Search

PurposePsychological safety climate has been commonly conceptualized as a facilitative team property. Despite the literature review and meta-analysis conducted recently, little is known about the potential dark side of psychological safety climate. The purpose of this paper is to develop a theoretical framework to advance our understanding of both the bright and dark sides of psychological safety.Design/methodology/approachDrawing on extant theories and previous literature, the authors propose a conceptual framework of the mechanisms and boundary conditions underlying the relationship between psychological safety climate and dysfunctional team behavior.FindingsThe authors propose that the relationship between psychological safety climate and dysfunctional behaviors in the team is directly contingent on psychological safety climate strength, and indirectly contingent on task interdependence, group faultlines, group conflict asymmetry and team power distance differentiation.Originality/valueFirst, the authors attempt to expand psychological safety climate literature by considering its potential damaging outcomes. Second, they contribute to the theory of psychological safety climate by suggesting a theoretical model consisting of the boundary conditions wherein psychological safety climate could reduce team effectiveness. Finally, the authors incorporate climate strength into the psychological safety literature to probe the antecedents of psychological safety climate strength and when it matters to the subsequent negative outcomes.

PurposeMarine experts have recognised the importance of on-board teamwork for a ship’s safe operation. The purpose of the study is to develop a framework of “on-board team effectiveness” as perceived by the seafarers with the help of conceptual categories discovered from the study. It describes and explain how members of floating shipboard team operates in a global environment which is dynamic, complex and full of challenges.Design/methodology/approachQualitative research design was used to study wherein the grounded theory approach was adopted for data analysis. A purposive sample of 44 Indian seafarers covering all ranks and departments of the shipboard team were selected for the study. Primary data were collected through long interviews and focused group discussions with the respondents. Secondary data were collected through industry periodicals.FindingsTen conceptual categories were developed, and their interplay was identified to understand various aspects of shipboard team working in different contexts.Practical implicationsThe insights gained from the study can be used to enhance shipboard team’s working and safe operation of the ship.Originality/valueThe study is unique in addressing team effectiveness issues of shipboard teams. Understanding teamwork effectiveness of a culturally diversified shipboard team shall facilitate safe working practices and act as a deterrent to human errors, which causes accidents and incidents.

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.

Purpose Team effectiveness is often predicated by a group’s ability to communicate. However, the effect of stress response on communication success, particularly nonverbal engagement, and how this might affect team performance, is not clear; a “phenomenon” this study sought to explore. Design/methodology/approach This was an observational study in a cohort of professional rugby players. Participants gave presentations to their peers on two separate occasions during a “live-in” camp designed to have psychologically stressful elements. Presentations were video recorded and audience engagement was measured. Testosterone and cortisol were used as biomarkers of stress response, with a high testosterone–cortisol ratio considered positive. A team training session followed the presentations and participants were rated for training quality. Findings A small decline in testosterone was observed each day after waking. Conversely, cortisol rose after waking, with the rise being the highest on the first day. A decline in testosterone–cortisol ratio was also seen each day after waking; the decline was greatest on the first day. Presentation duration and audience engagement was greatest for the second presentation; when the testosterone-cortisol ratio decline and the cortisol increase after waking was smaller. Training quality was also better that day. Pooled data revealed a moderate inverse relationship and weak positive relationships for audience engagement with post-meeting cortisol and post-meeting testosterone–cortisol ratio, respectively. Training quality was related to testosterone and testosterone–cortisol ratio, but inversely related to cortisol. Originality/value This study suggests that in stressful conditions, as suggested by an awakening hormone response, communication and team performance could become compromised with reduced ability to engage with others.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to propose and predict an improved model for antecedents to work group productivity. Design/methodology/approach The Campion work group effectiveness model (CWGEM) provides a wide variety of variables or constructs to predict and measure the effectiveness of a team, but suffers from limitations. This paper introduces social value orientation (SVO) and suggests its potential utility as an alternative conceptualization of certain portions of CWGEM, which, based on the literature reviewed, has the potential to explain differences in social support, workload sharing and communication and cooperation within groups, resulting in one measure more efficiently replacing three. Findings A series of testable propositions offering revisions to CWGEM is presented, along with special consideration for the inclusion of SVO as a predictor of work group outcomes. This paper expands on a theoretically developed empirical model that can predict differences in work group production. Research limitations/implications The revision to CWGEM presented here requires empirical validation, but work group conflict could benefit from an additional factor that explains interpersonal conflict, as SVO does. Originality/value The authors’ primary contribution is offering a revision to CWGEM that could provide an improved explanation for differences in work group productivity using SVO and a model that could result in a more efficient and better measure.

Purpose Applying media synchronicity theory (MST) as a theoretical foundation, this paper aims to examine whether teams using multiple communication modes perform better on a complex intra-team task than those using a single mode. Design/methodology/approach The authors adopted a mixed-methods explanatory design. Data were collected from 44 teams directly following participation in the Everest Leadership and Team Simulation. Teams were assigned a specific mode of communication: virtual (text-chat only), face-to-face (FTF) or dual (FTF and chat). Findings No significant differences in team goals achieved were found when comparing dual modes to single modes, counter to predictions based on MST. Qualitative data indicated that FTF communication is dominant and might lead to “medium inertia” when multiple modes are available. FTF teams reported higher perceptions of team effectiveness than text-chat-only teams. Research limitations/implications This study was conducted on a small number of teams in an artificial environment; therefore, generalizability is limited. Future research should consider other measures of team performance and test teams in a virtual setting where distance, as well as time, are factors. Practical implications FTF communication tends to be dominant to a point where virtual options are ignored, suggesting that greater awareness around communication processes required for complex tasks, and ways to appropriate different media for conveyance or convergence, is key to team performance. Originality/value This study highlights the importance of determining processes by which teams shift between media to maximize conveyance and convergence processes. Additionally, distinguishing between objective performance and perceptions of performance highlight an additional challenge for teams that can be explored.

