Interpersonal Construct [J].
Edmondson, Amy C. ;
Lei, Zhike .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY AND ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR, VOL 1, 2014, 1 :23-43
[28]   Learning from successful and failed experience: The moderating role of kind of after-event review [J].
Ellis, S ;
Mendel, R ;
Nir, M .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 2006, 91 (03) :669-680
[29]   The Effect of Filmed Versus Personal After-Event Reviews on Task Performance: The Mediating and Moderating Role of Self-Efficacy [J].
Ellis, Shmuel ;
Ganzach, Yoav ;
Castle, Evan ;
Sekely, Gal .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 2010, 95 (01) :122-131
[30]  
Fanning Ruth M, 2007, Simul Healthc, V2, P115, DOI 10.1097/SIH.0b013e3180315539