Organizing for Mars: A Task Management Perspective on Work within Spaceflight Multiteam Systems.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine how task, social, and situational factors shape work patterns, information networks, and performance in spaceflight multiteam systems (MTSs). BACKGROUND: Human factors research has explored the task and individual characteristics that affect decisions regarding when and in what order people complete tasks. We extend this work to understand how the social and situational factors that arise when working in MTSs affect individual work patterns. METHODS: We conducted a complex multi-site space analog simulation with NASA over the course of 3 years. The MTS task required participants from four teams (Geology, Robotics, Engineering, and Human Factors) to collaborate to design a well on Mars. We manipulated the one-way communication delay between the crew and mission support: no time lag, 60-second lag, and 180-second lag. RESULTS: The study revealed that team and situational factors exert strong effects: members whose teams have less similar mental models, those whose teams prioritize their team goal over the MTS goal, and those working in social isolation and/or under communication delay engage longer on tasks. Time-on-task positively predicts MTS information networks, which in turn positively predict MTS performance when communication occurs with a delay, but not when it occurs in real-time. CONCLUSION: Our findings contribute to research on task management in the context of working in teams and multiteam systems. Team and situational factors, along with task factors, shape task management behavior. APPLICATION: Social and situational factors are important predictors of task management in team contexts such as spaceflight MTSs.

Teammate Invitation Networks: The Roles of Recommender Systems and Prior Collaboration in Team Assembly.

Teammate invitation networks are foundational for team assembly, and recommender systems (similar to dating websites, but for selecting potential teammates) can aid the formation of such networks. This paper extends Hinds, Carley, Krackhardt, and Wholey's (2000) influential model of team member selection by incorporating online recommender systems. Exponential random graph modeling of two samples (overall N = 410; 63 teams; 1,048 invitations) shows the invitation network is predicted by online recommendations, beyond previously-established effects of prior collaboration/familiarity, skills/competence, and homophily. Importantly, online recommendations are less heeded when there is prior collaboration (effect replicates across samples). This study highlights technology-enabled team assembly from a network perspective.

Leading Teams in the Digital Age: Four Perspectives on Technology and What They Mean for Leading Teams.

Digital technologies are changing the nature of teamwork in ways that have important implications for leadership. Though conceptually rich and multi-disciplinary, much of the burgeoning work on technology has not been fully integrated into the leadership literature. To fill this gap, we organize existing work on leadership and technology, outlining four perspectives: (1) technology as context, (2) technology as sociomaterial, (3) technology as creation medium, and (4) technology as teammate. Each technology perspective makes assumptions about how technologies affect teams and the needs for team leadership. Within each perspective, we detail current work on leading teams. This section takes us from virtual teams to new vistas posed by leading online communities, crowds, peer production groups, flash teams, human-robot teams, and human-artificial intelligence teams. We identify 12 leadership implications arising from the ways digital technologies affect organizing. We then leverage our review to identify directions for future leadership research and practice.

Integrating social networks and human social motives to achieve social influence at scale.

The innovations of science often point to ideas and behaviors that must spread and take root in communities to have impact. Ideas, practices, and behaviors need to go from accepted truths on the part of a few scientists to commonplace beliefs and norms in the minds of the many. Moving from scientific discoveries to public good requires social influence. We introduce a structured influence process (SIP) framework to explain how social networks (i.e., the structure of social influence) and human social motives (i.e., the process of social influence wherein one person's attitudes and behaviors affect another's) are used collectively to enact social influence within a community. The SIP framework advances the science of scientific communication by positing social influence events that consider both the "who" and the "how" of social influence. This framework synthesizes core ideas from two bodies of research on social influence. The first is network research on social influence structures, which identifies who are the opinion leaders and who among their network of peers shapes their attitudes and behaviors. The second is research on social influence processes in psychology, which explores how human social motives such as the need for accuracy or the need for affiliation stimulate behavior change. We illustrate the practical implications of the SIP framework by applying it to the case of reducing neonatal mortality in India.

Teamwork in the time of COVID-19: Creating, dissolving, and reactivating network ties in response to a crisis.

The Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has prompted an unprecedented shift to remote work. Workers across the globe have used digital technologies to connect with teammates and others in their organizations. In what ways did the COVID-19 crisis alter the frequency and balance of internal and external team interactions? During a crisis, networking offers a type of goal-directed behavior through which individuals source and provide information. We can understand how people use their network through the lens of network churn, changes in embeddedness brought on by the creation, dissolution, and/or reactivation of network ties. higher We posit that performing individuals exhibit distinct networking strategies as compared to lower performing employees during the pandemic. We present a field study conducted in a multinational industrial manufacturing company in China investigating network churn during the COVID-19 pandemic. Findings show that, during a crisis, job performance is positively related to the volume of inter-team tie creation and inter-team tie reactivation, but not intra-team tie creation and intra-team tie reactivation. Job performance is not related to the volume of intra- and inter-team tie dissolution. The study provides early, yet important insights into the interplay between crisis and organizational social networks. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Information sharing and team performance: a meta-analysis.

