Getting the most out of multidisciplinary teams: a multi-sample study of team innovation in health care

Driven by the assumption that multidisciplinarity contributes positively to team outcomes teams are often deliberately staffed such that they comprise multiple disciplines. However, the diversity literature suggests that multidisciplinarity may not always benefit a team. This study departs from the notion of a linear, positive effect of multidisciplinarity and tests its contingency on the quality of team processes. It was assumed that multidisciplinarity only contributes to team outcomes if the quality of team processes is high. This hypothesis was tested in two independent samples of health care workers (N = 66 and N = 95 teams), using team innovation as the outcome variable. Results support the hypothesis for the quality of innovation, rather than the number of innovations introduced by the teams.

Individual differences in cognitive style and their effects on task and social orientations of self-managed work teams

When assembling self-managing work teams, the personalities of team members are often overlooked. One personality variable known to be critical for effective decision making in teams is cognitive style. This study sought to examine how differences and similarities in analytic/intuitive cognitive styles affected the behavior of team members on the task/emotionally expressive dimension identified by Bales. As hypothesized, intuitive individuals and homogeneous intuitive teams were found to initiate more social-emotional acts. Contrary to expectations, intuitive rather than analytic individuals and homogeneous intuitive rather than analytic teams engaged in more task-oriented behaviors. Teams also tended to select intuitive individuals as leaders. The possibility that different combinations of styles may be important for overall team effectiveness was subsequently discussed, and it was suggested that this may depend on whether the nature of the work environment is relatively well structured and mechanistic or relatively unstructured and organic.

Twelve steps to heaven:successfully managing change through developing innovative teams

In this article we propose that work teams implement many of the innovative changes required to enable organizations to respond appropriately to the external environment. We describe how, using an input?–?process?–?output model, we can identify the key elements necessary for developing team innovation. We propose that it is the implementation of ideas rather than their development that is crucial for enabling organizational change. Drawing on theory and relevant research, 12 steps to developing innovative teams are described covering key aspects of the team task, team composition, organizational context, and team processes.

Service to an interdisciplinary need-group from computerised secondary services

DUE TO COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS ONLY AVAILABLE FOR CONSULTATION AT ASTON UNIVERSITY LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICES WITH PRIOR ARRANGEMENT

Innovation in teams : a qualitative and quantitative study of team behaviours

This thesis explores the processes of team innovation. It utilises two studies, an organisationally based pilot and an experimental study, to examine and identify aspects of teams' behaviours that are important for successful innovative outcome. The pilot study, based in two automotive manufacturers, involved the collection of team members' experiences through semi-structured interviews, and identified a number of factors that affected teams' innovative performance. These included: the application of ideative & dissemination processes; the importance of good team relationships, especially those of a more informal nature, in facilitating information and ideative processes; the role of external linkages in enhancing quality and radicality of innovations; and the potential attenuation of innovative ideas by time deadlines. This study revealed a number key team behaviours that may be important in successful innovation outcomes. These included; goal setting, idea generation and development, external contact, task and personal information exchange, leadership, positive feedback and resource deployment. These behaviours formed the basis of a coding system used in the second part of the research. Building on the results from the field based research, an experimental study was undertaken to examine the behavioural differences between three groups of sixteen teams undertaking innovative an task to produce an anti-drugs poster. They were randomly assigned to one of three innovation category conditions suggested by King and Anderson (1990), emergent, imported and imposed. These conditions determined the teams level of access to additional information on previously successful campaigns and the degree of freedom they had with regarding to the design of the poster. In addition, a further experimental condition was imposed on half of the teams per category which involved a formal time deadline for task completion. The teams were video taped for the duration of their innovation and their behaviours analysed and coded in five main aspects including; ideation, external focus, goal setting, interpersonal, directive and resource related activities. A panel of experts, utilising five scales developed from West and Anderson's (1996) innovation outcome measures, assessed the teams' outputs. ANOVAs and repeated measure ANOVAs were deployed to identify whether there were significant differences between the different conditions. The results indicated that there were some behavioural differences between the categories and that over the duration of the task behavioural changes were identified. The results, however, revealed a complex picture and suggested limited support for three distinctive innovation categories. There were many differences in behaviours, but rarely between more than two of the categories. A main finding was the impact that different levels of constraint had in changing teams' focus of attention. For example, emergent teams were found to use both their own team and external resources, whilst those who could import information about other successful campaigns were likely to concentrate outside the team and pay limited attention to the internal resources available within the team. In contrast, those operating under task constraints with aspects of the task imposed onto them were more likely to attend to internal team resources and pay limited attention to the external world. As indicated by the earlier field study, time deadlines did significantly change teams' behaviour, reducing ideative and information exchange behaviours. The model shows an important behavioural progression related to innovate teams. This progression involved the teams' openness initially to external sources, and then to the intra-team environment. Premature closure on the final idea before their mid-point was found to have a detrimental impact on team's innovation. Ideative behaviour per se was not significant for innovation outcome, instead the development of intra-team support and trust emerged as crucial. Analysis of variance revealed some limited differentiation between the behaviours of teams operating under the aforementioned three innovation categories. There were also distinct detrimental differences in the behaviour of those operating under a time deadline. Overall, the study identified the complex interrelationships of team behaviours and outcomes, and between teams and their context.

