Search results

Whereas motivation and coordination losses in teams have been investigated for quite some time, systematic research on performance gains in teams (often called “synergetic effects”) only emerged recently. The purpose of the present paper is to clarify the concept of process gains (or synergy) in teams, and to introduce recent findings from basic psychology that can be very valuable for the management of high performing teams.

Based on the definition of synergy as process gain during teamwork compared with a clear baseline (team potential), this review develops specific requirements for the empirical demonstration of synergetic effects in teams. Moreover, a brief history of research on process gains in teams is provided, followed by an outlook on current and future trends in this field.

Although this research is still in its pioneering days, various triggers of process gains in teams have been already derived theoretically and/or demonstrated empirically, among them social support from fellow team members, perceived indispensability for the team outcome, the development and/or selection of experts for task and team processes, use of multiple perspectives and information, team learning, and social identification processes.

Understanding the preconditions and underlying mechanisms of process gains in teams enables managers to trigger performance levels of teams that exceed what can be expected based on the individual team members' capabilities alone. Moreover, the estimation of a team's potential provides a helpful standard for the assessment of the ongoing team performance.

Process gains in teams and related laboratory research have been largely neglected in the managerial literature so far. This paper and the current special issue are among the first to introduce a clear definition of process gains in teams, and to suggest concrete trigger factors of synergetic effects in teams based on systematic research.

The purpose of this paper is to determine the extent to which team processes vary between team types, as well as the relative importance of these processes for different team types.

A survey study evaluated a sample of 316 members of various work teams that were classified as either intellectual (e.g. executive team) or physical (e.g. production team) teams. Independent samples t‐tests, paired samples t‐tests, and confirmatory factor analysis were used to evaluate hypotheses.

Confirmatory analysis indicated transition and action oriented process behaviors were distinct from one another. Intellectual teams were found to value transition processes (planning and strategizing) more highly than physical teams. Intellectual teams also valued transition processes (planning and strategizing), more than action processes (monitoring and coordinating).

Research on team processes tends to focus upon a “one size fits all” approach to teamwork, but this approach has yielded inconsistent frameworks. This study provides evidence that these inconsistencies are due to the changing nature of teamwork. This study was limited in that only two broad types of teams and two types of process competencies were assessed.

Differences in the importance of certain processes for specific team types should be taken into account when implementing systems for team selection, performance appraisal, and training.

This paper provides empirical support for previous theoretical suppositions that different team types differ in the level of importance they place on certain processes.

The cumulative pool of data piling through the empirical expedition around hospitals in Vietnam provides the clue on whether corporate social responsibility (CSR) influences upward influence behavior, which in turn catalyzes team processes and competitive intelligence scanning. The aim of this paper is to journey through the review of the constructs of CSR, upward influence behavior, and team processes.

Structural equation modeling (SEM) approach served as an analyst for 349 responses returned from self‐administered structured questionnaires despatched to 522 hospital members in the middle‐management position.

A model of team processes and competitive intelligence evolved along the process of hypothesis testing. Ethical CSR was found to cultivate organizationally beneficial upward influence behavior in the healthcare service organizations.

The research findings provide the insight into the CSR‐based model of team processes which underscores the role of ethical CSR initiatives and organizationally beneficial upward influence tactics in the activation of competitive intelligence scanning deeds in hospitals in Vietnam business setting.

To examine how psychological diversity among work team members affects team interaction processes. Psychological diversity is described in terms of personality attributes (emotional stability, extraversion, conscientiousness, openness to experience, and agreeableness), need for achievement (nAch), and emotional intelligence. Team interaction processes include workload sharing, team communication, member flexibility, social cohesion, team viability.

A survey research was conducted that involved 1,421 oil‐drilling workers in 54 work teams. The participants were drawn from five major oil drilling companies in Nigeria. Standardized measures were used to collect data on each of the variables examined.

It was found that each of the measures of team interaction processes is predicted by different psychological diversity measures. However, emotional stability, extraversion, agreeableness and emotional intelligence are significant in predicting overall team interaction processes.

The psychological diversity measures examined are not exhaustive. It is also not clear the extent to which the findings can be generalized to other work settings that are different from oil‐drilling companies.

Human resources management in organizations that work in teams needs to include in their selection programs, psychological measures for identifying applicants who possess requisite psychological features for team work.

Study of the efficacy of psychological variables in enhancing work teams in oil drilling firms in Nigeria.

Team cognition is known to be an important predictor of team process and performance. DeChurch and Mesmer-Magnus (2010) reported the results of an extensive meta-analytic examination into the role of team cognition in team process and performance, and documented the unique contribution of team cognition to these outcomes while controlling for the motivational dynamics of the team. Research on team cognition has exploded since the publication of DeChurch and Mesmer-Magnus’ meta-analysis, which raises the question: to what extent do the effect sizes reported in their 2010 meta-analysis still hold with the inclusion of newly published research? The paper aims to discuss this issue.

The authors updated DeChurch and Mesmer-Magnus’ meta-analytic database with newly published studies, nearly doubling its size, and reran their original analyses examining the role of team cognition in team process and performance.

