Suchergebnisse

PurposeWhereas motivation and coordination losses in teams have been investigated for quite some time, systematic research on performance gains in teams (often called "synergetic effects") only emerged recently. The purpose of the present paper is to clarify the concept of process gains (or synergy) in teams, and to introduce recent findings from basic psychology that can be very valuable for the management of high performing teams.Design/methodology/approachBased on the definition of synergy as process gain during teamwork compared with a clear baseline (team potential), this review develops specific requirements for the empirical demonstration of synergetic effects in teams. Moreover, a brief history of research on process gains in teams is provided, followed by an outlook on current and future trends in this field.FindingsAlthough this research is still in its pioneering days, various triggers of process gains in teams have been already derived theoretically and/or demonstrated empirically, among them social support from fellow team members, perceived indispensability for the team outcome, the development and/or selection of experts for task and team processes, use of multiple perspectives and information, team learning, and social identification processes.Practical implicationsUnderstanding the preconditions and underlying mechanisms of process gains in teams enables managers to trigger performance levels of teams that exceed what can be expected based on the individual team members' capabilities alone. Moreover, the estimation of a team's potential provides a helpful standard for the assessment of the ongoing team performance.Originality/valueProcess gains in teams and related laboratory research have been largely neglected in the managerial literature so far. This paper and the current special issue are among the first to introduce a clear definition of process gains in teams, and to suggest concrete trigger factors of synergetic effects in teams based on systematic research.

PurposeSocial support from fellow team members has been neglected as a unique source of process gains in teams. This paper seeks to introduce the Model of Social Support within Teams (MSST) that explicates testable hypotheses on effects of team partners' affective and task‐related support on team performance.Design/methodology/approachA theoretical model is proposed that specifies the psychological mechanisms by which affective and task‐related support from fellow team members evoke process gains in teams compared with individual work. Moreover, moderators and potential limits of these beneficial effects are described. The model integrates results from experimental research on behaviour in small groups with findings from field studies on organisational citizenship behaviour, team cognition, and efficacy beliefs at the individual and team level.FindingsIt is predicted that affective support predominantly increases individual members' motivation, while task‐related support predominantly improves coordination within teams. Moreover, various moderators (team members' dispositions, task design, team characteristics) are considered.Practical implicationsAccording to this analysis, social support can be an effective measure to trigger process gains in teams, and thus to increase team performance and organisational success. Concrete interventions to foster social support in teams are derived from the model, among them task design, consideration of social attitudes in selection and staffing, and team training.Originality/valueThis paper introduces a theoretical model explicating a previously neglected source of process gains in teams. In contrast with other sources of process gains, social support relates to the interaction among team members and integrates both motivation and coordination gains.

PurposeThis study seeks to explore why some teams realize performance gains and others do not. Team identification is proposed as an explanatory mechanism of performance.Design/methodology/approachData from two longitudinal studies with 42 teams (270 individuals) are examined using regression analysis. Study 1 relies on student teams, while Study 2 is based on two field samples of actual working teams. In both studies, team identification was captured prior to the objective performance measures.FindingsThis study empirically provides evidence that team identification is linked to team performance across three settings.Research limitations/implicationsAlthough the sample size is relatively small within each study, the implications are that team process variables such as identification matter when gauging performance across all three settings.Practical implicationsIt is critical that team‐oriented processes, such as identification, are promoted if managers hope to see performance gains within work teams. Just because a team is created, this does not guarantee that the members will operate as a collective entity to accomplish tasks. If the members of the team identify with one another, they are more likely to outperform individual‐oriented teams.Originality/valueThere is little agreement regarding performance gains and teamwork. This study demonstrates that teams with identification are better performers across three settings, in which two are based on applied settings of actual intact work teams. This study is also valuable because it provides longitudinal data, given that identification is measured prior to performance.

Combinations of concentrated work and interactions are facilitated by office environments such as activity-based flexible offices (A-FOs). A-FOs are characterized by activity-based workspaces, an open-plan layout, and desk sharing. Although there is a growing enthusiasm for replacing cellular offices with A-FOs, the effects of such changes on office workers are still unclear. Within this three-wave longitudinal study, we investigated the changes (time lag of 1 and 8 months after the redesign) in perceived need–supply fit, distraction, interaction across teams, and workspace satisfaction during relocation from a cellular office to an A-FO. Moreover, as previous case studies indicated individual differences in the use of A-FOs, we considered participants' perceived need–supply fit as a moderator indicating an appropriate use of A-FO supplies. We found a linear increase of perceived need–supply fit, a decrease in distraction, and a significant interaction effect where workspace satisfaction and interaction across teams increased more strongly for participants reporting a better perceived need–supply fit.

PurposeEstablished measures of work values were often developed without consideration of age‐related differences, and thus might not be sensitive for values that are only relevant for specific subgroups (i.e. older workers). Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to introduce a new measure that reflects a broad range of different work values including those of special interest for older workers (generativity values). The Munster Work Value Measure (MWVM) covers 21 work values from five value clusters, and combines a rating and ranking version.Design/methodology/approachThe theoretical concept of the MWVM integrates various approaches from work motivation research. Reliability and validity of the MWVM are examined in two studies (n=81, n=471) using confirmatory factor analysis and multidimensional unfolding as well as concurrent data of organizational citizenship behavior and age‐related differences in work values.FindingsThe assumed structure of the MWVM was largely supported in both studies and for both the ranking and the rating versions of the MWVM. Moreover, correlational data supported the external validity of the MWVM.Research limitations/implicationsFurther validation research is desirable, together with benchmark data for specific subgroups (age, gender, occupations).Practical implicationsThe MWVM qualifies as an efficient screening tool of motivational profiles and provides a basis for age‐sensitive human resource management.Originality/valueThe MWVM is the first measure that covers a broad range of work values including those of particular importance to older workers. The MWVM is available at the authors' web site.