Departing from prior research focusing on average mental model similarity in teams, we propose a configural conceptualization of team (shared) mental models. Using this perspective, we examine the consequences of cognitive isolation, that is, a configuration in which one member has a task mental model that is relatively dissimilar from any other member while the remaining members’ mental models are relatively similar to each other. In a study of 79 student teams performing a business simulation over the period of 3 weeks, we find that cognitive isolation undermines team performance in teams with low member epistemic motivation.
As technology is increasingly integrated into teamwork, it is important to consider how and when human and non-human entities may function as teammates and the conditions under which they may be regarded as such. Drawing on cross-disciplinary literature, we advance a comprehensive conceptualization of “teammate,” which suggests that teammates take many forms, operate within various contexts, and are perceived as teammates. From this definition, we outline a set of guiding questions to consider before viewing technology as teammates with case examples to illustrate how one might use these questions in practice. Implications for theory, research, and practice are discussed.
Teams solve complex problems by combining expertise, yet leveraging this specialized knowledge requires time-intensive information sharing, producing a tradeoff between making decisions efficiently and knowledge emergence, the process through which individual knowledge becomes held at the team level. Using agent-based simulation, Grand et al. modeled learning and sharing processes that result in knowledge emergence. We extend this model across two simulation studies, incorporating shared and collective leadership theories to examine how authority and communication influence the tradeoff between efficiency and knowledge emergence. The simulations show who is granted decision-making authority and speaking time influence the balance of this tradeoff.
We conducted two experiments (166 triads) to examine when positive and negative moods shared among members help or hinder group creativity. We show that the effects of shared affect depend on whether groups adopt a global or local attentional focus immediately before the induction of mood. When groups initially adopted a global focus, subsequently inducing a positive mood increased group creativity relative to inducing a negative mood. In contrast, when groups initially adopted a local focus, subsequently inducing a positive mood decreased group creativity relative to inducing a negative mood. These effects were mediated by reductions in idea fixation during collaborative idea generation.
Sound decision making is critical for crews in isolated, confined, and extreme (ICE) environments, yet influencing factors are not well understood. Existing studies face challenges in generalizing due to variability in missions and crews, making data difficult to synthesize. Addressing this gap, we conducted semi-structured interviews with practitioners ( N = 8) from diverse ICE teams. Using directed content analysis guided by models of naturalistic decision making, teaming, and literature-identified ICE stressors, we propose an integrative framework that maps elements of ICE team decision making and their interrelationships, including mission objectives, risks, team characteristics, and communication. Accordingly, we identify high-priority factors for empirical investigation.
Building on conflict expression theory, we develop and validate a measure of workgroup conflict expression tendencies (the “CET” measure). The CET is comprised of four dimensions—Argue, Debate, Subvert, and Disguise—defined by the directness and intensity of expressed opposition. Across six studies with diverse samples, the measure shows strong psychometric properties and convergent, discriminant, criterion, and incremental validity. Conflict expression tendencies relate appropriately to adjacent constructs, are distinct from conflict types (task, process, relationship) and management strategies, and explain incremental variance in trust, emotions, and information acquisition. We conclude with directions for future research on conflict expression in groups.
Intergroup dialogue (IGD) is an empirically supported small group pedagogy for strengthening relationships and communication across social identities, increasing awareness of inequities, and promoting social action. Although research has examined IGD processes and outcomes from participants’ perspectives, far less is known about facilitators’ experiences, limiting guidance for facilitator training. This exploratory study investigated how peer- and self-nominated expert IGD facilitators conceptualize expertise, develop facilitation competencies, and advise on training. A critical-constructivist grounded theory analysis of seventeen interviews showed that IGD expertise centers on a dialogic orientation built through didactic and experiential learning, informing recommendations for training future facilitators.
Although team performance is crucial to organizational success, the role of social processes on the baseline and trajectory of team performance in newly formed teams remains largely unknown. Applying stress-as-offense-to-self theory, this study investigates how perceived team performance evolves over time and how individual- and team-level offenses or boosts to the self via appreciation, distributive justice, illegitimate tasks, and team meeting attitudes affect its initial level and subsequent development. Using longitudinal data from 49 student project teams, our findings support a positive performance trajectory and emphasize the importance of early perceived social dynamics on team performance throughout the collaboration process.
This meta-analysis examined how transactive memory systems (TMS) operationalization, task characteristics, and outcome measurements moderate TMS-team outcome relationships in laboratory studies. Based on 44 studies (103 effect sizes), TMS demonstrated a moderate positive relationship with team outcomes (r = .44, 95% CI [0.36, 0.50], p < .001). Team outcome measurement approach emerged as a significant moderator: self-report scales yielded larger effects (r = .77) than observer ratings (r = .38) or embedded metrics (r = .39). Findings highlight the importance of measurement decisions in TMS research.
Pit stops represent technical choreography that is highly complex and susceptible to error. An inductive examination of talk in pit crews' post-competition debriefs revealed expectations in tension: should pit crew members adapt their choreography to ensure their and others' safety, or should they push their boundaries to realize their competitive potential? In keeping with grounded practical theory methodology, analysis suggests several discursive techniques that pit crews employ in response to this tension and supports an emerging model of dilemmatic talk of debriefs.
