nach oben

Journal of Business and Psychology

Erschienen in:

15.11.2019 | Original Paper

Built for unity: assessing the impact of team composition on team cohesion trajectories

verfasst von: Bryan P. Acton, Michael T. Braun, Roseanne J. Foti

Erschienen in: Journal of Business and Psychology | Ausgabe 6/2020

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Team cohesion is a critical factor for team effectiveness. Cohesion is a dynamic emergent state, demonstrating important changes as a function of the interactions among team members. Given the important role of individual differences for impacting the quality of social interactions as well as the resulting appraisals of individuals, it is not surprising that a plethora of studies find significant relationships between team composition and team cohesion. Unfortunately, knowledge of how individual difference composition influences changes in cohesion over time is still lacking. Therefore, drawing on theories on the development of interpersonal relationships, we tested predictions regarding the role of team personality and goal orientation for shaping the longitudinal trajectories of social and task cohesion. More specifically, we used a highly interdependent laboratory simulation to assess the differential impact that individual differences have on the initial status (i.e., intercept) and change (i.e., slope) in cohesion over time. Growth curve modeling results suggest support for our predictions that different individual differences uniquely predict the intercepts and slopes of task and social cohesion. Implications for the composition and intervention of teams are discussed.

Vorheriger Artikel Cross-Temporal Meta-Analysis: A Conceptual and Empirical Critique

Nächster Artikel Fight and Flight: a Contingency Model of Third Parties’ Approach-Avoidance Reactions to Peer Abusive Supervision

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Ancona, D. G., Goodman, P. S., Lawrence, B. S., & Tushman, M. L. (2001). Time: A new research lens. Academy of Management Review, 26, 645–663.

Anderson, P. (1999). Perspective: Complexity theory and organization science. Organization Science, 10, 216–232.

Asendorpf, J. B., & Wilpers, S. (1998). Personality effects on social relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1531–1544.

Back, M. D., Schmukle, S. C., & Egloff, B. (2011). A closer look at first sight: Social relations lens model analysis of personality and interpersonal attraction at zero acquaintance. European Journal of Personality, 25, 225–238.

Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., Neubert, M. J., & Mount, M. K. (1998). Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(377–391), 62–78.

Barry, B., & Stewart, G. L. (1997). Composition, process, and performance in self-managed groups: The role of personality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 62–78.PubMed

Beal, D. J., Cohen, R. R., Burke, M. J., & McLendon, C. L. (2003). Cohesion and performance in groups: A meta-analytic clarification of construct relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 989–1004.PubMed

Bell, S. T. (2007). Deep-level composition variables as predictors of team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 595–615.PubMed

Bell, S. T., & Outland, N. (2017). Team composition over time. In Team Dynamics Over Time (Vol. 18, pp. 3–27). UK: Emerald publishing limited.

Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 349–381). San Francisco, CA, US: Jossey-Bass.

Bliese, P. D., & Hanges, P. J. (2004). Being both too liberal and too conservative: The perils of treating grouped data as though they were independent. Organizational Research Methods, 7, 400–417.

Borkenau, P., Mauer, N., Riemann, R., Spinath, F. M., & Angleitner, A. (2004). Thin slices of behavior as cues of personality and intelligence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 599–614.PubMed

Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models Newbury Park. Calif: Sage Publications.

Byrne, D. (1997). An overview (and underview) of research and theory within the attraction paradigm. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14, 417–431.

Carron, A. V., Bray, S. R., & Eys, M. A. (2002). Team cohesion and team success in sport. Journal of Sports Sciences, 20, 119-126.

Casey-Campbell, M., & Martens, M. L. (2009). Sticking it all together: A critical assessment of the group cohesion–performance literature. International Journal of Management Reviews, 11, 223–246.

Castaño, N., Watts, T., & Tekleab, A. G. (2013). A reexamination of the cohesion–performance relationship meta-analyses: A comprehensive approach. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 17, 207–231.

Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.PubMed

Costa Jr., P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). The five-factor model of personality and its relevance to personality disorders. Journal of Personality Disorders, 6, 343–359.

Cronin, M. A., Weingart, L. R., & Todorova, G. (2011). Dynamics in groups: Are we there yet? Academy of Management Annals, 5, 571–612.

Curhan, J. R., & Pentland, A. (2007). Thin slices of negotiation: Predicting outcomes from conversational dynamics within the first 5 minutes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 802–811.PubMed

Dierdorff, E. C., Bell, S. T., & Belohlav, J. A. (2011). The power of “we”: Effects of psychological collectivism on team performance over time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 247–262.PubMed

Dion, K. L. (2000). Group cohesion: From" field of forces" to multidimensional construct. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 4, 7–26.

