Sistema de Información Geográfica en Web

In this final section of the discussion, suggestions and directions for future research will be provided. A first suggestion for future research relates to the measurable constructs mentioned in the previous section. Researchers may develop and convert the emergent concepts of this qualitative research synthesis into measurable constructs. According to Gioia et al. (2013, p. 27), a subtle but significant distinction between concepts and constructs can be drawn in the sense that concepts are broader, more tenuous notions that can later be more narrowly defined, operationalized, and measured. This direction for future research, however, is not the most obvious and important suggestion in view of this qualitative research synthesis.

Perhaps the most important suggestion for future research of this synthesis is to further reinforce the 'building blocks' and construction of the proposed process model. As should be known by now, some components of the model are rather thin in terms of findings and the number of studies that have made a meaningful contribution. The design process, the responses to a team incentive system, and the degree of success of a team incentive system are all components of the process model that would embrace additional contributions from new primary studies. A closely related suggestion for future research is to initiate and conduct process studies on team incentives in settings other than the settings from this synthesis. In this synthesis, the final set of included studies was characterized by a monotonous dichotomy between healthcare settings and manufacturing-related settings. There are many other conceivable settings in which team-based structures are likely to be prevalent and in

which it would be interesting to examine the implementation and progression of a team incentive system (e.g., high-technology consulting and software development firms). New process studies on team incentives may also examine who generally initiates and comes up with the idea of implementing a team incentive system. In this synthesis, it became clear which parties were involved in the stages of design, implementation, and post-implementation and which roles they played in these stages, but this synthesis could not reveal who generally initiated a team incentive system. Given the events in which owners heavily protected their own financial interests during the design stage, it would not be entirely logical for owners to come up with the idea of implementing a team incentive system. Typically, one would expect HR managers and company management/leadership to take the initiative to introduce a team-based structure and corresponding team incentive system. However, it is also quite conceivable that subordinate team members themselves come up with the idea of possibly introducing a team incentive system, at least if these team members are generally allowed to provide some input. In addition to the party that takes the first initiative towards a team incentive system, it would be interesting to examine which events occur between the first initiative and the final decision to actually design a team incentive system, and how much time and effort this transition/progression takes.

Another interesting, potentially valuable direction for future research would be to examine whether the events, processes, stages, and emergent concepts from this synthesis would arise and occur in other domains and interventions. This direction was also proposed by Gioia et al. (2013, p. 24) who argued that many processes and concepts are similar, even structurally equivalent, across domains. It would be interesting to see whether similar events, processes, and groups of employees would arise after the implementation of a non-financial team incentive system. Potential rewards in such a non- financial incentive system may include additional days off for each member of the team, an award presentation in front of other teams, a new office space or upgraded workspace for the team, et cetera. In that case, the question would be to what extent the incentives of these rewards would lead to the same perceptions, responses, team dynamics, and staff turnover-related events as in a

financial team incentive system. It would also be interesting to examine a combination of financial and non-financial team incentives. For example, it may well be that an award presentation in front of other teams reinforces the events, perceptions, and responses that are set in motion by financial team incentives. At the level of individual team members, it may well be that informal leaders arise within a team and that their strong contribution to the team is recognized with an award presentation in front of their peers. If, in such a case, financial team incentives are added and the informal leaders and their team achieve the targets for actually receiving the monetary team rewards, the strong contribution of these informal leaders may be even further underlined and reaffirmed. In addition to examining a combination of financial and non-financial team incentives, researchers may examine whether promising concepts such as the role of team manager as intermediary and the sense of power and control also arise after the implementation of a different kind of intervention. Electronic health records (EHRs) could be such an intervention. Although perhaps widely researched, it is entirely possible that the implementation of electronic health records leads to concepts similar to the sense of power and control (e.g., a general practitioner's sense of control over his/her patients' progress) and perceptions similar to those of a complex and ever-changing system, to name a few examples.

Furthermore, when having decided to examine another phenomenon of interest or another domain, researchers may also decide to replicate the methodological combination that was applied in this study and see if it works for them. This methodological combination consists of conducting a qualitative research synthesis, applying the ENTREQ statement for the sake of transparency, and adopting a process theory perspective. This methodological combination is particularly suitable for uncovering promising concepts that are close to participants such as the role of team manager as intermediary and the sense of power and control. Qualitative synthesists and researchers pursuing the qualitative approach frequently seek to understand human behaviour and make use of thick description of the lived experience of study participants to provide true explanations. Process theory, in turn, is built in this synthesis through the use and structural analysis of narrative data. Participants not only make sense of their world in narrative terms, but they proactively plan and create narratives that are in accordance with their feelings, values, and expectations. Process explanations based on narrative data are therefore particularly close to the phenomena they claim to explain. In short, a qualitative research synthesis and process theory seek to understand human behaviour and are close to the feelings, values, and expectations of participants. These methods are therefore particularly suitable for uncovering concepts that are close to participants and normally seem to be somewhat elusive. The sense of power and control is an example of such an elusive emergent concept. The ENTREQ statement can subsequently complement the methodological combination to ensure and protect the necessary transparency and to make clear that things are not just made up. To conclude, the three aforementioned methods seem to form a proper and promising combination at first glance, but future replications should demonstrate whether this is truly the case.

Finally, speaking of methodology, relatively 'heavy' and rigorous methodological choices were made in this study. As with this study, future research endeavours could focus on conducting a qualitative research synthesis and following and documenting the precise steps of the ENTREQ statement. In that case, however, a valuable suggestion might consist of loosening the methodological choices and scope. First, qualitative synthesists may consider searching for and including grey literature. This study did not include grey literature in the actual synthesis and focused solely on peer-reviewed primary studies because at least some degree of confirmability and quality control was sought. However, assuming that grey literature meets a certain methodological standard, searching for grey literature may yield additional process studies on team incentives that could potentially enrich this synthesis' process model, especially the rather thin components of the design process, the responses to a team incentive system, and the degree of success of such a system. Grey literature may include research project papers, conference proceedings, dissertations, and master theses. While conference proceedings frequently have to comply with stated page limits, other grey literature such as research project papers and dissertations may not always have to deal with such limitations, may be of greater length, and are consequently more likely to contain valuable rich, thick descriptions. In addition to identifying additional process studies, researchers may also attempt to obtain additional process

data by loosening the data extraction process. For example, researchers may consider examining and extracting data from appendices and from other primary study sections than the sections discussed in this synthesis. Finally, with process studies that examined both financial and non-financial team incentives, researchers may also consider extracting data related to events that are set in motion by / have to do with non-financial team incentives in order to achieve an even more complete picture of a team incentive system and the precise interaction and complementarity between financial and non- financial team incentives. To recapitulate, this section has proposed various directions for future

research that relate to team incentives and the methodological combination applied in this synthesis, as well as several other interesting directions.