Abstract
In this manuscript we discuss the consequences of methodological choices when studying team processes “in the wild.” We chose teams in healthcare as the application because teamwork cannot only save lives but the processes constituting effective teamwork in healthcare are prototypical for teamwork as they range from decision-making (e.g., in multidisciplinary decision-making boards in cancer care) to leadership and coordination (e.g., in fast-paced, acute-care settings in trauma, surgery and anesthesia) to reflection and learning (e.g., in post-event clinical debriefings). We draw upon recently emphasized critique that much empirical team research has focused on describing team states rather than investigating how team processes dynamically unfurl over time and how these dynamics predict team outcomes. This focus on statics instead of dynamics limits the gain of applicable knowledge on team functioning in organizations. We first describe three examples from healthcare that reflect the importance, scope, and challenges of teamwork: multidisciplinary decision-making boards, fast-paced, acute care settings, and post-event clinical team debriefings. Second, we put the methodological approaches of how teamwork in these representative examples has mostly been studied centerstage (i.e., using mainly surveys, database reviews, and rating tools) and highlight how the resulting findings provide only limited insights into the actual team processes and the quality thereof, leaving little room for identifying and targeting success factors. Third, we discuss how methodical approaches that take dynamics into account (i.e., event- and time-based behavior observation and micro-level coding, social sensor-based measurement) would contribute to the science of teams by providing actionable knowledge about interaction processes of successful teamwork.
Highlights
Modern organizations rely on teams (Edmondson, 2012; Salas et al, 2013b; Mathieu et al, 2014)
It stands in contrast to the way teams have mostly been studied: much empirical team research has been static rather than dynamic, assessing team states rather than exploring how team processes dynamically develop over time and how these dynamics are related to team outcomes such as performance, satisfaction, and learning (Roe, 2008; Cronin et al, 2011; Humphrey and Aime, 2014; Mathieu et al, 2014; Kozlowski, 2015)
While we greatly appreciate the value of teamwork surveys such as the Team Diagnostic Survey (Wageman et al, 2005) and the Aston Team Performance Inventory (West et al, 2006), for assessing team members’ subjective perspective of team process functioning for the purpose of training and reflection, we argue that studying team dynamics by means of dynamic teamwork measures is a better methodological fit (Edmondson and McManus, 2007) and more promising for teamwork interventions
Summary
Modern organizations rely on teams (Edmondson, 2012; Salas et al, 2013b; Mathieu et al, 2014). It is critical to understand how team processes emerge and change and what they need and do to achieve best outcomes This is important in light of the evidence showing that poor teamwork in highrisk/high complexity fields such as healthcare can have disastrous consequences, i.e., loss of a patient’s life (Cooper et al, 1984; Flin and Mitchell, 2009; Reynard et al, 2009; Fernandez Castelao et al, 2011; Salas and Frush, 2013; Salas et al, 2013b). We illustrate potential other methodological approaches which are, for the time being, more extensive but provide benefits for applied team science
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.