Seven Key Reviews of the Teams Literature
In an increasingly complex work environment, organizations are relying more than ever on effective teams to meet their goals.
But, what are the best ways to create and support teams? One method of answering this question is to identify best practices from the scientific literature.
Below are seven reviews that provide an overview to the breadth and complexity of research on teams.
- 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. (256 KB, .pdf)
- Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Bell, B. S. (2003). Work groups and teams in organizations. In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen, & R. Klimoski (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Industrial and organizational psychology: Vol. 12 (pp. 333-375). London: Wiley.
- Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7, 77–124. (456 KB, .pdf)
- 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.
- McGrath, J.E., Arrow, H., & Berdahl, J.L. (2000). The study of groups: Past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 95-105. (60 KB, .pdf)
- Salas, E., Stagl, K. C., & Burke, C. S. (2004). 25 years of team effectiveness in organizations: Research themes and emerging needs. In C. L. Cooper & I.T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial organizational psychology: Vol. 19 (pp. 47-92). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
- Salas, E., Stagl, K. C., Burke, C. S., & Goodwin, G. F. (2007). Fostering team effectiveness in organizations: Toward an integrative theoretical framework of team performance. In R. A. Dienstbier, J. W. Shuart, W. Spaulding, & J. Poland (Eds.), Modeling complex systems: Motivation, cognition and social processes: Nebraska Symposium on Motivation: Vol 51 (pp. 185–243). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Print This Post
Types of Teams
Over the years, the scientific literature has conceptualized several types of teams. They’ve been characterized based on different classifications, dimensions, and features. Below are some of the more popular examples:
Kozlowski, Gully, Nason, and Smith (1999)
- Tasks
- Goals
- Roles
- Process Emphasis
- Performance Demands
Sundstrom, McIntyre, Halfhill, and Richards (2000)
- Production
- Service
- Management
- Project
- Action and Performing
- Advisory
Devine (2002)
- Executive
- Command
- Negotiation
- Commission
- Design
- Advisory
- Service
- Production
- Performance
- Medical
- Response
- Military
- Transportation
- Sports
Hackman and Wageman (2005)
- “Surgical” teams
- Coaching Groups
- Face-to-Face Teams
- Virtual Teams
- “Sand Dune” Teams
References
Devine, D.J. (2002). A review and integration of classification systems relevant to teams in organizations. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 291-310.
Hackman, J.R., & Wageman, R. (2005). When and how team leaders matter. Research in Organizational Behavior, 26, 37-74.
Kozlowski, S. W. J., Gully, S. M., Nason, E. R., & Smith, E. M. (1999). Developing adaptive teams: A theory of compilation and performance across levels and time. In D. R. Ilgen & E. D. Pulakos (Eds.), The changing nature of work performance: Implications for staffing, personnel actions, and development (pp. 240–292). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
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, 44-67.
Print This Post
Teams Defined
Over the next couple of weeks I’m going to publish a series of posts on the topic of teams. But, first let’s start with a generally accepted definition of teams:
“…are composed of two or more individuals who (a) exist to perform organizationally relevant tasks, (b) share one or more common goals, (c) interact socially, (d) exhibit task interdependencies (i.e., work flow, goals, outcomes), (e) maintain and manage boundaries, and (f ) are embedded in an organizational context that sets boundaries, constrains the team, and influences exchanges with other units in the broader entity.” (Kozlowski & Bell, 2003, p. 334).
References
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Bell, B. S. (2003). Work groups and teams in organizations. In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen, & R. Klimoski (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Industrial and organizational psychology: Vol. 12 (pp. 333-375). London: Wiley.
Print This Post
Dilbert on Leadership
Print This Post
The UX Driven Startup
Print This Post
