TeamMAPPS

Team Science Resources & References

 Resources
 Citations
 References
 Evidence

Resources

Popular/Contemporary Works on Teamwork

  • Teams That Work (Tannenbaum, Salas, 2021)
  • The Five Dysfunctions of a Team (Lencioni, 2002)
  • The Wisdom of Teams (Katzenback, 1993)
  • Team of Teams (McChrystal, 2015)
  • Team of Rivals (Goodwin, 2006)

Developmental Resources Available for the Practice of Team Science

Suggested Readings on Awareness and Exchange

Suggested Readings on Psychological Safety

Suggested Readings on Self-Correction and Adaptation

Citations

Introduction Module

  • 1 NIH (2021). What is Team Science? | Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences (DCCPS). https://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/brp/research/team-science-toolkit/what-is-team-science
  • 2 International Network for the Science of Team Science (2022). SciTS and Team Science Resources. https://www.inscits.org/scits-a-team-science-resources
  • 3 Cummings, J. N., & Kiesler, S. (2015). Collaborative research across disciplinary and organizational boundaries. Social Studies of Science, 35, 703- 722
  • 4 Disis, M. L., & Slattery, J. T. (2010). The road we must take: multidisciplinary team science. Science translational medicine, 2 (22), 22cm9. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.3000421
  • 5 Fiore, S. M., Rosen, M. A., Smith-Jentsch, K. A., Salas, E., Letsky, M., & Warner, N. (2010). Toward an understanding of macrocognition in teams: predicting processes in complex collaborative contexts. Human factors, 52 (2), 203-224. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720810369807
  • 6 Stokols, D., Misra, S., Moser, R. P., Hall, K. L., & Taylor, B. K. (2008). The ecology of team science: understanding contextual influences on transdisciplinary collaboration. American journal of preventive medicine, 35 (2 Suppl), S96-S115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.05.003
  • 7 Buljac-Samardzic, M., Dekker-van Doorn, C. M., van Wijngaarden, J. D., & van Wijk, K. P. (2010). Interventions to improve team effectiveness: a systematic review. Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 94 (3), 183-195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2009.09.015
  • 8 Borner, K., Contractor, N., Falk-Krzesinski, H. J., Fiore, S. M., Hall, K. L. , Keyton, J., & Uzzi, B. (2010). A multi-level systems perspective for the science of team science. Science Translational Medicine, 2 (49), 49cm24-49cm24.
  • 9 Hall, K. L., Stokols, D., Stipelman, B. A, Vogel, A. L., Feng, A, Masimore, B., ... & Berrigan, D. (2012). Assessing the value of team science: A study comparing center-and investigator-initiated grants. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 42 (2), 157-163
  • 10 Jones, B.F., S. Wuchty & B. Uzzi. 2008. Multi-University Research Teams: Shifting Impact, Geography, and Stratification in Science. Science 332 (21 November 2008): 1259-1039.
  • 11 Stvilla, B., Hinnant, C.C., Schindler, K., Worrail, A., Burnett, G., Burnett, K., Kazmer, M.M., & Marty, P.F. (2011). Composition of scientific teams and publication productivity at a national science lab. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 62(2), 270-283.
  • 12 Cummings JN, Kiesler S. (2005) Collaborative research across disciplinary and organizational boundaries. Social Studies of Science. 2005;35:703-722.
  • 13 Lungeanu, A., & Contractor, N. S. (2015). The Effects of Diversity and Network Ties on Innovations: The Emergence of a New Scientific Field. American Behavioral Scientist, 59(5), 548-564. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214556804
  • 14 Misra, S., Stokols, D., & Cheng, L. (2015). The transdisciplinary orientation scale: Factor structure and relation to the integrative quality and scope of scientific publications. Journal of Translational Medicine & Epidemiology, 3(2), 1042.
  • 15 Hall, K. L., Vogel, A. L., Huang, G. C., Serrano, K. J., Rice, E. L., Tsakraklides, S. P., & Fiore, S. M. (2018). The science of team science: A review of the empirical evidence and research gaps on collaboration in science. American Psychologist, 73(4), 532.

