Rebecca Grossman

The Transfer of Training: What Really Matters

Although organizations invest billions of dollars in training every year, many trained competencies reportedly fail to transfer to the workplace. Researchers have long examined the transfer problem, uncovering a wealth of information regarding the transfer of training. Inconsistencies remain, however, and organizations may find it difficult to pinpoint exactly which factors are most critical. Using Baldwin and Fords model of transfer, we identify the factors relating to trainee characteristics (cognitive ability, self-efficacy, motivation, perceived utility of training), training design (behavioral modeling, error management, realistic training environments) and the work environment (transfer climate, support, opportunity to perform, follow-up) that have exhibited the strongest, most consistent relationships with the transfer of training. We describe our reasoning for extracting such variables from the literature and conclude by discussing potential implications for practice and future research.

Critical social thinking A conceptual model and insights for training

As technology, globalization, changing work demands, and a growing reliance on teams are changing the work environment, the social complexity surrounding work functions is increasing dramatically. While a variety of socially relevant knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) have been examined, we argue that studying them in isolation is no longer sufficient, as individuals require a repertoire of KSAs that must be utilized in combination to be effective in complex social situations. Thus, we propose the construct critical social thinking (CST), a holistic, integrated approach to understanding the processes that enable individuals to function in such settings, and the KSAs that are necessary for each process. Because the significance of the CST construct is closely tied to the growing need for it in practice, we also integrate disparate training findings and link them to components of our conceptual model, enabling us to put forth initial insights regarding the approaches through which CST can be trained effectively.

What Matters for Team Cohesion Measurement? A Synthesis

Abstract Cohesion is a key contributor to team effectiveness, leading to great interest in understanding how to diagnose, monitor, and enhance it in practice. However, there is great inconsistency in how cohesion is conceptualized and measured, making it difficult to compare findings across studies, and therefore limiting the ability to advance science and practice. To begin addressing these issues, we draw from qualitative and quantitative analyses and extract themes indicating what matters most for effective cohesion measurement. Such themes are presented around six major questions – who, what, when, where, why, and how – as they pertain to each major component of the cohesion measurement process. Emerging approaches to cohesion measurement and corresponding avenues for future research are also discussed.

Debunking key assumptions about teams: The role of culture.

Scholars have argued that if psychologists are to gain a true understanding of human behavior, culture should be central to research and theory. The research on teams is an area where better integration between the mainstream and cross-cultural literatures is critically needed, given the increasing prevalence of multicultural teams. The purpose of this article is therefore to demonstrate how research focused on culture’s influence on teams advances current mainstream theoretical understanding of team effectiveness. Guided by widely accepted frameworks of team effectiveness (Ilgen, Hollenbeck, Johnson, & Jundt, 2005) and culture (Giorgi, Lockwood, & Glynn, 2015), we extract several key assumptions from the mainstream literature that have also been examined within the cross-cultural literature. Through a process of comparing and contrasting, we determined which components of current models are upheld and debunked when seeking to generalize these models to other cultural contexts outside of North America. Although we found some consistent results across the two literatures, most of our analyses reveal there are important boundary conditions surrounding common team effectiveness assumptions when culture is considered. By anchoring our analyses around fundamental aspects of teams, including how they form, function, and finish, we then revised these assumptions according to the integration of the teams and cross-cultural literatures. Taken together, we provide a rich foundation for future research, and facilitate a more nuanced understanding of human behavior within the team context.

The Influence of Culture on Team Dynamics

Originality/value Albeit research has started to accumulate regarding how culture influences teams through conflict, communication, trust, cohesion, and creativity, this chapter goes beyond current development to address when different cultural elements influence team dynamics.