PurposeThe fundamental role of corporate boards is to monitor and advise top management on strategic issues. It is therefore of the utmost importance that corporate directors are effective as a decision-making group to ensure corporate performance (Zattoni et al., 2015; Minichilli et al., 2012). But, what do we know about what is really going on inside the boardroom? This study aims to shed light on this important question.Design/methodology/approachThe authors undertake a targeted review of the literature to take account of all publications regarding board dynamics in relation to board effectiveness.FindingsThis study shows that we know very little about what is going on inside the “black box” of board dynamics and its relation to how effective directors are at doing their job, namely, monitoring and advising top management and establishing and expanding the firm’s network, to gain access to the resources it needs. The authors propose several avenues of research to better understand board dynamics.Originality/valueIn this study, the authors show how and why the present body of knowledge on team effectiveness should be harnessed to better understand corporate board dynamics in relation to board effectiveness.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine incongruities between autonomous team members’ expectations for top-leader involvement with teams and their perceptions of top-leader involvement actually encountered in their own team experiences.Design/methodology/approachInterview feedback was sought from three participants from each of six autonomous teams to capture explanations of their lived experiences from team participation. Transcribed data were examined through thematic analysis, from which patterned responses and meanings relevant to the research inquiry were identified.FindingsTo foster a team environment and shape the organizational context to align with autonomous team members’ expectations, organizational leaders should give significant attention to all-inclusive recruitment; frequent, face-to-face communication between themselves and team members; and an unwavering resource allocation.Originality/valueThis study addresses a unique realm of team research in addressing the need for top leaders to understand team members’ expectations for their involvement in shaping an organizational context most conducive to team effectiveness.

PurposeThis paper aims to examine the effect of shared leadership on student project team processes and outcomes. The authors focused on shared leadership and its association with team processes (coordination, goal commitment and knowledge sharing) and team performance.Design/methodology/approachTo examine the shared leadership, team processes and performance model, the authors conducted two separate surveys of 158 graduate and undergraduate students working in project teams at a large southwestern university.FindingsResults showed that shared leadership positively affected coordination activities, goal commitment and knowledge sharing, which in turn positively affect team performance. Each team process factor had a mediation effect, although shared leadership had no direct effect on team performance.Research limitations/implicationsThis research adds to the knowledge of important team process factors through which shared leadership indirectly affects team performance.Practical implicationsBased on the findings, the authors provided implications for students and instructors that shared leadership can facilitate team performance by enabling team members to coordinate activities, commit to goals and share knowledge effectively.Originality/valueThis study presents an initial understanding of the shared leadership-team performance relationship by introducing influential variables, such as coordination activities, goal commitment and knowledge sharing in a team.

Purpose By relying on social learning theory, the authors aim to evaluate how team characteristics as evaluated by a team coach impact participation in leadership development program activities. Specifically, the authors hypothesize that teams with high levels of competence and social support would participate more team and program-wide training activities. Design/methodology/approach The authors examine 41 teams (266 participants) in a leadership development program and develop a two-by-two matrix to categorize teams based on their underlying characteristics for the purpose of identifying participation differences. Findings The mixed results indicate how team social support is a key driver for participation in team activities and how team competence is associated with less participation in program-wide activities in a leadership development program. Practical implications The results point to the importance of team characteristics when using teams for education and training programs such as leadership development programs. Team characteristics such as team competence and team social support should be considered when building teams and for team facilitation needs during education and training programs that implore teams to enhance learning. Originality/value Although the use of teams as an organizing strategy is popular, very little research has examined the effectiveness of this strategy by taking a deeper look at team characteristics and how these impact participation in a leadership development program.

PurposeThe paper aims to propose a conceptualization of two types of team social capital: team-bonding and team-bridging social capital. Throughout the conceptual effort, the paper provides suggestions for future research avenues that link team social capital, as a distinct team-level construct, with other team research topics.Design/methodology/approachThe conceptualization of team social capital is based on a review and synthesis of prior research about social networks. The propositions about the relationships of team social capital with other team process and effectiveness variables are developed within the classical input-mediator-output framework.FindingsThe conceptualizations of team-bonding and team-bridging social capital and the common measures for each are provided. Moreover, a series of testable propositions regarding the associations between team social capital and team process, the influence of team social capital on team effectiveness and the antecedents of team social capital are made.Research limitations/implicationsBecause of the chosen research approach, the research results may lack generalizability. Therefore, researchers are encouraged to test the proposed propositions further.Originality/valueThis paper elaborates the concept of team social capital and specifies its implications to various team phenomena. With this conceptual effort, this paper has advanced our knowledge about the nature and role of team social capital in team research.

