Team learning from setbacks: A study in the context of start‐up teams

• Author: Martin Hoegl,Susanne Rauter,Matthias Weiss
• Date: 01 July 2018
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/job.2278
• Published date: 01 July 2018

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Team learning from setbacks: A study in the context of start‐up

teams

Susanne Rauter |Matthias Weiss |Martin Hoegl

Munich School of Management/Institute for

Leadership and Organization, Ludwig‐

Maximilians University of Munich, Munich,

Germany

Correspondence

Matthias Weiss, Munich School of

Management/Institute for Leadership and

Organization, Ludwig‐Maximilians University

of Munich, Geschwister‐Scholl‐Platz 1, 80539

Munich, Germany.

Email: weiss@bwl.lmu.de

Summary

Although setbacks often happen as a collective experience, teams are an underresearched

organizational unit when it comes to learning from setbacks. Despite the popular view that

experiencing setbacks may facilitate learning, there are conflicting theoretical assumptions about

the influence of setbacks on learning. Whereas one theoretical perspective in this topic area is in

line with the proverbial learning from failure, a competing perspective argues that setbacks

impede learning processes. This study aims to reconcile these conflicting assumptions by propos-

ing team reflexivity as a moderator between team‐experienced setbacks and team learning.

Building on social cognitive theory, we develop a model of learning from experienced setbacks

at the team level. We test our hypotheses on a sample of 57 start‐up teams. Our results show

that the effects of team‐experienced setbacks differ depending on whether the focus is on

affective reactions to or cognitive perceptions of the setback experience. Although the cognitive

perception of setbacks generally shows a detrimental effect on team learning, the pattern of

results for an affective reaction to setbacks is more complex: The relationship between negative

affective reactions to setbacks and team learning is negative for teams with low reflexivity and

positive for teams with high reflexivity.

KEYWORDS

experienced setback, negative affect, start‐up teams, team learning, team reflexivity

1|INTRODUCTION

Setbacks happen frequently, especially for teams working in knowl-

edge‐based organizations that operate in dynamic, complex, and high‐

velocity environments, such as entrepreneurial, innovation‐oriented,

or science‐based R&D teams (Deeds, DeCarolis, & Coombs, 2000;

McGrath, 1999; Mellahi & Wilkinson, 2004; Välikangas, Hoegl, &

Gibbert, 2009). In this context, setbacks are defined as an experienced

deviation from expected and desired results (Cannon & Edmondson,

2001; Jenkins, Wiklund, & Brundin, 2014; Shepherd, Haynie, & Patzelt,

2013). At the same time, setbacks are considered to be valuable

experiences that trigger learning (Shepherd, Patzelt, & Wolfe, 2011;

Singh, Corner, & Pavlovich, 2007). As a consequence, there is an

ongoing controversial debate in the literature on how to characterize

the relationship between setbacks and learning (Zhao, 2011).

On the one hand, research points to setbacks' activating character

in terms of directing attention and resources to that setback

(Shepherd et al., 2013; Weick, Sutcliffe, & Obstfeld, 2005). In this

regard, a situation that is experienced as a setback signals that

something relevant for task accomplishment is in jeopardy or lost

(Luce, Bettman, & Payne, 1997). According to this argument, a setback

stimulates a search for further information and explanations, which in

turn triggers the information processing required to learn (Cacioppo,

Gardner, & Berntson, 1999; Weick, 1988). On the other hand,

researchers have proposed that setbacks obstruct learning processes,

especially if teams are distracted from purposeful goal pursuit due to

the negative emotions associated with the setback (Frijda, 1988;

Lazarus, 1991b; Shepherd & Cardon, 2009). In this view, setbacks limit

attention and hinder creative or integrative thinking (Estrada, Isen, &

Young, 1997; Fredrickson & Branigan, 2005; Isen, Daubman, &

Nowicki, 1987) and subsequently interfere with learning (Fredrickson

& Branigan, 2005; Masters, Barden, & Ford, 1979). Extant research

has been mostly concerned with learning from setbacks on behalf of

the individual (Shepherd & Cardon, 2009; Ucbasaran, Shepherd,

Lockett, & Lyon, 2013) and has rarely considered learning from set-

backs experienced by teams. For this context, team learning is defined

as “a change in the group's repertoire of potential behavior”(Wilson,

Goodman, & Cronin, 2007, p. 1043). Given that teams within

Received: 19 March 2016 Revised: 13 February 2018 Accepted: 16 February 2018

DOI: 10.1002/job.2278

J Organ Behav. 2018;39:783–795. Copyright © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/job 783