Steve W. J. Kozlowski

Enhancing the Effectiveness of Work Groups and Teams

Teams of people working together for a common purpose have been a centerpiece of human social organization ever since our ancient ancestors first banded together to hunt game, raise families, and defend their communities. Human history is largely a story of people working together in groups to explore, achieve, and conquer. Yet, the modern concept of work in large organizations that developed in the late 19th and early 20th centuries is largely a tale of work as a collection of individual jobs. A variety of global forces unfolding over the last two decades, however, has pushed organizations worldwide to restructure work around teams, to enable more rapid, flexible, and adaptive responses to the unexpected. This shift in the structure of work has made team effectiveness a salient organizational concern. Teams touch our lives everyday and their effectiveness is important to well-being across a wide range of societal functions. There is over 50 years of psychological research—literally thousands of studies—focused on understanding and influencing the processes that underlie team effectiveness. Our goal in this monograph is to sift through this voluminous literature to identify what we know, what we think we know, and what we need to know to improve the effectiveness of work groups and teams. We begin by defining team effectiveness and establishing the conceptual underpinnings of our approach to understanding it. We then turn to our review, which concentrates primarily on topics that have well-developed theoretical and empirical foundations, to ensure that our conclusions and recommendations are on firm footing. Our review begins by focusing on cognitive, motivational/affective, and behavioral team processes—processes that enable team members to combine their resources to resolve task demands and, in so doing, be effective. We then turn our attention to identifying interventions, or “levers,” that can shape or align team processes and thereby provide tools and applications that can improve team effectiveness. Topic-specific conclusions and recommendations are given throughout the review. There is a solid foundation for concluding that there is an emerging science of team effectiveness and that findings from this research foundation provide several means to improve team effectiveness. In the concluding section, we summarize our primary findings to highlight specific research, application, and policy recommendations for enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams.

Work Groups and Teams in Organizations

Contemporary work organizations make heavy use of work teams to meet both immediate and strategic objectives. This chapter addresses the nature and dynamics of work teams. It emphasizes the types of teams that are commonly used in work settings and the processes that are key to their success. The extensive literature on work teams is reviewed and organized around the shifting demands the teams life cycle—from formation to disbanding. Special emphasis is given to research needs relative to team training and development and the role of team leadership. Keywords: composition; development; effectiveness; leadership; team life cycle; team processes; work teams

From Micro to Meso: Critical Steps in Conceptualizing and Conducting Multilevel Research

Although interest in multilevel organizational theory, research, and methods has been on the rise in recent years, vigorous debates in the literature regarding appropriate ways to conceptualize and measure multilevel constructs, justify aggregation, and analyze multilevel models have contributed to confusion. New investigators interested in testing multilevel theory are intrigued, but wary. The goal of this article is to cut through the confusion, identifying the critical choices and issues a researcher may confront as he or she shifts from a single level to a multilevel perspective. The authors address four primary choices—construct and measurement issues, model specification, research design and sampling, and data analyses— describing critical steps in conceptualizing and conducting multilevel research.

A Typology of Virtual Teams: Implications for Effective Leadership

As the nature of work in today’s organizations becomes more complex, dynamic, and global, there has been increasing emphasis on distributed, “virtual” teams as organizing units of work. Despite their growing prevalence, relatively little is known about this new form of work unit. The purpose of this article is to present a theoretical framework to focus research toward understanding virtual teams and identifying implications for effective leadership. The authors focus on delineating the dimensions of a typology to characterize different types of virtual teams. First, the authors distinguish virtual teams from conventional teams to identify where current knowledge applies and new research needs exist. Second, the authors distinguish among different types of virtual teams, considering the critical role of task complexity in determining the underlying characteristics of virtual teams and leadership challenges the different types entail. Propositions addressing leadership implications for the effective management of virtual teams are proposed and discussed.

A disagreement about within-group agreement: Disentangling issues of consistency versus consensus.

James, Demaree, and Wolf (1984) developed an indes, r WG , for assessing within-group agreement appropriate when only a single target is rated. The assessment of interperceiver agreement in such situations is of particular relevance to the composition model for climate. Schmidt and Hunter (1989) have criticized the conceptual foundation of r WG because it is not consistent with the classical model of reliability. They proposed an alternative approach, the use of the rating standard deviation (SD X ), the standard error of the rating mean (SE M ), and the associated confidence intervals for SE M to index interrater agreement. This comment argues that the critique of r WG dit not clearly distinguish the concepts of interrater consensus (i.e., agreement) and interrater consistency (i.e., reliability)

A multiple-goal, multilevel model of feedback effects on the regulation of individual and team performance

When working as a member of a team, individuals must make decisions concerning the allocation of resources (e.g., effort) toward individual goals and team goals. As a result, individual and team goals, and feedback related to progress toward these goals, should be potent levers for affecting resource allocation decisions. This research develops a multilevel, multiple-goal model of individual and team regulatory processes that affect the allocation of resources across individual and team goals resulting in individual and team performance. On the basis of this model, predictions concerning the impact of individual and team performance feedback are examined empirically to evaluate the model and to understand the influence of feedback on regulatory processes and resource allocation. Two hundred thirty-seven participants were randomly formed into 79 teams of 3 that performed a simulated radar task that required teamwork. Results support the model and the predicted role of feedback in affecting the allocation of resources when individuals strive to accomplish both individual and team goals.

