Exceeding the Ordinary: A Framework for Examining Teams Across the Extremeness Continuum and Its Impact on Future Research

Team emergent states (TES) represent dynamic properties of teams that are cognitive, affective, and motivational states of teams, and which vary as function of team context, inputs, processes, and outcomes. TES constructs have a theoretical origin residing at lower levels of analysis (i.e., individual) that arise over time to characterize the team as a whole. TES are key variables in team effectiveness models. These are distinct from team processes, which refer to the actions team members take to combine their individual resources, knowledge, and skills to achieve collective goals. Until the early 2000s, TES were often erroneously considered team processes. Since being clearly distinguished from team processes, the nature of TES has gained conceptual clarity, and the TES literature has evolved considerably. TES are typically conceptualized as playing a mediating role in input-mediator-outcome (IMO) models of team effectiveness, which depict inputs (I) as antecedent factors (e.g., team composition, design, leadership) that influence mediating mechanisms (M) such as team processes and team emergent states, which subsequently impact team outcomes (O) such as team performance. However, TES are also frequently examined as predictor, moderator, and outcome factors in studies today. There are numerous specific types of TES that can be classified into different categories depending upon whether the focal construct is cognitive, affective, or motivational in nature. The fundamental conclusion of this body of research is that a variety of factors can encourage the development of team emergent states, which have important implications for team processes and other team emergent states as well as team-level and, sometimes, individual-level effectiveness outcomes.

Rationale, aims, and objectives: Team effectiveness is associated not only with team design, but also with team dynamics such as work role performance. This study aimed to: (1) identify variables associated with perceived work role performance in a sample of 315 mental health professionals and (2) assess the contributions of team members and team characteristics; organizational and territorial context; team emergent states and team processes.Method: Mental health professionals from 4 health service networks in Quebec, Canada, completed a self-administered questionnaire consisting of standardized scales. Based on a conceptual framework adapted from the Input-Mediator-Output-Input (IMOI) model, independent variables were organized according to: (1) characteristics of team members and their teams, (2) organizational and territorial context, (3) team emergent states and (4) team processes. Their respective contributions to perceived work role performance were tested using a hierarchical regression analysis.Results: Perceived work role performance was associated with younger age (characteristics of team members and their team), familiarity between co-workers (Team emergent states) and belief in interprofessional collaboration, knowledge-sharing, team interdependence and team support (Team processes). Most variation in work role performance was explained by Team emergent states, followed by Team processes.Conclusion: This study tested a large number of variables associated with perceived work role performance in mental healthcare based on a comprehensive and innovative, theory-driven framework. The inclusion of mental health professionals from several types of teams representing mental health networks in different geographical areas added value to the study. The results confirm the need for managers to optimize team emergent states and team processes in order to improve work role performance. Initiatives such as training in teamwork and clinical guidelines are recommended.

Teams are composed of individual members who collectively contribute to team success. As a result, contemporary team research tends to focus on how team overall properties (e.g., the average of team personality and behavior) affect team processes and effectiveness while overlooking the potential unique influences of specific members on team outcomes. Drawing on minority influence theory (Grant & Patil, 2012), we extend previous teams research by demonstrating that an extra miler (i.e., a team member exhibiting the highest frequency of extra-role behaviors in a team) can influence team processes and, ultimately, team effectiveness beyond the influences of all the other members. Specifically, based on a field study, we report that the extra miler's behavioral influences (i.e., helping and voice) on team monitoring and backup processes and team effectiveness are contingent on his or her network position in the team, such that the member tends to have stronger influence on team outcomes when he or she is in a central position. We also find that even a single extra miler in a vital position plays a more important role in driving team processes and outcomes than do all the other members. Therefore, our research offers an important contribution to the team literature by demonstrating the disproportionate influences of specific team members on team overall outcomes.

