Search

PurposeTeams play a central role in the implementation of new practices in settings providing team-based care. However, the implementation science literature has paid little attention to potentially important team-level constructs. Aspects of teamwork, including team interdependence, team functioning, and team performance, may affect implementation processes and outcomes. This cross-sectional study tests associations between teamwork and implementation antecedents and outcomes in a statewide initiative to implement a standardized mental health screening/referral protocol in Child Advocacy Centers (CACs).MethodsMultidisciplinary team members (N = 433) from 21 CACs completed measures of team interdependence; affective, behavioral, and cognitive team functioning; and team performance. Team members also rated the acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of the screening/referral protocol and implementation climate. The implementation outcomes of days to adoption and reach were independently assessed with administrative data. Associations between team constructs and implementation antecedents and outcomes were tested with linear mixed models and regression analyses.ResultsTeam task interdependence was positively associated with implementation climate and reach, and outcome interdependence was negatively correlated with days to adoption. Task and outcome interdependence were not associated with acceptability, appropriateness, or feasibility of the screening/referral protocol. Affective team functioning (i.e., greater liking, trust, and respect) was associated with greater acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. Behavioral and cognitive team functioning were not associated with any implementation outcomes in multivariable models. Team performance was positively associated with acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, and implementation climate; performance was not associated with days to adoption or reach.ConclusionsWe found associations of team interdependence, functioning, and performance with both individual- and center-level implementation outcomes. Implementation strategies targeting teamwork, especially task interdependence, affective functioning, and performance, may contribute to improving implementation outcomes in team-based service settings.

BackgroundChildren's Advocacy Centers (CACs) use multidisciplinary teams to investigate and respond to maltreatment allegations. CACs play a critical role in connecting children with mental health needs to evidence-based mental health treatment, especially in low-resourced rural areas. Standardized mental health screening and referral protocols can improve CACs' capacity to identify children with mental health needs and encourage treatment engagement. In the team-based context of CACs, teamwork quality is likely to influence implementation processes and outcomes. Implementation strategies that target teams and apply the science of team effectiveness may enhance implementation outcomes in team-based settings.MethodsWe will use Implementation Mapping to develop team-focused implementation strategies to support the implementation of the Care Process Model for Pediatric Traumatic Stress (CPM-PTS), a standardized screening and referral protocol. Team-focused strategies will integrate activities from effective team development interventions. We will pilot team-focused implementation in a cluster-randomized hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation trial. Four rural CACs will implement the CPM-PTS after being randomized to either team-focused implementation (n = 2 CACs) or standard implementation (n = 2 CACs). We will assess the feasibility of team-focused implementation and explore between-group differences in hypothesized team-level mechanisms of change and implementation outcomes (implementation aim). We will use a within-group pre-post design to test the effectiveness of the CPM-PTS in increasing caregivers' understanding of their child's mental health needs and caregivers' intentions to initiate mental health services (effectiveness aim).ConclusionsTargeting multidisciplinary teams is an innovative approach to improving implementation outcomes. This study will be one of the first to test team-focused implementation strategies that integrate effective team development interventions. Results will inform efforts to implement evidence-based practices in team-based service settings.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, NCT05679154 . Registered on January 10, 2023.

The quality of teamwork in Child Advocacy Center (CAC) multidisciplinary teams is likely to affect the extent to which the CAC model improves outcomes for children and families. This study examines associations between team functioning and performance in a statewide sample of CAC teams. Multidisciplinary team members (N = 433) from 21 CACs completed measures of affective, behavioral, and cognitive team functioning. Team performance was assessed with three measures: team member ratings of overall performance, ratings of mental health screening/referral frequency, and caregiver satisfaction surveys. Linear mixed models and regression analyses tested associations between team functioning and performance. Affective team functioning (i.e., liking, trust, and respect; psychological safety) and cognitive team functioning (i.e., clear direction) were significantly associated with team members' ratings of overall performance. Behavioral team functioning (i.e., coordination) and cognitive team functioning were significantly associated with mental health screening/referral frequency. Team functioning was not associated with caregiver satisfaction with CAC services. Aspects of team functioning were associated with team members' perceptions of overall performance and mental health screening/referral frequency, but not caregiver satisfaction. Understanding associations between team functioning and performance in multidisciplinary teams can inform efforts to improve service quality in CACs and other team-based service settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reaching agreement in distributive negotiations often requires making concessions, in which one side incurs a cost to provide a benefit to the other party. Although these two aspects, conceder-cost and receiver-benefit, coexist in any concession, past work has not disentangled the potentially differential effects of concessions framed as conceder-cost versus receiverbenefit on negotiation processes and outcomes. In this paper, we document that concession-givers use conceder-cost frames more frequently and expect them to be more believable than receiver-benefit frames. However, receivers of concessions that emphasize conceder-cost are more skeptical of this frame and perceive their counterpart to be more manipulative than receivers of concessions that emphasize benefit. These negative perceptions, in turn lead them to make lower counteroffers compared to receivers of concessions that emphasize benefit, which ultimately help their economic outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examined the effects of personality traits on individuals' reactions to broken promises. We studied the effects of Neuroticism and Agreeableness on emotive and cognitive responses to breach and investigated whether these effects varied across different types (economic vs. social) and severity (high vs. low) of breach. We collected data from a scenario-based experiment with 119 undergraduate participants. Neuroticism was found to influence emotive and cognitive responses, whereas Agreeableness influenced emotive responses. Agreeableness also interacted with the type and severity of breach to differentially predict individuals' responses to breach.

Negotiators' social motives (cooperative vs. individualistic) influence their strategic behaviors. In this study, the authors used multilevel modeling and analyses of strategy sequences to test hypotheses regarding how negotiators' social motives and the composition of the group influence group members' negotiation strategies. Four-person groups negotiating a 5-issue mixed-motive decision-making task were videotaped, and the tapes were transcribed and coded. Group composition included 2 homogeneous conditions (all cooperators and all individualists) and 3 heterogeneous conditions (3 cooperators and 1 individualist, 2 cooperators and 2 individualists, 1 cooperator and 3 individualists). Results showed that cooperative negotiators adjusted their use of integrative and distributive strategies in response to the social-motive composition of the group, but individualistic negotiators did not. Results from analyses of strategy sequences showed that cooperators responded more systematically to others' behaviors than did individualists. They also redirected the negotiation depending on group composition. Keywords: negotiation, social motives, group processes

This article examines the effects of the other party's concession behavior on a negotiator's satisfaction and judgments. The timing of the concessions (immediate, gradual, delayed) and the justifications provided by the other party (negotiator skill vs. external constraints) were manipulated using a scenario method (Study 1) and a role-playing experiment (Study 2). Study 1 showed that concession timing influenced valuation of the object and satisfaction with the partner and the outcome. Justifications about why the concession was made interacted with concession timing to influence participants' attributions. Participants' attributions for why the concession was actually made, in turn, had a main effect on satisfaction and judgments of the negotiation. Study 2 replicated some, but not all, of these findings.

This study provides a meta-analysis of research on the associations between relationship conflict, task conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction. Consistent with past theorizing, results revealed strong and negative correlations between relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction. In contrast to what has been suggested in both academic research and introductory textbooks, however, results also revealed strong and negative (instead of the predicted positive) correlations between task conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction. As predicted, conflict had stronger negative relations with team performance in highly complex (decision making, project, mixed) than in less complex (production) tasks. Finally, task conflict was less negatively related to team performance when task conflict and relationship conflict were weakly, rather than strongly, correlated.