Doctoral work in translation studies as an interdisciplinary mutual learning process:how a translator, teacher educator and linguistic typologist worked together

The focus of this paper is on the doctoral research training experienced by one of the authors and the ways in which the diverse linguistic and disciplinary perspectives of her two supervisors (co-authors of this paper) mediated the completion of her study. The doctoral candidate is a professional translator/interpreter and translation teacher. The paper describes why and how she identified her research area and then focused on the major research questions in collaboration with her two supervisors, who brought their differing perspectives from the field of linguistics to this translation research, even though they are not translators by profession or disciplinary background and do not speak Korean. In addition, the discussion considers the focus, purpose and theoretical orientation of the research itself (which addressed questions of readability in translated English-Korean texts through detailed analysis of a corpus and implications for professional translator training) as well as the supervisory and conceptual processes and practices involved. The authors contend that doctoral research of this kind can be seen as a mutual learning process and that inter-disciplinary research can make a contribution not only to the development of rigorous research in the field of translation studies but also to the other disciplinary fields involved.

Organizing innovation:complementarities between cross-functional teams

Cross-functional teams play a potentially important part in the innovation process enabling knowledge sharing, the development of trust and overcoming spatial and organizational barriers. Using a supermodularity approach, we focus on potential complementarities which may arise when cross-functional teams are used in different elements of the innovation process in UK and German manufacturing plants. Using optimal combinations of cross-functional teams in the innovation process increases innovation success in the UK by 29.5 per cent compared to 9.5 per cent in Germany. Patterns of complementarity are complex, however, but are more uniform in the UK than in Germany. The most uniform complementarities are between product design and development and production engineering, with little synergy evident between the more technical phases of the innovation process and the development of marketing strategy. In strategic terms, our results suggest the value of using cross-functional teams for the more technical elements of the innovation process but that the development of marketing strategy should remain the domain of specialists.

Illusions of team working in health care

Purpose: The ubiquity and value of teams in healthcare are well acknowledged. However, in practice, healthcare teams vary dramatically in their structures and effectiveness in ways that can damage team processes and patient outcomes. The aim of this paper is to highlight these characteristics and to extrapolate several important aspects of teamwork that have a powerful impact on team effectiveness across healthcare contexts. Design/methodology/approach: The paper draws upon the literature from health services management and organisational behaviour to provide an overview of the current science of healthcare teams. Findings: Underpinned by the input-process-output framework of team effectiveness, team composition, team task, and organisational support are viewed as critical inputs that influence key team processes including team objectives, leadership and reflexivity, which in turn impact staff and patient outcomes. Team training interventions and care pathways can facilitate more effective interdisciplinary teamwork. Originality/value: The paper argues that the prevalence of the term "team" in healthcare makes the synthesis and advancement of the scientific understanding of healthcare teams a challenge. Future research therefore needs to better define the fundamental characteristics of teams in studies in order to ensure that findings based on real teams, rather than pseudo-like groups, are accumulated. © Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Real teams or pseudo teams? The changing landscape needs a better map

Commentary on focal article by Tannenbaum et al., Teams are changing: Are research and practice evolving fast enough?

Team working in intensive care:current evidence and future endeavors

Purpose of review: It has recently been argued that the future of intensive care medicine will rely on high quality management and teamwork. Therefore, this review takes an organizational psychology perspective to examine the most recent research on the relationship between teamwork, care processes, and patient outcomes in intensive care. Recent findings: Interdisciplinary communication within a team is crucial for the development of negotiated shared treatment goals and short-team patient outcomes. Interventions for maximizing team communication have received substantial interest in recent literature. Intensive care coordination is not a linear process, and intensive care teams often fail to discuss how to implement goals, trigger and align activities, or reflect on their performance. Despite a move toward interdisciplinary team working, clinical decision-making is still problematic and continues to be perceived as a top-down and authoritative process. The topic of team leadership in intensive care is underexplored and requires further research. Summary: Based on findings from the most recent research evidence in medicine and management, four principles are identified for improving the effectiveness of team working in intensive care: engender professional efficacy, create stable teams and leaders, develop trust and participative safety, and enable frequent team reflexivity.