Team Performance Relationship Research Articles

Cohesion and satisfaction as mediators of the team trust – team effectiveness relationship

Purpose – With extant research on the relationship between trust and effectiveness being inconclusive, the present study attempts to create a foundational investigation that examines the role of multiple mediators in the team trust – team effectiveness relationship. The authors identified the two emergent states of cohesion and satisfaction as intervening variables in the team trust – team effectiveness relationship, and tested this multi-mediation proposed model, within an interdependence theory perspective. Design/methodology/approach – MBA students at a large university in the southwestern USA were administered two waves of paper-based surveys, which were assigned to project groups. Individuals had been assigned to groups with the intent of maximizing diversity of age, gender, functional background, industry experience, and undergraduate major for each team (this is a goal of the MBA program, not the researchers). The first wave was administered one week after the groups had been formed and after all group members had met in their groups at least once. The second wave of surveys was administered at the end of the semester after the groups had been working together for three months and had completed their final projects. Findings – The results of the multiple mediation analysis found support for the hypotheses that cohesion and satisfaction serve as dual mediators of the trust – team effectiveness relationship. Originality/value – This study examined how trust operates through other variables to affect team performance. Two important variables that have been shown to be affected by trust are cohesion and satisfaction. Utilizing interdependence theory, the relationship of team trust and team performance was investigated through the intervening variables of cohesion and satisfaction, as both have been shown to possess properties that potentially represent different aspects of the interdependent relationship between team members. Therefore, this study examines how trust impacts team performance though the dual mediators of cohesion and satisfaction, in efforts to develop a more informed and theoretically grounded understanding of team performance and effectiveness processes.

Examining the “Pros” and “Cons” of Team Conflict: A Team-Level Meta-Analysis of Task, Relationship, and Process Conflict

Jehn (e.g., 1997) offered three distinct types of team conflict, namely, task conflict, relationship conflict, and process conflict. Despite existing meta-analyses, there remain important and ongoing issues that warrant further meta-analytic investigation. Our contribution is threefold. First, we report novel meta-analytic findings involving moderators of the conflict–team performance relationship. Second, we report on meta-analytic correlations involving all three conflict types and team innovation. Third, we report on the relations involving task conflict and relationship conflict with previously unexamined, but critical, teamwork variables: team potency, cooperative behaviors, competitive behaviors, and avoidance behaviors. Input for the current meta-analysis included 89 independent samples, 6,122 teams, and approximately 28,000 team members.

How Team Turnover Disrupts Team Performance: A Human Resources Loss Perspective

This study examined the influence of team turnover on team performance. We investigated whether task and relationship conflict mediate this relationship and whether team tenure moderates the relationship between turnover, conflict, and performance in teams. We built and tested a mediated moderation model, utilizing data from 65 health care teams. Results showed that task conflict, but not relationship conflict, operates as a mediating mechanism between team turnover and team performance. We also found that the indirect effect of task conflict depended upon team tenure: Task conflict only mediated the team turnover – team performance relationship when team tenure was low or moderate. When team tenure was high, team turnover did not associate with task conflict and team performance. It appears that while team turnover negatively influences team performance via task conflict, team tenure helps teams to reduce turnover’s negative consequences. We discuss implications for theory and practice.

The effects of information sharing, collective efficacy and team conflict on system development team performance

Understanding the factors that determine information systems development (ISD) outcomes is an important step towards successfully deploying those systems. The ISD process is an information intensive and collaborative endeavour typically performed in teams. As a result, the process involves the sharing of information among multiple individuals. Previous research has demonstrated that information sharing has a direct positive effect on team performance. However, little is known about key mechanisms that underlie this relationship. The goal of this research is to understand direct and indirect effects of information sharing in the ISD context. Specifically, collective efficacy and conflict are theorised as intervening mechanisms in the information sharing and team performance relationship. Data were collected from experienced software development professionals. Information sharing was found to influence ISD team performance directly and indirectly via team conflict and collective efficacy. The results of the study provide important insight into effectively managing software development activities.

The Relationships Among Leader Social Support, Team Social Support, Team Stressors and Team Performance

While workplace stress often leads to poor employee performance, this predicament can be improved through the use of social support and reward mechanisms. This study tests two models to investigate the relationships among support, reward, team stressors and team performance. In model 1, leader social support, team social support, and team reward plays an antecedent role in the relationship of team stressors and performance. In model 2, the tree variables have the moderating effect on the relationship between team stressors and performance. Data are collected from NPD team members of Taiwanese semi-conductor industry. The regression analyses are used for the tests of alignment hypotheses. The Model 1 provides the better explanation of relationships between the above-mentioned variables. This study contributes new evidence to disputed views in previous studies and offers important implications for both research and practice.