Purpose This study aims to examine the relationship between concrescent conversation environment (CCE), psychological safety and team effectiveness. Although CCE has been known to influence team outcomes, little is known about how it influences them. Integrating the social constructionist and social psychology perspectives, this study argues that CCE ignites a climate of psychological safety resulting in “joint-action” necessary for positive team outcomes. Design/methodology/approach Survey data were collected from 301 team members from US firms operating in different industries. Data were analyzed using SmartPLS. Findings The study establishes CCE as an antecedent to psychological safety and demonstrates that psychological safety mediates the relationship between CCE and team effectiveness. Research limitations/implications This is one of the initial studies to show how verbal behaviors socially construct team dynamics in the shape of psychological safety to influence team outcomes. In doing so, the authors advance the theory pertaining to the role of social exchanges in team processes and outcomes. Practical implications The results provide insights on how managers can improve team outcomes by influencing the conversational environment of the team to elicit feelings of psychological safety. The results also suggest that managers must focus on relational outcomes as well, along with performance outcomes. Originality/value From a social constructionist perspective, team development is built upon the verbal behaviors of the members as they pursue tasks. However, the extant group dynamics literature undervalues conversations’ role in team processes and outcomes. This is the first study that examines the link between a team's conversational environment, psychological safety and team outcomes.

Team processes refer to the actions team members take to combine their individual resources, knowledge, and skill to resolve their task demands and achieve collective goals. These are distinct from team emergent states which refer to characteristic levels of feelings or thoughts among team members. The distinguishing feature between team processes and emergent states is that team processes represent actions team members take, whereas emergent states represent team member attitudes, values, cognitions, and motivations. Both team processes and emergent states are conceptually dynamic and can vary as a function of the other. Conceptual clarity regarding the nature of team processes has developed only in the prior two decades. Prior to that time team processes were broadly and ill-defined. Team processes have occupied the mediating role in traditional input-process-outcome (IPO) models. However, these models have evolved to position team processes within a larger category of mediating mechanisms in organizing frameworks of overlapping domains capturing team structural features, team compositional features, and mediating mechanisms, all embedded within organizational structure and culture. Team processes are increasingly recognized as having taskwork and teamwork dimensions, with taskwork being represented as creative behavior, decision-making, and boundary spanning; and teamwork being represented by transition, action, and interpersonal processes. The subject of team processes has been represented in nearly all general reviews of small groups and teams, in many primary studies that examine both general and specific team processes, and in several meta-analyses. The fundamental conclusion of this body of research is that teams can learn how to have more effective processes, and teams with more effective processes exhibit higher performance.

Aim/Purpose: There is ample evidence that team processes matter more than the characteristics of individual team members; unfortunately, very few empirical studies have examined communication process variables closely or tied them to team outcomes. Background: The University of Miami Laboratory for Integrated Knowledge (U-LINK) is a pilot funding mechanism that was developed and implemented based on empirically-established best practices established in the literature on the Science of Team Science (SciTS). In addition to addressing grand societal challenges, teams engaged in processes designed to enhance the process of “teaming”. This study uses the Inputs-Mediator-Outputs-Inputs (IMOI) model as a blueprint for an investigation into how team communication processes (shared communication, shared leadership, formal meetings, informal meetings) influence intermediary team processes (goal clarity, role ambiguity, process clarity, trust) and team outcomes (team satisfaction, team productivity). Methodology: Monte Carlo methodologies were used to explore both longitudinal self-report (survey of communication and team outcome variables) data and objective data on scholarly productivity, collected from seventy-eight members of eleven real-world intact interdisciplinary teams to explore how team communication processes affect team outcomes. Contribution: This study is among the few that centers communication practice and processes in the operationalization and measurement of its constructs and which provides a test of hypotheses centered on key questions identified in the literature. Findings: Communication practices are important to team processes and outcomes. Shared communication and informal meetings were associated with increased team satisfaction and increased research productivity. Shared leadership was associated with increased research productivity, as well as improved process and goal clarity. Formal meetings were associated with increased goal clarity and decreased role ambiguity. Recommendation for Researchers: Studying intact interdisciplinary research teams requires innovative methods and clear specification of variables. Challenges associated with access to limited numbers of teams should not preclude engaging in research as each study contributes to our larger body of knowledge of the factors that influence the success of interdisciplinary research teams. Future Research: Future research should examine different team formation and funding mechanisms and extend observation and data collection for longer periods of time.

