scholarly journals Capturing team performance differences through communication based analyses of team cognition

2010 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliánna Katalin Soós ◽  
Márta Juhász
2012 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 381-394 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huey-Wen Chou ◽  
Yu-Hsun Lin ◽  
Shyan-Bin Chou

With the growing use of teamwork for strategic decision making in organizations, an understanding of the teamwork dynamics in the strategic decision-making process is critical for both researchers and practitioners. By conceptualizing team cognition in terms of a transactive memory system (TMS) and collective mind, in this study we explored the relationships among TMS, collective mind, and collective efficacy and the impact of these variables on team performance. Longitudinal data collected from 98 undergraduates were analyzed. Neither the TMS–team performance relationship nor the collective mind–team performance relationship was significant. Collective efficacy was found to play a mediating role in such relationships. We concluded that team cognition with collective efficacy is beneficial for understanding teamwork dynamics in strategic decision making.


Author(s):  
Nancy J. Cooke ◽  
Rene'e Stout ◽  
Krisela Rivera ◽  
Eduardo Salas

Team cognition is more than the aggregate cognition of team members. It is an emerging feature, worthy of study in its own right. In this paper we investigate potential metrics of team knowledge in the context of a broader exploratory study on measures of team knowledge, performance, and situation awareness. Team members assumed different roles in a three-person synthetic task in which they were presented with unique role-relevant information. Successful accomplishment of team objectives required team members to share information. The focus of this paper is on one of several measures collected which required judgments of pairwise relatedness ratings for mission-relevant terms. These data were submitted to Pathfinder network scaling and used to derive three metrics of team knowledge: knowledge accuracy, interpositional knowledge, and knowledge similarity. The metrics revealed different perspectives on team knowledge and were generally predictive of team performance and team situation awareness.


2015 ◽  
Vol 21 (1/2) ◽  
pp. 6-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicoleta Meslec ◽  
Daniel Graff

Purpose – The aim of the current paper is to explore the role of cross-understanding as a mediator between openness to cognitive experience and reflective communication cognitions on the one hand and team performance on the other hand using the input-mediator-output-input (IMOI) model as a framework (Ilgen et al., 2005). Design/methodology/approach – The sample consisted of 156 participants organized in 37 student teams. Two mediation models were estimated while using a nonparametric resampling procedure of bootstrapping developed by Hayes (2012). Findings – Cross-understanding positively mediates the relation between openness to cognitive diversity and team performance and the relation between reflective communication cognition and team performance. Reflective communication cognition has a direct and negative relation to team performance. Additionally, the percentage of women within groups positively relates to group performance. Research limitations/implications – Future research could explore the validity of this model in other organizational settings and while using different indicators for team performance. Practical implications – Practitioners should encourage an open climate toward knowledge diversity and different perspectives within teams, as this might create the optimal conditions for cross-understanding to emerge. Team members should also be encouraged to learn not only about the knowledge of other team members but also about their beliefs, preferences and things they are sensitive to, as this awareness is beneficial for the overall team performance. Originality/value – This paper contributes to the team cognition literature by bringing empirical support for a relatively less investigated concept: cross-understanding. The paper establishes its relation to team performance and two of its potential antecedents – openness to cognitive diversity and reflective communication cognition.


Author(s):  
Preston A. Kiekel ◽  
Nancy J. Cooke ◽  
Peter W. Foltz ◽  
Jamie C. Gorman ◽  
Melanie J. Martin

Some have argued that the most appropriate measure of team cognition is a holistic measure directed at the entire team. In particular, communication data are useful for measuring team cognition because of the holistic nature of the data, and because of the connection between communication and declarative cognition. In order to circumvent the logistic difficulties of communication data, the present paper proposes several relatively automatic methods of analysis. Four data types are identified, with low-level physical data vs. content data being one dimension, and sequential vs. static data being the other. Methods addressing all four of these data types are proposed, with the exception of static physical data. Latent Semantic Analysis is an automatic method used to assess content, either statically or sequentially. PRONET is useful to address either physical or content-based sequential data, and we propose CHUMS to address sequential physical data. The usefulness of each method to predict team performance data is assessed.


Author(s):  
Stephen M. Fiore ◽  
Haydee M. Cuevas ◽  
Eduardo Salas ◽  
Jonathan W. Schooler

The nature of teams is changing in that the implementation of distributed teams as a definable organizational unit has substantially increased. In this paper we discuss a portion of the cognitive processes potentially impacting distributed team performance. We elaborate on how team opacity arising from distributed interaction can impact team cognition, with an emphasis on the critical memory components that are foundational to the development and implementation of shared mental models.


2020 ◽  
pp. 204138662097211
Author(s):  
Ashley A. Niler ◽  
Jessica R. Mesmer-Magnus ◽  
Lindsay E. Larson ◽  
Gabriel Plummer ◽  
Leslie A. DeChurch ◽  
...  

Abundant research supports a cognitive foundation to teamwork. Team cognition describes the mental states that enable team members to anticipate and to coordinate. Having been examined in hundreds of studies conducted in board rooms, cockpits, nuclear power plants, and locker rooms, to name a few, we turn to the question of moderators: Under which conditions is team cognition more and less strongly related to team performance? Random effects meta-analytic moderator analysis of 107 independent studies ( N = 7,778) reveals meaningful variation in effect sizes conditioned on team composition and boundary factors. The overall effect of team cognition on performance is ρ = .35, though examining this effect by these moderators finds the effect can meaningfully vary between ρ = .22 and ρ = .42. This meta-analysis advances team effectiveness theory by moving past the question of “what is important?” to explore the question of “when and why is it important?” Results indicate team cognition is most strongly related to performance for teams with social category heterogeneity ( ρ = .42), high external interdependence ( ρ = .41), as well as low authority differentiation ( ρ = .35), temporal dispersion ( ρ = .36), and geographic dispersion ( ρ = .35). Functional homogeneity and temporal stability (compositional factors) were not meaningful moderators of this relationship. The key takeaway of these findings is that team cognition matters most for team performance when—either by virtue of composition, leadership, structure, or technology—there are few substitute enabling conditions to otherwise promote performance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document