Team Cognition, Collective Efficacy, and Performance in Strategic Decision-Making Teams

With the growing use of teamwork for strategic decision making in organizations, an understanding of the teamwork dynamics in the strategic decision-making process is critical for both researchers and practitioners. By conceptualizing team cognition in terms of a transactive memory system (TMS) and collective mind, in this study we explored the relationships among TMS, collective mind, and collective efficacy and the impact of these variables on team performance. Longitudinal data collected from 98 undergraduates were analyzed. Neither the TMS–team performance relationship nor the collective mind–team performance relationship was significant. Collective efficacy was found to play a mediating role in such relationships. We concluded that team cognition with collective efficacy is beneficial for understanding teamwork dynamics in strategic decision making.

Core-Self Evaluations and Team Performance

Team composition literature has established associations of team personality composition and performance in previous research. This study adds to this literature by examining the positive relationship of mean core self-evaluations (CSE) and team performance as well as the moderating effect of team-member exchange (TMX) on this relationship. Using 63 senior business student teams engaged in a management-simulation exercise, there was no support for the main effect of CSE above any variance explained in team performance by mean levels of the Big 5 factors. However, there was strong support for TMX as a moderator where mean CSE was only found to positively relate with team performance when TMX was high. The discussion will detail the results and future directions for research.

The interactive effects of person-focused citizenship behaviour, task interdependence, and virtuality on team performance

A multifactorial between-groups experiment examined the effects of person-focused organizational citizenship behaviours (OCBP) on the performance of teams characterized by different levels of virtuality and task interdependence. Results reveal in low virtual teams the moderating effects of task interdependence on the OCBP–team performance relationship are positive; however, these effects are reversed in high virtual teams. Using social presence and task–technology fit theories, our results indicate that task context affects how OCBP impacts team performance, particularly across different levels of team virtuality. The implications for research on OCB and the management of virtual teams are discussed.

The relationship of team learning behavior to team performance

The purpose of this study was to meta-analyze the research examining the effects of team learning behavior on team performance. In addition, team size, team type and study setting were investigated as potential moderators of the relationship between team learning behavior and team performance. In total, the database consisted of 21 effect sizes of 17 studies. They were analyzed by using Hunter & Schmidt (2004) meta-analytic procedure. The results indicated that team learning behavior was positively related to team performance and team innovation. The findings suggested that team size, team type, and study setting moderate the relationship of team learning behavior to team performance. The relationship of team learning behavior and team performance was stronger in small teams than in medium and large teams. The stronger relationship of team learning to team performance in project teams was found. Finally, the stronger relationship of team learning behavior to team performance in academic setting than organizational setting was shown. However, in small teams and the academic setting the number of independent studies was less than 5, so it was important to interpret with caution. The implication and limitations of this research were discussed.

The Relationship of Team Learning Behavior to Team Performance: Meta-Analysis

The purpose of this study was to meta-analyze the research examining the effects of team learning behavior on team performance. In addition, team size, team type and study setting were investigated as potential moderators of the relationship between team learning behavior and team performance. In total, the database consisted of 21 effect sizes of 17 studies. They were analyzed by using Hunter & Schmidt (2004) meta-analytic procedure. The results indicated that team learning behavior was positively related to team performance and team innovation. The findings suggested that team size, team type, and study setting moderate the relationship of team learning behavior to team performance. The relationship of team learning behavior and team performance was stronger in small teams than in medium and large teams. The stronger relationship of team learning to team performance in project teams was found. Finally, the stronger relationship of team learning behavior to team performance in academic setting than organizational setting was shown. However, in small teams and the academic setting the number of independent studies was less than 5, so it was important to interpret with caution. The implication and limitations of this research were discussed.