Information sharing is a central process through which team members collectively utilize their available informational resources. The authors used meta-analysis to synthesize extant research on team information sharing. Meta-analytic results from 72 independent studies (total groups = 4,795; total N = 17,279) demonstrate the importance of information sharing to team performance, cohesion, decision satisfaction, and knowledge integration. Although moderators were identified, information sharing positively predicted team performance across all levels of moderators. The information sharing-team performance relationship was moderated by the representation of information sharing (as uniqueness or openness), performance criteria, task type, and discussion structure by uniqueness (a 3-way interaction). Three factors affecting team information processing were found to enhance team information sharing: task demonstrability, discussion structure, and cooperation. Three factors representing decreasing degrees of member redundancy were found to detract from team information sharing: information distribution, informational interdependence, and member heterogeneity.

How Team Interlock Ecosystems Shape the Assembly of Scientific Teams: A Hypergraph Approach.

Today's most pressing scientific problems necessitate scientific teamwork; the increasing complexity and specialization of knowledge render "lone geniuses" ill-equipped to make high-impact scientific breakthroughs. Social network research has begun to explore the factors that promote the assembly of scientific teams. However, this work has been limited by network approaches centered conceptually and analytically on "nodes as people," or "nodes as teams." In this paper, we develop a ' team-interlock ecosystem' conceptualization of collaborative environments within which new scientific teams, or other creative team-based enterprises, assemble. Team interlock ecosystems comprise teams linked to one another through overlapping memberships and/or overlapping knowledge domains. They depict teams, people, and knowledge sets as nodes, and thus, present both conceptual advantages as well as methodological challenges. Conceptually, team interlock ecosystems invite novel questions about how the structural characteristics of embedding ecosystems serve as the primordial soup from which new teams assemble. Methodologically, however, studying ecosystems requires the use of more advanced analytics that correspond to the inherently multilevel phenomenon of scientists nested within multiple teams. To address these methodological challenges, we advance the use of hypergraph methodologies combined with bibliometric data and simulation-based approaches to test hypotheses related to the ecosystem drivers of team assembly.

Leadership in multiteam systems.

This study examined 2 leader functions likely to be instrumental in synchronizing large systems of teams (i.e., multiteam systems [MTSs]). Leader strategizing and coordinating were manipulated through training, and effects on functional leadership, interteam coordination, and MTS performance were examined. Three hundred eighty-four undergraduate students participated in a laboratory simulation modeling a 3-team MTS performing an F-22 battle simulation task (N = 64 MTSs). Results indicate that both leader training manipulations improved functional leadership and interteam coordination and that functional leader behavior was positively related to MTS-level performance. Functional leadership mediated the effects of both types of training on interteam coordination, and interteam coordination fully mediated the effect of MTS leadership on MTS performance.

Teamwork in multiteam systems.

The authors examined how networks of teams integrate their efforts to succeed collectively. They proposed that integration processes used to align efforts among multiple teams are important predictors of multiteam performance. The authors used a multiteam system (MTS) simulation to assess how both cross-team and within-team processes relate to MTS performance over multiple performance episodes that differed in terms of required interdependence levels. They found that cross-team processes predicted MTS performance beyond that accounted for by within-team processes. Further, cross-team processes were more important for MTS effectiveness when there were high cross-team interdependence demands as compared with situations in which teams could work more independently. Results are discussed in terms of extending theory and applications from teams to multiteam systems.

Social network approaches to leadership: an integrative conceptual review.

Contemporary definitions of leadership advance a view of the phenomenon as relational, situated in specific social contexts, involving patterned emergent processes, and encompassing both formal and informal influence. Paralleling these views is a growing interest in leveraging social network approaches to study leadership. Social network approaches provide a set of theories and methods with which to articulate and investigate, with greater precision and rigor, the wide variety of relational perspectives implied by contemporary leadership theories. Our goal is to advance this domain through an integrative conceptual review. We begin by answering the question of why-Why adopt a network approach to study leadership? Then, we offer a framework for organizing prior research. Our review reveals 3 areas of research, which we term: (a) leadership in networks, (b) leadership as networks, and (c) leadership in and as networks. By clarifying the conceptual underpinnings, key findings, and themes within each area, this review serves as a foundation for future inquiry that capitalizes on, and programmatically builds upon, the insights of prior work. Our final contribution is to advance an agenda for future research that harnesses the confluent ideas at the intersection of leadership in and as networks. Leadership in and as networks represents a paradigm shift in leadership research-from an emphasis on the static traits and behaviors of formal leaders whose actions are contingent upon situational constraints, toward an emphasis on the complex and patterned relational processes that interact with the embedding social context to jointly constitute leadership emergence and effectiveness.

