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

被引:21
作者
Acton, Bryan P. [1 ]
Braun, Michael T. [2 ]
Foti, Roseanne J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061 USA
[2] Univ S Florida, Tampa, FL 33620 USA
关键词
Team cohesion; Team composition; Team personality; Growth curve modeling; GOAL ORIENTATION; 5-FACTOR MODEL; THIN SLICES; PERFORMANCE; PERSONALITY; DYNAMICS; BEHAVIOR; ATTRACTION; POWER; TIME;
D O I
10.1007/s10869-019-09654-7
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
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.
引用
收藏
页码:751 / 766
页数:16
相关论文
共 101 条
[21]   Dynamics in Groups: Are We There Yet? [J].
Cronin, Matthew A. ;
Weingart, Laurie R. ;
Todorova, Gergana .
ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT ANNALS, 2011, 5 :571-612
[22]   Thin slices of negotiation: Predicting outcomes from conversational dynamics within the first 5 minutes [J].
Curhan, Jared R. ;
Pentland, Alex .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 2007, 92 (03) :802-811
[23]   The Power of "We": Effects of Psychological Collectivism on Team Performance Over Time [J].
Dierdorff, Erich C. ;
Bell, Suzanne T. ;
Belohlav, James A. .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 2011, 96 (02) :247-262
[24]  
Dion K. L., 2000, GROUP DYNAMICS THEOR, V4, P7, DOI 10.1037/1089-2699.4.1.7
[25]   Understanding self-report bias in organizational behavior research [J].
Donaldson, SI ;
Grant-Vallone, EJ .
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND PSYCHOLOGY, 2002, 17 (02) :245-260
[26]   Optimal Time Lags in Panel Studies [J].
Dormann, Christian ;
Griffin, Mark A. .
PSYCHOLOGICAL METHODS, 2015, 20 (04) :489-505
[27]   COHESION An Odyssey in Empirical Understanding [J].
Drescher, Stuart ;
Burlingame, Gary ;
Fuhriman, Addie .
SMALL GROUP RESEARCH, 2012, 43 (06) :662-689
[28]   What makes a good team player? Personality and team effectiveness [J].
Driskell, James E. ;
Goodwin, Gerald F. ;
Salas, Eduardo ;
O'Shea, Patrick Gavan .
GROUP DYNAMICS-THEORY RESEARCH AND PRACTICE, 2006, 10 (04) :249-271
[29]   MOTIVATIONAL PROCESSES AFFECTING LEARNING [J].
DWECK, CS .
AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST, 1986, 41 (10) :1040-1048
[30]   Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams [J].
Edmondson, A .
ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, 1999, 44 (02) :350-383