Advancing Multilevel Research Design Capturing the Dynamics of Emergence

Multilevel theory and research have advanced organizational science but are limited because the research focus is incomplete. Most quantitative research examines top-down, contextual, cross-level relationships. Emergent phenomena that manifest from the bottom up from the psychological characteristics, processes, and interactions among individuals—although examined qualitatively—have been largely neglected in quantitative research. Emergence is theoretically assumed, examined indirectly, and treated as an inference regarding the construct validity of higher level measures. As a result, quantitative researchers are investigating only one fundamental process of multilevel theory and organizational systems. This article advances more direct, dynamic, and temporally sensitive quantitative research methods designed to unpack emergence as a process. We argue that direct quantitative approaches, largely represented by computational modeling or agent-based simulation, have much to offer with respect to illuminating the mechanisms of emergence as a dynamic process. We illustrate how indirect and direct approaches can be complementary and, appropriately integrated, have the potential to substantially advance theory and research. We conclude with a set of recommendations for advancing multilevel research on emergent phenomena in teams and organizations.

Leading virtual teams: hierarchical leadership, structural supports, and shared team leadership.

Using a field sample of 101 virtual teams, this research empirically evaluates the impact of traditional hierarchical leadership, structural supports, and shared team leadership on team performance. Building on Bell and Kozlowskis (2002) work, we expected structural supports and shared team leadership to be more, and hierarchical leadership to be less, strongly related to team performance when teams were more virtual in nature. As predicted, results from moderation analyses indicated that the extent to which teams were more virtual attenuated relations between hierarchical leadership and team performance but strengthened relations for structural supports and team performance. However, shared team leadership was significantly related to team performance regardless of the degree of virtuality. Results are discussed in terms of needed research extensions for understanding leadership processes in virtual teams and practical implications for leading virtual teams.

Current issues and future directions in simulation-based training in North America

A number of emerging challenges including globalization, economic pressures and the changing nature of work has combined to create a business environment that demands innovative, flexible training solutions. Simulations are a promising tool for creating more realistic, experiential learning environments to meet these challenges. Unfortunately, the current literature on simulation-based training paints a mixed picture as to the effectiveness of simulations as training tools, with most of the previous research focusing on the specific technologies used in simulation design and little theory-based research focusing on the instructional capabilities or learning processes underlying these technologies. This article examines the promise and perils of simulation-based training, reviews research that has examined the effectiveness of simulations as training tools, identifies pressing research needs, and presents an agenda for future theory-driven research aimed at addressing those needs.

Team Learning, Development, and Adaptation

Preface. Part 1. How Groups Learn and What They Learn. V.I. Sessa, M. London, Group Learning: An Introduction. S.W.J. Kozlowski, B.S. Bell, Team Learning, Development, and Adaptation. H. Arrow, J. Cook, Configuring and Reconfiguring Groups as Complex Learning Systems. R.S. Tindale, S. Stawiski, E. Jacobs, Shared Cognition and Group Learning. A.P.J. Ellis, C.O.L.H. Porter, S.A. Wolverton, Learning to Work Together: An Examination of Transactive Memory System Development in Teams. Part 2. Member, Group, and Organizational Factors Influencing Group Learning. K.A. Jehn, J. Rupert, Group Faultlines and Team Learning: How to Benefit from Different Perspectives. C.O.L.H. Porter, A Multilevel, Multiconceptualization Perspective of Goal Orientation in Teams. N. Zakaria, A. Amelinckx, D. Wilemon, Navigating Across Culture and Distance: Understanding Determinants of Global Virtual Team Performance. S.J. Zaccaro, K. Ely, M. Shuffler, The Leaders Role in Group Learning. Part 3. Learning Interventions. C.S. Burke, E. Salas, D. Diaz, The Role of Team Learning in Facilitating Team Adaptation Within Complex Environments: Tools and Strategies. E.A.J.A. Rouwette, J.A.M. Vennix, Team Learning on Messy Problems. D.P. Brandon, A.B. Hollingshead, Collaborative Knowledge and Training in Online Groups. J.A. Cannon-Bowers, C.A. Bowers, A. Sanchez, Using Synthetic Learning Environments to Train Teams. J. Silberstang, T. Diamante, Phased and Targeted Interventions: Improving Team Learning and Performance. Part 4. Assessment of Group Learning. K.C. Stagl, E. Salas, D.V. Day, Assessing Team Learning Outcomes: Improving Team Learning and Performance. T.L. Gessner, K.L. Langkamer, R.J. Klimoski, Research Designs for Assessing Group Learning.