Search

Objective: We review the current state-of-the-art in team cognition research, but more importantly describe the limitations of existing theories, laboratory paradigms, and measures considering the increasing complexities of modern teams and the study of team cognition. Background: Research on, and applications of, team cognition has led to theories, data, and measures over the last several decades. Method: This article is based on research questions generated in a spring 2022 seminar on team cognition at Arizona State University led by the first author. Results: Future research directions are proposed for extending the conceptualization of teams and team cognition by examining dimensions of teamness; extending laboratory paradigms to attain more realistic teaming, including nonhuman teammates; and advancing measures of team cognition in a direction such that data can be collected unobtrusively, in real time, and automatically. Conclusion: The future of team cognition is one of the new discoveries, new research paradigms, and new measures. Application: Extending the concepts of teams and team cognition can also extend the potential applications of these concepts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In spite of the sudden onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, many instructors who used team-based pedagogies shifted them online rather than suspending them entirely, but with limited time and resources. To examine the difference in team dynamics and outcomes for courses in Spring 2019 and Spring 2020 of over 1500 first-year engineering students per semester, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and random forests method were used. Results show that students reported less improvement in team-member effectiveness, lower psychological safety, and less satisfaction in the semester with the emergency transition. However, students also reported lower conflict. The most important factor predicting project grades shifted from 'Interacting with teammates' to 'Having relevant knowledge, skills, and abilities' amid the emergency shift, accompanied by a reduction in team interdependence. In spite of the collection of data during an emergency transition, the foundation of face-to-face interaction before moving to virtual cooperation represents a useful contribution to research that has focused exclusively on virtual learning circumstances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This document is an editorial titled "Fluid teams" published in Frontiers in Psychology. The editorial discusses the concept of fluid teams, which are rapidly assembled teams that address immediate problems and disband after completing the task. The article highlights the advantages and disadvantages of fluid teams and explores their application in various contexts such as healthcare, innovation teams, and the military. It also presents research topics and gaps in understanding fluid team performance. The editorial provides a comprehensive overview of the topic and offers practical recommendations based on the research presented. [Extracted from the article]

Achieving diagnostic excellence on medical wards requires teamwork and effective team dynamics. However, the study of ward team dynamics in teaching hospitals is relatively underdeveloped. We aim to enhance understanding of how ward team members interact in the diagnostic process and of the underlying behavioral, psychological, and cognitive mechanisms driving team interactions. We used mixed-methods to develop and refine a conceptual model of how ward team dynamics in an academic medical center influence the diagnostic process. First, we systematically searched existing literature for conceptual models and empirical studies of team dynamics. Then, we conducted field observations with thematic analysis to refine our model. We present a conceptual model of how medical ward team dynamics influence the diagnostic process, which serves as a roadmap for future research and interventions in this area. We identified three underexplored areas of team dynamics that are relevant to diagnostic excellence and that merit future investigation (1): ward team structures (e.g., team roles, responsibilities) (2); contextual factors (e.g., time constraints, location of team members, culture, diversity); and (3) emergent states (shared mental models, psychological safety, team trust, and team emotions). Optimizing the diagnostic process to achieve diagnostic excellence is likely to depend on addressing all of the potential barriers and facilitators to ward team dynamics presented in our model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background In attempt to improve continuity of patient care and reduce length of stay, hospitals have placed an increased focus on reducing delayed discharges through discharge planning. Several benefits and challenges to team-based approaches for discharge planning have been identified. Despite this, professional hierarchies and power dynamics are common challenges experienced by healthcare providers who are trying to work as a team when dealing with delayed discharges. The objective of this study was to explore what was working well with formal care team-based discharge processes, as well as challenges experienced, in order to outline how teams can function to better support transitions for patients experiencing a delayed discharge. Methods We conducted a descriptive qualitative study with hospital-based healthcare providers, managers and organizational leaders who had experience with delayed discharges. Participants were recruited from two diverse health regions in Ontario, Canada. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted in-person, by telephone or teleconference between December 2019 and October 2020. All interviews were recorded and transcribed. A codebook was developed by the research team and applied to all transcripts. Data were analyzed inductively, as well as deductively through directed content analysis. Results We organized our findings into three main categories – (1) collaboration with physicians makes a difference; (2) leadership should meaningfully engage with frontline providers and (3) partnerships across sectors are critical. Regular physician engagement, as equal members of the team, was recommended to improve consistent communication, relationship building between providers, accessibility, and in-person communication. Participants highlighted the need for a dedicated senior leader who ensured members of the team were treated as equals and advocated for the team. Improved partnerships across sectors included the enhanced integration of community-based providers into discharge planning by placing more focus on collaborative practice, combined discharge planning meetings, and having embedded and physically accessible care coordinators in the hospital. Conclusions Team-based approaches for delayed discharge can offer benefits. However, to optimize how teams function in supporting these processes, it is important to consistently collaborate with physicians, ensure senior leadership engage with and seek feedback from frontline providers through co-design, and actively integrate the community sector in discharge planning.

