Team Dynamics Over Time: Volume 18

Cover of Team Dynamics Over Time
Subject:

Table of contents

(14 chapters)

Prelims

Pages i-ix
click here to view access options

Part I Conceptual Foundation of Timing for Teams

click here to view access options
Purpose

Team composition research considers how configurations (e.g., team-level diversity) of team members’ attributes (e.g., personality, values, demographics) influence important outcomes. Our chapter describes key issues in understanding and effectively managing team composition over time.

Methodology/approach

We discuss how context shapes team composition. We review empirical research that examined relationships between team composition, and team processes and emergent properties over multiple time points. We review research that examined how composition can be effectively managed over the lifecycle of a team.

Findings

Context shapes the nature of team composition itself (e.g., dynamic composition). To the extent that membership change, fluid boundaries, and multiple team membership are present should be accounted for in research and practice. The research we reviewed indicated no, or fleeting effects for surface-level (e.g., demographics) composition on the development of team processes and emergent properties over time, although there were exceptions. Conversely, deep-level composition affected team processes and emergent properties early in a team’s lifespan as well as later. Team composition information can be used in staffing; it can also inform how to best leverage training, leadership, rewards, tasks, and technology to promote team effectiveness.

Social implications

Teams are the building blocks of contemporary organizations. Understanding and effectively managing team composition over time can increase the likelihood of team.

Originality/value

Our chapter provides novel insights into key issues in understanding and effectively managing team composition over time.

Purpose

On the path to accomplishing task work, teams may face disruptive events like budget issues, equipment failures, and membership change that trigger adaptation. While recently researchers have clarified the team adaptation nomological network, our objective is to extend theory by providing a roadmap about various ways in which temporal considerations may complicate the impact of adaptation triggers on team adaptation and in turn adaptive outcomes.

Methodology/approach

We present three adaptation temporal considerations (i.e., timing, duration, and frequency) that may change the way team adaptation unfolds in response to a given adaptation trigger. We further explore and offer propositions about how the impact of adaptation timing, adaptation duration, and adaptation frequency differ by the type of adaptation trigger (i.e., task-based or team-based) experienced by the team.

Research implications

By examining adaptation to task-based or team-based triggers from a temporal perspective researchers may better explain why the timing of when the team adapts across its lifecycle (adaptation timing), how long the team takes to adapt (adaptation duration), and the recurrent need to adapt (adaptation frequency) is more or less likely to lead to positive adaptive performance outcomes.

Practical implications

Organizations may benefit from setting up teams for success by helping members understand that there are inherent differences in the adaptation triggers they face including temporal expectations. Organizations may see value in providing initial and on-going support to teams so they are better able to adapt when needed and mitigate negative effects due to adaptation timing, adaptation duration, and adaption frequency.

Purpose

Increased interest in team dynamics has resulted in new methods for measuring teamwork over time. The primary purpose of this chapter is to provide a survey of recent developments in teamwork/collaboration measurement in an educational context. Key topics include conceptual frameworks, large-scale assessments, and innovative measurement techniques.

Methodology/approach

A range of methods for collecting and analyzing teamwork data are discussed, and five frameworks for measuring collaborative problem solving (CPS) over time are compared. Frameworks from Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills (ATC21S) project, Educational Testing Service (ETS), ACT, and von Davier and Halpin (2013) are discussed. Results of assessments developed from these frameworks are also considered.

Social/practical implications

New techniques for measuring team dynamics over time have great potential to improve education and work outcomes. Preliminary results of the assessments developed from these frameworks show that important advances in teamwork measurement have been enabled by innovative task designs, data-mining techniques, and novel applications of stochastic models.

Originality/value

This novel overview and comparison of interdisciplinary approaches will help to indicate where progress has been made and what challenges are ahead.

Purpose

In this chapter we highlight a neurodynamic approach that is showing promise as a quantitative measure of team performance.

Methodology/approach

During teamwork the rapid electroencephalographic (EEG) oscillations that emerge on the scalp were transformed into symbolic data streams which provided historical details at a second-by-second resolution of how the team perceived the evolving task and how they adjusted their dynamics to compensate for, and anticipate new task challenges. Key to this approach are the different strategies that can be used to reduce the data dimensionality, including compression, abstraction and taking advantage of the natural redundancy in biologic signals.

Findings

The framework emerging is that teams continually enter and leave organizational neurodynamic partnerships with each other, so-called metastable states, depending on the evolving task, with higher level dynamics arising from mechanisms that naturally integrate over faster microscopic dynamics.

Practical implications

The development of quantitative measures of the momentary dynamics of teams is anticipated to significantly influence how teams are assembled, trained, and supported. The availability of such measures will enable objective comparisons to be made across teams, training protocols, and training sites. They will lead to better understandings of how expertise is developed and how training can be modified to accelerate the path toward expertise.

