SummaryWe conducted a field study of 71 action teams to examine the relationship between team mental model similarity and accuracy and the performance of real-world teams. We used Pathfinder to operationalize team members' taskwork mental models (describing team procedures, tasks, and equipment) and teamwork mental models (describing team interaction processes) and examined team performance as evaluated by expert team assessment center raters. Both taskwork mental model and teamwork mental model similarity predicted team performance. Team mental model accuracy measures were also predictive of team performance. We discuss the implications of our findings and directions for future research.

This study examined the 5-factor model of personality, transformational leadership, and team performance under conditions similar to typical and maximum performance contexts. Data were collected from 39 combat teams from an Asian military sample (N = 276). Results found that neuroticism and agreeableness were negatively related to transformational leadership ratings. Team performance ratings correlated at only.18 across the typical and maximum contexts. Furthermore, transformational leadership related more strongly to team performance in the maximum rather than the typical context. Finally, transformational leadership fully mediated the relationship between leader personality and team performance in the maximum context but only partially mediated the relationship between leader personality and team performance in the typical context. The Discussion section focuses on how these findings, although interesting, need to be replicated with different designs, contexts, and measures.

Drawing on social exchange and similarity-attraction theories, we hypothesized that individuals' demographic characteristics, values, and personality influence their acquisition of central positions in their teams' social networks. Education and neuroticism predicted centrality five months later; individuals who were highly educated and low in neuroticism became high in advice and friendship centrality and low in adversarial centrality. Team members' values similarity to their teammates also predicted advice and friendship centrality; demographic similarity had limited effects.

No abstract