Military Psychology

Gerhard Ohrband – ULIM University, Moldova

4th lecture

Team effectiveness

Course structure

1. Introduction: Historical Overview, main applications2. Environmental Stressors3. Leadership4. Team Effectiveness5. Individual and Group Behaviour6. Clinical Psychology7. Selection and Classification8. Training 9. Human Factor Engineering10. Psychotherapy and Counseling11. Terrorism12. Trauma Therapy13. Psychological Warfare14. Ethical Issues for a Psychologist in the Armed Forces15. Review: Preparation for the exams

Outline:

1. What are teams and why are they important?

2. Inputs into teams

3. Processes

4. Developing teams

1. What are teams and why are they important?Mohrman, Cohen and Mohrman (1995): Teams enable organizations to speedily develop and deliver

products and services cost effectively, while retaining high quality Teams enable organizations to learn (and retain learning) more

effectively Time is saved if activities, formally performed sequentially by

individuals, can be performed concurrently by people working in teams

Innovation is promoted because of cross-fertilization of ideas Teams can integrate and link information in ways than an

individual cannot

The input-process-output model

TaskTeam Composition

Organizational context

Cultural context

INPUTS

LeadershipCommunicationDecision-making

Cohesiveness

PROCESSES

Effectiveness

OUTPUTS

2. Inputs into teams

1. The task

2. Team composition

3. Organizational context

4. Cultural context

Input 1: the task

Team performance depends upon the task which has to be performed.

Kent and McGrath, 1969: Production tasks (high originality but low issue involvement) Discussion tasks (high issue involvement but low originality) Problem-solving tasks (high action orientation)

How to classify tasks other than by their cognitive requirements?

Job characteristics model (Hackman and Oldham, 1976)

Core job Dimensions

Skill variety

Task identity

TaskSignificance

Autonomy

Task feedback

Psychological states

Experienced meaningfulnessof the work

Experienced responsibilityfor outcome of the work

Outcomes

High internalworkMotivation

High qualitywork performance

High satisfactionwith the work

Low absenteeismand turnover

Knowledge of the actualresults of the work Activities

Growth Need Strength

Job characteristics model

MPS= (skill variety + task identity + task significance)

x autonomy x feedback

3

MPS: motivational potential score

The model succesfully predicts team effectiveness in

•Administrative support roles (Campion, Medsker and Higgs, 1993);•Professional jobs (Campion, Papper and Medsker, 1996);•Technical, customer service, clerical and management teams (Cohen, Ledford and Spreitzer, 1994)

Input 2: team composition

The mix of people with different occupations in a team clearly affects the team’s performance. Similarly, a team can have a mix of personalities, backgrounds and characteristics. But what is the ideal mix?

Impact of diversity dependent upon the self-categorization of team members (social identity theory, Tajfel and Turner, 1979)

Diversity in task-related attributes vs. relations-oriented characteristics (age, gender, ethnicity)

Diversity in task-related attributesWiersema and Bantel, 1992: Examined the diversity

of top management teams of 100 of the largest manufacturing companies in the USA. Diversity of educational specializations was related to a more adaptive organization and more effective strategic change.

Bantel, 1993: Management teams of banks which were heterogeneous with respect to education and functional background developed clearer corporate strategies

Diversity in relations-oriented characteristics Jackson, Brett, Sessa, Cooper, Julin and Peyronnin, 1991: Turnover

rates are highter in teams that are heterogeneous with respect to age. Age diversity can have its greatest effects when the differences

between the ages reflect differences in values, attitudes and perspectives.

For example, both risk-taking propensity and problem-solving processes are related to age; if age heterogeneity is present within the team, conflict may arise over the degree of risk that should be taken for a particular problem.

Ethnic diversity: effects diminish as group members gain experience with each other (Watson, Kumar and Michaelsen, 1993).

Mixed results for gender diversity Focus upon gender and ethnicity effects on communication within the

team.

Communication

Communication requires common understandings, meanings and language conventions.

People from different backgrounds will have different linguistic traditions and norms.

Women’s contributions to team discussions may be ignored, dismissed or seen as offensive due to a violation of sex-role stereotypes (Unsworth, 1994).

The contribution of team members of ethnic minorities may be downgraded because of their accents (Gallois and Callan, 1981; Callan, Gallois and Forbes, 1983; Giles and Street, 1985).

Input 3: organizational context Hackman (1990), Beard and Salas (1992): contextual factors that

may impact upon the team’s effectiveness. How people are rewarded in the team and organization The technical assistance available to support the team in its work Whether the organizational climate is supportive both of people

and teamworking The extent of competition and political intrigue within the

organization The level of environmental uncertainty (in relation to the task,

customers, suppliers, market share etc.)

Organizational climate

Set of perceptions that reflect how the employee views and appraises the work environment and organizational attributes.

Markiewicz and West, 1997: Where the climate is characterized by high control, low autonomy for employees, lack of concern for employee welfare and limited commitment to training, it is unlikely teamworking will thrive.

Mohrman et al., 1995: The extra commitment and effort demanded in team-based organizations requires organizational commitment to the skill development, well-being and support of employees.

Competition and intrigue will undermine team-based working, because teamwork depends on shared objectives, participative safety, constructive controversy and support.

Inter-team competition: greater commitment to the team’s success than to the organization’s succes.

