# Presentation: 732446

## Models and Approaches for Conducting Team-Level Research 

- Greg L. Stewart, PhD
- Tippie College of Business
- University of Iowa

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Why Study Teams?

- Growing Prevalence
- Technology
- Complexity
- Linking pin between organizations and people
- Closer proximity to behavior than organizations

- Please click to change to the next slide

##        Input, Process, Output Model of Teams

- INPUTS
- Team Composition
- Task Type
- Interdependence
- Autonomy
- Leadership
- Size
- Support

- PROCESSES
- Role Formation
- Communication
- Power
- Influence
- Conflict

- OUTPUTS
- Productivity
- Satisfaction
- Viability
- Coordination

- Forming         Storming         Norming        Performing

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Inputs for TeamsMeta-Analytic Results

- Inputs for TeamsMeta-Analytic Results

**                           ****Team Composition**
- 			   _K_	    _N_	   _rho_	   _VE_
-    Aggregated Traits	  38       3037	   .27	    40
-       Personality		  20       1842	   .26	    60
-       Cognitive		  10         791	   .40	    78
-   Heterogeneity	  26       1830	  -.04	  100
-        Management	    8         804	  -.03	  100
-        Production	  10         561	  -.07	  100
-        Demographics	  14         774	  -.07	  100
-        Expertise		  11       1046	  -.05	  100

- Source: Stewart, in press,
- Journal of Management

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Inputs for TeamsMeta-Analytic Results

- Inputs for TeamsMeta-Analytic Results

**                                    ****Task Design**
- 			   _K_	    _N_	   _rho_	   _VE_
-    Autonomy		  19       1410	   .25	    36
-       Knowledge	  11         684	   .26	    50
-       Physical		    6         380	   .36	    29
-   Interdependence	  11         574	   .25	  100
-        Knowledge	    6         308	   .29	    90
-        Physical		    3         161	   .12	  100
-  Meaningfulness	  15       1327	   .16	    55

- Source: Stewart, in press,
- Journal of Management

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Inputs for TeamsMeta-Analytic Results

- Inputs for TeamsMeta-Analytic Results

**                           ****Team Leadership**
- 			   _K_	    _N_	   _rho_	   _VE_
-    Leadership		  53       2437	   .26	    46
-       Transformational	  12	   541 	   .33	  100
-       Empowering	    9         580	   .32	    30
-                              **Other Effects**
-   Team Size		  26       1862	   .04	  100
-        Project		    8         489	   .09	  100
-        Production	  12         749 	  -.01	  100
-   Support		  13	   822      .34        63

- Source: Stewart, in press,
- Journal of Management

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Promising Areas for Team Input Research

- Team Composition
- Desirable characteristics; not heterogeneity
- Coordination
- Autonomy from other parts of organization
- Interdependence within team
- Leadership
- Facilitative Support
- Training, compensation, resources

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Critical Issues in Teams Research

- Measurement of Team-Level Constructs
- Outside Measures
- Aggregation of Team Member Measures
- Cross-Level Modeling
- Nesting of individuals
- Nesting within organizations

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Example Data

- Team 1  (Performance = 93)
- 			Task	       Social	Cohesion
-    Member A		  4.5	          3.3	     5.0
-    Member B		  3.0	          4.5       	     4.5
-    Member C		  2.5	          5.0	     4.0
- Team 2  (Performance = 78)
- 			Task	       Social	Cohesion
-    Member A		  2.0	          5.0	     5.0
-    Member B		  3.5	          4.0       	     4.5
-    Member C		  5.0	          1.0	     2.0

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Team Level Measurement Models

- Additive Model
- Team measure is sum of individual measures
- Average scores for task role inputs within teams
- Consensus Model
- Team measure is consistency of individual measures about self or peers
- Consistency of task role inputs within teams
- Referent-Shift Consensus Model
- Team measure is consistent individual perceptions about collective target
- Consistency of perceptions of cohesion, then mean within each team

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Team Level Measurement Models

- Dispersion Model
- Team measure is variance of individual measures
- Measure is variance of task roles within teams
- Process Model
- Team measure is some meaningful combination of individual measures
- Measures include maximum individual, minimum individual, proportional blocs, skew of distribution for each team, etc.

