We need teams in nearly every aspect of our lives (e.g., hospitals, schools, flight decks, nuclear power plants, oil rigs, the military, and corporate offices). Nearly a century of psychological science has uncovered extensive knowledge about team-related processes and outcomes. In this article, we draw from the reviews and articles of this special issue to identify 10 key reflections that have arisen in the team literature, briefly summarized here. Team researchers have developed many theories surrounding the multilayered aspects of teams, such that now we have a solid theoretical basis for teams. We have recognized that the collective is often stronger than the individual, initiating the shift from individual tasks to team tasks. All teams are not created equal, so it is important to consider the context to understand relevant team dynamics and outcomes, but sometimes teams performing in different contexts are more similar than not. It is critical to have teamwork-supportive organizational conditions and environments where psychological safety can flourish and be a mechanism to resolve conflicts, ensure safety, mitigate errors, learn, and improve performance. There are also helpful teamwork competencies that can increase effectiveness across teams or tasks that have been identified (e.g., coordination, communication, and adaptability). Even if a team is made up of experts, it can still fail if they do not know how to cooperate, coordinate, and communicate well together. To ensure the improvement and maintenance of effective team functioning, the organization must implement team development interventions and evaluate relevant team outcomes with robust diagnostic measurement. We conclude with 3 main directions for scientists to expand upon in the future: (a) address issues with technology to make further improvements in team assessment, (b) learn more about multiteam systems, and (c) bridge the gap between theory and practice. In summary, the science of teams has made substantial progress but still has plenty of room for advancement. (PsycINFO Database Record

The science of teamwork: Progress, reflections, and the road ahead.

Complexity science has been introduced in healthcare as a theoretical framework to better understand complex situations. Interdisciplinary healthcare teams can be viewed as Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) by focusing more on the team members’ interaction with each other than on the characteristics of individual team members. Viewing teams in this way can provide us with insights into the origins of team behaviour. The aim of this study is to describe the functioning of a healthcare team as it originates from the members’ interactions using the CAS principles as a framework and to explore factors influencing workplace learning as emergent behaviour. An interview study was done with 21 palliative home-care nurses, 20 community nurses and 18 general practitioners in Flanders, Belgium. A two-step analysis consisted of a deductive approach, which uses the CAS principles as coding framework for interview transcripts, followed by an inductive approach, which identifies patterns in the codes for each CAS principle. All CAS principles were identified in the interview transcripts of the three groups. The most prevalent principles in our study were principles with a structuring effect on team functioning: team members act autonomously guided by internalized basic rules; attractors shape the team functioning; a team has a history and is sensitive to initial conditions; and a team is an open system, interacting with its environment. The other principles, focusing on the result of the structuring principles, were present in the data, albeit to a lesser extent: team members’ interactions are non-linear; interactions between team members can produce unpredictable behaviour; and interactions between team members can generate new behaviour. Patterns, reflecting team behaviour, were recognized in the coding of each CAS principle. Patterns of team behaviour, identified in this way, were linked to interprofessional competencies of the Interprofessional Collaboration Collaborative. Factors influencing workplace learning were identified. This study provides us with insights into the origin of team functioning by explaining how patterns of interactions between team members define team behaviour. Viewing healthcare teams as Complex Adaptive Systems may offer explanations of different aspects of team behaviour with implications for education, practice and research.

/pdf/healthcare-teams-as-complex-adaptive-systems-understanding-50nafdds87.pdf

Healthcare teams as complex adaptive systems: understanding team behaviour through team members’ perception of interpersonal interaction

The scientific study of teamwork in the context of spaceflight has uncovered a considerable amount of knowledge over the past 20 years. Although much is known about the underlying factors and processes of teamwork, much is left to be discovered for teams who will be operating in extreme isolation and confinement during a future Mars mission. Special considerations must be made to enhance teamwork and team well-being for multi-year missions during which the small team will live and work together. We discuss the unique challenges of effective teamwork in a Mars mission scenario, and the difficulties of studying teamwork using analogs of the space environment. We then describe the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's current practices and research on teamwork, which includes team selection and composition, teamwork training, countermeasures to mitigate risks to effective team performance, and the measurement and monitoring of team functioning. We end with a discussion of the teamwork research areas that are most critical for a successful journey to Mars. (PsycINFO Database Record