Work in uncertain environments

Input 4: cultural context

Hofstede, 1980: four dimensions

1. Individualism – collectivism (degree to which people define themselves as individuals or as group members);

2. Power distance;

3. Uncertainty avoidance;

4. Masculinity – feminity (whether achievement or interpersonal relationships are valued in the workplace).

Examples

UK: relatively low power distant, low uncertainty avoidant, highly individualistic, masculine.

Spain: high power distance, high uncertainty avoidance, more collective and feminine.

Netherlands: more masculine, low power distance, high uncertainty avoidance, high individualism

And Moldova?

Impact

The very definition of ‘team’ may change across cultures Effective leadership (situational-based versus trait theories) Social loafing effect identified in Western societies is apparently

non-existent and sometimes reversed in China and Israel (Earley, 1987, 1993).

Group participation Attitudes towards time: latecomers to a team meeting were

perceived negatively in the USA, but positively in Brazil (Smith and Noakes, 1996)

3. Processes

Leadership Communication Decision-making Cohesiveness Team climate

Process 1: leadership

Transactional and transformational leaders (Bass, 1990)

Transactional leaders focus on transactions, exchanges and contingent rewards and punishment

Transformational leadership involves influencing team members through charisma and visioning.

Autonomous work groups

Or self-managed teams No formal leader Leaders are rather emergent than selected Effective in nursing (Weisman, Gordon and

Cassard, 1993), mineral processing plants (Cordery et al., 1991) and other manufacturing and service industries (Macy and Izumi, 1993; Cordery, 1996; Guzzo, 1996)

Five reasons for improved team performance using self-managed teams (Cordery, 1996)1. Autonomous work teams make decisions more rapidly in

response to changing and uncertain environments.2. Decisions which are made in trusting and open climates, such

as those found in autonomous work teams, are more likely to be creative and innovative.

3. Opportunities for new learning due to greater responsibility and more skill-use.

4. Increased self-efficacy.5. Job characteristics are linked to job satisfaction, intrinsic

motivation, lower absenteeism and better work performance.

Process 2: communication

Need for a facilitator in group situations Impact of information technology on team

communication (voice messaging, teleconferencing)

Process 3: decision-making

Team decision-making includes four elements:

1. Describing the problem

2. Identifying possible solutions

3. Evaluating and choosing the best solution

4. Implementing the solution

Problem definition

Must begin with problem recognition. Problems may be regarded as threats and

identification of problems by team members in discouraged.

“problem”-mindedness. Defining problems through breakdown and analysis

of its component. Problems which are defined from a number of

different perspectives are likely to produce a wider variety of solutions.

Producing a variety of solutionsBrainstorming, four basic principles:1. Criticism of others’ suggestions is prohibited;2. Free thinking and wild, obscure solutions are welcomed;3. Quantity not quality of solutions is the primary aim;4. Combination of modification of the ideas will be required.Physical and psychological barriers may impede the process. Modified version: team members individually record their solutions

before sharing them all with the other team members.

Evaluation of solutions

Must be based upon task-related criteria. Danger of ‘groupthink’, driven by consensus

thinking (example: ‘Bay of Pigs’ invasion in 1961)

Implementation

Implementing the chose decision and succesfully maintaining it depends upon participation levels within the team.

Ownership of decisions

Process 4: cohesiveness

Degree of attraction and liking among team members Liking for the team as whole Increases team effectiveness by increasing team members’ helping

behaviours, as well as increasing motivation. Ouchi, 1980: highly cohesive teams had lower communication and

coordination costs and could thus apply greater attention to problems under time pressure.

Mullen and Copper, 1994: It is effective performance which increases team cohesion, more than cohesion affecting performance.

Shaw and Shaw, 1962: highly cohesive groups devoted more time to planning and problem-solving.

Shaw, 1981: socially integrated groups experience higher morale and satisfaction.

Process 5: team climate

Atmosphere within the team Shared perceptions of both formal and

informal policies, procedures and practices Related to level of role conflict, ambiguity, job

tension and overall job satisfaction.

Climate for innovation (Peiró et. al., 1992)1. Vision: a clear, shared, negotiated, attainable and evolving

ideal of a valued outcome which gives the team focus and direction.

2. Participative safety: reduces resistance to change, encourages commitment and empowerment and allows all team members’ opinions to be heard in a safe environment.

3. Support for innovation: helps to reduce threat, which is often present when forwarding new and original ideas to the team.

4. Task orientation: commitment to excellence and high-quality innovation.

4. Developing teams

Markiewicz and West (1997): three main functions in which team leaders must be trained and competent

1. Managing the team: setting clear objectives, clarifying the roles of team members, developing individual tasks, evaluating individual contributions, providing feedback on team performance and reviewing team processes, strategies and objective

2. Coaching individuals: listening, recognizing and revealing feelings, giving feedback and agreeing goals

3. Leading the team: creating favourable performance conditions for the team, building and maintaining the team as a performing unit and coaching and supporting the team

Discussion Points:

1. Describe a team you have once been in. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages in being in that team.

2. “Diversity is a double-edged sword”. Explain the statement.3. What is groupthink? Is the concept applicable to the family as

well as the organization?4. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the computer-

mediated communication technology: voice mail and teleconferencing?

5. Discuss the five areas of team development and explain how each can improve team effectiveness.

Literature

Campion, M.A., Medsker, G.J. and Higgs, A.C. (1993). Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology, 46, 823-50.

Macy, B.A. and Izumi, H. (1993). Organizational change, design and work innovation: a meta-analysis of 131 North American field studies – 1961 – 1991. In Research in Organizational Change and Design, Volume 7. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.