Background: Prior research has demonstrated that participation in authentic learning experiences that resemble real-world engineering practice is key to unlocking the benefits of collaborative projects, such as design projects, for students in engineering. However, research has also documented that women are less likely to participate in key learning experiences in engineering design education, undermining the goals of project-based learning. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this research study was to understand how social power dynamics shape the types of tasks allocated to students in teams and, by extension, students learning in collaborative engineering design projects. Drawing on the Model of Inequitable Task Allocation in Project-Based Learning, this work examines the role of prior experiences and skills, self-efficacy, and students’ motivation in the process by which design tasks allocation is negotiated in student teams. Design/Method: This ethnographic study entailed three data collection strategies: (a) ongoing observations of three focal design teams in a cornerstone design course, (b) one-on-one, semi-structured interviews with focal design team members, and (c) reflections from peer mentors who worked with focal and non-focal teams. Results: Students reflected on their prior experiences and skills, and the confidence they gained or lacked as a result, when negotiating their roles in their teams. Importantly, students’ valuation of their skills was gendered, where masculinized notions of engineering skills might lead women to underreport their skills during the role-negotiation process. Finally, while gendered patterns of marginalization and exclusion were apparent, I discuss the strategies women employed to exert influence over their team dynamics. Conclusions: Ensuring equitable participation in collaborative projects is key to support learning for all students in collaborative projects. Understanding how students negotiate their roles and learning opportunities is an important step in supporting students’ learning in collaborative projects.

Background: Prior research has demonstrated that participation in authentic learning experiences that resemble real-world engineering practice is key to unlocking the benefits of collaborative projects, such as design projects, for students in engineering. However, research has also documented that women are less likely to participate in key learning experiences in engineering design education, undermining the goals of project-based learning. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this research study was to understand how social power dynamics shape the types of tasks allocated to students in teams and, by extension, students learning in collaborative engineering design projects. Drawing on the Model of Inequitable Task Allocation in Project-Based Learning, this work examines the role of prior experiences and skills, self-efficacy, and students' motivation in the process by which design tasks allocation is negotiated in student teams. Design/Method: This ethnographic study entailed three data collection strategies: (a) ongoing observations of three focal design teams in a cornerstone design course, (b) one-on-one, semi-structured interviews with focal design team members, and (c) reflections from peer mentors who worked with focal and non-focal teams. Results: Students reflected on their prior experiences and skills, and the confidence they gained or lacked as a result, when negotiating their roles in their teams. Importantly, students' valuation of their skills was gendered, where masculinized notions of engineering skills might lead women to underreport their skills during the role-negotiation process. Finally, while gendered patterns of marginalization and exclusion were apparent, I discuss the strategies women employed to exert influence over their team dynamics. Conclusions: Ensuring equitable participation in collaborative projects is key to support learning for all students in collaborative projects. Understanding how students negotiate their roles and learning opportunities is an important step in supporting students' learning in collaborative projects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In attempt to improve continuity of patient care and reduce length of stay, hospitals have placed an increased focus on reducing delayed discharges through discharge planning. Several benefits and challenges to team-based approaches for discharge planning have been identified. Despite this, professional hierarchies and power dynamics are common challenges experienced by healthcare providers who are trying to work as a team when dealing with delayed discharges. The objective of this study was to explore what was working well with formal care team-based discharge processes, as well as challenges experienced, in order to outline how teams can function to better support transitions for patients experiencing a delayed discharge.  METHODS: We conducted a descriptive qualitative study with hospital-based healthcare providers, managers and organizational leaders who had experience with delayed discharges. Participants were recruited from two diverse health regions in Ontario, Canada. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted in-person, by telephone or teleconference between December 2019 and October 2020. All interviews were recorded and transcribed. A codebook was developed by the research team and applied to all transcripts. Data were analyzed inductively, as well as deductively through directed content analysis.Results: We organized our findings into three main categories - (1) collaboration with physicians makes a difference; (2) leadership should meaningfully engage with frontline providers and (3) partnerships across sectors are critical. Regular physician engagement, as equal members of the team, was recommended to improve consistent communication, relationship building between providers, accessibility, and in-person communication. Participants highlighted the need for a dedicated senior leader who ensured members of the team were treated as equals and advocated for the team. Improved partnerships across sectors included the enhanced integration of community-based providers into discharge planning by placing more focus on collaborative practice, combined discharge planning meetings, and having embedded and physically accessible care coordinators in the hospital.Conclusions: Team-based approaches for delayed discharge can offer benefits. However, to optimize how teams function in supporting these processes, it is important to consistently collaborate with physicians, ensure senior leadership engage with and seek feedback from frontline providers through co-design, and actively integrate the community sector in discharge planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intraoperative hand-offs are poorly coordinated and associated with risk of surgical miscount. We evaluated hand-off patterns for nursing staff during two common operations hypothesizing that hand-off patterns would be associated with increased surgical miscounts and vary during operations performed standard versus nonstandard operating hours. We retrospectively analyzed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (N = 3888) and appendectomy (N = 1768) from 2012 to 2021 at a single institution using electronic medical records. We evaluated intraoperative hand-off patterns and the presence of miscounts for operations performed during standard versus nonstandard hours. Standard operating hours were defined as M-F 7:30 am to 5:00 pm. Across 5656 operations, 10 cases had surgical miscounts and were significantly longer than those without (156.5 versus 101 min P = 0.0178). More than half (51.3%) of cases had no identified hand-offs, and 42.9% of cases occurred during nonstandard hours. Cases during standard versus nonstandard hours were more likely to have hand-offs (56.0% versus 38.9%), P < 0.0001 and had shorter interval between hand-offs (64 versus 75 min), P < 0.0001. The period between patient entry to the room and intubation, which includes initial counts, had a disproportionately high percentage of hand-offs (P < 0.0001). Variability in hand-off occurrence and frequency in operations performed during standard and nonstandard hours suggest that hand-offs are influenced by staffing patterns. Few surgical miscounts occurred but were associated with longer cases. Hand-offs disproportionately occurred between patient entry and intubation, with a potential for disruption of initial instrument counts. Future work optimizing hand-off coordination is an opportunity to mitigate risk to patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Although diversity, friction, and harmonisation in interprofessional teamwork are aspects frequently conceptualised, no empirical study discusses them in combination. Focusing on risk and function with respect to each aspect, this article empirically examines how dynamics between these aspects during interprofessional teamwork interactions fosters conditions for effective teamwork. Methods An ethnographic study of three interprofessional teams, in the context of mental health and substance use, was conducted in Norway. Data were collected through observations of 14 team meetings and 18 in-depth interviews with health and social work professionals. Thematic analysis was applied to code the data. Results A conceptual ideal-type model, which includes all three aspects was developed to represent the emergent findings. The results suggest that the diversity of professional perspectives inherent in interprofessional teams is the foundation of interprofessional teamwork. However, friction is needed to promote innovation, encourage new insights, and intensify discussions. In addition, harmonisation balances professional distinctions, fosters trust, and ties professionals together. Conclusion This article presents a comprehensive model of how professionals work together in interprofessional teams. The model makes visible the functions and risks of each aspect and the dynamics between them. Furthermore, the article argues for mobilisation and balance of all three aspects in combination to maximise the capacity of interprofessional teamwork. Such insight can be used to support the development and successful implementation of interprofessional teamwork in health care.