Originality/value

The innovation of this study is the potential it raises for developing globally applicable quantitative models of team dynamics that will allow comparisons to be made across teams, tasks, and training protocols.

Part II Special Topics in Teams Over Time

Purpose

Our aim is to catalog how the functional behaviors that leaders engage in should change over time based on the needs of the team – thereby presenting a functional view of team leadership over time.

Methodology/approach

A critical review of the literature on team leadership, team development, and teams was conducted. This information was critically analyzed and integrated to produce a framework serving to depict how team needs change over time, and based on this, highlight the leadership behaviors which should be most critical at particular points in time. Based on the limited amount of literature that explicitly focused on team leadership over time, a series of propositions which flow from the framework are also put forth.

Findings

Great strides have been made in understanding team leadership; however, little work was uncovered that directly focused on how leadership dynamics change over time within the context of the team. Leveraging the limited work that existed, we developed a framework (and propositions) that serves to delineate how team leadership functions change over time. In doing so, we have integrated work delineating leadership functions within transition and action phases of team task cycles along with that highlighting how the role of the leader may vary based on team developmental needs.

Originality/Value

The originality of this chapter lies in its using a functional approach to leadership to argue how the efficacy of particular leadership functions change over time based on team task cycles and development needs. This, in turn, can be used to focus training efforts.

Purpose

Theories of trust imply that team trust develops and grows over time, yet relatively few researchers have taken on the challenge of studying team trust in longitudinal research designs. The purpose of this chapter is to provide a concise summary of the existing literature on team trust over time, and to offer a conceptual model of team-level trust development over time to aid future research on this topic.

Methodology/approach

We draw from the Input–Mediator–Output–Input (IMOI) framework, as well as previous multilevel models of organizational trust development, and published findings from longitudinal team trust studies.

Findings

Taking a temporal perspective, we consider how team-level mediators and outcomes can both predict and be predicted by team trust trajectories and feedback loops over time, as well as how those relationships with team trust might change based on the existence of other moderating variables including trust violation and repair.

Research implications

Future longitudinal team research may use the model as a starting point for investigating the antecedents, as well as the team processes and dynamic emergent states, that can effectively predict trajectories of team trust across various stages of teamwork.

Practical implications

Based on our review of extant literature, we provide several recommendations for training and organizational intervention including the importance of management’s consideration of team-level trust in providing feedback, enhancing cohesion, and mitigating conflict.

Originality/value

We provide insight into the development of team trust trajectories and offer a framework to help guide future longitudinal team trust research.

Purpose

To better understand contributing factors and mediating mechanisms related to team dynamics in isolated, confined, and extreme (ICE) environments.

Methodology/approach

Literature review.

Findings

Our primary focus is on cohesion and adaptation – two critical aspects of team performance in ICE environments that have received increased attention in both the literature and funding initiatives. We begin by describing the conditions that define ICE environments and review relevant individual biological, neuropsychiatric, and environmental factors that interact with team dynamics. We then outline a unifying team cohesion framework for long-duration missions and discuss several environmental, operational, organizational, and psychosocial factors that can impact team dynamics. Finally, we end with a discussion of directions for future research and countermeasure development, emphasizing the importance of temporal dynamics, multidisciplinary integration, and novel conceptual frameworks for the inherently mixed work and social setting of long-duration missions in ICE environments.

Social implications

A better understanding of team dynamics over time can contribute to success in a variety of organizational settings, including space exploration, defense and security, business, education, athletics, and social relationships.

Originality/value

We promote a multidisciplinary approach to team dynamics in ICE environments that incorporates dynamic biological, behavioral, psychological, and organizational factors over time.

Purpose

In a variety of domains, teams represent the main mechanism for dealing with change, complexity, and uncertainty in organizations. Consequently, teams need to be able to adapt and effectively use shared and complementary cognitive processing while collaborating to deal with these challenges.

Methodology/approach

A conceptual review is provided that addresses this type of complex collaborative cognition via discussion of macrocognition and the processes contributing to effective team problem-solving.

Findings

Despite extensive research on problem-solving, research and theories regarding how problem-solving changes over time as teams develop is missing. With this review, we extend research on team problem-solving and team development through integration of existing theory and concepts from the team literature.

Social implications

This review provides a theoretical foundation for understanding and studying the developmental dynamic of team problem-solving.

Originality/value

A team problem-solving development model is described which outlines the degree to which the primary elements of team development are likely to affect macrocognitive processes within problem-solving phases. A set of propositions is offered in order to guide research on team development in collaborative problem-solving.

click here to view access options
Purpose

To summarize and build on research that explores the influence of culture on team dynamics, particularly over time. Specifically, we explore culture and teams from a dynamic perspective by providing a framework for understanding both how culture influences team dynamics over time, and where interventions should be targeted at different points to maximize the potential benefits of cultural diversity.