Drawing on team-level cognitive appraisal theory, we develop and test a theoretical model that explicates whether, when, and how team reflexivity translates into team boundary-spanning behavior (TBSB). We argue that team reflexivity is a team-level stressor that shapes TBSB through distinct appraisal processes. Specifically, we examine the mediating roles of challenge and hindrance appraisals, as well as the moderating role of empowering leadership. Using multi-source, multi-wave data from 591 members nested in 140 teams, our results show that team reflexivity promotes TBSB via challenge appraisal while undermining it via hindrance appraisal. Moreover, empowering leadership conditions these relationships.
Teams research has never been for those who prefer easy answers. The future of the field will belong to those willing to ask harder questions. We must reduce our reliance on comfortable simplifications and treat variability as substantive, context as fundamental, and artificial intelligence as an active participant in collaboration. The future of teams research will depend on scholars willing to embrace messiness without sacrificing rigor.
This essay discusses the future of research on group status using a multilevel perspective. Although status is inherently multilevel, researchers in this domain have not fully leveraged this perspective in their empirical studies. We identify three ways group status can, and should, be represented as a multilevel phenomenon: when status ratings are obtained from multiple observers, when individual member status ratings are used to compose group status perceptions or hierarchies, and when status changes dynamically over time. We hope this essay encourages scholars to more fully embrace a multilevel approach, which is essential for advancing research on status in small groups and beyond.
Medical teams operating under stressful conditions are prone to experiencing disconnects, which are instances of task-specific incompatibility (i.e., ineffective coordination) between team members. In simulation-based medical team training, we examined (1) whether we can identify disconnects, by locating transitions in low-level team coordination based on data collected with wearable devices, and (2) how medical teams address disconnects based on video-based annotations of different types of high-level team coordination behavior. We find that with our exploratory approach we can identify disconnects with low-level transitions. Moreover, teams resolve disconnects with explicit action and information coordination, but lose valuable time in doing so.
As small groups and teams research undergoes rapid methodological and technological transformation, longstanding theoretical questions about coordination are resurfacing in consequential ways. Advances in wearable sensing, artificial intelligence, and computational modeling now enable fine-grained observation of multilevel interaction dynamics, revealing teams as complex, multiscale systems. Drawing on a decade of research in coordination dynamics, this paper argues for reframing coordination as a foundational organizing principle rather than a discrete team process. We outline three key opportunities for the next decade: developing multiscale, functionally grounded theories of coordination; aligning methodological choices with conceptual meaning through systematic comparison of synchrony metrics; and adopting longitudinal designs to capture coordination trajectories across time. Integrating these directions promises to enhance theoretical coherence, methodological rigor, and practical relevance. Ultimately, a multiscale, temporally informed understanding of coordination dynamics can advance cumulative science and inform interventions that promote adaptive teamwork in high-stakes organizational contexts.
Teams are increasingly the locus of our work and leisure, with the study of such groups still important for human flourishing. This essay focuses on four aspects of studying team diversity: topics (e.g., language, human-AI teams), theory, multidisciplinary approaches, and funding/conducting such research. Not only are different types of heterogeneity fruitful to study, but the next decade could see a diversity of theories, approaches, and ways to support such research.
The widespread use of teams across society has driven interest in understanding team effectiveness. Prior reviews often focus on specific disciplines or contexts (e.g., sports or medicine). Using systematic bibliometric protocols enriched with machine learning, this study synthesizes 6,051 peer-reviewed publications from Scopus and WoS, covering 1992 to 2022, to examine the evolution of team effectiveness research, key contributors, influential publications, and emerging trends. Results reveal exponential growth-Co-authorship, co-citation, and co-word analyses-identified influential venues, authors, publications, and 10 thematic pillars: TEAM PROCESSES; TEAM COMPOSITION & DIVERSITY; EMERGENT STATES; TEAM COGNITION; LEADERSHIP; TECHNOLOGY, VIRTUAL & HYBRID TEAMS; TEAM OUTCOMES & EFFECTIVENESS INDICATORS; ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT & TEAM SUPPORT; TEAM DEVELOPMENT & TRAINING; and MULTI-TEAM SYSTEMS & INTER-TEAM DYNAMICS. Emerging trends include AI integration, adaptive leadership in diverse contexts, and conflict resolution in hybrid teams. This review offers a research agenda and a dynamic, open-access dataset to support future studies.
In this essay, I highlight the liminality of teams research - where new discoveries can be made by embracing things "in-between." One liminal space is that between individuals and groups - the patterns of intra- and interpersonal relationships that represent the microdynamics of teams. Another liminal space is that between past and future research philosophies, questions, and methods that will help us discover those patterns. Liminal spaces are transitional and challenging, but they are the very threshold of exciting change.
This essay argues that today's teams need a broader, communication-centered, multilevel understanding of expertise in an AI era. Rather than treating expertise as a stable attribute located in individuals, it foregrounds how expertise is enacted and negotiated across people, AI tools, and everyday work practices. I outline three directions for future research: tracing how expertise circulates in AI-mediated work, designing communicative safeguards that sustain accountability, and developing practices that make human-AI expertise legible and durable over time.