Women are minoritized in U.S engineering programs and most engineering classrooms, and a variety of evidence indicates that they face inequities in team interactions. To reduce the impact of these inequities, some research indicates that instructors should avoid isolating women in engineering teams. While there are studies of mixed-gender teams in engineering education, most have focused on team performance and the team's final product, peer evaluation ratings, leadership self-efficacy, and the mode of collaboration. No comprehensive study of the dynamics of mixed-gender teams could be identified in the context of engineering education. This study investigates multiple measures of team dynamics holistically in mixed-gender teams: peer ratings, task interdependence, conflict, psychological safety, and satisfaction. Further, this research explores the extent to which women's satisfaction improves if their male teammates have similar characteristics (e.g., race/ethnicity and citizenship status) and how the women's satisfaction is related to the GPAs of their male teammates. The participants of this study were enrolled in a first-year engineering course, who provided information about various team dynamics four times during their teaming process. Mann-Whitney U tests were used to explore differences in team dynamics between mixed-gender teams and all-male teams. A multiple regression model was used to predict the women's team satisfaction based on their male team members' characteristics. Mixed-gender teams reported higher levels of task interdependence, but reported similar levels of conflict, psychological safety, and satisfaction. Women tended to be more satisfied when they worked with men who have similar citizenship status (based on class demographics, domestic women are more satisfied if their male teammates are also domestic). The results of this study include recommendations for instructors to improve team formation and facilitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multidisciplinary neuro-oncology clinics allow collaboration between various specialties and training levels. Building a tenable clinical research program based in the longitudinal dialogue and practice of collaborative clinicians and trainees can bridge clinical observations to research execution. However, forming a research team around a multidisciplinary clinic's activities is constrained by a lack of literature or guidelines. As well, challenges in sustaining team logistics, communication, and productivity can persist without a standardized team framework. This perspective discusses the state of research teams in clinical oncology, and uses experiences from the McMaster Pediatric Brain Tumour Study Group to guide those seeking to form a research team based on the collective activities and observations of a multidisciplinary clinic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although diversity, friction, and harmonisation in interprofessional teamwork are aspects frequently conceptualised, no empirical study discusses them in combination. Focusing on risk and function with respect to each aspect, this article empirically examines how dynamics between these aspects during interprofessional teamwork interactions fosters conditions for effective teamwork.Methods: An ethnographic study of three interprofessional teams, in the context of mental health and substance use, was conducted in Norway. Data were collected through observations of 14 team meetings and 18 in-depth interviews with health and social work professionals. Thematic analysis was applied to code the data.Results: A conceptual ideal-type model, which includes all three aspects was developed to represent the emergent findings. The results suggest that the diversity of professional perspectives inherent in interprofessional teams is the foundation of interprofessional teamwork. However, friction is needed to promote innovation, encourage new insights, and intensify discussions. In addition, harmonisation balances professional distinctions, fosters trust, and ties professionals together.Conclusion: This article presents a comprehensive model of how professionals work together in interprofessional teams. The model makes visible the functions and risks of each aspect and the dynamics between them. Furthermore, the article argues for mobilisation and balance of all three aspects in combination to maximise the capacity of interprofessional teamwork. Such insight can be used to support the development and successful implementation of interprofessional teamwork in health care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contribution: This article presents agile software engineers stick together (ASEST+), an improved version of a framework called ASEST that aims to develop team cohesion, leading to better team learning and software engineering student teams. Background: Effective teamwork is crucial for agile software development’s success and is, therefore, a key topic of current software engineering education. In the previous work, a preliminary proposal for ASEST+ was presented. Here, an improved version, more suitable for agile practice education and considering cohesion antecedents, is described. Intended Outcome: A teaching-learning framework to support teamwork in agile software education. Application Design: ASEST+ is built around Scrum teams and combines learning strategies to train students in collaborative and technical agile practices. ASEST+ establishes policies for role allocation and team rule agreements to regulate communication and address conflict management agile practices. ASEST+ addresses personality traits, conflict resolution, and task interdependence as the antecedents identified as the most important. Findings: A quasiexperiment showed that the use of ASEST+ significantly increases the students’ positive perceptions on team cohesion, team performance, and team learning compared with the control group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multidisciplinary neuro-oncology clinics allow collaboration between various specialties and training levels. Building a tenable clinical research program based in the longitudinal dialogue and practice of collaborative clinicians and trainees can bridge clinical observations to research execution. However, forming a research team around a multidisciplinary clinic’s activities is constrained by a lack of literature or guidelines. As well, challenges in sustaining team logistics, communication, and productivity can persist without a standardized team framework. This perspective discusses the state of research teams in clinical oncology, and uses experiences from the McMaster Pediatric Brain Tumour Study Group to guide those seeking to form a research team based on the collective activities and observations of a multidisciplinary clinic.

Team-based learning is recognized as an important opportunity for teamwork skill development, experiential learning, and learning from peers. However, team-based learning presents many challenges. One important challenge involves the accurate, reliable and valid assessment of team health. With such diagnostics, students could receive formative feedback and engage in meaningful goal setting, adjustment and action planning. Moreover, instructors could identify teams in distress and in need of support. We examine the team CARE assessment, which is a team diagnostic on ITPmetrics.com that assesses communication, adaptability, relationships and education/learning. Although the team CARE assessment has been used extensively in educational contexts, the assessment is lengthy and time-consuming to complete. We offer a shorter version, that we call the Bare CARE assessment, by utilizing psychometric analyses and content validity to eliminate the least useful items. We find that the Bare CARE is reliable and valid when considering correlations with teamwork variables and team performance (i.e. grades). Our sample of 61,549 students working in 14,601 teams offers state-of-the-art validation evidence using a large sample that ensures stable and robust results. We discuss the implications for use in pedagogy and future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Teams have been a ubiquitous structure for conducting work and business for most of human history. However, today’s organizations are markedly different than those of previous generations. The explosion of innovative ideas and novel technologies mandate changes in job descriptions, roles, responsibilities, and how employees interact and collaborate. These advances have heralded a new era for teams and teamwork in which previous teams research and practice may not be fully appropriate for meeting current requirements and demands. In this article, we describe how teams have been historically defined, unpacking five important characteristics of teams, including membership, interdependence, shared goals, dynamics, and an organizationally bounded context, and relating how these characteristics have been addressed in the past and how they are changing in the present. We then articulate the implications these changes have on how we study teams moving forward by offering specific research questions.