Getting Specific about Demographic Diversity Variable and Team Performance Relationships: A Meta-Analysis

The authors revisited the demographic diversity variable and team performance relationship using meta-analysis and took a significant departure from previous meta-analyses by focusing on specific demographic variables (e.g., functional background, organizational tenure) rather than broad categories (e.g., highly job related, less job related). They integrated different conceptualizations of diversity (i.e., separation, variety, disparity) into the development of their rationale and hypotheses for specific demographic diversity variable—team performance relationships. Furthermore, they contrasted diversity with the team mean on continuous demographic variables when elevated levels of a variable, as opposed to differences, were more logically related to team performance. Functional background variety diversity had a small positive relationship with general team performance as well as with team creativity and innovation. The relationship was strongest for design and product development teams. Educational background variety diversity was related to team creativity and innovation and to team performance for top management teams. Other variables generally thought to increase task-relevant knowledge (e.g., organizational tenure) and team performance were unrelated to team performance, although these variables were almost never studied as the variety conceptualization (i.e., the conceptualization that can reflect the breadth of knowledge that can be applied to the task). Team mean organizational tenure was related to team performance in terms of efficiency. Race and sex variety diversity had small negative relationships with team performance, whereas age diversity was unrelated to team performance regardless of diversity conceptualization. Implications for staffing teams and future research are discussed.

Team Identification, Team Performance and Leader-Member Exchange Relationships in Virtual Groups

While previous research has identified group identification as an important factor in affecting relevant outcomes (e.g., satisfaction, turnover, commitment) in face-to face environments, this paper provides initial evidence to support the proposition that group identification also matters in virtual environments. In particular, the authors found that team members’ perceptions of the leader-member exchange relationship and the team’s past performance are related to individuals’ identification with the virtual team and that identification affects satisfaction and behavioral intentions. Individuals who perceive leader-member exchange as high (e.g., the leader displays a willingness to help the team member solve problems and the leader recognizes the member’s potential) and who report that their teams perform well had stronger identification with the team. Individuals who reported strong identification with their team were more satisfied with the team and had greater intentions to perform positive behaviors in the future.

The Team Personality–Team Performance Relationship Revisited: The Impact of Criterion Choice, Pattern of Workflow, and Method of Aggregation

Using meta-analytic evidence, this study tested trait- and task-based theoretical approaches to team personality management, using both team behaviors and team outcomes as criteria. Trait theories state that maximization of the team trait is harmful for Extroversion (complementary team fit) but beneficial for Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, and Emotional Stability (supplementary fit). Task-based theories state that tasks with few work exchanges are best reflected by mean trait scores, whereas tasks with frequent work exchanges are best represented by other types of scores (e.g., minimum score). Correlations between different aggregations of team personality and team performance were coded, as well as the study criterion choice and the pattern of workflow (as moderators). Partial support for both trait and task theories were found. Team Conscientiousness and Agreeableness provided supplementary fit primarily with team behaviors, but there was mixed evidence that Extroversion provided complementary fit. Furthermore, minimum and variance measures of the team trait related to team performance in tasks with frequent work exchanges, but not in tasks with few work exchanges. Results suggest several limitations with existing measurement methods, which are discussed.

Deep-level composition variables as predictors of team performance: A meta-analysis.

This study sought to unify the team composition literature by using meta-analytic techniques to estimate the relationships between specified deep-level team composition variables (i.e., personality factors, values, abilities) and team performance. The strength of the team composition variable and team performance relationships was moderated by the study setting (lab or field) and the operationalization of the team composition variable. In lab settings, team minimum and maximum general mental ability and team mean emotional intelligence were related to team performance. Only negligible effects were observed in lab settings for the personality factor and team performance relationships, as well as the value and team performance relationships. In contrast, team minimum agreeableness and team mean conscientiousness, openness to experience, collectivism, and preference for teamwork emerged as strong predictors of team performance in field studies. Results can be used to effectively compose teams in organizations and guide future team composition research.

A Longitudinal Examination of the Comparative Criterion-Related Validity of Additive and Referent-Shift Consensus Operationalizations of Team Efficacy

Using a longitudinal design, the authors examined the criterion-related validity of two operationalizations of task-specific team efficacy that differed in their approximation to the level of analysis of the criterion, team performance. Data were obtained from 85 highly interdependent dyadic teams trained over a 2-week period to perform a complex perceptual-motor skill task. Results indicated that, as expected, the operationalization with a team-level referent (referent-shift consensus) was superior to the operationalization with an individual-level referent (additive) across all three data collection periods. For the referent-shift consensus operationalization, within-team agreement and the criterion-related validity improved between the first and second data collection periods but not between the second and third. However, for both operationalizations, despite the increased strength of the team efficacy and team performance relationships, efficacy ratings collected later in the study protocol did not explain unique variance in subsequent team performance once the effect of previous performance was statistically controlled.