Donaldson, S. I., & Grant-Vallone, E. J. (2002). Understanding self-report bias in organizational behavior research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 17, 245–260.

Dormann, C., & Griffin, M. A. (2015). Optimal time lags in panel studies. Psychological Methods, 20, 489–505.PubMed

Driskell, J. E., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., & O’Shea, P. G. (2006). What makes a good team player? Personality and team effectiveness. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 10, 249–271.

Drescher, S., Burlingame, G., & Fuhriman, A. (2012). Cohesion: An odyssey in empirical understanding. Small Group Research, 43, 662–689.

Duncan, T. E., Duncan, S. C., & Strycker, L. A. (2013). An introduction to latent variable growth curve modeling: Concepts, issues, and application. Routledge Academic.

Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040–1048.

Driskell, J. E., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., & O’Shea, P. G. (2006). What makes a good team player? Personality and team effectiveness. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 10, 249–271.

Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 350–383.

Evans, C. R., & Dion, K. L. (2012). Group cohesion and performance: A meta-analysis. Small Group Research, 43, 690–701.

Evans, C. R., & Dion, K. L. (1991). Group cohesion and performance: A meta-analysis. Small Group Research, 22, 175-186.

Flynn, F. J. (2005). Having an open mind: The impact of openness to experience on interracial attitudes and impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 816–826.PubMed

Gong, Y., Kim, T. Y., Lee, D. R., & Zhu, J. (2013). A multilevel model of team goal orientation, information exchange, and creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 827–851.

Grand, J. A., Braun, M. T., Kuljanin, G., Kozlowski, S. W., & Chao, G. T. (2016). The dynamics of team cognition: A process-oriented theory of knowledge emergence in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101, 1353–1385.PubMed

Gully, S. M., Devine, D. J., & Whitney, D. J. (1995). A meta-analysis of cohesion and performance: Effects of level of analysis and task interdependence. Small Group Research, 26, 497–520.

Hackman, J. R. (1987). The design of work teams. In J. W. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 315–342). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Hamilton, K. (2014). Octodad: Dadliest catch: The Kotaku Review. Retrieved September 3, 2015.

Hendrick, C., & Brown, S. R. (1971). Introversion, extraversion, and interpersonal attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 20, 31–36.PubMed

Hox, J. J., Moerbeek, M., & van de Schoot, R. (2017). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. New York, NY: Routledge.

Humphrey, S. E., Hollenbeck, J. R., Meyer, C. J., & Ilgen, D. R. (2007). Trait configurations in self-managed teams: A conceptual examination of the use of seeding for maximizing and minimizing trait variance in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 885–892.PubMed

Ilgen, D. R., Hollenbeck, J. R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D. (2005). Teams in organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 517–543.PubMed

Judge, T. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). The bright and dark sides of personality: Implications for personnel selection in individual and team contexts. In J. Langen-Fox (Ed.), Research companion to the dysfunctional workplace: Management challenges and symptoms (Vol. 1, pp. 332–355). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Jung, M. F. (2016). Coupling interactions and performance: Predicting team performance from thin slices of conflict. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 23, 18–31.

Kenny, D. A. (1994). Interpersonal perception: A social relations analysis. New York: Guilford Press.

Kenny, D. A., Albright, L., Malloy, T. E., & Kashy, D. A. (1994). Consensus in interpersonal perception: Acquaintance and the big five. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 245–258.PubMed

Kenny, D. A., Mohr, C. D., & Levesque, M. J. (2001). A social relations variance partitioning of dyadic behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 128–141.PubMed

Kozlowski, S. W. (2015). Advancing research on team process dynamics: Theoretical, methodological, and measurement considerations. Organizational Psychology Review, 5, 270–299.

Kozlowski, S. W., & Chao, G. T. (2012). The dynamics of emergence: Cognition and cohesion in work teams. Managerial and Decision Economics, 33, 335–354.

Kozlowski, S. W., Chao, G. T., Grand, J. A., Braun, M. T., & Kuljanin, G. (2013). Advancing multilevel research design: Capturing the dynamics of emergence. Organizational Research Methods, 16, 581–615.

Kozlowski, S. W., Gully, S. M., Nason, E. R., & Smith, E. M. (1999). Developing adaptive teams: A theory of compilation and performance across levels and time. In Pulakos (Eds.), The changing nature of performance: Implications for staffing, motivation, and development (pp. 240–292).

Kozlowski, S. W., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7, 77–124.PubMed

Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Klein, K. J. (2000). A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 3–90). San Francisco, CA, US: Jossey-Bass.