Purpose The authors first examine the extent to which having an accurate understanding of and anticipate on one another’s work routines (defined as crossattuning) explains additional variance of team performance above and beyond other implicit coordination concepts such as team familiarity and transactive memory. Furthermore, the authors aim to propose that social sensitivity interacts with team size and team longevity in supporting the emergence of cross-attuning. Design/methodology/approach The authors first use a quasi-experimental design with 35 student-teams in Study 1 to test the discriminant validity of their construct. In Study 2, the authors use a field study with 66 work teams to test their hypotheses. Findings Study 1 shows that cross-attuning has a positive effect on team performance and that it explains additional variance above other implicit coordination-concepts. In Study 2, the authors confirm cross-attuning associates with supervisor-rated team performance and find that team social sensitivity is more positively related to cross-attuning in small teams with low longevity and in large teams with high longevity in comparison to large teams with low longevity. Originality/value The study of implicit coordination mechanisms in teams has primarily focused on having knowledge about other team members’ expertise and competencies and how teams cope with unexpected events. How teams deal with individual work routines – repetitive work-related behavior that is limited in considering alternative actions and the task environment – have received limited attention, despite the potential of these individual routines to thwart successful team task completion.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is an examination of the literature on team boundary activity to trace how team boundary activity has evolved as a construct and examine the dimensions of team boundary activity and their relationships. It highlights the need for a deeper examination of the dimensions of buffering and reinforcement, and why buffering and reinforcement are required. It presents the case of why it is important to study this topic and maps out areas for future research. Design/methodology/approach The paper reviews conceptual and empirical papers published on team boundary activity in reputed journals between the years 1984 and 2016. Findings The focus of research in team boundary activity has been on external interactions of the team (boundary spanning), and very few papers have studied the activities through which the team defines and defends its borders (boundary strengthening). These boundary-strengthening activities can be equally important for innovation and learning in externally dependent teams. Further, there is a need to clearly distinguish these constructs from other variables like team identification. Another area that has here-to not been researched is the relationships between the dimensions of team boundary activity. Last, there is a need to consider a wider range of antecedents, outcomes and moderators of team boundary activity. Research limitations/implications This paper is based on past empirical and conceptual papers, identified using search terms such as team boundary activity, team boundary spanning and external communication. Other related areas can also be explored for identifying variables of interest. Originality/value As opposed to previous reviews which focused mainly on team boundary spanning, this paper considers all dimensions of team boundary activity, with special focus on buffering and reinforcement. It proposes a 2 × 2 framework to explain the effect of boundary-spanning and boundary-strengthening activities on the achievement of team objectives. It examines the cyclical nature of relationship between team boundary activity and team performance. It highlights measurement issues in the area of team boundary activity.

PurposeThis paper aims to identify the determinants of team engagement emerging as a collective team-level phenomenon under time pressure context. The paper particularly explores how teams working under time pressure conditions use their social resources to develop into highly engaged teams.Design/methodology/approachThe paper develops a conceptual framework along with related propositions by integrating diverse literature from the field of team processes, leadership and engagement. The arguments are theoretically embedded into the job demands-resources (JD-R) model to explain the emergence of team engagement under time pressure conditions.FindingsThe suggested conceptual model based on the JD-R model reveal that teams working under time pressure conditions view it as a challenging job demand and, hence, use their social resources as a coping mechanism, thereby developing into highly engaged teams. However, the paper finds that for team engagement to emerge under time pressure, teams require two important determinants. These two main determinants are team leader engaging behaviors and team climate. Engaging team leader’s behaviors include four sub-components: emotional agility, use of humor, efficient delegation and quality of feedback. Team climate constitute three sub-components: open communication, fun at work and compassion within the team. Only teams which have a strong team climate and team leaders’ engaging behaviors tend to have high team engagement under time pressure contexts.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper offers implications for both HR and line managers in team-based organizations to promote factors that enhance team engagement, for teams to perform under time pressure situations.Originality/valueThe paper identifies determinants of team engagement under time pressure context and further adds to the understanding of team processes by theoretically exploring how time pressure as a job demand can be channeled in a positive manner for promoting team engagement by using teams’ social resources: team leader’s engaging behaviors and team climate.

PurposeThe purpose of this editorial is to introduce the special issue from the IWOT conferences in 2012, focusing on teamwork within the Nordic model.Design/methodology/approachThe paper identifies the content of the Nordic model and discusses how it is relevant for high performing autonomous teams, especially connected to teams with a high level of autonomy.FindingsShared leadership is positive for team performance when team autonomy is high. The paper identifies eight important variables for creating high performing cross‐functional teams, the role of trust between workers and supervisors in order to unlock standards, and emphasizes the role of industrial relations as an important support system for team work.Originality/valueThis editorial provides an overview of the Nordic perspective of autonomous teams contained in the special issue which comprises four original articles that are examples of latest developments in this research area. Each of these articles contains a brief introduction on how they contribute to filling in gaps in the literature.

PurposePrevious studies show that sharing leadership in teams offers potential performance benefits across various contexts. This paper aims to investigate moderators of the effectiveness of shared leadership. In particular, it seeks to explore the moderating effects of team work function – manufacturing versus knowledge team work – and team autonomy.Design/methodology/approachIn order to test the hypotheses, the authors conducted hierarchical regression analyses and ran moderated two‐way regression analyses using a field sample of 552 employees comprising 81 teams in a Danish manufacturing company.FindingsContrary to expectations, the results demonstrated a non‐significant relationship between shared leadership and team performance. However, as expected, work function significantly moderated this relationship such that shared leadership exhibited a negative relationship with manufacturing team performance and a positive relationship with knowledge team performance. Moreover, team autonomy was positively related to performance, and it significantly moderated the relationship between shared leadership and team performance.Research limitations/implicationsThe study provides a potentially useful framework for understanding boundary conditions for the effectiveness of shared leadership. However, since the design of the study is cross‐sectional, direct causation cannot be inferred. Moreover, the study took place within a single organization in a Danish context and, therefore, care must be taken in generalizing the findings without additional evidence from further research.Originality/valueTo the authors' knowledge, the study is the first to obtain evidence which indicates that the success of shared leadership may depend on the team work function and the level of team autonomy.

