ABSTRACT
Research on teams in organizations tends to focus on understanding the causes of team performance with a focus on how to enjoy the benefits of team success and avoid the negative consequences of team failure. This paper instead asks the question, 'what are some of the negative consequences of team success?' A review of the literature on teams is augmented with research from cognitive science, sociology, occupational psychology, and psychology to explore the potential negative long-term consequences of teamwork success. The general topics of groupthink, overconfidence bias, regression to the mean, role overload, and strategy calcification are reviewed while discussing the implications for future research streams and practical team management.
Subject(s)
Achievement , Cooperative Behavior , Group Processes , Work Performance , HumansABSTRACT
Research on teams in organizations tends to focus on understanding the causes of team performance with a focus on how to enjoy the benefits of team success and avoid the negative consequences of team failure. This paper instead asks the question, 'what are some of the negative consequences of team success?' A review of the literature on teams is augmented with research from cognitive science, sociology, occupational psychology, and psychology to explore the potential negative long-term consequences of teamwork success. The general topics of groupthink, overconfidence bias, regression to the mean, role overload, and strategy calcification are reviewed while discussing the implications for future research streams and practical team management
No disponible
Subject(s)
Humans , Group Processes , Work Performance , Competitive Behavior , Models, Organizational , Cooperative Behavior , Organizational CultureABSTRACT
The main objectives in this research were to introduce the concept of team role knowledge and to investigate its potential usefulness for team member selection. In Study 1, the authors developed a situational judgment test, called the Team Role Test, to measure knowledge of 10 roles relevant to the team context. The criterion-related validity of this measure was examined in 2 additional studies. In a sample of academic project teams (N = 93), team role knowledge predicted team member role performance (r = .34). Role knowledge also provided incremental validity beyond mental ability and the Big Five personality factors in the prediction of role performance. The results of Study 2 revealed that the predictive validity of role knowledge generalizes to team members in a work setting (N = 82, r = .30). The implications of the results for selection in team environments are discussed.