Kozlowski, S. W. J., Ployhart, R. P., & Lim, B. C. (2010). The developmental role of team leaders. In C. Resick & D. Doty (Chairs), Current perspectives on leadership in collective work arrangements. Symposium presented at the 25th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Atlanta, GA.

Kreft, I. G., De Leeuw, J., & Aiken, L. S. (1995). The effect of different forms of centering in hierarchical linear models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 30, 1–21.PubMed

Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person-organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49, 1–49.

Kristof-Brown, A., Barrick, M. R., & Kay Stevens, C. (2005). When opposites attract: A multi-sample demonstration of complementary person-team fit on extraversion. Journal of Personality, 73, 935–958.PubMed

LePine, J. A., Buckman, B. R., Crawford, E. R., & Methot, J. R. (2011). A review of research on personality in teams: Accounting for pathways spanning levels of theory and analysis. Human Resource Management Review, 21, 311–330.

Mathieu, J., Maynard, M. T., Rapp, T., & Gilson, L. (2008). Team effectiveness 1997-2007: A review of recent advancements and a glimpse into the future. Journal of Management, 34, 410–476.

Mathieu, J. E., Kukenberger, M. R., D'innocenzo, L., & Reilly, G. (2015). Modeling reciprocal team cohesion–performance relationships, as impacted by shared leadership and members’ competence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 713–734.PubMed

Mathieu, J. E., Tannenbaum, S. I., Donsbach, J. S., & Alliger, G. M. (2014). A review and integration of team composition models:moving toward a dynamic and temporal framework. Journal of Management, 40, 130–160.

McCrae, R. R. (1996). Social consequences of experiential openness. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 323–337.PubMed

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 81.PubMed

Mehta, A., Feild, H., Armenakis, A., & Mehta, N. (2009). Team goal orientation and team performance: The mediating role of team planning. Journal of Management, 35, 1026–1046.

Moss, S. A., Garivaldis, F. J., & Toukhsati, S. R. (2007). The perceived similarity of other individuals: The contaminating effects of familiarity and neuroticism. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 401–412.

Pettigrew, A. M., Woodman, R. W., & Cameron, K. S. (2001). Studying organizational change and development: Challenges for future research. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 697–713.

Pieterse, A. N., van Knippenberg, D., & van Ginkel, W. P. (2011). Diversity in goal orientation, team reflexivity, and team performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 114, 153–164.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.PubMed

Porter, C. O. (2005). Goal orientation: Effects on backing up behavior, performance, efficacy, and commitment in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 811.PubMed

Prewett, M. S., Walvoord, A. A., Stilson, F. R., Rossi, M. E., & Brannick, M. T. (2009). The team personality–team performance relationship revisited: The impact of criterion choice, pattern of workflow, and method of aggregation. Human Performance, 22, 273–296.

Raudenbush, S. W., Bryk, A. S., Cheong, Y. F., Congdon, R., & Du Toit, M. (2011). HLM statistical software: Version 7. Computer software.

Rosh, L., Offermann, L. R., & Van Diest, R. (2012). Too close for comfort? Distinguishing between team intimacy and team cohesion. Human Resource Management Review, 22, 116–127.

Salas, E., Estrada, A. X., & Vessey, W. B. (2015). Team cohesion: Advances in psychological theory, methods and practice. West Yorkshire, England: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Salas, E., Grossman, R., Hughes, A. M., & Coultas, C. W. (2015). Measuring team cohesion: Observations from the science. Human Factors, 57, 365–374.PubMed

Salas, E., Cooke, N. J., & Rosen, M. A. (2008). On teams, teamwork, and team performance: Discoveries and developments. Human Factors, 50, 540-547.

Scherbaum, C. A., & Ferreter, J. M. (2009). Estimating statistical power and required sample sizes for organizational research using multilevel modeling. Organizational Research Methods, 12, 347–367.

Scribner, J. P., Sawyer, R. K., Watson, S. T., & Myers, V. L. (2007). Teacher teams and distributed leadership: A study of group discourse and collaboration. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43, 67–100.

Severt, J. B., & Estrada, A. X. (2015). On the function and structure of group cohesion. In E. Salas, W. B. Vessey, & A. X. Estrada (Eds.), Team cohesion: Advances in psychological theory, methods and practice (pp. 3–24). West Yorkshire, England: Emerald Group publishing limited.

Shuffler, M. L., DiazGranados, D., & Salas, E. (2011). There’s a science for that: Team development interventions in organizations. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 365–372.

Shuffler, M. L., Diazgranados, D., Maynard, M. T., & Salas, E. (2018). Developing, sustaining, and maximizing team effectiveness: An integrative, dynamic perspective of team development interventions. Academy of Management Annals, 12, 688–724.PubMed

Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. B. (2003). Applied longitudinal data analysis: Modeling change and event occurrence (1st ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Snyder, M., & Ickes, W. (1985). Personality and social behavior. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., pp. 883–948). New York, NY: Random House.

