Measuring team knowledge: A window to the cognitive underpinnings of team performance.

The authors report an effort aimed at developing and evaluating measures of taskwork and teamwork team knowledge for teams in which members differ in knowledge backgrounds. These measures were used in a study with 36 teams to explore the cognitive underpinnings of team performance variations due to cross-training regime. The authors demonstrate that these measures are valid and provide team performance information that complements outcome and behavioral measures. Teams exposed to full cross-training acquired more taskwork and teamwork knowledge than control teams or teams exposed to a conceptual version of cross-training. Measures of team knowledge provide information regarding team task performance critical for system design and training programs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Mental efficacy and physical efficacy at the team level: Inputs and outcomes among newly formed action teams.

The authors demarcated mental efficacy and physical efficacy at the team level, and they explored these 2 factors as outcomes of 4 potential inputs and as predictors of 3 outcomes among 110 newly formed action teams in a military setting. Both types of team efficacy benefited from greater team size and an initial experience of enactive mastery, but they were not influenced by teams' female representation or knowledge pool. In terms of predictive contributions, both mental and physical efficacy facilitated internal social cohesion, yet only mental efficacy promoted problem solving and observed teamwork effectiveness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Antecedents of team reward attitude.

The authors tested a model of the antecedents of team reward attitude (TRA), where high TRA reflects a positive attitude toward receiving team-based rewards. Participants were members of 18 intact teams working on complex and inherently interdependent tasks in a high-technology manufacturing organization. The authors found that the most proximal antecedents of TRA were an individual's belief in the value of teamwork (positive) and his or her job performance (negative). Belief in the value of teamwork mediated the relationship between distal antecedents (collectivism, task interdependence, and self-efficacy for teamwork) and TRA. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The development of collective efficacy in teams: A multilevel and longitudinal perspective.

The authors developed and tested a longitudinal multilevel model of collective efficacy formation. In 50 self-managing student teams, they investigated the effects of individual-level and team-level factors on observed behaviors and the subsequent development of collective efficacy for mastering a complex team task. Self-efficacy for teamwork, task-relevant knowledge, and collective efficacy predicted individual teamwork behaviors (rated by peers). Aggregated measures of teamwork behavior were related to subsequent collective efficacy, which was significantly related to final team performance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Goal congruence in project teams: Does the fit between members' personal mastery and performance goals matter?

Research on team goals rarely considers the impact of congruence in perceptions of personal goals of self versus other members. In this study of 324 members of 64 short-term project teams, polynomial regression analysis was used to explore how congruence in personal and perceived team mastery and performance goals affected individual outcomes. Results indicated that congruence in perceived performance goals elicited greater individual satisfaction and contributions, regardless of goal strength (i.e., high or low personal performance goals). Conversely, perceived team mastery goals had a greater effect on individual outcomes than did perceived congruence in self- other mastery goals. Congruent self-actual team goals showed weaker but similar relationships to individual outcomes, but contrary to hypotheses, this effect was not mediated by congruence in perceived self-other goals. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Transactive memory system links work team characteristics and performance.

Teamwork and coordination of expertise among team members with different backgrounds are increasingly recognized as important for team effectiveness. Recently, researchers have examined how team members rely on transactive memory system (TMS; D. M. Wegner, 1987) to share their distributed knowledge and expertise. To establish the ecological validity and generality of TMS research findings, this study sampled 104 work teams from a variety of organizational settings in China and examined the relationships between team characteristics, TMS, and team performance. The results suggest that task interdependence, cooperative goal interdependence, and support for innovation are positively related to work teams' TMS and that TMS is related to team performance; moreover, structural equation analysis indicates that TMS mediates the team characteristics-performance links. Findings have implications both for team leaders to manage their work teams effectively and for team members to improve their team performance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A multilevel model of minority opinion expression and team decision-making effectiveness.

The consideration of minority opinions when making team decisions is an important factor that contributes to team effectiveness. A multilevel model of minority opinion influence in decision-making teams is developed to address the conditions that relate to adequate consideration of minority opinions. Using a sample of 57 teams working on a simulated airport security-screening task, we demonstrate that team learning goal orientation influences the confidence of minority opinion holders and team discussion. Team discussion, in turn, relates to minority influence, greater decision quality, and team satisfaction. Implications for managing decision-making teams in organizations are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Backing up behaviors in teams: The role of personality and legitimacy of need.

