When Perceived Team Boundaries Blur: Inconsistent Perceptions and Implications for Performance

Abstract

In complex and dynamic work settings, multidisciplinary teams often do not exhibit clear membership boundaries or stability. While recent research has explored the implications of blurred team boundaries, little is known about how individuals perceive their teams in these environments and how, if at all, their perceptions relate to their performance and job satisfaction. We draw on the context of primary care delivery in the United States, where fluid multi-disciplinary teams exhibit notably blurred boundaries. We explore individuals’ perceptions of team boundaries using a survey fielded within 59 clinics (N=828). We discover substantial variation in individuals’ perceptions of who is on their team, even in the same work setting (e.g., mean team size=10.60; standard deviation=5.09). Individuals perceiving more expansive teams report higher care quality (b=.02; p<.01) but there is a curvilinear relationship with job satisfaction. When divided into a core of people always on the team and a periphery of people sometimes on the team, the core size drives the positive relationship with quality (b=.03 p<.01). The perceived periphery was marginally negatively associated with perceived quality (b=-.02, p<.10), which was driven by deviance from the norm perception, i.e., attributions to the periphery of roles considered by most others to be core. Our findings suggest that people perceiving team boundaries more expansively might be more able to deliver high quality work performance in certain environments, though their job satisfaction may be negatively affected. Future research should explore how to ameliorate this tension.