Spector, P. E., Rosen, C. C., Richardson, H. A., Williams, L. J., & Johnson, R. E. (2017). A new perspective on method variance: A measure-centric approach. Journal of Management, Online First, 1–20.

Spink, K. S., Ulvick, J. D., Crozier, A. J., & Wilson, K. S. (2014). Group cohesion and adherence in unstructured exercise groups. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 15, 293–298.

Stewart, G. L. (2003). Toward an understanding of the multilevel role of personality in teams. In M. R. Barrick & A. Ryan (Eds.), Personality and work: Reconsidering the role of personality in organizations (pp. 183–204). San Francisco, CA, US: Jossey-Bass.

Sundstrom, E., De Meuse, K. P., & Futrell, D. (1990). Work teams: Applications and effectiveness. American Psychologist, 45, 120–133.

Sunnafrank, M., & Ramirez Jr., A. (2004). At first sight: Persistent relational effects of get-acquainted conversations. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21, 361–379.

Taggar, S., & Neubert, M. J. (2008). A cognitive (attributions)-emotion model of observer reactions to free-riding poor performers. Journal of Business and Psychology, 22, 167–177.

Tan, X., Shiyko, M., Li, R., Li, Y., & Dierker, L. (2012). Intensive longitudinal data and model with varying effects. Psychological Methods, 17, 61–77.PubMed

Tekleab, A. G., Quigley, N. R., & Tesluk, P. E. (2009). A longitudinal study of team conflict, conflict management, cohesion, and team effectiveness. Group & Organization Management, 34, 170–205.

Tidwell, N. D., Eastwick, P. W., & Finkel, E. J. (2013). Perceived, not actual, similarity predicts initial attraction in a live romantic context: Evidence from the speed-dating paradigm. Personal Relationships, 20, 199–215.

Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. A. C. (1977). Stages of small-group development revisited. Group & Organization Studies, 2, 419–427.

van Vianen, A. E., & De Dreu, C. K. (2001). Personality in teams: Its relationship to social cohesion, task cohesion, and team performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10, 97–120.

Van De Ven, A. H., Delbecq, A. L., & Koenig, R. (1976). Determinants of coordination modes within organizations. American Sociological Review, 41, 322–338.

VandeWalle, D. (1997). Development and validation of a work domain goal orientation instrument. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57, 995–1015.

VandeWalle, D., Cron, W. L., & Slocum Jr., J. W. (2001). The role of goal orientation following performance feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 629–640.

Waller, M. J., Okhuysen, G. A., & Saghafian, M. (2016). Conceptualizing emergent states: A strategy to advance the study of group dynamics. The Academy of Management Annals, 10, 561–598.

Wang, M., Beal, D. J., Chan, D., Newman, D. A., Vancouver, J. B., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2017). Longitudinal research: A panel discussion on conceptual issues, research design, and statistical techniques. Work, Aging and Retirement, 3, 1–24.

Wildman, J. L., Shuffler, M. L., Lazzara, E. H., Fiore, S. M., Burke, C. S., Salas, E., & Garven, S. (2012). Trust development in swift starting action teams: A multilevel framework. Group & Organization Management, 37, 137–170.

Witt, L. A. (2002). The interactive effects of extraversion and conscientiousness on performance. Journal of Management, 28, 835–851.

Zhou, Y., Wang, K., Chen, S., Zhang, J., & Zhou, M. (2017). An exploratory investigation of the role of openness in relationship quality among emerging adult Chinese couples. Frontiers in Psychology, 8.

Titel: Built for unity: assessing the impact of team composition on team cohesion trajectories
verfasst von: Bryan P. Acton
Michael T. Braun
Roseanne J. Foti
Publikationsdatum: 15.11.2019
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Journal of Business and Psychology / Ausgabe 6/2020
Print ISSN: 0889-3268
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-353X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-019-09654-7

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2020

Personal Endorsement of Ambivalent Sexism and Career Success: an Investigation of Differential Mechanisms

Fight and Flight: a Contingency Model of Third Parties’ Approach-Avoidance Reactions to Peer Abusive Supervision

Uncovering Relations Between Leadership Perceptions and Motivation Under Different Organizational Contexts: a Multilevel Cross-lagged Analysis

Who Is Responsible for Confronting Prejudice? The Role of Perceived and Conferred Authority

The Gendered Nature of Emotional Ambivalence Towards Coworkers and Its Relational Consequences

A Psychometric Assessment of OCB: Clarifying the Distinction Between OCB and CWB and Developing a Revised OCB Measure

Premium Partner