PurposeResearch from numerous theories shows teams' information sharing and discussion enhances effectiveness. Likewise, team communication structure can increase information sharing, manage conflict productively and foster creativity. However, the lack of unifying theory hinders understanding of the disparate research findings. Agazarian aims to unify the field with her meta‐theoretical, multi‐level Theory of Living Human Systems (TLHS). Furthermore, her TLHS‐derived Systems‐Centered Training (SCT) presents an innovative structure to improve team performance. The purpose of this paper is to compare the verbal process, productivity, and creativity of pre‐existing work groups using SCT methods or Robert's Rules of Order (RRO), to test TLHS/SCT reliability and validity.Design/methodology/approachThe verbal characteristics, information sharing, productivity, and creativity in SCT and RRO teams were compared using the System for Analyzing Verbal Interaction (SAVI), Group Productivity Scale and Work Group Inventory.FindingsSCT teams, compared to groups using RRO, talked in ways more likely to transfer and integrate task‐related information. Furthermore, SCT teams were more productive, better performing, and more creative.Research limitations/implicationsThe study's design does not permit cause‐and‐effect conclusions. Proposals for future research are made.Practical implicationsThe results suggest SCT methods improve team communication, productivity, and creativity. Because this study examined “real‐world” teams, the findings may apply to similar groups in various workplaces.Social implicationsHaving the ability to use differences as resources could improve society.Originality/valueThis paper suggests SCT methods offer innovative communication structures that focus teams effectively, perhaps by minimizing off‐task communications and conflict. Also, as SCT operationally defines TLHS, these results support the validity of TLHS.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to investigate whether team members work harder and perform better when they are compensated based on both team and individual performance than either alone and whether teammates' familiarity with one another influences the effectiveness of the compensation scheme.Design/methodology/approachFour‐member ad hoc student teams repeatedly complete an interdependent task on the computer in an experiment which manipulates individual compensation plan, team compensation plan, and teammate familiarity.FindingsResults indicate that offering a combination of individual and team performance‐based compensation results in comparable performance under both strong and weak team identity, suggesting that the lower productivity levels associated with weak team identity can be overcome with performance‐based compensation.Research limitations/implicationsThe data are collected from an experimental game created to resemble one interdependent production environment, thus reducing the generalizability of the results. An experimental environment was chosen because it allowed testing of only the variables of interest – team compensation, individual compensation, and team identity, while holding other factors (i.e. task and compensation variation) constant.Practical implicationsThe results suggest that, regardless of team identity, firms can benefit from offering both team and individual performance‐based compensation.Originality/valueThis study examines individual and team compensation simultaneously, in contrast to studying each in isolation. Additionally, this study investigates whether teammate familiarity moderates the effect of performance‐based compensation on performance.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to identify, review and classify the key practice indicators of successful team integration in construction projects, with the intention of gaining a greater insight into how they influence team dynamics.Design/methodology/approachThis is a review paper that draws on existing research and, through observation of previous studies, identifies patterns to produce a greater understanding of the indicators affecting team integration in construction projects.FindingsThe review identified 15 key practice indicators of team integration from the literature, which together form the basis for transforming disparate project teams into a highly integrated team. It is argued that although there is an element of interdependence between some of the indicators, for the purpose of defining team integration practice by means of key indicators it is important to consider them independently because each indicator represents a key element of team integration practice. The indicators were classified as either “Relationship Oriented Indicators”, whereby the relationship between project teams is directly influenced through human behaviours, or “Non‐Relationship Oriented”, whereby relationships are indirectly influenced by putting systems or processes in place to promote, or at the very least allow, members of different functions to collaborate.Practical implicationsThe process of integration is a result of a combination of many indicators and this review presents a complete picture of team integration for construction projects developed from past team integration research. It is hoped that the proposed framework will make a contribution by providing the necessary groundwork for further research and development in this area, with the aim of bridging the current gaps in the understanding of team integration in the construction management discipline.Originality/valueAlthough there is a diversity of current thinking on team integration practice in construction projects, there is currently no consolidated set of key indicators embedded in integration practice. This study achieves that while recognising a complex system of interdependency between some of the indicators. It further extends the team integration literature by providing deeper insights into the characterisation and importance of exercising and improving integration practice.

PurposeCurrent research remains unclear on what factors contribute to cross‐functional team (CFT) success. Thus, the primary purpose of this investigation is to examine internal factors of the team (namely internal team environment, shared leadership, and cohesion) and the influence of each factor on CFT effectiveness.Design/methodology/approachStructural equation modeling is used to empirically examine the data collected from an undergraduate student sample. Teams worked competitively on a complex task requiring functional area expertise.FindingsResults from the study indicate internal team environment influences effectiveness through shared leadership and cohesion as found in other forms of teams. However, unique to CFTs, internal team environment is not directly related to effectiveness, and shared leadership does not directly influence cohesion. The findings suggest that in CFTs, internal team environment indirectly influences effectiveness.Research limitations/implicationsThe findings of this study can be used to expand current models of CFT effectiveness. Additionally, by examining the internal dynamics of the team (e.g. internal team environment) researchers will be better able to account for the previous vast differences found in CFT outcomes.Practical implicationsManagers interested in influencing team effectiveness are encouraged to focus on the internal dynamics of CFTs. To indirectly influence team effectiveness managers should insure teams establish a clear purpose and that members support one another and feel comfortable making contributions to the team.Originality/valueThis investigation offers understanding of how CFTs can be structured to influence effectiveness and provides insight into previously inconsistent findings. Both researchers and managers will benefit from an enhanced understanding of how internal factors uniquely influence CFT effectiveness.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to describe a model of team establishment that emerged from 64 teams comprised of mid‐career working professionals.Design/methodology/approachA total of 64 similarly configured 18 member teams assembled for work on the same day and, thereafter, worked on similar tasks. A single representative team was observed throughout its process of its formation‐establishment‐using participant observation and interviews. A case report describing the process was co‐constructed afterward. Individuals from remaining teams systematically compared/contrasted their experience with the case report. Qualitative analysis of 874 responses provides the basis for this paper.FindingsTeams formed very differently than expected. A highly dynamic and rapid process was seen. The model suggests interplay between ongoing assessment of the context and organizing for work while norms emerge and work is performed.Research limitations/implicationsIndividual comparisons/contrasts with the case report, unlike the case report itself, were not the result of prolonged engagement, persistent observation, triangulation, and co‐construction processes. The research focus was on team development; implications for performance are not addressed.Practical implicationsLeaders can influence the speed of establishment through intentionality during the establishment phase. The rapid establishment process that emerged here may have application across a wider range of work settings—especially where members are experienced in working collaboratively.Originality/valueThe model of team establishment has likely application in other settings. The study also suggests the valuable insights that study informants can contribute to research.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to determine the extent to which team processes vary between team types, as well as the relative importance of these processes for different team types.Design/methodology/approachA survey study evaluated a sample of 316 members of various work teams that were classified as either intellectual (e.g. executive team) or physical (e.g. production team) teams. Independent samples t‐tests, paired samples t‐tests, and confirmatory factor analysis were used to evaluate hypotheses.FindingsConfirmatory analysis indicated transition and action oriented process behaviors were distinct from one another. Intellectual teams were found to value transition processes (planning and strategizing) more highly than physical teams. Intellectual teams also valued transition processes (planning and strategizing), more than action processes (monitoring and coordinating).Research limitations/implicationsResearch on team processes tends to focus upon a “one size fits all” approach to teamwork, but this approach has yielded inconsistent frameworks. This study provides evidence that these inconsistencies are due to the changing nature of teamwork. This study was limited in that only two broad types of teams and two types of process competencies were assessed.Practical implicationsDifferences in the importance of certain processes for specific team types should be taken into account when implementing systems for team selection, performance appraisal, and training.Originality/valueThis paper provides empirical support for previous theoretical suppositions that different team types differ in the level of importance they place on certain processes.