Teams have been a ubiquitous structure for conducting work and business for most of human history. However, today's organizations are markedly different than those of previous generations. The explosion of innovative ideas and novel technologies mandate changes in job descriptions, roles, responsibilities, and how employees interact and collaborate. These advances have heralded a new era for teams and teamwork in which previous teams research and practice may not be fully appropriate for meeting current requirements and demands. In this article, we describe how teams have been historically defined, unpacking five important characteristics of teams, including membership, interdependence, shared goals, dynamics, and an organizationally bounded context, and relating how these characteristics have been addressed in the past and how they are changing in the present. We then articulate the implications these changes have on how we study teams moving forward by offering specific research questions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The present study was designed to evaluate the team workload questionnaire (TWLQ) in a task that was distinct from the task used to create it.Background: The TWLQ was created from workload ratings generated by members of athletic sports teams. Given that such teams represent only a portion of the diversity of operational teams, we aimed to assess the generalizability of the TWLQ.Method: The present study applied the TWLQ in a collaborative choice task (hiring decision) to determine whether the factor structure reported in the initial publication of the scale would generalize from the execution tasks it was developed from to a disparate team task focused on consensus building.Results: Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the present data (N = 144) were a poor fit for the three-factor structure of the TWLQ. Subsequent exploratory factor analysis revealed a much more interrelated model of team workload with no clear division between the three conceptual factors described in the original validation of the TWLQ.Conclusion: The factor structure of the TWLQ did not generalize to the present team-choice task.Application: Given that the duties of operational teams vary, it is critical that future research examine how the conceptual structure of team workload may be altered by task type. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The current study examines the feasibility and potential effects of long distance, remote simulation training on team dynamics. Design: The study design was a prospective study evaluating team dynamics before and after remote simulation. Subjects: Study subjects consisted of interdisciplinary teams (attending physicians, physicians in training, advanced care practitioners, and/or nurses). Setting: The study was conducted at nine training sites in eight countries. Interventions: Study subjects completed 2–3 simulation scenarios of acute crises before and after training with the Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness (CERTAIN). Measurements and main results: Pre- and post-CERTAIN training simulations were evaluated by two independent reviewers utilizing the Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM), which is a 11-item questionnaire that has been validated for assessing teamwork in the intensive care unit. Any discrepancies of greater than 1 point between the two reviewers on any question on the TEAM assessment were sent to a third reviewer to judge. The score that was deemed discordant by the third judge was eliminated. Pre- and post-CERTAIN training TEAM scores were averaged and compared. Of the nine teams evaluated, six teams demonstrated an overall improvement in global team performance following CERTAIN virtual training. For each of the 11 TEAM assessments, a trend toward improvement following CERTAIN training was noted; however, no assessment had universal improvement. ‘Team composure and control’ had the least absolute score improvement following CERTAIN training. The greatest improvement in the TEAM assessment scores was in the ‘team’s ability to complete tasks in a timely manner’ and in the ‘team leader’s communication to the team’. Conclusion: The assessment of team dynamics using long distance, virtual simulation training appears to be feasible and may result in improved team performance during simulated patient crises; however, language and video quality were the two largest barriers noted during the review process.

Teams perform cognitive activities such as making decisions and assessing situations as a unit. The team cognition behind these activities has traditionally been linked to individual knowledge and its distribution across team members. The theory of interactive team cognition instead argues that team cognition resides in team interactions and that it is an activity that takes place in a rich context that needs to be measured at the team level. This article describes this dynamic perspective on team cognition, some research that supports it, and the implications for measuring, understanding, and improving team cognition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The current study examines the feasibility and potential effects of long distance, remote simulation training on team dynamics. Design: The study design was a prospective study evaluating team dynamics before and after remote simulation. Subjects: Study subjects consisted of interdisciplinary teams (attending physicians, physicians in training, advanced care practitioners, and/or nurses). Setting: The study was conducted at nine training sites in eight countries. Interventions: Study subjects completed 2-3 simulation scenarios of acute crises before and after training with the Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness (CERTAIN). Measurements and main results: Pre- and post-CERTAIN training simulations were evaluated by two independent reviewers utilizing the Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM), which is a 11-item questionnaire that has been validated for assessing teamwork in the intensive care unit. Any discrepancies of greater than 1 point between the two reviewers on any question on the TEAM assessment were sent to a third reviewer to judge. The score that was deemed discordant by the third judge was eliminated. Pre- and post-CERTAIN training TEAM scores were averaged and compared. Of the nine teams evaluated, six teams demonstrated an overall improvement in global team performance following CERTAIN virtual training. For each of the 11 TEAM assessments, a trend toward improvement following CERTAIN training was noted; however, no assessment had universal improvement. 'Team composure and control' had the least absolute score improvement following CERTAIN training. The greatest improvement in the TEAM assessment scores was in the 'team's ability to complete tasks in a timely manner' and in the 'team leader's communication to the team'. Conclusion: The assessment of team dynamics using long distance, virtual simulation training appears to be feasible and may result in improved team performance during simulated patient crises; however, language and video quality were the two largest barriers noted during the review process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]