Facilitating Awareness & Exchange Module

  • 1 Homan, A. C., Van Knippenberg, D., Van Kleef, G. A., & De Dreu, C. K. (2007). Bridging faultlines by valuing diversity: diversity beliefs, information elaboration, and performance in diverse work groups. Journal of applied psychology, 92(5), 1189-1199.
  • 2 Kooij-de Bode, H. J. M., van Knippenberg, D., & van Ginkel, W. P. (2008). Ethnic diversity and distributed information in group decision making: The importance of information elaboration. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 12(4), 307-320.
  • 3 van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Homan, A. C. (2004). Work Group Diversity and Group Performance: An Integrative Model and Research Agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 1008-1022.
  • 4 Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of personality and social psychology, 48(6), 1467.
  • 5 Gibson, C. B., & Zellmer-Bruhn, M. E. (2001). Metaphors and meaning: An intercultural analysis of the concept of teamwork. Administrative science quarterly, 46(2), 274-303.
  • 6 Hollingshead, A. B. (1998). Communication, learning, and retrieval in transactive memory systems. Journal of experimental social psychology, 34(5), 423-442.
  • 7 Moreland, R. L. (1999). Transactive memory: Learning who knows what in work groups and organizations. In Shared cognition in organizations (pp. 3-32). Psychology Press.
  • 8 Wegner, D. M. (1987). Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. In Theories of group behavior (pp. 185-208). Springer, New York, NY.
  • 9 DeChurch, L. A., & Mesmer-Magnus, J. R. (2010). The cognitive underpinnings of effective teamwork: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 32-53.
  • 10 Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & DeChurch, L. A. (2009). Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 535-546.
  • 11 Bisbey TM, Wooten KC, Salazar Campo M, Lant TK, and Salas E. Implementing an evidence-based competency model for science team training and evaluation: TeamMAPPS. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science 5: e142, 1-10. doi: 10.1017/cts.2021.795
  • 12 Cheung, H.K. & Liu, S. (2014). How Should We Speak: Comparing Effectiveness of Promotive and Prohibitive Voices. Undergraduate Journal of Psychology Vol. 27 No. 1. https://stage-journals.charlotte.edu/ujop/article/view/274
  • 13 Argote, L. & Ingram, P. (2000). Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, Science Direct, Volume 8, Issue 1. ISSN 0749-5978, https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2000.2893. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597800928930)
  • 14 Jaewon, K., MacDuffie, J.P., & Pil, F.K. (2010). Employee voice and organizational performance: Team versus representative influence. Human Relations, 63(3), 371-394. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726709348936
  • 15 Van Dyne, L., & LePine, J. A. (1998). Helping and voice extra-role behaviors: Evidence of construct and predictive validity. Academy of Management Journal, 41(1), 108-119. https://doi.org/10.2307/256902
  • 16 Liang, J., Farh, C. I., & Farh, J. L. (2012). Psychological antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice: A two-wave examination. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 71-92. DOI:10.5465/amj.2010.0176
  • 17 Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & Viswesvaran, C. (2005). Whistleblowing in organizations: An examination of correlates of whistleblowing intentions, actions, and retaliation. Journal of Business Ethics, 62(3), 277-297. DOI:10.1007/s10551-005-0849-1
  • 18 De Dreu, C. K., & Weingart, L. R. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: a meta-analysis. Journal of applied Psychology, 88(4), 741. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.741
  • 19 Milliken, F. J., Morrison, E. W., & Hewlin, P. F. (2003). An Exploratory Study of Employee Silence: Issues that Employees Don't Communicate Upward and Why*. Journal of management studies, 40(6), 1453-1476. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1111/1467-6486.00387
  • 20 Wu, J., & Du, Y. (2022). Linking Abusive Supervision to Promotive and Prohibitive Voice Behavior: Testing the Mediating Roles of Work Engagement and Negative Reciprocity. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022 May; 19(9): 5498. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19095498
  • 21 Lin, S.H.J., & Johnson, R.E. (2015). A suggestion to improve a day keeps your depletion away: Examining promotive and prohibitive voice behaviors within a regulatory focus and ego depletion framework. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2015 Sep;100(5):1381-1397. doi: 10.1037/apl0000018.
  • 22 Du, Y., & Wang, Z. (2021). How Does Emotional Labor Influence Voice Behavior? The Roles of Work Engagement and Perceived Organizational Support. Sustainability 2021, 13(19), 10524; https://doi.org/10.3390/su131910524
  • 23 Cortina, L. M., & Magley, V. J. (2003). Raising voice, risking retaliation: Events following interpersonal mistreatment in the workplace. Journal of occupational health psychology, 8(4), 247-265. doi: 10.1037/1076-8998.8.4.247. PMID: 14570522.
  • 24 Avery, D. R., & Quiñones, M. A. (2002). Disentangling the effects of voice: the incremental roles of opportunity, behavior, and instrumentality in predicting procedural fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology 2002 Feb;87(1):81-6. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.87.1.81. PMID: 11916218.