Purpose – Despite the widespread use of teams and extensive research regarding school‐based teams, there is a paucity of research regarding team‐theory applied to high school administrations. This paper aims to explore the team structures and conditions of a public high school administration that has demonstrated success with a heterogeneous student population.Design/methodology/approach – This is a case study employing multiple approaches within a qualitative particularistic case study methodology. The participants were the members of a public high school administration, plus the employees of the school. The study used surveys, semi‐structured interviews, and coded observations to examine the structures and conditions of the administration as a team.Findings – The findings suggest practical strategies of value to school leaders seeking to increase the likelihood for administrative team success. A qualitative case study of a public high school administration revealed the presence of five enabling conditio...

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine whether organizational culture moderates the relationship between shared leadership and team proactive behavior.Design/methodology/approachData were collected from 21 commercial banks in Turkey that had formally implemented work teams. The study used data obtained from 420 team members. Moderated hierarchical regression was used to examine the moderating role of organizational culture on the shared leadership and team proactive behavior relationship.FindingsShared leadership within a work team was positively related to team proactive behavior. The relationship of shared leadership with team proactivity is stronger in organizations with higher level of supportive culture.Research limitations/implicationsA practical implication of these results for leaders of management teams is that sharing some leadership roles and responsibilities within their teams with other members may have positive effects for the proactivity of the team as well as the satisfaction of the team members. The generalizability of the results may be limited by sources of funding of the banks studied and demographic factors such as participants' age, gender and organizational tenure.Originality/valueThe use of organizational culture as a moderator on this link is unprecedented. Although shared leadership within teams may increase job demands on members and require them to take on new roles, it seems to have positive effects on perceptions of their jobs. In addition, the extent to which an organization encourages a supportive culture makes a difference in the relationship of shared leadership with team proactivity. Finally, using a large number of samples from Turkish banking sector adds to the growing literature examining shared leadership in non‐Western settings.

PurposeThis conceptual paper aims to offer a theoretical contribution that explicates the “blind spot” cultural diversity and reward diversity team conflict contingencies, and personal audit as a mechanism for managing the consequences.Design/methodology/approachThe paper suggests a framework for analysing and managing diversity (cultural and reward) driven team conflicts. Given the theoretical foundation, personal audit among team members is recommended as a tool for managing the consequences of such conflict factors.FindingsThis paper underlines the team building intervention utility for team effectiveness. It reinforces theoretical foundation that highlights conflict as a determinant of team effectiveness, and reviews two diversity dimensions of team conflicts. Finally, it suggests and explains an “active learning” personal audit model for achieving the conceptualised team effectiveness perspective.Practical implicationsThe paper highlights critical but usually overlooked team conflict intricacies in football team management. This framework offers practical relevance in enabling understanding of “attitudes and behaviours” of team members and human resource management in football marketing. Managers would benefit from this perspective and improve team effectiveness, performance and organisation's performance.Originality/valueThe paper offers valuable conceptual insight for development, one that serves the interest of management of football clubs and academia.

PurposeCompanies desire to improve their team organization by learning from other companies in their sector and adopting “best practice”. Researchers and consultants, who are called on to facilitate these learning processes, are confronted with the real world ambiguity and multiple meanings of “team” and “team organization”. A shared understanding of team organization is a precondition for learning and knowledge transfer between companies. This paper seeks to ask how this common understanding can be constructed.Design/methodology/approachThe paper uses participatory research and a literature review. Based on a research project involving Norwegian manufacturing companies, the paper presents and discusses a participatory process, in which a graphical profiling tool was developed and applied in order to make sense of different forms of team organization.FindingsThe paper finds that companies were actively involved in deciding what the relevant dimensions of team working were. In reflection seminars, systematical comparison between companies dissolved conceptual ambiguity and supported reflection.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper reports experiences with the mapping tool from two companies. Both are characterized by cooperative industrial relations, and openness to researchers. More research should be done in order to investigate the general workability of the process proposed here.Practical implicationsThe proposed process for constructing and using a mapping tool are relevant for consultants and researchers, who aim to facilitate learning in a multiple company context. In particular, it is relevant for dealing with popular, but unclear concepts such as “team” and “team working”. To be workable, the process should take care to involve relevant stakeholders and the profiling should avoid technical language.Social implicationsThrough a participatory approach, all participants in an organization can take part in a dialogue on team working. By introducing a common language, power distances may be reduced.Originality/valueThe general idea of using graphical profiling to support reflection is not original. The contribution is presenting and discussing a concrete participatory process for how graphical profiling can be made relevant and useful.