Teamwork and collaboration in long-duration space missions: Going to extremes.

markdownIntra-team power struggles, or competitions over resource control between members, are pervasive in organizations. Research has shown that power struggles impair team outcomes, yet why and when they arise remains unknown. In this dissertation, I unravel which factors elicit competitive power dynamics in teams, allowing important insight into their prevention. 
I draw on social psychological research on power and integrated this with the literatures on group threats and team (power) structures to theorize that power may be sought as a protection-tool when members feel threatened and are motivated by the team structure to cope with this threat individualistically. Accordingly, I develop an overarching framework where I posit that the combination of a threatening team environment with an individualistic team structure encourages intra-team power struggles. This framework finds support in three studies that examined the combined effects of team threats (i.e., inter-team conflict, team uncertainty, and organizational change) and internal team structures (i.e., power structures and outcome interdependence). 
My dissertation research contributes to several literatures. First, by arguing that power can be utilized as a protection tool, and identifying situations that motivate this, I extend the literature on power (dynamics). Second, by showing that team threats foster intra-team power struggles when teams have an individualistic team structure, I qualify previous research in which threatening team situations have been found to unite teams internally. Last, by pointing out that hierarchy promotes power struggles when teams face threats, I qualify previous research that has advocated for the benefits of hierarchy in such situations.

https://repub.eur.nl/pub/105346/EPS2018446ORG9789058925077.pdf

Tug-of-War: Why and when teams get embroiled in power struggles

An Approach for Conducting Actionable Research With Extreme Teams

In teams, some combinations of people work together better than others. A large body of literature with a rich history suggests that the configuration of team member attributes, called team composition, has a fundamental influence on teamwork. Team composition shapes the emergence of affective states, behavioral processes, and cognitive states (the ABCs of teamwork), which ultimately affect how teams meet their objectives. The purpose of this article is to describe what is known about team composition and its influence on the ABCs of teamwork. We discuss what team composition is, and why it is important. We then describe key discoveries related to how team composition shapes the ABCs of teamwork. Building on what we know, we outline important directions for future research. (PsycINFO Database Record

Team composition and the ABCs of teamwork.

BACKGROUND Future space exploration, such as a mission to Mars, will require space crews to live and work in extreme environments unlike those of previous space missions. Extreme conditions such as prolonged confinement, isolation, and expected communication time delays will require that crews have a higher level of interpersonal compatibility and be able to work autonomously, adapting to unforeseen challenges in order to ensure mission success. Team composition, or the configuration of member attributes, is an important consideration for maximizing crewmember well-being and team performance. METHODS We conducted an extensive search to find articles about team composition in long-distance space exploration (LDSE)-analogue environments, including a search of databases, specific relevant journals, and by contacting authors who publish in the area. RESULTS We review the team composition research conducted in analogue environments in terms of two paths through which team composition is likely to be related to LDSE mission success, namely by 1) affecting social integration, and 2) the team processes and emergent states related to team task completion. DISCUSSION Suggestions for future research are summarized as: 1) the need to identify ways to foster unit-level social integration within diverse crews; 2) the missed opportunity to use team composition variables as a way to improve team processes, emergent states, and task completion; and 3) the importance of disentangling the effect of specific team composition variables to determine the traits (e.g., personality, values) that are associated with particular risks (e.g., subgrouping) to performance.

Team Composition Issues for Future Space Exploration: A Review and Directions for Future Research.

Purpose
Team composition research considers how configurations (e.g., team-level diversity) of team members’ attributes (e.g., personality, values, demographics) influence important outcomes. Our chapter describes key issues in understanding and effectively managing team composition over time.


Methodology/approach
We discuss how context shapes team composition. We review empirical research that examined relationships between team composition, and team processes and emergent properties over multiple time points. We review research that examined how composition can be effectively managed over the lifecycle of a team.


Findings
Context shapes the nature of team composition itself (e.g., dynamic composition). To the extent that membership change, fluid boundaries, and multiple team membership are present should be accounted for in research and practice. The research we reviewed indicated no, or fleeting effects for surface-level (e.g., demographics) composition on the development of team processes and emergent properties over time, although there were exceptions. Conversely, deep-level composition affected team processes and emergent properties early in a team’s lifespan as well as later. Team composition information can be used in staffing; it can also inform how to best leverage training, leadership, rewards, tasks, and technology to promote team effectiveness.


