Suchergebnisse

Zusammenfassung
Open Government ist mehr als Beteiligung und Transparenz. Es ist eine Reaktion und eine Proaktion im Zuge der veränderten informationellen Machtverhältnisse durch Technologie, insbesondere durch das World Wide Web. Open Government schafft emanzipatorische Informationsinfrastrukturen, mehr Evidenz im Diskurs und mehr Verbindlichkeit sowie Kontinuität durch intersektorale und Ebenen übergreifenden Zusammenarbeit und Co-Kreation. Open Government ist Teil einer systematischen Grundlage für eine Aufsicht der Öffentlichkeit in einer globalen und offenen Governance aus Berichtswesen, Evaluation und Verbindlichkeitsmechanismen. Die Open Government Partnership bietet einen solchen globalen Verbindlichkeitsmechanismus zur Stärkung von Open Government. OGP ist somit ein Schlüssel-Mechanismus, an dem Deutschland seit 2016 teilnimmt. Obwohl Deutschland durch eine lange Tradition der Partizipation eigentlich gute Voraussetzungen im OGP-Mechanismus hat, liegt es hinter den Erwartungen, auch im internationalen Vergleich. Dabei könnte es insbesondere im Bereich der Multilevel-Governance von Open Government Rollenmodell werden.

Die Frage nach der Bereitschaft digital zu teilen und digitale Teilhabe zu ermöglichen, geht von einer Option der Kulturerbeeinrichtungen (Museen, Sammlungen und Archive) aus und hinterfragt, wo diese Bereitschaft möglicherweise eingeschränkt ist. Was genau – fehlende rechtliche Regelungen, zu geringe Finanzierung oder das eigene Selbstverständnis – hindert Kulturerbeeinrichtungen daran zu teilen? Ob und wie Kulturerbe digital zur Verfügung zu stellen ist, wie die Praxis in den Kulturerbeeinrichtungen aussieht und wie die Politik hierauf reagieren könnte, soll im Anschluss an eine gleichnamige Veranstaltung nachfolgend aufgezeigt werden.

The question of the willingness to share digitally and to make digital participation possible assumes that the cultural heritage institutions (museums, collections and archives) have an option and questions where this willingness is possibly limited. What exactly is hindering cultural heritage institutions from sharing – a lack of legal regulations, insufficient funding or their own self-perception? Whether and how cultural heritage is to be made available digitally, how this works in practice in the cultural heritage institutions and how politics could react to this will be subsequently shown following an event of the same name.

This research provides and validates a field survey measure of team mental models (TMMs) on the location of team member expertise. The measure integrates two important aspects into the expertise location TMM Index: (a) the quality of meta-knowledge about experts within the team, and (b) team consensus regarding within-team expertise. Complementary to content-specific TMM approaches, this measure can be applied across different team and task types as a screening indicator in organizational surveys. To validate the TMM Index, an experimental study ( n = 120, 40 teams) and a longitudinal field study ( n = 130, 37 teams) were conducted. Both studies provide evidence that the TMM Index is a reliable screening indicator that corresponds to content-specific accuracy and consensus scores. Multilevel analyses revealed that the TMM Index predicts team performance (self- and other ratings), team coordination, and individual variables such as knowledge credibility and self-efficacy over time.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to compare effects of different monetary team‐based reward strategies on performance, pay satisfaction, and communication behavior in computer‐mediated groups.Design/methodology/approachIn a laboratory experiment, 32 groups of undergraduate students, each consisting of three individuals, interacted electronically and performed a consensus‐reaching task. Team‐based incentives were distributed either equally (each team member received an equal share) or equitably (each team member's share depended on her/his individual contribution). A control group received no team‐based (or other) incentives.FindingsHierarchical multilevel analyses revealed that both types of team‐based rewards increased team members' motivation and pay satisfaction compared to the control condition. Moreover, the effects of team‐based rewards on performance were moderated by group members' assertiveness. In addition, team‐based rewards lead to more cooperative and task‐oriented communication in the computer‐mediated groups. Finally, equally divided rewards led to higher pay satisfaction on average than equitably divided incentives.Originality/valueOn a research level, this study shows that team‐based rewards have positive effects not only on performance but also on communication behavior in computer‐mediated groups. As a practical implication, reward effects should be considered cautiously as they might be influenced by team members' personality. Moreover, whereas no major differences were found between equity and equality principles in terms of performance, the latter seems to be preferable when satisfaction is a major issue in virtual teams.