Moving beyond relationship and task conflict: toward a process-state perspective.

Teams are formed to benefit from an expanded pool of expertise and experience, yet 2 aspects of the conflict stemming from those core differences will ultimately play a large role in determining team viability and productivity: conflict states and conflict processes. The current study theoretically reorganizes the literature on team conflict--distinguishing conflict states from conflict processes--and details the effects of each on team effectiveness. Findings from a meta-analytic cumulation of 45 independent studies (total number of teams = 3,218) suggest states and processes are distinct and important predictors of team performance and affective outcomes. Controlling for conflict states (i.e., task and relationship conflict), conflict processes explain an additional 13% of the variance in both team performance and team affective outcomes. Furthermore, findings reveal particular conflict processes that are beneficial and others detrimental to teams. The truth about team conflict: conflict processes, that is, how teams interact regarding their differences, are at least as important as conflict states, that is, the source and intensity of their perceived incompatibilities.

Charting a course for collaboration: a multiteam perspective.

The translation of medical research from bench-to-bedside often requires integrated input from multiple expert teams. These collectives can best be understood through the lens of multiteam systems theory. Team charters are a practical tool thought to facilitate team performance through the creation of explicit shared norms for behavior. We extend the current literature on team charters to the multiteam context and make three practical recommendations for multiteam charter content that could facilitate effective communication and leadership processes between teams.

Building team adaptive capacity: the roles of sensegiving and team composition.

The current study draws on motivated information processing in groups theory to propose that leadership functions and composition characteristics provide teams with the epistemic and social motivation needed for collective information processing and strategy adaptation. Three-person teams performed a city management decision-making simulation (N=74 teams; 222 individuals). Teams first managed a simulated city that was newly formed and required growth strategies and were then abruptly switched to a second simulated city that was established and required revitalization strategies. Consistent with hypotheses, external sensegiving and team composition enabled distinct aspects of collective information processing. Sensegiving prompted the emergence of team strategy mental models (i.e., cognitive information processing); psychological collectivism facilitated information sharing (i.e., behavioral information processing); and cognitive ability provided the capacity for both the cognitive and behavioral aspects of collective information processing. In turn, team mental models and information sharing enabled reactive strategy adaptation.

Perspective: teams won't solve this problem.

OBJECTIVE: We link the problem of complex sociotechnical systems to a new unit-of-analysis and fruitful developing area of applied research, the multiteam system. BACKGROUND: Teams are the dominant entity and theoretical lens being applied to understanding the performance of complex sociotechnical systems. We submit that such problems cannot be solved through the teams lens because complex sociotechnical systems exhibit features such as mixed-motive goal structures and complex, layered social identities that do not meet the definitional requirements of a team. METHOD: We present key findings from multiteam systems research and review the studies contained in the special issue on the basis of the focal constructs and unit of analysis. RESULTS: Although progress is being made on understanding key constructs essential to understanding complex sociotechnical systems, the unit of analysis needs to be shifted upward from the team level to the system level. CONCLUSION: Progress on understanding the inner workings and leverage points for the success of complex sociotechnical systems requires a fundamental shift in the unit of analysis toward understanding the macrodynamics of larger systems of teams. APPLICATION: The multiteam system perspective offers a useful theoretical lens for future research on and tool development (e.g., training, information technology) for improving the functioning of complex sociotechnical systems.

The cognitive underpinnings of effective teamwork: a meta-analysis.

Major theories of team effectiveness position emergent collective cognitive processes as central drivers of team performance. We meta-analytically cumulated 231 correlations culled from 65 independent studies of team cognition and its relations to teamwork processes, motivational states, and performance outcomes. We examined both broad relationships among cognition, behavior, motivation, and performance, as well as 3 underpinnings of team cognition as potential moderators of these relationships. Findings reveal there is indeed a cognitive foundation to teamwork; team cognition has strong positive relationships to team behavioral process, motivational states, and team performance. Meta-analytic regressions further indicate that team cognition explains significant incremental variance in team performance after the effects of behavioral and motivational dynamics have been controlled. The nature of emergence, form of cognition, and content of cognition moderate relationships among cognition, process, and performance, as do task interdependence and team type. Taken together, these findings not only cumulate extant research on team cognition but also provide a new interpretation of the impact of underlying dimensions of cognition as a way to frame and extend future research.