Promoting Psychological Safety Module

  • 1 Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383.
  • 2 Frazier, M. L., Fainshmidt, S., Klinger, R. L., Pezeshkan, A., & Vracheva, V. (2017). Psychological safety: A meta-analytic review and extension. Personnel Psychology, 70(1), 113-165.
  • 3 Lacerenza, C. N., Reyes, D. L., Woods, A. L., & Salas, E. (2016). Psychological safety module. Doerr Institute for New Leaders training at Rice University.
  • 4 Newman, A., Donohue, R., & Eva, N. (2017). Psychological safety: A systematic review of the literature. Human Resource Management Review. doi: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.01.001
  • 5 Rozovsky, J. (2015). The five keys to a successful Google team. https://rework.withgoogle.com/blog/five-keys-to-a-successful-google-team/
  • 6 Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036-1039.

Self-Correction/Adaptation Module

  • 1 Bisbey, T. M., Snyder, G. P., Paoletti, J., & Salas, E. (2021, April). The emergence of collective resiliency and its impact on performance. Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, New Orleans, LA.
  • 2 Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Salas, E., Pierce, L., & Kendall, D. (2006). Understanding team adaptation: A conceptual analysis and model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6), 1189-1207.
  • 3 Reiter-Palmon, R., Kennel, V., Allen, J., & Jones, K. J. (2018). Good catch! Using interdisciplinary teams and team reflexivity to improve patient safety. Group & Organization Management, 43(3), 414-439.
  • 4 Reyes, D. L., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Salas, E. (2018). Team development: the power of debriefing. People & Strategy, 41(2), 46-52.
  • 5 Salas, E., Sims, D. E., & Burke, C. S. (2005). Is there a "big five" in teamwork?. Small Group Research, 36(5), 555-599.
  • 6 Schippers, M. C., Edmondson, A. C., & West, M. A. (2014). Team reflexivity as an antidote to team information-processing failures. Small Group Research, 45(6), 731-769.
  • 7 Smith-Jentsch, K. A., Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Salas, E. (2008). Guided team self-correction: Impacts on team mental models, processes, and effectiveness. Small Group Research, 39(3), 303-327.
  • 8 Tannenbaum, S. I., & Cerasoli, C. P. (2013). Do team and individual debriefs enhance performance? A meta-analysis. Human Factors, 55, 231-245.

