Team Composition

9 Key excerpts on "Team Composition"

• 

  eBook - ePub

  Team Dynamics Over Time

  • Eduardo Salas, William B. Vessey, Lauren B. Landon, Eduardo Salas, William B. Vessey, Lauren B. Landon, Eduardo Salas, William B. Vessey(Authors)
  • 2017(Publication Date)
  • Emerald Publishing Limited

    (Publisher)

  In many circumstances, individual and team-based composition models both contribute to the prediction of valued outcomes. As an example, a new product development team may be best positioned for success when team members prefer to work in teams rather than individually, the team is diverse in terms of functional background, and members in key positions (e.g., boundary spanning roles) have the necessary levels on the attributes needed for the role (e.g., self-monitoring). The different models can be combined via an algorithm such as the one provided by Mathieu et al. (2014b). This algorithm can include a temporal vector to account for changing Team Composition and outcome relationships over time (Mathieu et al., 2014b). Further, because Team Composition itself may be dynamic because of membership change, fluid boundaries and multiple team membership, the question becomes to what extent the team has the best combination of member attributes for a particular task or circumstance (Mathieu et al., 2014b).

  There are a large number of possible Team Composition attributes and configurations to consider. In most cases, researchers and practitioners should focus on identifying a few key composition considerations that are important for effectiveness in the specific circumstance. Some Team Composition considerations are likely to be important for most teams. For example, a highly disagreeable team member may be disruptive to team performance in most organizational circumstances (Bell, 2007 ). Other key Team Composition considerations will be highly dependent on the context. For example, self-managing teams with ambiguous leadership structures can thrive when shared leadership emerges (Carson, Tesluk, & Marrone, 2007 ). Shared leadership is more likely to emerge in teams composed of members that are high on both psychological collectivism and extraversion, or both psychological collectivism and motivation to lead (Chen, 2014 ).

  Analysis of the context within which teams operate and an understanding of the theoretical path through which Team Composition is expected to relate to valued outcomes can be used to identify important attributes and configurations (Bell & Brown, 2015 ; Bell, Fisher, Brown, & Mann, 2016 ). The context can be used to identify important emergent properties (e.g., team cohesion) that contribute to a team’s human capital. The context also informs how Team Composition may be most effectively managed (e.g., through staffing, specific leadership behaviors). Team Composition is shaped by the context beyond the temporal aspects discussed here (Johns, 2006

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Team Building

  Proven Strategies for Improving Team Performance

  • William G. Dyer, W. Gibb Dyer, Jr., Jeffrey H. Dyer(Authors)
  • 2007(Publication Date)
  • Jossey-Bass

    (Publisher)

  An assessment instrument for evaluating Team Composition and context is included as well. Team Composition and Performance For a team to succeed, team members must have the skills and experi- ence to accomplish the task, and they must have the motivation to suc- ceed. In putting the team together, team leadership is critical. Some of the characteristics of effective team leaders include the following: 1 • Clear vision of the team’s role in accomplishing organiza- tional goals • Clear vision of the metrics that will accurately measure team performance • Project management and work-planning skills • Conflict management and problem-solving skills 29 • Understanding of team processes and interdependencies • Skills to manage change and build team competencies • Ability to gain support and resources for the team from key executives and other constituencies In addition to effective leaders, successful teams also need team members that have the following characteristics: • Technical skills, knowledge, or experience related to the team’s work • Good interpersonal and communication skills • High degree of motivation to be part of a team effort • Good conflict-management skills • Ability to adapt to new situations • Dependability and ability to take initiative to help the team achieve its goals We often find that team leaders do not receive adequate training and as a result are ill-equipped to lead the team. Effective team leaders understand that the way they manage the team, and individual team members, is strongly influenced by the degree to which team members are skilled and motivated (see Figure 3.1). Team members may not have the skills or may not be properly motivated to work on the team. When team members are neither skilled nor motivated, team leaders may attempt to drop them from the team, realizing that the work required to both build skills and motivate is substantial.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior

  Evidence-based Lessons for Creating Sustainable Organizations

  • Steve M. Jex, Thomas W. Britt, Cynthia A. Thompson, Cynthia A Thompson(Authors)
  • 2024(Publication Date)
  • Wiley

    (Publisher)

  The third determinant, labeled composi- tion, largely involves the characteristics of the team members themselves. One key aspect of this is the degree to which teams are composed of members who possess het- erogeneous skills and are flexible enough to Source: Reproduced by permission from Campion et al. (1993) / John Wiley & Sons. Job Design • Self-Management • Participation • Task Variety • Task Significance • Task Identity Interdependence • Task Interdependence • Goal Interdependence • Interdependent Feedback and Rewards Composition • Heterogeneity • Flexibility • Relative Size • Preference for Group Work Context • Training • Managerial Support • Communication/ Cooperation between Groups Process • Potency • Social Support • Workload Sharing • Communication/ Cooperation within Groups Productivity Satisfaction Manager Judgments Effectiveness Criteria Themes/Characteristics FIGURE 11.5 Campion’s Synthesis Model of Group Effectiveness 587 cover for each other when required. Another important factor here is the relative size of the team. Although there is no magic num- ber that is recognized as the “correct” team size, the general rule of thumb is that teams should be large enough to do the work, but not too large (i.e., more is not better). Finally, the variable preference for teamwork is somewhat unique because it is not con- tained in the previous models. Some people simply like or dislike working in some teams more than others. The third category, labeled context, is comprised of factors in the organizational environment in which the team performs. These include the training available to teams, the degree to which managers sup- port teams, and the extent to which there is cooperation and communication among different teams. Teams will be most effective when the organizational context provides plentiful training opportunities, when man- agers support teams, and when there is a high degree of cooperation and communi- cation among teams.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Organizational Behavior

  • Michael A. Hitt, C. Chet Miller, Adrienne Colella, Maria Triana(Authors)
  • 2017(Publication Date)
  • Wiley

    (Publisher)

  To ensure that the benefits of teamwork outweigh the costs that occur from it, teams must be structured and managed properly. Literally thousands of studies in almost every type of organizational context have examined factors that influence team effectiveness. We focus on three factors: Team Composition, team structure, and team processes. Team Composition Team Composition is important because it addresses who members of the team are and what human resources (skills, abilities, and knowledge) they bring to the team. When man- agers assign associates to teams, they often make three questionable assumptions, which can lead to mistakes, 51 including the assumptions that everyone knows how to work in a team, everyone is well suited to work in a team, and larger team size is better. In this section, we address these issues. Diversity In Chapter 2, we explored in depth the impact of demographic diversity on group performance. Some studies have found negative effects for demographic diversity, 52 process loss The differ- ence between actual and potential team perfor- mance that is caused by diverting time and energy into maintaining the team as opposed to working on substantive tasks. 368 CHAPTER 11 Groups and Teams others have found positive effects, 53 and still others have found no effect. Meta-analytic studies which have summarized the relationship between team demographic diversity and performance across many studies conducted in this area of research, have concluded that the relationship is a very small negative (near zero) effect. 54 Another type of diversity that can impact team performance corresponds to differences in important beliefs among team members. Consistent with research on demographic diversity, the impact of belief diversity on performance has been mixed. 55 Overall, the effects of demographic and belief diversity on team performance seem to depend on several factors: 56 • Type of task.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  The Problems with Teamwork, and How to Solve Them

  • Annika Lantz Friedrich, Daniela Ulber, Peter Friedrich(Authors)
  • 2019(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  It depends on the number of persons in a team, if team goals can be achieved. On the one hand there should be enough people to accomplish the task (see Wageman et al., 2005, earlier). On the other hand, too many team members are not economically sensible. Wheelan (2009) found in a study with 329 teams that teams with three to eight team members were more productive than larger teams. Bell (2004) reports several studies that show that teams consisting of too many members have negative effects on team processes, such as participation and coordination. The more persons there are in a team, the more there is a need for collective coordination of communication and regulation of team processes.

