Studying team shared mental models

Group, team, or something in between? Conceptualising and measuring team entitativity

“…Hence the focus was on visual cues that can be observed by outsiders who are not part of the entity. As opposed to the outsider perspective, studies including an insider perspective focus on properties of the group, as they are experienced and perceived by the members themselves (Carpenter et al, 2008;Jans, Postmes, & Van der Zee, 2011). These are not necessarily observable by non-group members.…”

“…The extent to which these properties are perceived to be present is presumed to indicate the group's degree of entitativity. For example, Carpenter et al (2008) ascribed the fact that some groups are more group-like than others to the perceived degree of cohesion, unity, interdependence, conformity, and fit between group members. From an insiders' perspective, Jans et al (2011) criticised the proposition that similarity -a core aspect of entitativity in an outsider perspective -is a key predictor of perceived entitativity and argue that within-group differences do not necessarily hinder a sense of cohesion and unity.…”

“…The defining features included in the conceptualisation put forward here are derived from the aforementioned team definitions and the most prominent criteria rising from entitativity literature (Campbell, 1958;Carpenter et al, 2008;Hamilton et al, 2002). Three main features of team entitativity can be distinguished, acting as forces binding team members together in a task-focused team: (a) having shared goals and responsibilities, (b) cohesion, and (c) interdependence among team members.…”

“…Entitativity literature uses common goals and outcomes, shared purpose, and common fate as criteria or cues for the degree of entitativity (Campbell, 1958;Carpenter et al, 2008;Crawford & Salaman, 2012;Hamilton & Sherman, 1996;Lickel et al, 2000). Furthermore, to be defined as a team, groups of individuals have to share common goals (Katzenbach & Smith, 1993;Kozlowski & Bell, 2003).…”

“…The degree of cohesion is a second defining feature of entitativity (e.g., Carpenter et al, 2008;Cavazza, Pagliaro, & Guidetti, 2014;Spencer-Rodgers, Hamilton, & Sherman, 2007). Sometimes entitativity is even reduced to cohesion (Hamilton, 2007).…”