Overall, results show consistent effects for team cognition in team process and performance. However, whereas originally compilational cognition was more strongly related to both team process and team performance than was compositional cognition, in the updated database, compilational cognition is more strongly related to team process and compositional cognition is more strongly related to team performance.

Meta-analyses are only as generalizable as the databases they are comprised of. Periodic updates are necessary to incorporate newly published studies and confirm that prior findings still hold. This study confirms that the findings of DeChurch and Mesmer-Magnus’ (2010) team cognition meta-analysis continue to generalize to today’s teams.

This study examines human resource (HR) professionals' perceptions of the outcomes, process dynamics and affect toward team interviews. Results indicate HR professionals with experience conducting team interviews have significantly more positive views than HR professionals without experience. Additionally, African Americans, compared to Caucasians, expressed a significantly more positive view of the process dynamics of team interviews. Results indicate HR professionals were more positive about participating in team interviews as an interviewer than as an interviewee.

The purpose of this paper is to integrate three streams of literature – organizational capabilities based in resource‐based view (RBV) and the team‐ and organization‐level innovation – to provide a theoretical framework of how firms invest in developing innovative capabilities for entrepreneurship and change management.

This is a conceptual paper based on the RBV and the team‐ and organization‐level innovation literatures.

Linking the three bodies of literature, two main models for developing innovative capabilities are proposed: organization and project team models. The “organization model” requires firms to invest at the organization level to generate the supporting organization‐level processes, i.e. communication routines, independent of when they organize for innovation, and the “project team model” calls for just‐in‐time investment as needed in the process of innovation. The paper discusses other potential models and provides directions for future research on this important and timely topic.

The paper expands the RBV of the firm by providing a theoretical framework of how firms develop the capabilities to mobilize and create knowledge for innovation as an entrepreneurial activity and for managing the changes in organizations.

The purpose of this paper is to test the mediating role of top management team (TMT) team trust in examining the relationship between team processes (internal and external) and human resource management (HRM) decision performance (quality and satisfaction) in the context of the People’s Republic of China.

The sample data of this study include 524 team members from 76 TMTs in east China’s Shanghai, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Anhui provinces. IBM SPSS AMOS 22.0 software was employed for the data analysis.

The study finds that TMT internal and external processes have significant positive effects on HRM decision quality and satisfaction. The study further finds that TMT team trust partially mediates the relationship between TMT processes (internal and external processes) and HRM decision quality and satisfaction.

This research provides useful insights into the role of TMT team trust in enhancing managerial decision performance.

This study is among the limited studies that explore the influence of team trust in the relationship between TMT processes (internal and external processes) and HRM decision quality and satisfaction among TMTs in China. This study has extended TMT knowledge in mainstream management with guidelines on how to enhance organizational decision performance.

This paper aims to explore the independent and interactive leadership style and team processes on organisational learning in an Indian context.

The methodology used is survey based. Primary data were collected from 36 Indian manufacturing sector executives and in total there were three teams (n=11, n=13 and n=12).

It was found that overall leadership style and transactional leadership had significant positive impact on organisational learning. Furthermore, team processes like cohesion and support and confrontation and problem solving were also found to be important predictors of organisational learning. The interactive effect of independent variables on dependent variable was also positive and significant.

Discussions are performed and conclusions are drawn in the light of existing literature. The study bears implications for researchers to take on similar research in other contexts.

The study bears significant implications for executives working in manufacturing organisations. It is suggested that transactional leadership style should be employed to contribute towards organisational learning in such firms. Moreover, the use of team processes will also help in enhancing learning at the team and organisational levels.

This paper identifies two significant criterion variables to predict organisational learning. It is a pioneering effort to use team processes and leadership style together as predictors of organisational learning in Indian context.

This two-part study aims to contribute to the body of knowledge on team development by examining the development of self-managing teams (SMTs) in healthcare. Based on an exploration of the team development literature, a perspective on SMT development was created, which suggested that SMTs develop along a non-sequential pattern of three processes–team management, task management and boundary management and improvement–that is largely the result of individual, team, organizational and environmental-level factors.

The perspective on SMT development was assessed in a Dutch mental healthcare organization by conducting 13 observations of primary mental healthcare SMTs as well as 14 retrospective interviews with the self-management process facilitator and advisors of all 100 primary mental healthcare SMTs.

Empirical results supported the perspective on SMT development. SMTs were found to develop along each of the three defined processes in a variety or possible patterns or simultaneously over time, depending on many of the identified factors and three others. These factors included individual human capital, team member attitudes and perceived workload at the individual level, psychological safety, team turnover, team size, nature of the task and bureaucratic history at the team level, and management style and material and social support at the organizational level.

This study provides a non-sequential model of SMT development in healthcare, which healthcare providers could use to understand and foster SMTs development. To foster SMT development, it is suggested that cultural change need to be secured alongside with structural change.

Even though various team development models have been described in the literature, this study is the first to indicate how SMTs in the healthcare context develop toward effective functioning.