PurposeThis contribution aims to evaluate structural team constellations (STCs) – a team intervention related to the better known family structure constellations.Design/methodology/approachIn total, 67 team members from 14 working teams carried out an STC. They were surveyed at three measuring points by means of a questionnaire on their evaluation of task and relationship conflicts and on their satisfaction with the therapeutic alliance with the constellator.FindingsStable decreases were shown in both conflict variables. Participants who evaluated the conflict variables more positively over the course of time were also more satisfied with the therapeutic alliance with the constellator.Practical implicationsGiven the low time requirements involved, STCs can be considered recommendable compared with other team interventions.Originality/valueAlthough constellations are experiencing a boom in German‐speaking countries, there are hardly any studies in English on this method. This paper is one of the first contributions towards the establishment of the method in the Anglo‐American area.

PurposeThe punctuated equilibrium model of group activity and the positive task conflict‐performance relationship are prominent in the team literature; however, their respective underlying concepts, team approach and ideas‐task complexity fit have been neglected. The first aim of the paper is to introduce these concepts, show how these underlie the two theories, and how they might be linked together in a novel way. The second aim is to illustrate the value of these ideas through the use of a case study of three teams working separately on an identical software engineering project.Design/methodology/approachThe performance, conflict levels, approaches and ideas of three teams working on an identical software project are compared. The data were largely collected by observation of all the teams' meetings.FindingsThe findings show that the team approach and ideas‐task complexity fit are significant in determining performance. It is also found that ideas emerge as frequently outside of conflict as in it and that the team's approach shapes conflict, not vice versa. Though the team with the most conflict performed best, it was differences in approach and the matching of the variety of ideas (not conflict) to task complexity that was important. Conflict in the teams reflected the approach, influencing its execution more than its development.Practical implicationsThe research highlights the importance of initial meetings and the need to consider the team approach concept in teamwork training.Originality/valueThe paper re‐emphasises the significance of Gersick's conception of team approach and the importance of the level of ideas fitting the complexity of the task, which is itself shaped by the approach; the case study makes a valuable contribution as it focuses on teams conducting an identical project for a single client.

PurposeBusinesses are increasingly using teams as their fundamental organisational unit. This paper aims to explore the impact of demographic antecedents and the social‐network structure, measured in terms of task‐related advice‐network density, centralisation and fragmentation, on work‐team performance. The paper seeks to examine: the impact of the social‐network structure (dense, fragmented or centralised) on work‐team performance and the origins of the social structure. It also tests whether team diversity (in terms of variety with regard to gender and separation with regard to age and education) has an impact on team performance.Design/methodology/approachA survey was conducted on 76 work teams (499 employees) representing 48 different organisations.FindingsWith regard to the first question, density was positively related to team performance. The impact of advice‐network fragmentation was also positive, and this is in line with the results of other studies focusing on teams conducting standard tasks. In addressing the second question the paper explored whether diversity as variety (age) and diversity as separation (age and education) had an effect on the work team's social‐network structure. Age and education had no effect, but gender diversity was related negatively to density and positively to fragmentation. It was also related negatively to team performance.Originality/valueThe contribution of this research is twofold in that it explores social‐structure effects on team performance and examines the possible antecedents of the team's social structure. The results of the investigation strengthen the rationale behind integrating the literature on social‐network analysis and teams.

PurposeIn light of contradictory research findings, the purpose of this paper is to examine the moderating effects of team setting (face‐to‐face or online) on the relationship that team member affect and interaction processes have on individual team source learning, and at the team level on the relationship between group cohesiveness and perceived team performance.Design/methodology/approachStudents enrolled in graduate level organizational behavior classes at a large university in the southeastern United States responded to the survey. The final sample included 79 students in 21 on‐campus teams and 97 students in 26 online teams. All classes surveyed required a detailed team project. Tests of the moderator hypotheses were conducted using hierarchical linear multiple regression.FindingsTeam setting moderated the relationship that member teamwork orientation and member social interaction had on individual team‐source learning; the relationships were stronger in online teams.Practical implicationsThe results have implications for teams in a variety of settings since the team composition and nature of the work conducted by student teams are similar to that in Western organizational contexts. To avoid possible conflicts that impede learning and performance in online teams, administrators should ensure that team members are chosen carefully and give members a strong reason for being on the team.Originality/valueThis paper extends the model examined by Williams et al. to include member social interaction and consider the context in which teamwork occurs and its effects on personal learning and team performance.

PurposeTwo of the most sought after properties in today's dynamic and competitive manufacturing environment are labour flexibility and effective teamworking. This is due in no small part to the growth of modern manufacturing philosophies which strongly advocate the need for both teamwork and flexibility. This paper aims to explore the impact of two labour flexibility strategies (functional flexibility and intra‐cell flexibility) on teamwork in a cellular manufacturing environment.Design/methodology/approachUsing a revised input/process/output (IPO) team effectiveness model a questionnaire was designed and a case study undertaken at a large Australian manufacturer. The knowledge, skills, and ability (KSAs) gained from job rotation (flexibility) was quantitatively tested against team processes and team performance.FindingsIt was found that functional flexibility had an overall stronger, significant effect on the five team processes tested (communication, conflict resolution, problem solving, goals and performance, tasks and planning) than did intra‐cell flexibility. In regards to output (team performance) functional flexibility performed better in areas such as customer delivery, inventory holdings and quality, while intra‐cell flexibility performed better in the area of absenteeism. An inconclusive result was obtained for the fifth output measure, efficiency rate.Research limitations/implicationsThe study was conducted at a single organisation, which limits the generalisation of the outcomes, therefore broader research on the area is recommended.Practical implicationsThe study provides evidence that the individual benefits of both functional flexibility and teamworking may be enhanced while being practised concurrently. With labour flexibility and teamwork being key factors in most modern organisations, the practical implications are much wider than the field of manufacturing.Originality/valueIndividually, the literature offers much on teamworking and flexibility but studies exploring the combined effects of these two important elements are rare, especially in the field of manufacturing. The present paper fills some of the gaps