In this article, the authors developed several hypotheses regarding both the main and interactive effects of 2 types of team inputs on backing up behaviors in teams: (a) team composition characteristics in terms of the personality of the members of the team and (b) team task characteristics in terms of the extent to which the nature of the task is one that legitimately calls for some members of the team to back up other members of the team. Results from a study of 71 4-person teams performing a computerized tactical decision-making task suggest that the legitimacy of the need for back up has an important main effect on the extent to which team members provide assistance to and receive assistance from each other. In addition, the legitimacy of the need for back up also has important interactive effects with both the personality of the back up recipient and the personality of the back up providers on backing up behaviors in teams. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

What makes a good team player? Personality and team effectiveness.

Good team players are often defined in trait terms; that is, they are described as dependable, flexible, or cooperative. Our goal is to examine the relationship between team member personality traits and team effectiveness. However, to understand the effects of personality on team performance requires greater specificity in how personality is described and in how team effectiveness is described. A hierarchical model of team member personality is presented that defines higher-level personality traits and specific facets relevant to team performance. Next, a classification of the core teamwork dimensions underlying effective team performance is presented. Finally, predictions are derived linking team member personality facets to specific teamwork requirements. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Laying the foundation for successful team performance trajectories: The roles of team charters and performance strategies.

[Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 95(4) of Journal of Applied Psychology (see record 2010-13313-007). In the article “Laying the Foundation for Successful Team Performance Trajectories: The Roles of Team Charters and Performance Strategies,” by John E. Mathieu and Tammy L. Rapp (Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 90–103), the “High Chart–Low Strategy” and the “Low Chart–High Strategy” lines were inadvertently reversed in Figure 1. Below is the corrected version of Figure 1.] This study examined the influences of team charters and performance strategies on the performance trajectories of 32 teams of master's of business administration students competing in a business strategy simulation over time. The authors extended existing theory on team development by demonstrating that devoting time to laying a foundation for both teamwork (i.e., team charters) and taskwork (performance strategies) can pay dividends in terms of more effective team performance over time. Using random coefficients growth modeling techniques, they found that teams with high-quality performance strategies outperformed teams with poorer quality strategies. However, a significant interaction between quality of the charters of teams and their performance strategies was found, such that the highest sustained performances were exhibited by teams that were high on both features. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Cooperative outcome interdependence, task reflexivity, and team effectiveness: A motivated information processing perspective.

A motivated information processing perspective (C. K. W. De Dreu & P. J. D. Carnevale, 2003; see also V. B. Hinsz, R. S. Tindale, & D. A. Vollrath, 1997) was used to predict that perceived cooperative outcome interdependence interacts with team-level reflexivity to predict information sharing, learning, and team effectiveness. A cross-sectional field study involving management and cross-functional teams (N = 46) performing nonroutine, complex tasks corroborated predictions: The more team members perceived cooperative outcome interdependence, the better they shared information, the more they learned and the more effective they were, especially when task reflexivity was high. When task reflexivity was low, no significant relationship was found between cooperative outcome interdependence and team processes and performance. The author concludes that the motivated information processing perspective is valid outside the confines of the laboratory and can be extended toward teamwork in organizations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Relationship between individual proficiency and team performance and efficiency.

Using 64 pairs of college students doing jigsaw puzzles, team and individual performance was compared. They could work the puzzles better alone than when doing it in pairs cooperatively, however, relatively poor prediction is obtained from measures of individual proficiency. The performance of the most efficient member of a team, however, predicted slightly better both team performance and team efficiency. "The more similar the two members of a team were in individual proficiency, the more likely they were to form a proficient and effective team." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Team cognition in experienced command-and-control teams.

Team cognition in experienced command-and-control teams is examined in an UAV (Uninhabited Aerial Vehicle) simulation. Five 3-person teams with experience working together in a command-and-control setting were compared to 10 inexperienced teams. Each team participated in five 40-min missions of a simulation in which interdependent team members control a UAV to take reconnaissance photos. Experienced teams exceeded performance of inexperienced teams, suggesting transfer of previous command-and-control experience. Compared to inexperienced teams, experienced teams had fewer errors on process-related training knowledge, superior team process ratings, and communications containing fewer coordination-related utterances. These findings support the view that team cognition emerges through the interactions of team members, that interactions distinguish high-performing teams from average teams, and that these interactions transfer across different tasks. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The Team Role Test: Development and validation of a team role knowledge situational judgment test.

The main objectives in this research were to introduce the concept of team role knowledge and to investigate its potential usefulness for team member selection. In Study 1, the authors developed a situational judgment test, called the Team Role Test, to measure knowledge of 10 roles relevant to the team context. The criterion-related validity of this measure was examined in 2 additional studies. In a sample of academic project teams (N = 93), team role knowledge predicted team member role performance (r = .34). Role knowledge also provided incremental validity beyond mental ability and the Big Five personality factors in the prediction of role performance. The results of Study 2 revealed that the predictive validity of role knowledge generalizes to team members in a work setting (N = 82, r = .30). The implications of the results for selection in team environments are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis.

