Teams leading teams: Examining the role of leadership in multi-team systems

A major challenge of modern teams lies in the coordination of the efforts not just of individuals within a team, but also of teams whose efforts are ultimately entwined with those of other teams. Despite this fact, much of the research on work teams fails to consider the external dependencies that exist in organizational teams and instead focuses on internal or within team processes. Multi-Team Systems Theory is used as a theoretical framework for understanding teams-of-teams organizational forms (Multi-Team Systems; MTS's); and leadership teams are proposed as one remedy that enable MTS members to dedicate needed resources to intra-team activities while ensuring effective synchronization of between-team activities. Two functions of leader teams were identified: strategy development and coordination facilitation; and a model was developed delineating the effects of the two leader roles on multi-team cognitions, processes, and performance.^ Three hundred eighty-four undergraduate psychology and business students participated in a laboratory simulation that modeled an MTS; each MTS was comprised of three, two-member teams each performing distinct but interdependent components of an F-22 battle simulation task. Two roles of leader teams supported in the literature were manipulated through training in a 2 (strategy training vs. control) x 2 (coordination training vs. control) design. Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and mediated regression analysis were used to test the study's hypotheses. ^ Results indicate that both training manipulations produced differences in the effectiveness of the intended form of leader behavior. The enhanced leader strategy training resulted in more accurate (but not more similar) MTS mental models, better inter-team coordination, and higher levels of multi-team (but not component team) performance. Moreover, mental model accuracy fully mediated the relationship between leader strategy and inter-team coordination; and inter-team coordination fully mediated the effect of leader strategy on multi-team performance. Leader coordination training led to better inter-team coordination, but not to higher levels of either team or multi-team performance. Mediated Input-Process-Output (I-P-O) relationships were not supported with leader coordination; rather, leader coordination facilitation and inter-team coordination uniquely contributed to component team and multi-team level performance. The implications of these findings and future research directions are also discussed. ^

The effects of the outdoor experiential ropes course on perceived team performance

The purpose of this quasi-experimental study was to explore the perceived effects of the Ropes Course on the performance of intact work teams. The dependent variable, team performance, was measured by the Team Performance Assessment, a 20 question inventory. The Ropes Course, the independent variable, was an outdoor experiential training program presently marketed as a highly effective team building training program. Issues the team addressed in the highly emotional and physical environment were purported to transfer back to the work environment and act as a catalyst for change The Ropes Course in this study consisted of a day long series of outdoor mental, emotional and physical exercises addressing the issues of goal-setting, role expectations, accountability, trust, respect, communication, problem-solving and decision-making. The 68 subjects, 37 in the treatment group and 31 in the control were employees of a large international financial institution. They were not chosen by random selection. The work teams' managers recognized a need to improve team morale, performance and functioning due to corporate reengineering and downsizing resulting in team members' job losses. Control teams were partially matched to the treatment teams on the basis of professional composition and similar job descriptions. The pretest of the Team Performance Assessment was given the morning of the Ropes Course treatment and the posttest was given three to five weeks later. The control teams received the pretests and posttests at about the same time intervals at their work location but received no Ropes Course treatment. The treatment teams' scores and the control teams' scores were statistically compared using the Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) and the Multivariate Analysis of Covariance (MANCOVA) at the .05 level of significance. The statistical analysis revealed a significant difference between the control and experimental teams after the team building Ropes Course training as measured by the Team Performance Assessment (Gilbert, 1996). ^

Workplace Discrimination Climate and Team Effectiveness: The Mediating Role of Collective Value Congruence, Team Cohesion, and Collective Affective Commitment

This study explored the relationship between workplace discrimination climate on team effectiveness through three serial mediators: collective value congruence, team cohesion, and collective affective commitment. As more individuals of marginalized groups diversify the workforce and as more organizations move toward team-based work (Cannon-Bowers & Bowers, 2010), it is imperative to understand how employees perceive their organization’s discriminatory climate as well as its effect on teams. An archival dataset consisting of 6,824 respondents was used, resulting in 332 work teams with five or more members in each. The data were collected as part of an employee climate survey administered in 2011 throughout the United States’ Department of Defense. The results revealed that the indirect effect through M1 (collective value congruence) and M2 (team cohesion) best accounted for the relationship between workplace discrimination climate (X) and team effectiveness (Y). Meaning, on average, teams that reported a greater climate for workplace discrimination also reported less collective value congruence with their organization (a1 = -1.07, p < .001). With less shared perceptions of value congruence, there is less team cohesion (d21 = .45, p < .001), and with less team cohesion there is less team effectiveness (b2 = .57, p < .001). In addition, because of theoretical overlap, this study makes the case for studying workplace discrimination under the broader construct of workplace aggression within the I/O psychology literature. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis found that workplace discrimination based on five types of marginalized groups: race/ethnicity, gender, religion, age, and disability was best explained by a three-factor model, including: career obstruction based on age and disability bias (CO), verbal aggression based on multiple types of bias (VA), and differential treatment based on racial/ethnic bias (DT). There was initial support to claim that workplace discrimination items covary not only based on type, but also based on form (i.e., nonviolent aggressive behaviors). Therefore, the form of workplace discrimination is just as important as the type when studying climate perceptions and team-level effects. Theoretical and organizational implications are also discussed.

Adaptation in knowledge-based teams: An examination of team composition, leader sensegiving, and cognitive, behavioral, and motivational mechanisms

Organizations are increasingly relying on teams to do the work that has traditionally been done by individuals. At the same time, the environments in which these organizations and teams operate have been becoming progressively more complex and uncertain. These trends raise important questions about the factors that enable teams to adapt. In response to these questions, the current study sought to identify the cognitive, behavioral, and motivational processes and emergent states that promote a team's adaptation to unforeseen changes and novel events, and the team compositional characteristics and leadership processes that enabled these processes and emergent states. Two hundred twenty two undergraduate students from a large Southeastern University composed 74 3-person teams, and participated in a computerized decision-making simulation where each team formed the governing body (i.e., Mayor's cabinet) for two separate simulated cities, and made strategic decisions about city operations. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three roles, distributing expertise and creating mutual interdependence. External team leader sensegiving was manipulated through video recorded communications from an external team leader. Results indicate that team cognitive ability, achievement striving, and psychological collectivism, as well as external team leader sensegiving, were all related to the similarity and quality of team members' strategy-focused mental models (cognitive emergent states), and to the amount of information sharing among members (behavioral process). In turn, teams with more similar and higher quality mental models, and who shared greater levels of information, were found to have a greater ability to react and adapt to environmental changes, and to have greater levels of decision-making effectiveness. Results indicate a pattern of relationships consistent with hypotheses, and have important implications for organizations and knowledge-based teams charged with management responsibilities. Organizations should staff teams with the compositional characteristics that enable the development of similar and high quality mental models, and that promote information sharing among teammates. Similarly, organizations which train and develop leaders to engage in sensegiving behaviors enable team adaptability and promote enhanced decision-making effectiveness when faced with unforeseen changes and novel situations.