  3.3.2 Team structure and task

  Team Composition needs to be suitable for the specific team structure and task. There are several classifications to differentiate team types. Hollenbeck, Beersma, and Schouten (2012) have extracted three main dimensions to describe different teams – we will use them to show exemplarily what demand structural conditions put to Team Composition, and how these are related to the definition of the team task.

  1. Skill differentiation : The role structure of a team (how is work divided among team members?) has an impact on Team Composition. The team task (especially its knowledge characteristics: complexity, skill variety and specialization, see Chapter 3 ) determines the different expertise and specialized competencies that team members need to bring. This again sets the scope for different ways of work division: In a team with a functional work division, team members have different expertise and take over different tasks based on their dissimilar competencies. The more similar the qualifications of team members, the more interchangeable their roles can be. (Wildman et al., 2012)
  2. Authority differentiation : What about authority and responsibility – do all team members equally participate in decision-making or are there differences? We will see later in Chapter 8 that leadership tasks can be shared within the team. For this purpose, team members with specific competencies are needed. This is another aspect for Team Composition. Again, these competencies are related to the team task – the more complex, autonomous and complete it is (see Chapter 3

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  When Bad Teams Happen to Good People

  Your Complete Repair Guide for Successful Teamwork

  • Valerie Patrick(Author)
  • 2021(Publication Date)
  • Career Press

    (Publisher)

  CHAPTER 4

  Troubleshooting Team Composition

  The composition of a workplace team is an important factor in team performance independent of other factors such as who the team leader is and how that team operates. Researchers have found that the mere act of forming a team has performance benefits regardless of how different or similar the team members are in appearance and thinking.1 For example, we like people we perceive to be on our team more than those we perceive to be outside our team. Further, we empathize more with people we perceive to be on our team than with those we perceive to be outside our team. Finally, we are better at inferring the goals, thoughts, and feelings behind the faces of those we consider on our team versus those we consider outside our team. A correlation exists between team performance and the ability of members to infer the thoughts and feelings of one another.2

  The performance benefits from the mere act of forming a team can be destroyed by incentives for team members to protect self-interest over team interest. For example, a boss who rewards the individual accomplishments of one subordinate with a higher raise than the team contributions of another subordinate is placing more value on self-interest than team interest. I knew individuals with high self-interest at work who took credit for teamwork after the team disbanded. For example, one boss asked me to lead a team to commercialize a new technology. Once the technology was commercialized under my leadership, my boss filed a patent application including all the members except for me. I met with him to inquire about the exclusion, and he explained that I had not contributed to the original idea. My boss did not value my contribution of leading the team that converted the idea to an invention even though converting an idea to an invention is a prerequisite to file a patent application and receive a patent.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  High-Performing Self-Managed Work Teams

  A Comparison of Theory to Practice

  • Dale E. Yeatts, Cloyd Hyten(Authors)
  • 1997(Publication Date)
  • SAGE Publications, Inc

    (Publisher)

  Team Composition Team Composition refers to how a team is composed—that is, who is on the team (Hackman & Oldham, 1980). The team's composition can vary on a wide range of team member characteristics. These have been organized by Maznevski (1994) into two groups of characteristics—role-related charac-teristics and personal characteristics. Role-related characteristics include those related to the job such as occupation, organizational position, and specialized knowledge and skills. Team members may be very homogeneous with regard to one or more of these, or they may be very diverse or heterogeneous. In our case studies, one of the manufacturing SMWTs was made up of all machinists—people skilled in operating a variety of machines. There was little diversity on the team with regard to the role-related charac-teristics. On the other hand, a nursing home SMWT included a social worker, mental health specialist, director of nursing, and nursing home administrator. This team's composition was very diverse with regard to role-related char-acteristics. Personal characteristics have been defined by Maznevski (1994) as those personal attributes that cannot be changed in most cases, including age, gender, nationality, cultural values, race, and personality. The SMWTs we studied were remarkably homogeneous with regard to several personal characteristics. Of the four manufacturing teams, two were over 90% male and two were over 90% female. Of the three nursing home teams, one was over 90% female, and the remaining two were 100% female. Only the government teams displayed diversity with regard to gender. Similar findings were found with regard to age, with only the government teams displaying diversity. Of the 10 SMWTs we studied, 9 were at least 80% Caucasian, while the 10th was 90% non-Caucasian.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Collaboration in Outsourcing

