Command and Control Teams: Techniques for Assessing Team Performance

Cooper, Merri-Ann; Shiflett, Samuel C.; Korotkin, Arthur L.; Fleishman, Edwin A.

doi:10.21236/ada141442

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Fleishman and his colleagues developed a more extensive taxonomy of team-performance dimensions (Cooper, Shiflett, Korotkin, & Fleishman, 1984; Nieva, Fleishman, & Rieck, 1978; Shiflett, Eisner, Price, & Schemmer, 1982). After a number of years of research on the structure of tasks and human abilities (see Fleishman & Quaintance, 1984, for the culmination of this work), Fleishman focused his attention on teams in a programmatic research effort that spanned a decade.…”

Section: Critical Constructsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teams embedded in organizations: Some implications.

Ilgen¹

1999

American Psychologist

339

246

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From the early 1980s to the present, organizations have increased their reliance on teams. Over the same time period, the amount of traditional small group–team research has decreased. The void has been filled by research that is focused on issues facing task-performing teams embedded in organizations. It is argued here that the organizational perspective has produced research that complements and extends past research on groups and teams. A case is made for differences in orientation between traditional team research and work aimed specifically at teams in organizations. Implications of these differences are explored.

show abstract

Section: Critical Constructsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teams embedded in organizations: Some implications.

Ilgen¹

1999

American Psychologist

339

246

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This taxonomy underwent through several iterations (Cooper et al , 1984; Nieva et al , 1978; Shiflett et al , 1982) until its current form, which consists of the following seven functions: Orientation. Resource distribution. Timing. Response coordination. Motivation. Systems monitoring. Procedure maintenance. …”

Section: Conceptual Framework Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceived outcomes of action learning: study from a large public sector organization in UAE

Rao

Abdul²,

D’souza

2017

MBE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of action learning programs on individual performance improvement and career progression in a large banking sector organization in the UAE. Design/methodology/approach A conceptual model was proposed and measured the outcomes of the action learning program variables in a public sector bank in the UAE. A total of 106 employees of the organization who had participated in a certified management program (CMP) have responded to the survey. Findings The outcomes of action learning program variables, such as self-efficacy, teamwork and performance management, were found to have an influence significantly on individual performance improvement. Research limitations/implications As the current study was focused on banking sector only, similar studies from other industries/sectors (e.g. trading, services, etc.) can be taken up for further research by including antecedents and consequences of participants of action learning programs. Practical implications This study could offer specific guidance to managers as to how and what type of education and learning programs to be provided to their team members for competency development and career progression. Social implications As the UAE economy is growing and population staying in the region is becoming multicultural, there is an ample need for managers to foster learning and education environment in various organizations to change culture and managerial practices toward achieving organizational objectives. Originality/value The study is original and provides value and direction for managers and senior management on talent development processes.

show abstract

“…The taxonomy developed by Nieva et al (1978) is presented in Table 2 and the final modification of that taxonomy by Fleishman and Zaccaro (1992) is given in Table 3. The preliminary taxonomy developed by Nieva et al was revised by Shifflett et al (1982) and then validated by a process of rating videotapes of Army combat and combat support teams (Shifflett et al, 1982) and Air Force command and control teams (Cooper, Shifflett, Korotkin, & Fleishman, 1984). As a result of these studies, in which raters used validated behavioral rating scales, Cooper et al identified additional functions (systems monitoring and procedure maintenance) which were added to the scheme.…”

Section: Quadrant I Generatementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Motivational functions We recognize the importance of motivational functions, but in regard to C2V performance, we assume that motivation is sufficiently high (cf. Cooper et al, 1984). Table 5 Taxonomy of Task Demand Functions (Version 2) 1.…”

Section: Error-checking Functionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We recognize the importance of motivational functions, but in regard to C2V performance, we assume that motivation is sufficiently high (cf. Cooper et al, 1984). The research assistants identified tasks from this list that were not redundant, that were sufficiently complex, and that showed some promise for inclusion in the final battery.…”

Section: Motivational Functionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Development of a team performance task battery to evaluate performance of the command and control vehicle (C2V) crew

McGlyn¹,

Sutton²,

Sprague³

et al. 1999

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Requirements for mobility and speed in battle command led to the development of a mobile, digitized command and control vehicle (C2V). Conducting battle command in a C2V impacts how the individual and team will acquire, process, and disseminate information. To test the effect that the C2V will have on battle command performance requires an evaluation of both individual and team performance. Cognitive test batteries exist to assess individual performance. The current effort was to develop a task battery for use in evaluating team performance. Four team performance functions (information exchange, resource matching, coordination, and error checking) were proposed and used to guide the selection of tasks to form a team performance task battery. Tasks were selected from a large sample of group tasks identified and assessed for applicability to the team performance functions. Tasks that most exemplified each of the four functions and that could be used to support the C2V test were compiled into a task list and developed for implementation. Task development included creating, gathering, or assembling stimulus materials, instructions, and test protocols. Manual versions of all the selected tasks and digital versions of some tasks were developed. A sufficient number of replications of each task were developed to support the C2V test design. Four of the tasks developed were used during the C2V test. It was concluded that the C2V environment impaired performance of all group performance tasks, especially those that required a great degree of coordination and integration. Future research must expand this initial effort to empirically define and validate team functions and related tasks.

show abstract

Command and Control Teams: Techniques for Assessing Team Performance

Cited by 7 publications

References 74 publications

Teams embedded in organizations: Some implications.

Teams embedded in organizations: Some implications.

Perceived outcomes of action learning: study from a large public sector organization in UAE

Development of a team performance task battery to evaluate performance of the command and control vehicle (C2V) crew

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About