Social implications
Teams are the building blocks of contemporary organizations. Understanding and effectively managing team composition over time can increase the likelihood of team.


Originality/value
Our chapter provides novel insights into key issues in understanding and effectively managing team composition over time.

Team Composition Over Time

Prevailing team effectiveness models suggest that teams are best positioned for success when certain enabling conditions are in place (Hackman, 1987; Hackman, 2012; Mathieu, Maynard, Rapp, & Gilson, 2008; Wageman, Hackman, & Lehman, 2005). Team composition, or the configuration of member attributes, is an enabling structure key to fostering competent teamwork (Hackman, 2002; Wageman et al., 2005). A vast body of research supports the importance of team composition in team design (Bell, 2007). For example, team composition is empirically linked to outcomes such as cooperation (Eby & Dobbins, 1997), social integration (Harrison, Price, Gavin, & Florey, 2002), shared cognition (Fisher, Bell, Dierdorff, & Belohlav, 2012), information sharing (Randall, Resick, & DeChurch, 2011), adaptability (LePine, 2005), and team performance (e.g., Bell, 2007). As such, NASA has identified team composition as a potentially powerful means for mitigating the risk of performance decrements due to inadequate crew cooperation, coordination, communication, and psychosocial adaptation in future space exploration missions. Much of what is known about effective team composition is drawn from research conducted in conventional workplaces (e.g., corporate offices, production plants). Quantitative reviews of the team composition literature (e.g., Bell, 2007; Bell, Villado, Lukasik, Belau, & Briggs, 2011) are based primarily on traditional teams. Less is known about how composition affects teams operating in extreme environments such as those that will be experienced by crews of future space exploration missions. For example, long-distance and long-duration space exploration (LDSE) crews are expected to live and work in isolated and confined environments (ICEs) for up to 30 months. Crews will also experience communication time delays from mission control, which will require crews to work more autonomously (see Appendix A for more detailed information regarding the LDSE context). Given the unique context within which LDSE crews will operate, NASA identified both a gap in knowledge related to the effective composition of autonomous, LDSE crews, and the need to identify psychological and psychosocial factors, measures, and combinations thereof that can be used to compose highly effective crews (Team Gap 8). As an initial step to address Team Gap 8, we conducted a focused literature review and operational assessment related to team composition issues for LDSE. The objectives of our research were to: (1) identify critical team composition issues and their effects on team functioning in LDSE-analogous environments with a focus on key composition factors that will most likely have the strongest influence on team performance and well-being, and 1 Astronaut diary entry in regards to group interaction aboard the ISS (p.22; Stuster, 2010) 2 (2) identify and evaluate methods used to compose teams with a focus on methods used in analogous environments. The remainder of the report includes the following components: (a) literature review methodology, (b) review of team composition theory and research, (c) methods for composing teams, (d) operational assessment results, and (e) recommendations.

/pdf/critical-team-composition-issues-for-long-distance-and-long-4r51awiy7f.pdf

Critical Team Composition Issues for Long-Distance and Long-Duration Space Exploration A Literature Review, an Operational Assessment, and Recommendations for Practice and Research

by SHARDUL DESHMUKH (Under the Direction of Neal Outland) ABSTRACT The problem aimed at is the suboptimality of team decision-making. This thesis performs an attempt at implementing an artificial agent into a conversation to facilitate team decisionmaking. Two methods are experimented with to attempt to achieve this goal. The agent records and analyzes under and over speaking within participants of the team. The agent also tracks conversation topics and generates text to add relevant information into the conversation based on what the team is currently discussing. The thesis refers to the first method as ‘moderating speaking equity’ and to the second method as ‘inserting conversation relevant information’. Moderating speaking equity is performed through a python script and inserting conversation relevant information is performed through two separate Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) with Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) layers and Generative Pretrained Transformer J (GPTJ).

Neal B. Outland

Papers

Team composition and the ABCs of teamwork.

Team Composition Issues for Future Space Exploration: A Review and Directions for Future Research.

Team Composition Over Time

Critical Team Composition Issues for Long-Distance and Long-Duration Space Exploration A Literature Review, an Operational Assessment, and Recommendations for Practice and Research

IMPLEMENTING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE INTO TEAM DECISION MAKING by SHARDUL DESHMUKH