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore how negotiation teams can rely on social networks to enhance their performance at the table.Design/methodology/approachThe paper examines the impact of social relations on team performance in the negotiation task. It conducts a selective review and integration of negotiation, small group and social network research.FindingsThe paper's main argument is that teams can rely on social relations to locate and get hold of resources that will augment their ability to manage the bargaining process. To tap into the value of social networks, teams need to look beyond their internal processes and develop strategies that actively manage their environment. The paper examines three such strategies: membership change, knowledge acquisition, and ambassadorial activity.Originality/valueThe paper outlines a relational approach to team negotiation. This approach has the potential to improve team negotiation practice by opening up a new way to design and manage negotiation teams.

PurposeThis paper seeks to develop a self‐report instrument completed by team members, the Integral Team Effectiveness Measure (ITEM), in order to assess team strengths and weaknesses based on a review of research and models of effective teams. The ability of the instrument, based on an “integral” or holistic framework, to capture a latent factor relevant to team success is tested. Based on two studies, support for the construct and predictive validity of the ITEM measure is provided.Design/methodology/approachPsychometric evaluation of a survey instrument is described. A quasi‐experiment to see whether an objective measure of team performance can be predicted from the instrument and multi‐level modelling was also incorporated.FindingsAlthough there are many elements necessary for good teamwork, there is nevertheless an underlying common theme. This underlying theme or construct of integral team effectiveness can be measured with a self‐report instrument, which successfully predicted subsequent team performance in a sample of 45 teams.Practical implicationsThe Integral Team Effectiveness Measure (ITEM) is an instrument that captures an important underlying quality of teams. Organisations relying on teams may benefit from using the ITEM to diagnose weaknesses and to design corrective interventions.Originality/valueAlthough many previous studies have described variables which impact team performance, integral team effectiveness is an original contribution in that it describes and measures an underlying essence of teamwork. Managers and team members may find integral team effectiveness valuable for overcoming the apparent complexities and contradictions that confound sincere efforts to improve team performance.

PurposeThe purpose of this article is to explore the effects of the interaction between team diversity and reciprocated relational preferences on task and relationship conflict in teams.Design/methodological approachThe paper reports the results of an empirical study conducted on 66 teams, of which 32 were randomly created, while 34 teams were formed through a pair matching strategy (team dating).FindingsThe results show that mutual positive preferences attenuated the positive impact of team diversity on relationship conflict within teams.Research limitations/implicationsThe results support the theoretical distinction between task and relationship conflict and show that close interpersonal relations within teams have a differential impact on the two types of conflict.Practical implicationsThe results reported in the study support the use of the team dating strategy for team design in different organizational settings.Originality/valueThe paper introduces a new method for team formation based on reciprocated relational preferences.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of adult attention deficit on team members, the relationships between team members, the task performance dynamics within teams and team member performance.Design/methodology/approachA total of 304 management students working in self managing project teams completed measures of adult attention deficit, difficulty with necessary tasks, general independence, extraordinary reliance on team mates and acceptance of reliance on team mates. A measure of a team member's performance was completed by the other team members upon completion of the team project. Product moment correlations were used to examine associations between the measures, and partial correlations were used to test for mediation effects. The Williams T2 test was used to test for significant differences in correlations between adult attention deficit and related variables.FindingsAdult attention deficit interferes with the ability to perform necessary tasks and constrains the achievement of a general sense of independence. The disorder also promotes extraordinary reliance on team mates and constrains team member performance. Although the disorder promotes extraordinary reliance on team mates, it promotes acceptance of such reliance to a much lesser extent.Research limitations/implicationsFuture research needs to sample a variety of workplace teams. Testing the hypotheses on new samples will also help to confirm the validity and reliability of the measures developed for this study.Practical implicationsOrganizations that are increasingly reliant on the performance of employee teams need to be more aware of the influence of adult attention deficit on team members, their relationships with other team members and their performance. Providing individual training and team interventions that target the cognitive, emotional and behavioral capacity for completing necessary tasks is especially important for team members afflicted with the disorder.Originality/valueThis is the first study to examine the relationship between adult attention deficit, reliance on other team members and team member performance. This research is of value to researchers, organizational development specialists, managers and team members who are trying to improve the performance of team members with adult attention deficit.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to address and gain a more complete understanding of the effects on relationships between perceived team support (PTS), team commitment and intent to leave the team.Design/methodology/approachTeam commitment was examined as a mediator between perceived team support and intent to leave the team. To reach this objective, a survey on French white‐collar employee (n=355) was conducted. The procedure of Baron and Kenny was selected for the mediation test.FindingsThe study provides several interesting data. First, data reveal two dimensions for PTS. The first one is labelled PTS toward work, the second one is labelled PTS toward well‐being. Second, while team commitment mediates the relationship between PTS toward work and intent to leave the team, team commitment does not mediate PTS toward well‐being and the intent to leave the team.Originality/valueThe findings extend the understanding of how perceived team support and team commitment are related to intent to leave the team. It was found that team commitment plays a mediating role between perceived team support and intent to leave the team. Because to date, no research has examined the mediating role of team commitment on the relationship between PTS and intent to leave the team, the study provides interesting findings.

