It’s Not Easy Being a Team: Researching Collaboration from All Sides

1. It’s Not Easy Being a Team: Researching Collaboration from All Sides INFORMS Speaker Series December 10, 2004

2. Overview • Definition • Team Communication Research • Shared Mental Model Data Collection • Modeling Teams

3. Cross-Functional Project Teams A collection of two or more individuals, representing different functional areas, assembled to work on a time-limited, non-repetitive assignment. Source: Cohen and Bailey, 1997

4. Overview • Definition • Team Communication Research • Shared Mental Model Data Collection • Modeling Teams

5. The Team Communication- Performance Relationship  Team members must integrate different frames of reference. Too much information exchanged will overload the team members’ information processing capabilities and will inhibit performance.  Too little communication will not supply enough information and will also lead to low performance.  Current research givesmixedresults about this relationship.

6. Empirical Research Approach • Questionnaire designed and administered. • Final sample representing 60 teams (630 respondents) in 25 corporations and government organizations – aerospace, automotive, public utilities, electronics and communication. • Response rate – 61%. . • Analysis: Multiple Regression.

7. Empirical Research Findings

8. Empirical Research Findings

9. Simulation Research Approach • Simulation algorithm developed • Simulation coded in Visual C++ • 10,000 simulations performed

10. Simulation Research Approach

11. Simulation Research – Findings • Communication Type

12. Simulation Research – Findings • Project Complexity

13. Simulation Research – Findings • Communication Media Efficiency

14. Optimization Research Approach • Communication as a function of performance: pi = axi2- bxi + c xi =  yij + zij • Team Performance Max PT =  pi/N N = size of the team K = level of interdependence, 1< i < K N = 3 K = 2 N = 6 K = 4

15. Optimization Research Approach • Team size • N = 3, 6, 9, 18 and 27 • Team interdependence • K = 0, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 24 • Member ability • Low, Medium and High ai • 650 models solved

16. Optimization Research Findings • Team Size

17. Optimization Research Findings • Team Interdependence

18. Team Communication The Story • A curvilinear relationship exists (empirical) • The amount of information exchanged is the reason for this relationship (simulation) • Team size and interdependence do not impact this relationship (optimization)

19. Overview • Definition • Team Communication Research • Shared Mental Model Data Collection • Modeling Teams

20. Shared Mental Models(SMM) “Knowledge [and belief] structures held by members of a team that enable them to form accurate explanations and expectations for the task, and in turn, to coordinate their actions and adapt their behavior to demands of [their unique situation]. Source: Cannon-Bowers, Salas, and Converse, 1993

21. Teamwork Orientation Differentiation Integration Taskwork Changes or adjustments required? YES NO SMM Development

22. Determinants Individual Team Organization Environment Models Team membership Project goals Project work allocation Project team interaction Climate Context SMM Content Requirements

23. Teamwork SMM MM1 MM2 MMn Orientation Differentiation Integration Taskwork SMM Changes or adjustments required? YES NO Orientation Orientation Differentiation Differentiation Integration Integration Multiple SMM Development Process

24. SMM ResearchApproach • Class Project Quasi-Experiments • Laboratory Experiments

25. Quasi Experiment Design • Experimental design • Sample: student teams completing semester long projects • IV: mental models (team organization, goals, work allocation, interaction processes) • DV: team performance • Data collection • Questionnaire (qualitative and quantitative) • Project performance assessment (project grades) • Data analyses • Qualitative and quantitative analyses

26. Quasi Experiment Results • N=16 teams • Preliminary evidence • Focus of mental models shifts from general to specific over time • Goals: overarching goal to task oriented goals • Organization: structure to who’s who

27. Quasi Experiment Results

28. Laboratory Experiment Design • 2x2 Experimental design • SMM development • Virtuality • Variables • IV: mental models (goals, membership, interaction) • DV: team performance • Sample: 3 person student teams

29. Face-to-Face

30. Computer-Mediated

31. Laboratory Experiment Design • 2x2 Experimental design • SMM development • Virtuality • Variables • IV: mental models (goals, membership, interaction) • DV: team performance • Sample: 3 person student teams

32. Laboratory Experiment Design • Scheduling Task • Task Objective: Create a workforce schedule with the minimum cost in the minimum time • Participant Roles: • Human resource representative • Union representative • Production manager

33. Laboratory Experiment Design

34. Laboratory Experiment Design

35. Laboratory Experiment Results

36. Laboratory Experiment Results: Face-Face v. Computer Mediated • Interaction Mental Model

37. Laboratory Experiment Results: Face-Face v. Computer Mediated • Quality Performance – No difference • Time Performance – significant difference

38. Laboratory Experiment Extension • A set of controlled experiments is planned to determine the effects of • Time pressure • Environmental uncertainty on SMM development and team performance.

39. Laboratory Experiments Sample Size

40. Overview • Definition • Team Communication Research • Shared Mental Model Data Collection • Modeling Teams

41. Modeling Teams • Micro Level • SMM Development Process • SMM Content • Macro Level • Team Behavior

42. Modeling Team BehaviorApproach • Model developed following systems theory guidelines • Experimental data used to estimate relationships • Model simulated in Matlab

43. Team ProcessesSimulation Results

44. Conclusion • Multiple approaches provide complementary views of team phenomenon. • Taken together the results comprehensively inform theory and practice.