Team Dimensions: Their Identity, Their Measurement and Their Relationships

Nieva, Veronica F.; Fleishman, Edwin A.; Rieck, Angela

doi:10.21236/ada149662

Cited by 73 publications

(81 citation statements)

References 68 publications

(94 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…I ICJWvL'V. rm1ios rucacie' cmncmindWitli lrimilrnyWaa havc Conicludcd that t a hy"tcima ;111111(?IL 1 l)(-St j V-4 captures the dynamic nature of teams, and, further, that a simple input-process-output paradigm is most useful for understanding the relationships between environment, team, and performance (Dyer, 1985;Hackman and Morris, 1975;Meister, 1976;Nieva et al, 1978;Knerr et al, 1980;Shiflett, 1979).…”

Section: Premisesamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Again, following Dyer (1980), "team performance skills" refer to the skills needed to execute activities/actions that are performed in response to the actions of other team members or that guide/cue the actions of other team members. Although they are the skills of individual members, they contribute to the performance of the team functions of Nieva et al (1978). Whereas both Nieva and Knerr view team functions and team processes respectively as operations of the team as an entity (Nieva et al, 1978, p. 62), team performance skills remain the skills of individual battle staff members.…”

Section: Iv-10mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Battle staff integration.

Olmstead¹

1992

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

4 16 017 IDA Log No. HO 91 -37013DEFINITIONS IDA publishes the following documents to reporl thL ,-ults of its work. ReportsReports are the most ?uthoritative and most carefully considered products IDA publishes. They normally embody results of major projects which (a) have a direct bearing on decisions affecting major programs, (b) address issues of significant concern to the Executive Branch. the Congress and/or the public, or (c) address issues that have significant economic implications. IDA Reports are reviewed by outside panels of experts to ensure their ht!h quality and relevance to the problems studied, and they are released by the President of IDA. Group ReportsGroup Reports recora the findings and results of IDA established working groups and panels composed of senior individuals addressing major issues which otherwise would be the subject of an IDA Report. IDA Group Reports are reviewed by the senior individuals responsible for the project and Wtlenr as selected by IDA to ensure their high quality and relevance [o the problems studied, and are released by the President of IDA. PapersPapers, also authoritative and carefully considered products of IDA, address studies that are narrower in scope than those covered in Reports. MA Papers are reviewed to ensure that they meet the high ý'andards expected of refereed papers ,n professional journeas or formai Agency reports. Approved for public release; distribulion urdimited. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)This paper sets forth a research-based conceptual framework for understanding and addressing battle staff functioning and its relation to the effectiveness of combat organizations. It also develops a concept for maintaining battle staff structure and function under the heavy stress of combat. Together, the melding of structure and function and the notion of functional competence constitute the area of Battle Staff Integration. This paper offers practitioners (military leaders, trainers, and performance analysts) guidance for developing and directing effective battle staffs. The dynamic structure and functioning of military organizations are discussed and the roles of battle staffs are analyzed. An historical and analytical review of organizational theories and concepts is included, and the concept of team work and the characterislics of effective teams are discussed. A conceptual framework is presented for teamwork in problem-solving and decision-making activities within hierarchical organizations. SUBJECT TERMS PREFACEThis paper had its origin in 1963 in a program of research concerned with highlevel leadership conducted for the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College and of which I was project director. During the course of the research, it became apparent that little was known systematically about the dynamics of large military organizations--about what goes on within a combat unit in terms of the dynamic determinants of its effectiveness on the battlefield. The result was a series of intermittent projects over the last 20 years, conducted whenever i...

show abstract

Section: Premisesamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Iv-10mentioning

confidence: 99%

Battle staff integration.

Olmstead¹

1992

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several authors have noted as a key characteristic of team behavior and performance the ability of one member of a team to compensate for less than adequate performance of other members (George, 1979;Nieva, Fleishman, and Reick, 1978;Dyer, 1980;Shaw, 1976). This can include providing guidance or corrections to the behavior of another team member, or what has been termed 'load balancing:' performing part or all of a task in another member's stead (Lanzetta and Roby, 1956).…”

Section: Potential For Compensation or Correction In Task Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…While there have been many attempts to characterize the variety of behaviors demonstrated by teams in performing team tasks Roth, 1982a, 1982b;Dyer, Tremble, and Finley, 1980;Nieva, Fleishman, and Reick, 1978), these have not led to consensus. Unified concepts that can lead the researcher to formulate testable hypotheses about the effects of factors on team behavior and performance have not been adopted.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Taxonomy for Predicting Team and Collective Task Performance Change

Roth¹

1992

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Even though oral information exchange is the prevalent means of communication between crewmembers and its breakdown has been implicated as one of the primary causes of aircraft incidents and accidents (Billings & Reynard, 1981), very little is known about the relationship between crew communication and operational performance (Dyer, 1984;Denson, 1981;Nieva, Fleishman, & Rieck, 1978). Dyer (1984) noted that little research has been devoted to examining such issues as: how team members interact with each other; how interactions vary over time; or how members interact in different situations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%