The cognitive underpinnings of adaptive team performance in ill-defined task situations

Zajac, Stephanie; Gregory, Megan E.; Bedwell, Wendy L.; Kramer, William S.; Salas, Eduardo

doi:10.1177/2041386613492787

Cited by 53 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Limited research is available on team learning in these contexts (Salas, Guthrie, & Burke, 2007; van der Haar et al, 2015; Zajac et al, 2014). van der Haar and colleagues (2015) showed that in EMCC teams constructive conflict makes the difference.…”

Section: Team Leader Structuring Behaviors and Constructive Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Team Leader Structuring for Team Effectiveness and Team Learning in Command-and-Control Teams

Haar

Koeslag-Kreunen

Euwe

et al. 2017

Small Group Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to their crucial and highly consequential task, it is of utmost importance to understand the levers leading to effectiveness of multidisciplinary emergency management command-and-control (EMCC) teams. We argue that the formal EMCC team leader needs to initiate structure in the team meetings to support organizing the work as well as facilitate team learning, especially the team learning process of constructive conflict. In a sample of 17 EMCC teams performing a realistic EMCC exercise, including one or two team meetings (28 in sum), we coded the team leader’s verbal structuring behaviors (1,704 events), rated constructive conflict by external experts, and rated team effectiveness by field experts. Results show that leaders of effective teams use structuring behaviors more often (except asking procedural questions) but decreasingly over time. They support constructive conflict by clarifying and by making summaries that conclude in a command or decision in a decreasing frequency over time.

show abstract

Section: Team Leader Structuring Behaviors and Constructive Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Team Leader Structuring for Team Effectiveness and Team Learning in Command-and-Control Teams

Haar

Koeslag-Kreunen

Euwe

et al. 2017

Small Group Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This study sought to test the proposition that team learning is a crucial factor for transactive memory development (Zajac et al, 2014). Moreover, as team learning is an ongoing process over the complete life cycle of a team, comprising knowledge-and communicationbased learning behaviours to create, store, and retrieve knowledge at the team level, we assumed that in the different phase of team development differential relationships exist between these team learning behaviours and transactive memory development.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Following their line of thinking, we analyse the team phase-specific influence of communication-and knowledge-based team learning behaviours in face-to-face teams on transactive memory development, as suggested in the literature (Zajac et al, 2014). In the following, we first explain the concept of team learning before we continue with the analysis of different team learning behaviours and their influence on transactive memory formation in different phases of team development.…”

Section: Transactive Memory Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Phase-specific relationships between team learning processes and transactive memory development

Oertel

Antoni

2015

European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With this study we seek to contribute to the research on the emergence of transactive memory, that is, the knowledge of "who knows what", as part of the structural component of transactive memory systems (TMSs). Based on our theoretical model of team learning and transactive memory development, we analyse the relationships among different team learning behaviours and transactive memory during various phases of team development. We use a longitudinal design with three points of measurement at the beginning, in the middle, and at the end of a semester, to examine real student project teams over their full life cycle. The results support our presumptions of phase-specific influences of team learning behaviours on transactive memory development. This shows that knowledge-based processes (storage and retrieval) play a more important role during early stages of project-based teamwork, followed by a shift to a higher relevance of communication-based processes (reflection and coconstruction) in later stages. Implications for further research and team management phenomena are discussed.

show abstract

“…When organisations are dealing with difficult and complex tasks, teams are the chosen approach (Salas et al, 2008). This becomes more noticeable as work changes because of technology, globalisation, and organisational restructuring (Zajac et al, 2014).…”

Section: Why Teams?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Shared Strategic Understanding

Berggren¹

2016

Linköping Studies in Arts and Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cover illustration © Eric Palmquist/Bildupphovsrätt 2016 Tous pour un, un pour tous Les trois mousquetaires (1844) by Alexandre DumasPå ärans och hjältarnas språk:En för alla, och alla för en. AbstractThis thesis describes the development of an instrument for assessing shared understanding in teams. The purpose was to develop an instrument that would be usable, understandable, objective, flexible and self-explanatory. Teams working in naturalistic settings are expected to have a shared understanding of common goals and how to achieve these. The problem investigated in this thesis is that current techniques and instruments for assessing shared understanding in teams generally suffer from one or more of the following drawbacks, namely that they are expensive, difficult to use, time-consuming, requiring expertise, and are often based on subjective perceptions. Departing from existing theory in team cognition techniques and theories, the research questions posed in this thesis are: 1) How can shared understanding be measured without the disadvantages of existing methods? 2) How can shared understanding be assessed without the bias of self-ratings and/or assessments by experts/observers? 3) Can team performance be better understood by the outcomes of an instrument that measures shared understanding?These research questions are answered through six studies that are presented in this thesis. Over the six studies an instrument was iterated and subsequently developed, called the shared priorities instrument. When using this instrument, team members are instructed to generate items and rank these in order of importance. By comparing these rank orders from different participants, a team measure of shared understanding can be calculated. The advantages of this instrument compared to earlier measures are that it is less expensive, easier to use, less time-consuming, does not require subject matter expertise, and that the instrument is distanced from subjective perceptions.Furthermore, the final study provides results where outcomes from the shared priorities instrument correlate with performance, supporting earlier research connecting shared understanding in teams with team performance. A structural equation model, a result of the final study, shows that the instrument is both valid and reliable.

show abstract

The cognitive underpinnings of adaptive team performance in ill-defined task situations

Cited by 53 publications

References 67 publications

Team Leader Structuring for Team Effectiveness and Team Learning in Command-and-Control Teams

Team Leader Structuring for Team Effectiveness and Team Learning in Command-and-Control Teams

Phase-specific relationships between team learning processes and transactive memory development

Assessing Shared Strategic Understanding

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About