Misty L. Loughry

Development of a Theory-Based Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness.

This article describes the development of the Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness. The authors used the teamwork literature to create potential items, which they tested using two surveys of college students (Ns = 2,777 and 1,157). The authors used exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis to help them select items for the final instrument. The full instrument has 87 items that measure 29 types of team member contributions with 3 items each. These fall into five categories (contributing to the teams work; interacting with teammates; keeping the team on track; expecting quality; and having relevant knowledge, skills, and abilities). A short version of the instrument has 33 items. Potential uses for the instrument and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Justifying Aggregation With Consensus-Based Constructs A Review and Examination of Cutoff Values for Common Aggregation Indices

Management researchers often use consensus-based composition models to examine the antecedents and effects of higher-level constructs. Typically, researchers present three indices, rwg, ICC(1), and ICC(2), to demonstrate agreement and consistency among lower-level units when justifying aggregation. Nevertheless, researchers debate what values for these indices are sufficient. This study examines the distributional characteristics of ICCs and rwg values from three sources: the multilevel literature, a large multinational sample of student teams, and a large sample of randomly generated “pseudo teams.” Our results support existing cutoff criteria for ICCs but suggest that generally accepted values for rwg may, under certain circumstances, reflect pseudo-agreement (i.e., agreement observed among two raters not attributable to the same target). Thus, when there is minimal between-group variance (i.e., low ICCs), it is difficult to determine whether high rwg values reflect agreement or pseudo-agreement. Based on these findings, we provide recommendations to help researchers interpret aggregation indices.

Why Won't Task Conflict Cooperate? Deciphering Stubborn Results

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to suggest why the theoretically positive relationship between task conflict and team performance has received mixed empirical support. Design/methodology/approach – We review the literature on task conflict and offer explanations for findings that contradict the expected positive relationship between task conflict and team performance. Findings – High levels of correlation among task, relationship and process conflict, and measurement and data analysis issues make it difficult to isolate the effects of each type of conflict. Group-level moderators, including values congruence, goal alignment, norms for debate and the group’s performance history and conflict history affect the relationship between task conflict and performance. The complex relationship between conflict and trust may cause task conflict to have mixed effects on performance. Individual differences and conflict management approaches also affect the relationship between task conflict and performance. Temporal issues and stages of group development are other relevant influences. Practical implications – To better achieve the theorized performance benefits of task conflict, a context characterized by trust is needed. Then norms fostering task conflict can be cultivated and employees can be trained in conflict management. Individual differences that affect team members’ ability to confidently accept task conflict can be considered in selection. Originality/value – Suggestions are presented for future research that may explain discrepant findings in the past empirical literature. In particular, it may be difficult for some team members to perceive task conflict in well-functioning teams. Measures of task conflict that avoid the use of words with a negative connotation should be tested.

Peer Control in Organizations

Peer control occurs when workers who are at the same organizational level or in the same field exert lateral control over their peers. Peer control is widespread in organizations, yet is not well understood. This chapter discusses the scope of the peer control concept, including different types of formal and informal peer controls designed by managers and workers. The potential benefits and drawbacks of peer control are also discussed. Five theoretical perspectives that can be used to examine informal peer control are reviewed. The chapter concludes with suggestions for future research on peer control.

Workshop: Training students to become better raters: Raising the quality of self- and peer-evaluations using a new feature of the CATME system

The goal of this workshop is to introduce participants to tools that can help them manage teams in their classes effectively and efficiently. We review some of the factors that instructors may wish to consider when administering self- and peer-evaluations and how they might improve the quality of those evaluations using rater training. Attendees with wireless-network-capable laptop computers will interact with the system in real-time.

Workshop - tools for team assignments and peer evaluations

Assigning students to cooperative-learning teams and processing peer evaluations can consume an inordinate amount of a busy faculty members time. Recently developed software packages with easy-to-use web-interfaces can simplify the effort and produce reliable results. This hands-on workshop engages participants in using an integrated software package for assisting faculty management of student teams. The first system, team-maker, automates the assignment of students to cooperative learning teams. The second system, CATME, manages student peer evaluations. In the workshop, attendees are guided through the tutorials illustrating the features of both systems. Fictitious student data are provided so that attendees can experience the entire process of assigning students to teams and administering and reviewing a peer evaluation. Attendees are expected to bring their own wireless-capable laptop computers.

Workshop - managing student teams: Scholarship, practice, and the team-maker/CATME applications

Do you assign students to teams based on best practices - or the path of least resistance? Do you cope with hitchhikers on student teams - or ignore them? Is managing student teams just too much trouble? Instructors play a key role in their studentspsila teaming experiences. In this workshop, we review some of the factors that instructors may wish to consider when assigning students to teams and administering peer evaluations. We review the literature and engage the participants in discussions about their own experiences and practices. We conduct interactive, hands-on, practical activities using team-maker and CATME - free, web-based software systems. To get the greatest benefit from the workshop, participants should bring their own wireless-network-capable laptop computers.