Purpose This study aims to develop a comprehensive measurement that consists of the most significant indicators of team effectiveness. Based on the input-mediator-outcome model, this measurement assesses two main aspects related to team effectiveness: team processes and emergent states (TPES). Design/methodology/approach The scale was developed and validated following three major steps. First, items were generated through literature reviews and expert reviews. Second, a pretest was conducted to refine the scale among 755 Chinese employees recruited on a survey service platform. Finally, in the evaluation section, 3,950 samples were used for scale validation, including a predictive validity test examining the relationship between TPES and team outcomes among 3,550 participants in paired samples (team members and leaders), from 381 work teams from several private companies in IT industries in China. Findings The TPES scale measures the team members’ interactions and the team status, consists of five dimensions: goal and role, collaboration, innovation, motivation and cohesiveness, showing acceptable reliability, validity and model fit. The five dimensions show significant positive effects on team performance and members’ satisfaction. Originality/value This novel measure of team process and emergent state tailored to IT companies provides a way to comprehensively diagnose a team’s strengths and/or weaknesses, thus suggesting directions for team development.

PurposeThis paper aims to determine the impact of perceived virtuality on team dynamics and outcomes by adopting the Input-Mediators-Outcome (IMO) framework. Further, it also investigates the mediating role of team processes and emergent states.Design/methodology/approachThe authors collected survey data from 315 individuals working in virtual teams (VTs) in the information technology sector in India using both offline and online questionnaires. They performed the analysis using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM).FindingsThe authors investigated two sets of hypotheses – both direct and indirect (or mediation interactions). Results show that psychological empowerment and conflict management are significant in managing VTs. Also, perceived virtuality impacts team outcomes, i.e. perceived team performance, team satisfaction and subjective well-being.Research limitations/implicationsThe interplay between the behavioural team process (conflict management) and the emergent state (psychological empowerment) was examined. The study also helps broaden our understanding of the various psychological variables associated with teamwork in the context of VTs.Practical implicationsFindings from this study will aid in assessing the consequences of virtual teamwork at both individual and organisational levels, such as guiding the design and sustainability of VT arrangements, achieving higher productivity in VTs, and designing effective and interactive solutions in the virtual space.Social implicationsThe study examined the interplay between behavioural team processes (such as conflict management) and emergent states (such as psychological empowerment). The study also theorises and empirically tests the relationships between perceived virtuality and team outcomes (i.e. both affective and effectiveness). It may serve as a guide to understanding team dynamics in VTs better.Originality/valueThis exploratory study attempts to enhance the current understanding of the research and practice of VTs within a developing economy.

This review of health care team effectiveness literature from 1985 to 2004 distinguishes among intervention studies that compare team with usual (nonteam) care; intervention studies that examine the impact of team redesign on team effectiveness; and field studies that explore relationships between team context, structure, processes, and outcomes. The authors use an Integrated Team Effectiveness Model (ITEM) to summarize research findings and to identify gaps in the literature. Their analysis suggests that the type and diversity of clinical expertise involved in team decision making largely accounts for improvements in patient care and organizational effectiveness. Collaboration, conflict resolution, participation, and cohesion are most likely to influence staff satisfaction and perceived team effectiveness. The studies examined here underscore the importance of considering the contexts in which teams are embedded. The ITEM provides a useful framework for conceptualizing relationships between multiple dimensions of team context, structure, processes, and outcomes.

Innovative state: Book review and interview with Aneesh Chopra, M.P.P.