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Assessing Consistency

- Rwg measure  (Agreement)
- Compares variation in raters scores with expected variance; provides a measure for each group
- Formula:  1- (actual/expected)
- Expected depends on response alternatives & expected shape of distribution
- Expected shapes are rectangular, triangular, skewed
- Example

- 		Rater 1         Rater 2	Rater 3	    Rater 4
- Desired	   	    4	          4                     4   	        4
- Rectangular	    1	          2	    	    4	        5

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Assessing Consistency

- Intraclass Correlations (Reliability)
- ICC1:  [MSB-MSW] / MSB + [(k-1)*MSW]
- Proportion of total variance explained by group membership
- (i.e., 50 percent of an individual’s cohesion perception can be explained by her team membership).
- Reliability of a single rater
- ICC2:  [MSB-MSW] / MSB
- An estimate of the reliability of group means
- Compares variance between groups with variance within groups; Reliability is higher when more groups are internally consistent but vary from one another
- Reliability of ratings provided by all members of team

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Sample Findings

- Sample of 45 Teams
- 4-6 members per team
- Executive Students completing class projects
- Measures: Task Inputs, Social Inputs, Cohesion, Group Performance
- Cohesion (consensus measure)
- Rwg
- Mean for 45 groups is .85
- Range is .09 to .99
- 5 groups fall below the .70 threshold
- ICC
- ICC1 is .46
- ICC2 is .80

- Source: Stewart, Fulmer, & Barrick
- Working Paper, 2004

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Sample Findings

- 			      Cohesion	       Performance
- 1. Social Role Mean	 	 .65		-.09
- 2. Social Role Variance	-.43		-.33
- 3. Social Role Skew		-.28		-.12
- 4. Task Role Mean		 .13		-.08
- 5. Task Role Variance		-.45		 .15
- 6. Task Role Skew		 .15		-.20

- Source: Stewart, Fulmer, & Barrick
- Working Paper, 2004

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Nesting of Teams

- Person
- A

- Person
- C

- Person
- B

- Team 1

- Person
- D

- Person
- F

- Person
- E

- Team 2

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Levels of Relationships

- Single Level Models
- Individual — Individual Level
- Team — Team Level
- Organization — Organization Level
- Cross Level Models
- Individual — Team Level
- Organization — Team Level
- Cross-Level Moderation

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Single Level Models

- Individual
- Does mental ability predict individual performance?
- Team
- Does interdependence predict performance?
- Organization
- Does number of management layers predict performance?

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Team – Team Level Research

- 5

- 3

- 4

- 0

- -1

- +1

- Performance

- Interdependence

- Creative
- Tasks

- Routine
- Tasks

-             Plots for Relationships
-            with Team Performance

- Source: Stewart & Barrick, 2000
- Academy of Management Journal

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Individual-Team Level Research

- 			_Viability__	__Cohesion__	__Performance_
- Mean Ability		   .28		 -.01		     .23
- Minimum Ability	   .13		  .04		     .02
- Maximum Ability	  -.06		 -.24		     .03
- Mean Conscientious	   .20		  .00		     .26
- Min Conscientious	   .20		  .14		     .34
- Max Conscientious	   .08		 -.08		     .01
- Mean	Agreeable	   .16		  .32		     .34
- Min Agreeable	   .20		  .38		     .32
- Max Agreeable	 -.18		 -.39		   -.06

- Source: Barrick, Stewart, Neubert, & Mount, 1998
- Journal of Applied Psychology

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Individual-Team Level Research

- 			_Viability__	__Cohesion__	__Performance_
- Mean Extraversion	   .30		   .36		     .12
- Min Extraversion	   .31		   .24		     .26
- Max Extraversion	   .19		   .33		   -.02
- Mean Emotion Stab	   .32		   .53		     .24
- Min Emotion Stabil	   .31		   .34		     .03
- Max Emotion Stabil	   .12		   .18		   -.11

- Source: Barrick, Stewart, Neubert, & Mount, 1998
- Journal of Applied Psychology

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Cross-Level Moderator

- 279 people in 19 teams working in manufacturing
- Individual Relationship
- People high on openness to experience are higher individual performers when working in teams
- Team-level moderator
- Openness to Experience-Performance relationship is stronger when the person is working in a team with high interdependence
- Adaptation becomes increasingly critical

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Cross-Level Moderator

- Hierarchical Linear Modeling Process
- Level 1: Regression equation to calculate beta of relationship between openness and performance within each group
- Level 2: Use beta coefficients as dependent variable; team interdependence as independent variable
- Results
- Team-level interdependence moderates the individual-level relationship  (slope =1.85; t=1.91, _p_<.05)

- Source: Stewart, 2004
- Working Paper

- Please click to change to the next slide

## Cross-Level Moderator #2

- Laboratory Experiment
- Openness and performance at individual level
- Team goals at team level

- Source: Stewart, 2004
- Working Paper

- Please click to change to the next slide

## When Doing Teams Research

- Think carefully about levels of analysis issues
- Which level for each variable?
- How do the variables relate across levels?
- Pay attention to measurement issues
- Is the measure a form of aggregation?
- If so, what type of aggregation is best?

- Please click to change to the next slide