References

  • Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Salas, E., Pierce, L., & Kendall, D. (2006). Understanding team adaptation: A conceptual analysis and model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6), 1189.
  • Christian, J. S., Christian, M. S., Pearsall, M. J., & Long, E. C. (2017). Team adaptation in context: An integrated conceptual model and meta-analytic review. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 140, 62-89.
  • Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23(3), 239-290.
  • Cooke, N. J., & Hilton, M. L. (Eds). Enhancing the effectiveness of team science. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.
  • Delise, L. A., Allen Gorman, C., Brooks, AM., Rentsch, J. R., & Steele-Johnson, D. (2010). The effects of team training on team outcomes: A meta-analysis. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 22(4), 53-80.
  • Falk-Krzesinski, H. J., Borner, K., Contractor, N., Fiore, S. M., Hall, K. L., Keyton, J., Spring, B., Stokols, D., Trochim, W., & Uzzi, B. (2010). Advancing the science of team science. Clinical and Translational Science, 3(5), 263-266.
  • Falk-Krzesinski, H. J., Contractor, N., Fiore, S. M., Hall, K. L., Kane, C., Keyton, J., ... & Trochim, W. (2011). Mapping a research agenda for the science of team science. Research Evaluation, 20(2), 145-158.
  • Gladstein, D. L. (1984). Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(4) 499-517.
  • Goodwin, D. K. (2009). Team of rivals: The political genius of Abraham Lincoln. Penguin UK.
  • Guzzo, R. A., & Dickson, M. W. (1996). Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and effectiveness. Annual Review of Psychology, 47(1), 307-338.
  • Hackman, J. R. (2009). Why teams don't work. Interview by Diane Coutu. Harvard Business Review, 87(5), 98-105.
  • Hülsheger, U. R., Anderson, N., & Salgado, J. F. (2009). Team-level predictors of innovation at work: A comprehensive meta-analysis spanning three decades of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1128-1145.
  • 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.s
  • Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (2015). The wisdom of teams: Creating the high-performance organization. Harvard Business Review Press.
  • Klein, C. , DiazGranados, D., Salas, E., Le, H., Burke, C. S., Lyons, R., & Goodwin, G. F. (2009). Does team building work? Small Group Research, 40(2), 181-222.
  • Kohn, S. E., & O'Connell, V. D. (2007). Six habits of highly effective teams. Franklin Lakes, NJ: The Career Press.
  • Lencioni, P. (2012). The five dysfunctions of a team. Pfeiffer, a Wiley Imprint, San Francisco.
  • Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (2015). The wisdom of teams: Creating the high-performance organization. Harvard Business Review Press.
  • Lungeanu, A., & Contractor, N. S. (2015). The effects of diversity and network ties on innovations: The emergence of a new scientific field. American Behavioral Scientist, 59(5), 548-564.
  • Mathieu, J. E., Hollenbeck, J. R., van Knippenberg, D., & Ilgen, D.R. (2017). A century of work teams in the Journal of Applied Psychology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3), 452.
  • McChrystal, G. S., Collins, T., Silverman, D., & Fussell, C. (2015). Team of teams: New rules of engagement for a complex world. Penguin.
  • Salas, E., Cooke, N. J., & Rosen, M.A. (2008). On teams, teamwork, and team performance: Discoveries and developments. Human Factors, 50(3), 540-547.
  • Salas, E., DiazGranados, D., Klein, C., Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Goodwin, G. F., & Halpin, S. M. (2008) Does team training improve team performance? A meta-analysis. Human Factors, 50(6), 903-933.
  • Salas, E., Nichols, D. R., & Driskell, J. E. (2007). Testing three team training strategies in intact teams: A meta-analysis. Small Group Research, 38(4), 471-488.
  • Salas, E., Rozell, D., Mullen, B. , & Driskell, J. E. (1999). The effect of team building on performance: An integration. Small Group Research, 30(3), 309-329.
  • Salas, E., Sims, D. E., & Burke, C. S. (2005). Is there a "big five" in teamwork? Small Group Research, 36(5), 555-599.
  • Sun, Y., Livan, G., Ma, A., & Latora, V. (2021) Interdisciplinary researchers attain better long-term funding performance. Communication Physics, 4:263 https://doi.org/10.1038/s42005-021-00769-z
  • Sundstrom, E., Mcintyre, M., Halfhill, T., & Richards, H. (2000). Work groups: From the Hawthorne studies to work teams of the 1990s and beyond. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 4(1), 44.
  • Woolf, S. H. (2008). The meaning of translational research and why it matters. JAMA, 299(2), 211-213.
  • Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036-1039.
  • Zerhouni, E. A (2007). Translational research: moving discovery to practice. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 81(1), 126-128.

Literature Review & Evidence

Groups & Teams

There are many popular and well cited reviews of the literature (Hollenbeck, van Knippenberg, & llgen, 2017; Gladstein, 1984; Sundstrom, DeMuse, & Futrell (1990); Guzzo & Dickson, 1996; Cohen & Bailey, 1997 llgen, Hollenbeck, Johnson, & Jundt, 2005).

