Evaluating the effect of displaying team vs. individual metrics on team performance

Abstract

This work explores the assessment dimension of persistent feedback to a team, i.e., how presenting feedback based on individual scores vs. team scores vs. both (I&T) affects team performance and team dynamics of a three-person team. Various studies have attempted to determine which level of feedback interdependence (i.e., individual vs. team vs. I&T), presented within a collaborative context, produced optimal team performance. The studies have shown mixed results. Precisely 117 participants (39 three-person Teams) conducted a modified version of the Multiple Errands Test known as the Team Multiple Errands Test (TMET). The teams performed the TMET within a virtual desktop environment. They performed the task in three real-time persistent feedback conditions: Individual, Team, and I&T. Overall, the feedback condition seemed to influence the speed with which team members completed the task. Specifically, the results indicated that individuals in the Team feedback condition moved more quickly through the task than individuals in the I&T feedback condition. There were no significant differences between the Individual condition and the Team or I&T conditions. We suggest that user interface (UI) designers developing persistent feedback for a virtual collaborative training environment should primarily present feedback based on team assessment, as opposed to the I&T assessment, and to be cautious of information overload.