PurposeThis paper aims to examine the influence of the level of team virtuality on the effects of intra‐team conflicts on team performance, which have hardly been investigated.Design/methodology/approachA framework is proposed based on the extent to which team members use communication media to coordinate their actions and execute their tasks, taking into account the extent to which the communication media are synchronous and the extent to which the communication media convey para‐verbal and nonverbal aspects of communication. Data of 49 teams with 172 team members were analyzed using stepwise multiple regression analysis.FindingsThe level of team virtuality influences the relation between intra‐team conflict and perceived team performance. The higher the level of team virtuality, the greater the positive impact of task conflict on perceived team performance. In teams with a low level of virtuality task conflict has a negative impact on perceived team performance, and in high virtual teams task conflict has a positive impact. In addition, process conflict has a negative impact on perceived team performance.Research limitations/implicationsThe present study provides a framework for the effects of the level of team virtuality that can be used in further research and has implications for practice.Originality/valueThe study shows the effects of the level of team virtuality on team performance, which is important considering the emerging use of virtual communication tools in organizations.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to propose and support a model to predict the effectiveness of teams.Design/methodology/approachThe literature provides a wide variety of variables or constructs to measure the effectiveness of a team. The article proposes a mathematical model to predict the effectiveness of a team. A priori comparisons are used to develop a mathematical model of the optimum team.FindingsThe study expands on the theory of team effectiveness and demonstrates that a theoretically developed empirical model can predict team effectiveness quantitatively. A mathematical model was developed as an empirical function of performance, behavior, attitude, team member style and corporate culture.Research limitations/implicationsThere has been little effort to standardize the measurable variables of team effectiveness. Additionally, the means to evaluate the individual's influence on team effectiveness has not been documented in relation to the effectiveness of the team. This paper uses a specific set of constructs, which might be the optimum set of variables to measure performance, behavior, and attitude.Practical implicationsBy considering the model suggested here, managers will be able to select individual team members to enhance team performance.Originality/valueFew models have been proposed to predict the effectiveness of a team based on team member selection. This model provides anyone selecting team members with a model to use when choosing among technically qualified candidates.

PurposeThe purpose of this editorial is to introduce the special issue on the relationship of strategic performance management to team strategy, company performance and organizational effectiveness.Design/methodology/approachThe paper explains each of the components in this relationship before introducing the problematic issues regarding this relationship and where the gaps are missing in the extant literature; hence the need for the special issue is justified.FindingsThe paper finds that the concluding remarks are offered to suggest that strategic performance management can take place at top management, middle management, or strategic operations levels, and the their impact on team strategy, company performance and organizational effectiveness can be regarded as a special phenomenon, termed “strategic team performance management”.Originality/valueThis editorial provides an overview of this compilation which comprises five original papers that are examples of latest developments in this research area, and each of these articles contains a brief introduction on how they contribute to filling in gaps in the literature.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to review the research on organizational teams. The aim is delimiting the conceptual space of effectiveness and determining team‐level measurement issues.Design/methodology/approachA range of published works, which analyse the different variables of effectiveness for each type of team, is reviewed (the most used effectiveness criteria are shown in a table). According to the existence of different types of teams – work team, parallel team, project team and management team – the authors assess what variables and measures are more appropriate according to team type, analyse the problems in gathering data and measuring in this level of analysis and, finally, offer a proposal of measurement issues for future research.FindingsThe authors conclude that effectiveness is a multidimensional concept with three dimensions: performance, attitudinal outcomes, and behavioural outcomes. Regarding team‐level measurement issues, the authors also conclude that there is a need to use multiple data sources and multimethod analyses incorporating consensus and aggregation methods, as well as observation and key informants.Practical implicationsThe results of this work can support future research on teams. Although considerable headway has been made in the team effectiveness studies, there are things that still need to be done. The paper shows that a more complete measure of effectiveness must be developed, according to the three dimensions: performance, attitudinal outcomes, and behavioural outcomes.Originality/valueThe paper is a comprehensive review and provides a basis for researchers in the area of effective teams.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to outline a set of principles which enable companies and managers to effectively handle people as a resource and allow them to turn teams into high performance teams.Design/methodology/approachThe Alinghi sailing team's approach to establishing and managing a high performance team was explored by means of an ethnographic case study. The development, organization and leadership principles of the team were subjected to intense scrutiny. This was done by interviewing the key players in the different areas (sailing crew, design team and management) at different stages, by observation of the group at work and video analyses. To substantiate the findings from interviews and observations, workshops with team members and experts were organized.FindingsThe Swiss Alinghi sailing team was the undisputed winner of the famous America's Cup in 2003 and managed to defend it successfully in July 2007 – against strong competition. The principles implemented by team founder Ernesto Bertarelli also offer a valuable model for managers.Originality/valueThe study is a useful tool for companies and managers who wish to create and manage high performance teams.

PurposeThe purpose of this article is to provide a conceptual framework for measuring the performance of multidiscipline teams in knowledge‐creating organizations.Design/methodology/approachThe author conducts a meta‐analysis of case studies on individual and team performance and technical communication in the context of creating organizational knowledge. This analysis provides a basis for a new conceptual framework for team functions and performance.FindingsThis framework updates the definition of team functions to include knowledge creation and communication. The framework describes several factors that contribute to successful performance and provides a scale for measuring successful performance based on the additional team functions.Practical implicationsAn organization's ability to create and manage knowledge may be their only lasting competitive advantage. Managers, whose responsibilities include fostering purposeful knowledge creation and transfer, need a framework for understanding how these goals can be factored into team performance and what factors contribute to the successful achievement of these goals. This paper provides such a framework.Originality/valueThis is the first conceptual framework for team performance that includes knowledge creation and stakeholder communication as principle team functions.