Multiteam Systems: A Structural Framework and Meso-Theory of System Functioning

Abstract

It has been over a decade since organizational researchers began seriously grappling with the phenomenon of multiteam systems (MTSs) as an organizational form spanning traditional team and organizational boundaries. The MTS concept has been met with great enthusiasm as an organizational form that solves both theoretical and practical challenges. However, the development of the MTS domain has been stifled by the absence of theory that clearly delineates the core dimensions influencing the interactions between the individuals and teams operating within them. We contribute to such theory building by creating a multidimensional framework that centers on two key structural features of MTSs—differentiation and dynamism—that create distinct forces affecting individual and team behavior within the system. Differentiation characterizes the degree of difference and separation between MTS component teams at a particular point in time, whereas dynamism describes the variability and instability of the system over time. For each dimension, we discuss the underlying subdimensions that explain how structural features generate boundary-enhancing and disruptive forces in MTSs. We then advance a mesolevel theory of MTS functioning that associates those forces with individuals’ needs and motives, which, in turn, compile upward to form team and MTS emergent states. Finally, we discuss coordination mechanisms that offset or compensate for the structural effects and serve to cohere the MTS component teams. The theoretical and practical implications of our work and an agenda for future research are then discussed.

Challenges to multiteam system leadership: an analysis of leadership during the management of railway disruptions

“…Contrary to most of the studies on teamwork, which focus on individuals within a single team, MTS research looks at how multiple teams function to grasp the unique opportunities, challenges, and complexities of these systems (Marks et al 2005). For instance, although teams might be effective at within-team coordination, the system itself may still fail to adapt to a disruption, due to an inability to meet between-team coordination requirements (Luciano et al 2015). MTS research has stressed the importance of leader teams (e.g.…”

Accomplishment of goal levels in multi team systems: Role of leadership skills and multicultural teams

“…Here, goal striving means the sets of processes and activities in the attainment and fulfillment of goals that can be achieved by individuals, multi teams and component teams. According to Luciano, DeChurch & Mathieu (2015), teams plan for a valuable advantage for the MTS in their planning process. However, the adaption of goal striving resulting from goal hierarchical changes are due to the insertion of new objectives that ascend from the operational conditions which are basically not included in goal hierarchy of MTSs.…”

“…For instance, ambulance crew not only extracts victims from vehicle at road accident but also diverts traffic, clears the roadways and minimizes additional health loss. On the contrary, Luciano, DeChurch, Mathieu (2015) argued that goal striving adaption leads to diversion of attention because for achieving MTS goals the component teams cannot concentrate all of their resources in this regard. While discussing the systematic sequence inter dependencies (back to back, corresponding, and concentrated), each systematic sequence imposes and differs on the basis of certain sequence of behaviors which lead them to the exploit of predominant team objectives.…”

Conflict management for co‐ordination between shift teams in Shanghai subway stations

“…). Researchers have called for investigations on how teams in a multiteam system work together and, in particular, manage conflicts across team boundaries to improve the performance of the system (Luciano, DeChurch and Mathieu in press; Zaccaro, Marks and DeChurch ). Having teams compete against each other has long been thought to strengthen their motivation and productivity because they possess the incentives to win (Sherif and Sherif ).…”

“…). Individuals from different teams develop psychological safety among themselves, which helps them feel free to express their own positions and doubts (Somech and Khalaili ); they use collaborative rather than contentious approaches to discuss and communicate varying perspectives because they believe they are confronted with a common task (Luciano, DeChurch and Mathieu in press). These interaction dynamics induced by co‐operative goals are labeled the co‐operative approach to conflict management.…”