The effects of facilitation on team outcomes have been in the focus of many studies. However, only a few quantitative studies investigate how teams evolve through team processes and emergent states. The goal of this review paper is to synthesize quantitative research studies to better understand the constructs of facilitation and to identify future avenues of facilitation research. We performed a structured literature review to identify relevant quantitative studies using the input-mediator-outcome model to group elicited constructs of facilitation. We found that most studies treat team processes and emergent states as a black box. We argue that we need to open this black box and include measures that allow for conceptualizing how human and automated facilitation affects team outcomes. Hence, we propose a research agenda, which enhances current models explaining team outcomes by a conceptualization and measurement of team processes and emergent states.

The rise of team-based structures within organisations has prompted increasing research focused at improving team processes, typically with a view to increasing team performance (e.g., Allen & Hecht, 2004). This expanding team-level focus within the organisational behaviour literature has required researchers to consider the complexities surrounding the conceptualisation and measurement of team-based constructs and phenomena (e.g., team satisfaction; team cohesion; team conflict), including how best to aggregate traditionally individual-level phenomena to the team level (Bliese, 2000; Chan, 1998). Increasing recognition of the role of affect in organisations ( e.g., Ashkanasy & Dorris, 2017; Barsade & Gibson, 2007) has similarly led to a growing cohort of researchers conceptually and empirically considering affect-related constructs at the team level (e.g., Ashkanasy, 2003; Barsade & Gibson, 2012; Cote, 2007). One influential stream within this area is research on group affective tone established by George and her colleagues ( e.g., George, 1990, 2002; George & King, 2007). George (1990) provided some of the earliest empirical evidence for group affective tone by demonstrating that individuals in workgroups tend to experience highly similar levels of state affect. The affective tone of a team has been shown to have significant impact on team functioning. A more positive affective tone has been linked with a number of advantageous team outcomes, including better team cooperation (Barsade, 2002), better coordination (Sy, Cote, & Saavedra, 2005), lower team conflict (e.g., Barsade, 2002), lower absence rates within the team (Mason & Griffin, 2003), and more helping behaviours displayed within the team (Chi, Chung, & Tsai, 2011 ). However, there have also been some counterintuitive findings that suggest the impact of group affective tone on team outcomes is more complex than sometimes theorised. In line with the IPSO model of team effectiveness (Marks, Mathieu, & Zaccaro, 2001) my program of research will consider the interplay of affective input variables of the team (specifically trait affect and emotional intelligence) on the development of group affective tone and discrete emotional tones as an emergent state. I use affect-as­information theory (Schwarz & Clore, 2003) and the emotions-as-social-information model (EASI; Van Kleef, 2009) to guide my propositions regarding the influence of group affective tone on team dynamics ( conflict) and outcomes (team performance and team satisfaction). Finally, my expectations regarding the impact of team conflict on team outcomes are based on Jehn and Bendersky's (2003) contingency theory of the consequences of conflict. My broad research questions are: RQ 1. Under what conditions will team members' positive affect and negative affect converge? RQ2. What are the consequences of group affective tone on team conflict? RQ3. What are the consequences of group affective tone on team performance/ satisfaction? RQ4. To what extent does team emotional intelligence influence the interplay of team conflict and team performance? Three studies were conducted to address these questions. All studies used student samples in order to have a high amount of control over the formation of teams and the tasks they completed. Study 1 involved existing student teams assessed during the completion of a survival decision-making task. It examined the convergence of team members' affect, and whether the consequences of teams' affective tone on experienced conflict and objective performance in the task was dependent on teams' (self-rated) collective emotional intelligence, as well as the role of collective emotional intelligence in determining the effectiveness of team conflict on performance. Study 2 utilised an experimental design of randomly formed university teams, and addressed how the trait affective composition of a team contributed to the affective tone of teams, and whether this link was contingent on teams' self-rated level of emotional intelligence, as well as the impact of collective emotional intelligence and formally imposed display rules on the link between teams' affective tone and performance (both self-rated and objective) in a creative task. Finally, the aim of Study 3 was to take a more fine-grained look at the collective emotions of a team, and investigate the convergence of discrete emotions (e.g., joviality, fear, and hostility) in university teams completing a workplace-based decision-making task, as well as whether the consequences of teams' various emotional tones on experienced conflict and objective performance was dependent on teams' collective emotional intelligence (assessed via a situational judgement test). Results of my program of research have both supported previous research on affective tone and extended knowledge regarding the impact of collective emotional intelligence on team interactions with some counterintuitive findings. In an extension of previous research on affect at the team level, I examined specific emotions and their convergence in short tasks, and demonstrated that specific emotions will have differential influences on team outcomes which are not easily apparent when researchers classify affect as either globally positive or negative in nature. Regarding the role of emotional intelligence in team affectivity, different facets were found to have opposing effects. My research has extended past findings by demonstrating that the awareness facets of emotional intelligence can be harmful to a team's functioning when considering the negative affective tone of the team. When a team is lower in negative affective tone, having high awareness of emotions can be detrimental in terms of both relationship conflict experienced in the team, and objective performance of the team. This finding is in contrast to the majority of affective tone models which predict emotional intelligence will help buffer against the harmful impacts of negative affective tone. However, certain management aspects of emotional intelligence were found to be highly valuable in the interplay between positive affective tone, task conflict, and team performance. Contrary to past theory suggesting the desirability of a highly positive affective tone (e.g., George, 1995), and research demonstrating a simple positive link between positive tone and performance ( e.g., Hmieleski, Cole, & Baron, 2012; Kim & Choi, 2012) my research has challenged the notion that a positive affective tone is universally advantageous. Based on my research, during complex decision-making or creative tasks, teams need to be able to manage their positivity so that it remains functional, rather than making them complacent about their task; providing team-level support for affect-as-information theory (Schwarz & Clore, 2003). The practical implications of my research include the notion that team-level emotional intelligence may be a vital resource for maximising team performance. Managers of teams, in particular, should be aware that a highly positive team atmosphere may not be beneficial unless team members possess the skills to manage that collective positive emotion productively. Team selection which considers the emotional intelligence of potential members to ensure adequate collective levels, or training interventions which aim to increase employees' emotional intelligence are two options for organisations to consider.

