search

ZhangZeyu-UoE / DI-Sport-Analysis

The data challenge project - Sport Analysis in UoE Design Informatics.
0 stars 1 forks source link

Issue of the how much we should focus on the 'tension' within a team. #3

Open FinnKP opened 3 years ago

FinnKP commented 3 years ago

This is my interpretation of the Game Changer paper: Structural folding is beneficial because it allows the channeling of communication between groups of different histories within a team.

However We cannot have structural folding without these differences within a team. The Game Changer paper describes the 'tension' that these differences causes. It describes the tension as something which contributes to creativity - but not necessarily success.

Therefore I have these things to think about:

  1. Is tension something that we should not focus on? I think it's worth mentioning, because without tension, there's no structural fold. But if we are more focussing on success rather than creativity (see next question), the effect of tension doesn't need to be a focus, right?
  2. Should we treat success as something that involves creativity? I'm wondering if a football team's management needs to be creative in order to be successful... I suppose success can come from new methods, or just copying methods of previously successful teams. However, if we consider success as separate creativity, then that would probably give us an answer to question 1, because we could argue that the success is a result of the structural fold and creativity is a result of the tension.
ZhangZeyu-UoE commented 3 years ago

Based on Finn's interpretation of Game Changer paper, I reckon that tension is absolutely worth considering because I believe creativity is important for professional team, particularly in top competitions.

Therefore, In response to Finn's question, I believe that ideally creativity should be regarded as one dimension of success, rather than consider them separately. It should make our success definition more reasonable.

However, from a perspective of data analysis, I think it would be so challenging if we define team success with creativity, mainly because creativity is serendipitous and sometimes emotional, thus could be hard to mathematically model.

Therefore, my opinion is: studying tension as a success element could be helpful for more precise definition of team performance, but it may take huge effort to find an appropriate model (maybe impossible) if we want to focus on it. And it is possible that it can only be studied by qualitative analysis. In that case we may not able to focus on creativity much in our data analysis.