Information sharing is a central process through which team members collectively utilize their available informational resources. The authors used meta-analysis to synthesize extant research on team information sharing. Meta-analytic results from 72 independent studies (total groups = 4,795; total N = 17,279) demonstrate the importance of information sharing to team performance, cohesion, decision satisfaction, and knowledge integration. Although moderators were identified, information sharing positively predicted team performance across all levels of moderators. The information sharing–team performance relationship was moderated by the representation of information sharing (as uniqueness or openness), performance criteria, task type, and discussion structure by uniqueness (a 3-way interaction). Three factors affecting team information processing were found to enhance team information sharing: task demonstrability, discussion structure, and cooperation. Three factors representing decreasing degrees of member redundancy were found to detract from team information sharing: information distribution, informational interdependence, and member heterogeneity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Task conflict and team creativity: A question of how much and when.

Bridging the task conflict, team creativity, and project team development literatures, we present a contingency model in which the relationship between task conflict and team creativity depends on the level of conflict and when it occurs in the life cycle of a project team. In a study of 71 information technology project teams in the greater China region, we found that task conflict had a curvilinear effect on team creativity, such that creativity was highest at moderate levels of task conflict. Additionally, we found this relationship to be moderated by team phase, such that the curvilinear effect was strongest at an early phase. In contrast, at later phases of the team life cycle, task conflict was found to be unrelated to team creativity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Taking the reins: The effects of new leader status and leadership style on team performance.

New leaders face a challenging task when they take charge of their teams. They have to determine how best to guide the work process, and they must understand how their behaviors will affect the members of their team. This research examines how a newly assigned team leader's status moderates subordinates' reactions to different leadership styles to affect assessments of the leader's self-confidence and effectiveness, and how this impacts team performance. Across 2 experimental studies, results demonstrate that low-status leaders are rated as more effective when they use a directive style, whereas high-status leaders are viewed as more effective when they use a participative style, and this relationship is mediated by perceptions of self-confidence. In addition, teams whose leaders are viewed more favorably perform better on a complex group task. These findings imply that low-status individuals are able to enhance their level of personal power by drawing on whatever positional power they hold, whereas high-status individuals are better off relying solely on their personal power to influence others. This research also provides a clear demonstration that assessments of new leaders' behaviors are subject to an appraisal that is clouded by observers' status perceptions and attributions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Mental model metrics and team adaptability: A multi-facet multi-method examination.

This paper empirically examines the convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity of three team mental model measurement approaches. Specifically, this study measures the similarity (MM-similarity) and quality (MM-quality) facets of team strategy-focused mental models using structural networks, priority rankings, and importance ratings. The convergent and divergent relationships among the three mental model metrics are then examined via a multi-facet multi-method matrix. Finally, the relative utility of each metric for understanding the relationships between team mental models, team adaptability, and decision effectiveness are compared. The study was conducted in a laboratory setting, modeling 56 four-person decision-making teams. Results indicate little convergent and extensive discriminant validity across the three mental model metrics. In addition, only mental models measured using the structural networks metric were found to have predictive validity in relation to team adaptation and performance. The quality and similarity of team structural networks were found to have interactive effects in relation to adaptation such that mental model quality was most strongly related to adaptation for teams with low mental model similarity and unrelated to adaptation for teams with high similarity. In turn, adaptation was critical for team decision effectiveness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Relationships among team ability composition, team mental models, and team performance.

This study examined the relationship between the similarity and accuracy of team mental models and compared the extent to which each predicted team performance. The relationship between team ability composition and team mental models was also investigated. Eighty-three dyadic teams worked on a complex skill task in a 2-week training protocol. Results indicated that although similarity and accuracy of team mental models were significantly related, accuracy was a stronger predictor of team performance. In addition, team ability was more strongly related to the accuracy than to the similarity of team mental models and accuracy partially mediated the relationship between team ability and team performance, but similarity did not. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Understanding team innovation: The role of team processes and structures.

The present study focused on innovation of teams, examining the contributions of team interaction processes (exchanging information, learning, motivating, and negotiating) and structures (functional heterogeneity and frequency of meetings) to innovation. Specifically, it was hypothesized that (a) team structures will be positively related to team innovation, (b) team heterogeneity will be positively related to team interaction processes, (c) team interaction processes will be positively related to team innovation, and (d) team interaction processes will mediate the relationship between team heterogeneity and team innovation. Results from a sample of 48 intact teams in elementary and secondary schools supported the main hypotheses. These results imply that the development of mutual interaction processes is a crucial mechanism for translating team heterogeneity into innovation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)