This paper presents a model of team learning and tests it in a multimethod field study. It introduces the construct of team psychological safety—a shared belief held by members of a team that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking—and models the effects of team psychological safety and team efficacy together on learning and performance in organizational work teams. Results of a study of 51 work teams in a manufacturing company, measuring antecedent, process, and outcome variables, show that team psychological safety is associated with learning behavior, but team efficacy is not, when controlling for team psychological safety. As predicted, learning behavior mediates between team psychological safety and team performance. The results support an integrative perspective in which both team structures, such as context support and team leader coaching, and shared beliefs shape team outcomes.

/pdf/psychological-safety-and-learning-behavior-in-work-teams-igq2jhsmtc.pdf

Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams

In 1974 an article appeared in Science magazine with the dry-sounding title “Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases” by a pair of psychologists who were not well known outside their discipline of decision theory. In it Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman introduced the world to Prospect Theory, which mapped out how humans actually behave when faced with decisions about gains and losses, in contrast to how economists assumed that people behave. Prospect Theory turned Economics on its head by demonstrating through a series of ingenious experiments that people are much more concerned with losses than they are with gains, and that framing a choice from one perspective or the other will result in decisions that are exactly the opposite of each other, even if the outcomes are monetarily the same. Prospect Theory led cognitive psychology in a new direction that began to uncover other human biases in thinking that are probably not learned but are part of our brain’s wiring.

Thinking fast and slow.

What Makes Teams Work: Group Effectiveness Research from the Shop Floor to the Executive Suite

A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes.

Research on organizational diversity, heterogeneity, and related concepts has proliferated in the past decade, but few consistent findings have emerged. We argue that the construct of diversity requires closer examination. We describe three distinctive types of diversity: separation, variety, and disparity. Failure to recognize the meaning, maximum shape, and assumptions underlying each type has held back theory development and yielded ambiguous research conclusions. We present guidelines for conceptualization, measurement, and theory testing, highlighting the special case of demographic diversity

/pdf/what-s-the-difference-diversity-constructs-as-separation-26wv9bj3r1.pdf

What's the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations.

Team Mental Model: Construct or Metaphor?

Because research on team mental models is still in its formative stages, there is a need for continued conceptual development of the construct and direct empirical support linking team mental models to team outcomes. Researchers in other fields have developed concepts that are distinct from, but clearly related to team mental models, including information sharing, transactive memory, group learning, and cognitive consensus. Although these research streams currently exist in parallel with little cross-fertilization, there is much to be gained from integration across disciplinary boundaries. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to enrich the theoretical understanding of team mental models and to broaden the empirical research base by adopting a cross-disciplinary focus and incorporating related team knowledge domains from other literatures. Based on a synthesis of various literatures, we develop a framework that delineates the relationships among team knowledge constructs. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

https://www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/job.86

Team mental models in a team knowledge framework: expanding theory and measurement across disciplinary boundaries

Metaphor No More: A 15-Year Review of the Team Mental Model Construct

This article seeks to promote the advancement of empirical research on team mental models by (a) highlighting the conceptual work that must precede the selection of any measurement tool, (b) deline...

The Measurement of Team Mental Models: We Have No Shared Schema

Summary The increased use of teams in organizations, coupled with an increasingly diverse workforce, strongly suggests that we should learn more about how team diversity affects functioning and performance. The purpose of this study was to explore the differential impact of surface-level diversity (gender, ethnicity), deep-level diversity (time urgency, extraversion), and two moderating variables (team orientation, team process) on relationship conflict over time. Hypotheses were tested by tracking 45 student project teams in a longitudinal design. Results revealed that team orientation and team process moderated the diversity–conflict link. Specifically, team orientation helped to neutralize the negative effects of surface-level (gender) diversity on relationship conflict. In a similar manner, team processes worked to weaken the deleterious effects of deep-level diversity (time urgency) on relationship conflict. In addition, relationship conflict resulted in lower perceived performance by team members. Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

/pdf/surface-and-deep-level-diversity-in-workgroups-examining-the-tw9l725w0r.pdf

Susan Mohammed

Papers

Team Mental Model: Construct or Metaphor?

Team mental models in a team knowledge framework: expanding theory and measurement across disciplinary boundaries

Metaphor No More: A 15-Year Review of the Team Mental Model Construct

The Measurement of Team Mental Models: We Have No Shared Schema

Surface- and deep-level diversity in workgroups: Examining the moderating effects of team orientation and team process on relationship conflict