Investigating the effects of time pressure on new product development teams

Motivation is an essential factor in achieving high-level outcomes in virtual teams (VT). Using a dataset of 3,071 individuals nested in 614 VT, we examine whether distinct individual motivation-change patterns coexist during VT work and how team context (e.g., team characteristics and team dynamics) relates to such motivation-change patterns. Based on a problematization approach and social motivation theory, and using the latent class growth analysis, we identified three distinct classes of individual motivation-change patterns (i.e., constant high motivation, decreasing motivation, increasing motivation) over time. Interestingly, while team dynamics (e.g., transition/action process, collective efficacy, interpersonal process, team cohesion) are related to motivation-change patterns, team characteristics (e.g., the average age of team members, team size, homogeneity of intrateam nationalities, gender diversity) are not related to individual motivation-change patterns in VT. This suggests, in contrast to face-to-face work settings, that team characteristics may play a different role in VT because people do not meet in person. Thus, to improve and/or maintain the motivation of VT members over time, it would be beneficial to focus on task- and relational-focused processes (e.g., team dynamics), regardless of team characteristics.

This study examines the impact of real-team--as opposed to a team in name only--characteristics (i.e., team boundaries, stability of membership, and task interdependence) on team processes (i.e., team learning and emotional support) and team effectiveness in the long-term care sector. We employed a longitudinal survey in which the real-team characteristics and team processes were rated by team members, and team effectiveness was rated one year later by team members and managers. Our results show that team learning and emotional support are predictors of team effectiveness as rated by team members and managers. They also show that there is no such thing as a real team in the long-term care sector because each real-team characteristic has a different impact on team processes and effectiveness. Whereas one set of real-team characteristics (i.e., stability of membership) is beneficial for healthy team processes and team effectiveness, another set (i.e., team boundaries) has only an indirect effect on team effectiveness via team processes or is even detrimental (i.e., task interdependence). We conclude that more intensive teamwork in the long-term care sector will lead to better outcomes if this teamwork involves increased stability of membership and clarified team boundaries but not if it involves added task interdependency among team members.