We meta-analyzed the relationship between team planning and performance moderated by task, team, context, and methodological factors. For testing our hypothesized model, we used a meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach. Based on K = 33 independent samples (N = 1,885 teams), a mixed-effects model indicated a non‐zero moderate positive effect size (ρ = .31, 95% CI [.20, .42]). Methodological quality, generally rated as adequate, was unrelated to effect size. Sensitivity analyses suggest that effect sizes were robust to exclusion of any individual study and publication bias. The statistical power of the studies was generally low and significantly moderated the relationship, with a large positive relationship for studies with high-powered (k = 42, ρ = .40, 95% CI [.27, .54]) and a smaller, significant relationship for low-powered studies (k = 54, ρ = .16, 95% CI [.01, .30]). The effect size was robust and generally not qualified by a large number of moderators, but was more pronounced for less interdependent tasks, less specialized team members, and assessment of quality rather than quantity of planning. Latent class analysis revealed no qualitatively different subgroups within populations. We recommend large‐scale collaboration to overcome several methodological weaknesses of the current literature, which is severely underpowered, potentially biased by self-reporting data, and lacks long-term follow-ups.

Background This study examined whether the effects of a sit-stand desk (SSD) intervention on employees’ musculoskeletal complaints (i.e., intensity and prevalence) and activation (i.e., vigilance and vitality) persist or fade out and whether velocity and acceleration of health improvements can predict medium-term (six-month) and long-term (24-month) improvements. Drawing from dynamic models of self-regulation, as well as the psychological momentum theory, we hypothesized that velocity and acceleration of health improvements in the early stages of the intervention would predict medium-term health improvements, which sustain long-term. Methods We used data from a six-month seven-wave randomized controlled trial with employees in mostly sedentary occupations and supplemented this by follow-up data from the same participants 18 months later, resulting in eight waves. Results Bayesian structural equational modeling revealed no significant intervention effect after 24 months implying a fade-out. But more importantly, velocity and, partially, acceleration of health improvements at earlier stages predicted medium-term improvements in musculoskeletal complaints and long-term improvements in vigilance. Conclusion The findings of this study suggest that positive intervention effects fade out over time and health effects benefit from prompt progresses at the beginning of the intervention, warranting exploration in prolonged longitudinal studies.