Team adaptation: A fifteen-year synthesis (1998–2013) and framework for how this literature needs to “adapt” going forward

Ch-Ch-Ch-changes: How Action Phase Functional Leadership, Team Human Capital, and Interim vs. Permanent Leader Status Impact Post-transition Team Performance

“…Accordingly, our study sheds light on the mechanisms that enable teams to perform more successfully following a leader transition. Specifically, our study is one of the first to leverage team adaptation research (e.g., Maynard et al 2015) and consider how a team's human capital creates a capacity to overcome the disruptive challenges of a leader change and perform effectively. Leveraging the logic embedded within the strategic core theory introduced by Humphrey et al (2009), our findings demonstrate that having higher quality human capital within both strategic and non-strategic core roles is essential for teams embarking on a leadership change but that, as would be expected, the strategic core has a greater impact.…”

“…Second, mid-stream leader transitions are disruptive events (Giambatista et al 2005;Rowe et al 2005). Likewise, evidence from the team adaptation literature (see Maynard et al 2015 for a review) indicates that a team's human capital equips the team with the resources needed to adapt to disruptive events and perform successfully (e.g., LePine 2003LePine , 2005Resick et al 2014). As such, the human capital that the new leader inherits provides the fundamental building blocks necessary for achieving the team's goals.…”

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

“…Leadership behaviours are assumed to have an important influence on the relationship between the adaptation process and outcome (Maynard et al 2015;. However, it is difficult to quantify and compare outcomes given the unique characteristics of disruptions and their contexts.…”

“…Location, timing, and the type and severity of the incident will all influence the adaptation process and the capacity of the system to adjust operations before it becomes impossible to control (Golightly et al 2013). The way in which operators respond to a disruption (both individually and as a team) will also be context specific, depending on individual characteristics such as experience, knowledge, and flexibility (Maynard et al 2015). Nevertheless, Burke et al (2006) argue that each team adaptation follows a cyclical process consisting of four phases: (a) situation assessment, (b) plan formulation, (c) plan execution, and (d) learning.…”

Adaptation and Cognition of High-Risk Environment Teams in an Input-Mediator-Outcome Framework

“…These changes or disruptions, usually called "triggers", prompt teams to make modifications in order to complete their task (Maynard et al, 2015). Unanticipated changes in the task context may require team members to collectively adapt their roles to the current situation.…”