Team reflections, team mental models and team performance over time

Abstract

Purpose Although previous research proved positive impacts of team reflection on team outcomes, especially team performance and innovation, there are only a few insights in to which factors (mediators) account for these positive effects and over what period these effects unfold (temporal effects). To close this gap, this paper aims to investigate the direct effects of team reflection on team performance over time, as well as indirect effects because of the development of similar and accurate team mental models to explain this relationship. Design/methodology/approach Within a longitudinal experimental study on 22 student project teams working on a complex problem-solving task, the effects of repeated team reflection interventions on the development of team performance and team mental models over six measuring times were analysed. Findings Results show that team reflections caused significant increases in team performance and team mental models over time. Results also provide evidence that team mental models’ quality mediates the effects of team reflections on team performance. Research limitations/implications The results are interesting for both research fields, team reflection and team mental models, as the findings indicate the merits of recurrent reflection for improving team mental models’ quality. Practical implications For organisational practice, the question of how reflection processes can be deliberately triggered in teams and effectively integrated into the daily routine should be considered. Originality/value The findings accentuate the role of team reflections for improving team performance team mental models over time. By continuous reflecting teams increase awareness and insights into effective team processes and strategies (i.e. shared and accurate team mental models), which lead to better performance.

Perspectives on knowledge integration in cross-functional teams in information systems development

“…Instead, they argue for a more dynamic perspective in which the intensity of social categorization and its effect on informational diversity benefits fluctuates over time. This resonates with a dynamic, process-oriented perspective on knowledge structures in teams, in which team cognition is not a static property of the team but an emergent state residing in team members' social interactions (Cooke et al, 2013;Curseu and Pluut, 2018;Grand et al, 2016;Kneisel, 2020).…”

“…The typology of perspectives on knowledge sharing revealed by the results of this study underlines that different CFT members may, on top of having different attitudes toward different types of knowledgehence knowledge differentiation, also have different attitudes toward the value and relevance of integrating these different types of knowledge within the team, hence toward knowledge integration. This finding suggests that (cross-functional) team configurations have important implications for the development of shared team mental models, and, in that way, for problem-solving and performance by teams (Kneisel, 2020). Team mental models are emergent states that change and evolve over time as a consequence of internal and external team developments and in the interaction among team members (Santos and Passos, 2013).…”

“…However, project duration ranges from several weeks to several years. If team-configuration remains stable, we would expect fluctuations in the effectiveness of knowledge integration processes over time (Cooke et al, 2013;Curseu and Pluut, 2018;Grand et al, 2016;Kneisel, 2020; Perspectives on knowledge integration Srikanth et al, 2016), but potentially a noticeable improvement in the long term, nevertheless. Longitudinal research could gauge the differences in knowledge integration and knowledge boundaries between short-term and more long-term cross-functional ISD teams.…”

“…In interaction, project team members may build a collectively shared, actionable team mental model, which is necessary for the team to operate in effective ways (e.g. Kneisel, 2020;Santos and Passos, 2013).…”

Impact of shared leadership on team performance through team reflexivity: examining the moderating role of task complexity

“…communication) are discussed openly (Yang et al, 2020;Verhoeven, 2018;Zhu et al, 2018;Zhou, 2013). The reflexive team uncovers the reasons behind their success and failure, resolves misunderstandings and suggests new approaches for future challenges (Kneisel, 2020;Wills and Clerkin, 2009). Thus, from social exchange perspective this study argues that reflexivity is the outcome mechanism of shared leadership, because when team members would share their leadership behaviors in return the members of the team will feel psychologically empowered, and they will reflect upon and perform better.…”