  A Journey to Quality

  • S. Brinkkemper, Slinger Jansen(Authors)
  • 2016(Publication Date)
  • Palgrave Macmillan

    (Publisher)

  On the other hand, it risks placing the best, or the worst, students in a single team, thereby limiting their abilities. Team abilities are also at risk of Optimal Team Composition 165 being limited when students are allowed to form their own teams, since they “tend to work well with people they already know” (Scott and Cross, 1995, p. 296). Since Scott and Cross (1995) discuss teams for short academic projects, they indi- cate that for small teams, consisting of two or three students, letting them choose their own team members delivers the optimal result. For larger teams, however, they believe the balancing of both academic achievement and performance pro- files, and psychological profiles, is the best approach. It has a positive effect on the team performance, although they indicate that these approaches do not take into account whether the team members can work well together. Deibel (2005), who also researched student teams, found that interaction between team members is a key aspect of group learning, and collaboration has a positive impact on the socialization and information processing abilities of the students. It exposes them to the different ideas students can have and encour- ages their cognitive growth (Deibel, 2005). 10.2.3 Summary To summarize what we believe to be the most influential criteria for team com- position as described above from literature, we provide a few of bullet points that should be considered during the Team Composition activities. Assume intense coordination between individuals in a dynamic working • environment since we are focusing on a distributed software development environment. The level of outsourcing: how much, and what, will be done onshore in com- • parison with offshore. This process should be kept simple. The size of a team: with small groups, the collaboration between individuals • is vital, while with larger teams, the complementation of knowledge and skill plays a major role.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  The Emerald Handbook of Group and Team Communication Research

  • Stephenson J. Beck, Joann Keyton, Marshall Scott Poole, Stephenson J. Beck, Joann Keyton, Marshall Scott Poole(Authors)
  • 2021(Publication Date)
  • Emerald Publishing Limited

    (Publisher)

  Therefore, the success of newcomer socialization partly depends on how much the team ’ s and the individuals ’ goals are aligned during role negotiations ( Levine et al., 2005 ). In summary, studying group composition as a process examines how teams respond to environmental changes by reconstituting their Team Compositions. Speci fi cally, the research on membership fl uidity and role development shows that teams ’ adaptive abilities for membership changes hinge on how effectively they communicate about emergent changes and coordinate member interactions to establish new role distributions and role behaviors. Conclusions and Future Directions The study of group composition is concerned with how a group is assembled, who constitutes the group, and how group composition relates to group functioning. The goals of this chapter were to synthesize contemporary literature on group composition from various disciplines and to identify how communication plays a role in the study of group composition. In doing so, we integrated group composition research from three different approaches, and our review reveals that each approach makes unique contributions to advancing our knowledge on group composition. As part of the efforts to move the group composition research forward, we identify three areas in which future research might further advance our knowledge of group composition. Digital Environment Recent advances in communication technologies are transforming how work teams coordinate their efforts for collective performance ( Yan et al., 2019 ; see Chapter 24 of this volume). Facilitated by social media, ubiquitous computing devices, and arti fi cial intelligence, groups are increasingly assembled online as Group Composition as a Cause, a Consequence, and a Process 347 observed in expert team formation from the crowd ( Valentine et al., 2017 ), hackathons ( Trainer et al., 2016 ), and online games ( Kim et al., 2017 ).

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book