The effectiveness of team reflexivity interventions: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Abstract

Cumulating evidence from 24 independent randomized controlled trials or experiments (N = 4,339), we meta-analytically examined questions regarding the effectiveness of team reflexivity on collective performance outcomes and behaviors, and the conditions under which such effects are strongest. We addressed these questions by testing the overall effect of team reflexivity on performance outcomes (i.e., indices or metrics that quantify goal attainment) and behaviors (i.e., those actions or states that precede or influence goal attainment), and assessing the robustness of this pooled effect across study (e.g., team size), outcome (e.g., measurement approach), and intervention characteristics (e.g., virtuality) via a series of moderator analyses. We found a positive and significant medium overall effect of team reflexivity interventions on performance outcomes (g = .549) and performance behaviors (g = .548). Moderator analyses indicated that the team reflexivity-performance outcome effect is contingent upon the measurement approach (in favor of self-reports over objective indices or researcherassessed outcomes). With regard to performance behaviors, the effect of team reflexivity was strongest for cognitions and behaviors relative to affective dimensions, and when interventions were delivered to teams present physically relative to virtual teams. Collectively, our findings extend existing meta-analytic evidence regarding team reflexivity interventions in terms of resolution (i.e., inability to isolate unique effects), scope (i.e., primary studies missed via the systematic search), and methodological quality of primary evidence (i.e., incorporation of quasi-experimental designs).

Enhancing shared mental models: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

“…Our directional expectation regarding the usefulness of TDI was supported; the magnitude ( g = .61) observed can be considered moderate-to-large relative to distributions observed in social psychology (Lovakov & Agadullina, 2021). This magnitude is comparable to meta-analytic values reported for the specific TDI of teamwork interventions (McEwan et al, 2017), leadership training (Lacerenza et al, 2017), team training (Hughes et al, 2016), and team reflections (Lines et al, 2021). Sensitivity and metabias analyses generally supported the robustness of the overall effect of TDI on SMM.…”

“…This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. leadership training (Lacerenza et al, 2017), team training (Hughes et al, 2016), and team reflections (Lines et al, 2021). Sensitivity and metabias analyses generally supported the robustness of the overall effect of TDI on SMM.…”

“…Evidence supports the utility of targeted (e.g., leadership) or multicomponent TDI as an effective means by which to optimize team functioning across a variety of domains, such as the military, education, healthcare, and sport (e.g., Klein et al, 2006; Lacerenza et al, 2017; Lines et al, 2021; McEwan et al, 2017). An important question for the science and practice of SMM development, therefore, is not whether TDI enhance this element of team cognition, but rather by how much they effect change or development.…”

“…In terms of work design interventions, for example, organizations might enrich (e.g., increase autonomy or decision-making) and/or enlarge (e.g., job rotation, increase task variety) jobs with or without employee input, enhance employee’s perceptions of the significance of their work, empower teams with job autonomy, or implement system-wide changes (e.g., information and communication systems; Knight & Parker, 2021). Although TDI are operationalized in diverse ways, particularly regarding the active ingredients or components that drive change in target outcomes, this degree of specificity is often absent from statistical syntheses of the effectiveness of TDI on team processes and outcomes (e.g., Lacerenza et al, 2017; Lines et al, 2021; McEwan et al, 2017). From a theoretical standpoint, knowledge of “what” drives change is fundamentally important for clarifying the mechanisms of action or “how” an intervention works, that is, the nature of the change or development process through which the active ingredients of an intervention affect target outcomes (Connell et al, 2019).…”

Supporting Team Reflexivity During the COVID-19 Lockdown: A Qualitative Study of Multi-Vision Groups In-person and Online

“…The reflexive team is thus an important organizational tool for protecting workers' well-being. Studies have shown that team reflexivity positively affects job engagement (as measured by efficacy, energy, and level of involvement), compassion satisfaction (defined as the pleasure derived from being able to do one's work well while also helping others), and resilience (the ability to respond positively to challenging experiences) (Sanchez-Reilly et al, 2013;Lines et al, 2021).…”