The sound of silence: The case of virtual team organising

In this paper we discuss the role of silence within a virtual organising context. The paper raises issues related to the construction of silence in the virtual team context and the implications it has on team interactions. By drawing upon existing studies on virtual teams, we argue that members' silence may not always have negative effects on team performance and team relationships, but that silence is an embedded part of this environment as it reinforces the very nature of virtuality. The theoretical and practical significance of this study are discussed and implications for further research are identified.

Leader and Staff Role-Efficacy as Antecedents of Collective-Efficacy and Team Performance

A model of the relationships between leader role-efficacy for initiating structure behavior, staff role-efficacy for team playing behavior, actual behavior, collective-efficacy, and team performance was tested. Participants (N = 268) were randomly assigned to newly formed teams (n = 59) that worked on a novel task under time constraints. The results showed that leader and staff behavior mediated the relationship between role-specific efficacy and collective-efficacy. In addition, high leader and staff role behavior, in combination, led to the highest collective-efficacy. Low staff role behavior neutralized the effect of high leader role behavior on collective-efficacy, and vice versa. The results also indicated that collective-efficacy mediated the leader role behavior-staff role behavior and team performance relationship.

The Relationship of Group Process Variables and Team Performance

The efficacy of three group process variables—group potency, social cohesion, and team-member exchange—in explaining team performance was examined for 648 military officers working in 50 self-managed teams over a 5-week period. Team performance was assessed on two objective criteria (mental task performance and physical task performance) and one subjective criterion (commander team performance ratings). Each of the group process variables was related to at least one aspect of team performance. Of the three group process variables, group potency exhibited the greatest predictive efficacy as it explained unique variance in team performance over that accounted for by both social cohesion and team-member exchange.

Development of a Self‐Report Instrument for Exploring Team Factor, Leadership and Performance Relationships

Claims have been recently made for a seven‐factor model that ndifferentiated performance levels in project teams. We have tested the model with results from a self‐report inventory. Forty‐four opportunities for data collection were taken and a total of 1103 useable inventories collected from participants across European, Asian and African locations. Teams reported on were predominantly work‐related. All seven factors correlate as predicted with leadership and team‐performance criteria. We report results supporting the original proposition that team effectiveness, including its creativity, can be interpreted as arising through leadership interventions of a transformational kind, which impact on a set of theoretically‐derived team factors.

Performance and Process Measure Relationships in Transitioning from a Low to High Fidelity Simulation Environment

Entin (1999) reported that after sufficient training with a six-node non-traditional optimized C2 architecture, teams performed higher with it than with a six-node traditional non-optimized C2 architecture. Moreover, teams performing with a four-node non-traditional optimized C2 architecture performed as well as the six-node traditional non-optimized C2 architecture. Entin (1999) also noted that the various team process measures supported the performance outcome and predicted performance. The prior work was performed employing the low fidelity Distributed Dynamic Decision making III (DDD-III) research simulator. The DDD offers a high degree of experimental control, on-line data collection, as well as a high level of abstraction. Part of the charge of the Adaptive Architecture for Command and Control project is to investigate whether findings ascertained within the low fidelity DDD environment can be replicated in a high fidelity simulation environment. The current study was a partial response to this charge. The scenario and forces used with the DDD experiment were adapted to the marine's MAGTIF Tactical Warfare Simulation (MTWS) environment. Because of the watershed nature of this study several technical issues were examined (e.g., the effects of the presence or absence of trained operators and the benefit of operator training). Further resource limitations precluded replicating the earlier design, but it was possible to examine the team process and performance relationship for the four-node — six-node comparison. Nineteen officers enrolled at the Naval Postgraduate School were partitioned into five four-node teams that participated in eight trials and three six-node teams that participated in six trials. Twelve participants received intensive MTWS operator training and all received general MTWS familiarization training. Results showed that as in the previous experiment, teams employing the four-node optimized architecture where able to perform at the same level as teams using the six-node non-optimized architecture. It would seem that the optimization of the four-node architecture is able to compensate for the 33% reduction in team staff. In the previous experiment the team process measures significantly predicted performance outcome. The regression analysis revealed a multiple R of .86 (p<.02), that accounts for 73% of the variance. Findings for the current experiment revealed a similar relationship and pattern. The multiple R is .82 (p<.03), accounting for 68% of the variance. Moreover, the process measures in the equations were quite similar across the two experiments. We conclude that we were successful in transitioning the scenario and mission from a low to high fidelity simulation environment.