Methodology/approach

Drawing from a prominent model of team development (Kozlowski, Gully, Nason, & Smith, 1999), we provide mechanisms through which culture exerts an influence, as well as the practical approaches that will be best suited for mitigating potential negative effects at different points in time.

Findings

We focus on the following phases: team formation, task compilation, role compilation, team compilation, as well as team maintenance. At first, surface-level characteristics and subgroup formation should be closely monitored along with interventions to develop a group identity when teams are being formed. Later on, emergent states (e.g., trust, conflict) can come to the forefront as team members can develop multiple memberships or yet be resistant to performing in an adaptive manner.

Research limitations/implications

We identify key avenues for future research to serve as a foundation for those studying the cultural diversity within teams via temporal lens, including the role of context and going beyond Hofstede’s cultural dimensions.

Originality/value

Albeit research has started to accumulate regarding how culture influences teams through conflict, communication, trust, cohesion, and creativity, this chapter goes beyond current development to address when different cultural elements influence team dynamics.

click here to view access options
Purpose

The reliance on teams in today’s work environment underscores the importance of understanding how teams function. To better understand teams, one must be able to measure team dynamics or interaction. The purpose of this chapter is to outline an unobtrusive approach to measuring team dynamics from verbal communications.

Methodology

The basic premise of this approach is that the words we use provide insight into how we feel and think at any given time. The methodology described in this chapter employs a lexical analytic approach to examining team dynamics. To best accomplish this, we first identify the principal features or dimensions of teamwork and then we propose lexical measures that may map to these processes.

Practical implications

This approach can be employed to track team functioning over time “at a distance” without interrupting task performance.

Originality

This chapter describes an approach to measuring relevant teamwork dimensions through verbal content. This approach has the potential to give us direct, unobtrusive insight into the emotional and cognitive states of teams. It is original in its examination of how team dynamics can be indexed in speech.

Part III Team Processes over Time: A Look Forward

Purpose

This chapter reviews the challenges associated with measuring and studying cohesion over time and provides guidance for addressing these issues in future research.

Methodology/approach

We reviewed the team cohesion and team development literatures, including definitions and conceptualizations of cohesion as well as the seminal team development taxonomies. We then integrated these literatures to identify the challenges and potential solutions for studying team cohesion as a dynamic construct.

Findings

We identified five key challenges – theoretical and practical in nature – that researchers and organizations often face in capturing and studying team cohesion emergence: problems with self-report measures; measuring multiple dimensions of cohesion at appropriate times; failure to combine multilevel and temporal frameworks; and tracking of team and organizational events. In response, we provide actions that researchers can take in addressing these challenges: using indirect/unobtrusive measures; using social network analysis; studying “swift cohesion”; adopting an event system theory framework; and applying agent-based modeling.

Research implications

This comprehensive chapter provides recommendations for studying team cohesion as a dynamic, emergent process rather than as a static state. We discuss the challenges pertaining to study design and measurement when capturing team cohesion emergence, and provide theoretical and practical ideas to guide researchers in overcoming these issues in future research.

Practical implications

This chapter suggests tools and data collection techniques that organizations and practitioners can use for measuring and improving team cohesion, such as using unobtrusive measures and timing measurement according to team and organizational events.

Purpose

Multiteam systems (MTSs) have been employed across numerous organizations and occupations (e.g., healthcare, emergency disaster response, business, and military) to achieve complex goals over time. As MTSs are inherently different than team level and organizational level theories, this chapter highlights the defining features of these dynamic systems through a temporal lens. Thus, the main purpose of our chapter is to address the challenges and issues concerning MTSs over time in order to provide a future agenda to guide researchers and practitioners.

Methodology/approach

To explore temporality throughout this chapter, we leverage two key MTSs frameworks along with contributions from the literature to produce a review, which demonstrates the extent of MTS theoretical and practical findings. After reviewing the definitional components of MTSs, we highlight various compositional, linkage, and developmental attributes that operate within a system. We then expand upon these attributes to consider the structural features of the system that enhance boundaries between component teams (i.e., differentiation) and may disrupt the system over time (i.e., dynamism).

Findings

After reviewing and integrating current MTS literature, we provide a new conceptual framework for MTSs and their temporal complexities. We offer several methodologies that managers and researchers can employ to assess these complex systems and suggest practical recommendations and areas for future research as we continue to study MTSs.

Originality

Our original conceptual framework considers MTSs through a dynamic lens developing over time and suggests the need for future research to build upon this perspective.

Index

Pages 323-338
click here to view access options
Cover of Team Dynamics Over Time
DOI
10.1108/S1534-0856201618
Publication date
2017-08-04
Book series
Research on Managing Groups and Teams
Editors
Series copyright holder
Emerald Publishing Limited
ISBN
978-1-78635-403-7
eISBN
978-1-78635-403-7
Book series ISSN
1534-0856