2. Terminology
Dyad: Two-person unit
Group vs. Team
No real distinction
Team: A social aggregation in which a limited number
of individuals interact on a regular basis to accomplish a
set of shared objectives for which they have mutual
responsibility.
3. Origins of Work Teams
Factors that led to the use of teams:
Information age
Educated and trained population
Rate of change in work activities
Teams are not always better than individuals
4. Level of Analysis
Individual vs. Team vs. Organization
Micro vs. Meso vs. Macro
Organization
Work Groups
Individuals
5. Types of Teams
(Larson & LaFasto, 1989)
Problem Solving Team: A type of team
created for the purpose of focusing on the
resolution of a particular problem or issue.
Creative Team: A type of team created for
the purpose of developing innovative
possibilities or solutions.
6. Types of Teams
(Larson & LaFasto, 1989)
Tactical Team: A type of team created for the
purpose of executing a well-defined plan or
objective.
Ad Hoc Team: A type of team created for a
limited duration that is designed to address
itself to resolving one particular problem.
7. Types of Teams
(Larson & LaFasto, 1989)
Broad
Objective
Dominant
Feature
Process Emphasis Example
Problem
Resolution
Trust Focus on Issues CDC
Creative Autonomy Explore possibilities and
alternatives
IBM PC
Team
Tactical Clarity Directive, highly focused
tasks, role clarity, well-
defined operational
standards, accuracy
Cardiac
Surgery
Team
8. Principles of Teamwork
1. Feedback provided and accepted
2. Backing up team members
3. Collective group
4. Within-team interdependence
5. Leadership makes a difference
9. Team Structure
Structure of a team includes:
Number of members
Demographic composition
Experience of members
Diversity in teams:
Information diversity
Value diversity
12. Team Processes: Socialization
Socialization: process of mutual adjustment
that produces changes over time in the
relationship between a person and a team.
How socialization works (Moreland & Levine, 2001):
Evaluation
Commitment
Role transition and phases of membership
(investigation, socialization, maintenance,
resocialization, remembrance)
14. Team Processes:
Shared Mental Models
Shared Mental Model:the cognitive
processes held in common by members of a
team regarding how they acquire
information, analyze it, and respond to it.
What is shared (Cannon-Bowers & Salas, 2001)?
Task-specific knowledge
Task-related knowledge
Knowledge of teammates
Shared attitudes and beliefs
15. Team Processes:
Shared Mental Models
Groupthink:a phenomenon associated with
team decision making in which members feel
threatened by forces external to the team,
resulting in a deterioration in the cognitive
processing of information.
3 Causes:
High level of cohesion
Structural organizational flaw
Proactive situational context
16. Groupthink Example
A board of directors of an international air
freight service must decide whether the
company should enter a cost-cutting war with
their competitors. The board begins its
decision-making meeting with the
chairperson’s loaded questions: “Should we
enter into this foolish price war or just keep
rates the way they are?”
17. Team Processes:
Decision Making
Multi-level theory of team decision
making (Hollenbeck, LePine, & Ilgen,
1996):
Team informity
Staff validity
Dyadic sensitivity
18. Improving Team Decision
Making
Assign the devil’s advocate role
Be open to dissenting points of view
Seek outside opinions
Break up into smaller groups
Rethink issues before making final decision
Use brainstorming
19. Virtual Teams
Virtual teams: Task-focused teams that meet
without being physically present or working
at the same time.
Defining Characteristics (Avolio et al., 2001):
Communication takes place electronically
Team members are dispersed geographically
Members may interact synchronously or
asynchronously
20. Virtual Teams
Challenges:
Development of shared mental models
Evaluation of team results
Achievement of team cohesion
Problems with leadership
22. Intergroup Conflict
Consequences:
Conflict changes group members’ perceptions of
each other
Group becomes more cohesive
Strained interaction between the two groups
Argumentative behavior
Attitudes passed on to new members
Goals focus inward, away from organization as a
whole
23. Overcoming Intergroup
Conflict
Superordinate Goals: goals that both groups
endorse and that often require cooperative
intergroup behavior to be achieved
Getting 2 conflicting groups together by itself
will not reduce conflict
Conflict can be reduced if members cooperate to
achieve superordinate goals.
24. Overcoming Intergroup
Conflict
One problem occurs in conflicting groups is
that they do not communicate.
One strategy to overcome the conflict is to
plan a negotiation between the 2 groups.
Negotiation:facilitates communication and is
usually seen a a fair method of dispute
resolution.
25. Overcoming Intergroup
Conflict
Member exchanges: members of conflicting
groups role play each other.
Intergroup team development: team
activities to improve relationships between
groups.
26. Overcoming Intergroup
Conflict
Reducing need for intergroup interaction:
Create conditions in which two groups have little
or no need to interact
Reduce interdependence among groups
The resource allocation process:
Ensure groups have similar resources
Allocate resources fairly
27. Special Issues in Teams
Personnel Selection
Training
Performance Appraisal
28. Personnel Selection in Teams
Traditional individual personnel selection methods
may not take the social context of teams into
consideration.
Selection of team members requires best mix of
personnel.
Establishing team requirements involves
identifying and assessing the congruence among
members with regard to personality and values.
29. Personnel Selection in Teams
Prieto (1993) asserts that 5 social skills are
critical for an individual to enhance group
performance:
1. Gain group’s acceptance
2.Increase group solidarity
3.Be aware of group consciousness
4.Share group identification
5.Manage others’ impressions
30. Team Training
Logic of team training is similar to individual
training, although mechanism is somewhat
different.
Team task analysis provides information
about knowledge, skills, and attitudes the
team members must possess to be successful.
32. Team Performance Appraisal
Major issue: extent to which individuals will
slacken their performance within the team.
Social loafing: a phenomenon identified in
groups or teams in which certain individuals
withhold effort or contributions to the collective
outcome.
33. Team Performance Appraisal:
Social Loafing
Three types of social loafing:
Free riding
Sucker effect
Felt dispensability
Share the same characteristics:
• Concern with impact of
individual contributions on
team performance.
• Expectation of return on effort
• Teamwork can weaken
individual effort-team success-
individual outcome link