The literature generally approaches investigating team effectiveness using an input-throughput-output framework, studying areas such as:

  • Team context (e.g., external environment, task design, group size)
  • Team process (e.g., cohesion, commitment)
  • Effectiveness (e.g., productivity, self-perceived performance)
  • Team outcomes (satisfaction, turnover, commitment)

Recent team research has proposed that performance of teams is also based on team adaptation (Christian, Christian, Pearsall, & Lang, 2017; Burke, Stagl, Salas, Pierce, & Kendell, 2006).

Research involving team level predictors of innovation is also very critical for science. Refer to the meta-analysis spanning three decades by Hulsheger, Anderson, & Salgardo (2009).

Well-Known Models

The ABCs of Teamwork (Salas, Cooke & Rosen, 2008) Effective teamwork and team dynamics are largely shaped by:

  • Affective States - feelings at attitudes such as satisfaction, commitment, trust
  • Behavioral Processes - observable team activities such as decision making, problem solving, communication, and conflict
  • Cognitive States - structure of knowledge organization and collective perceptions such as shared mental model, team learning, etc.

The Big Five of Teamwork (Salas, Sims, & Burke, 2005)

  • Team Leadership
  • Mutual Performance Monitoring
  • Backup Behavior
  • Adaptability
  • Team Orientation

Six Habits of Highly Effective Teams (Kohn & O'Connell, 2007)

  • Strengthen Emotional Capacity
  • Expand Self-Awareness
  • Practice Empathy and Respectfulness
  • Establish and Regulate Team Norms
  • Think Laterally
  • Entrust Team Members with Appropriate Roles

Why Teams Don't Work (Hackman & Coutu, 2009)

  • Lack of a compelling direction
  • Happy teams are not necessarily productive - constructive conflict and tension is good
  • Inexperience as a team really hurts
  • Suppression of a deviant who asks difficult questions
  • Leaders who do not focus on team learning
  • Lack of organizational support

Efficacy & Evidence

The growth of team science as a conference foci has increased dramatically (Bürner, et al., 2010), and the number of journals now devoting special issues to the topic are impressive.

Over 30 years of research indicates that effective teamwork leads to:

  • More ideas and creativity
  • Higher performance and productivity
  • Greater team satisfaction
  • Greater commitment to the team
  • Better decision making and problem solving
  • Increased collaboration

Evidence for Team Science Results from Wuchty, Jones, Uzzi (2007)

  • Reviewed 19.9 million papers over 50 years, and 2.1 million patents
  • Teams increasingly dominate solo authors in production of knowledge
  • Teams produce more frequently cited research than individuals
  • Teams produce high impact research

Results from Jones, Wuchty, Uzzi (2008)

  • Examined 4.2 million papers published over 30 years
  • Multi-university collaborations are fastest growing type of networking structure
  • Multi-university collaborations produce high impact papers (when they include top-ranked universities)
  • Multi-university collaborations suggest a concentration of knowledge production in fewer - rather than more - centers of high impact science

Why Translational Science Lends Itself to Teams (Woolf, 2008; Zerhouni, 2007)

  • By definition, it cannot be done by an individual
  • It involves simultaneous and time-based interaction between laboratories, clinics, and select populations
  • Requires expertise from many different disciplines
  • Functional areas of medicine and science have historically been funded and managed in silos
  • New knowledge and efficient applications of science require interdisciplinary questions and interdisciplinary answers
  • Traditional management structures and academic bureaucracies suppress innovation and reward individual contributions
  • It promotes development, understanding, and use of best practices
  • It optimizes resources through sharing

Why Translational Research Teams Are Important

"The purpose of the CTSA Program, which NCRR is leading on behalf of the NIH Roadmap for Medical Research, is to assist institutions to forge a uniquely transformative, novel, and integrative academic home for Clinical and Translational Science that has the consolidated resources to: 1) captivate, advance, and nurture a cadre of well-trained multi- and interdisciplinary investigators and research teams; 2) create an incubator for innovative research tools and information technologies; and 3) synergize multi-disciplinary and inter-disciplinary clinical and translational research and researchers to catalyze the application of new knowledge and techniques to clinical practice at the front lines of patient care." https://ncats.nih.gov/ctsa/action

© 2024 The University of Texas Medical Branch