Time to Re-Group

Abstract

Action teams are unique among group types in that their work is focused on time-constrained performance events that cannot be redone later. This aspect of their team temporality gives rise to an emphasis on simulationa technique used by teams to replicate the taskwork, coordination, and communication of real-life events-and adaptation-in which teams use "time-outs" to give members a chance to regroup and communicate. In the present article, we attempt to offer more precision in research and theorizing across diverse team types through first offering a typology of action teams that considers the work of critical, contending, and performing teams. This typology informs the nested phase model introduced next, which accounts for the unique temporality of teams that place a heavy emphasis on performance and the related issues of cyclicity, finality, and epochality that characterize their work. Testable propositions intended to guide future research are offered.

Reflection in the heat of the moment: The role of in‐action team reflexivity in health care emergency teams

“…In its fullest form, in-action TR encompasses a brief time-out (Ishak & Ballard, 2011;Rall, Glavin, & Flin, 2008) or absolute interruption in taskwork (Okhuysen & Waller, 2002). However, most situations prevent action teams from stopping the process entirely.…”

“…In fact, inaction TR as complete time-out may disrupt active taskwork and hamper performance depending on its timing. Therefore, TR described as complete interruptions or formal interventions during performance events (Ishak & Ballard, 2011;Okhuysen, 2001;Okhuysen & Eisenhardt, 2002;Schippers et al, 2014) does not apply for most action teams-especially teams dealing with fast paced, event-driven tasks that leave no time for a full-on "stop and talk. "…”

“…2 | THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT 2.1 | Action teams and TR Action teams represent groups of experts who conduct interlinked tasks during complex, time-limited performance events involving audiences, adversaries, or challenging environments (Sundstrom, McIntyre, Halfhill, & Richards, 2000) associated with substantial physical, psychological, and interpersonal challenges (Ishak & Ballard, 2011). These performance events (e.g., a match for a sports team) are discrete and bounded in space and time (Morgeson, Mitchell, & Liu, 2015), which makes them clearly distinguishable from other phases with less activity (i.e., planning, reflection).…”

“…These performance events (e.g., a match for a sports team) are discrete and bounded in space and time (Morgeson, Mitchell, & Liu, 2015), which makes them clearly distinguishable from other phases with less activity (i.e., planning, reflection). During performance events, action teams face finality of action often associated with highly significant events (e.g., harm or death of patient or team member; Ishak & Ballard, 2011;Sundstrom et al, 2000).…”

Monitoring and talking to the room: Autochthonous coordination patterns in team interaction and performance.

“…For example, in large teaching hospitals, an operating room team of anesthesiologists, surgeons, and nurses usually disbands at the end of a surgical shift, even though-depending on organizational factors such as specialization and staffing schedule-some or all of these team members may have a shared history and future in working together cooperatively in various compositions. Thus, with their various representations of dynamic team memberships and involved mechanisms such as entrainment (Ancona & Waller, 2007) and handoffs in leadership (Tschan et al, 2006), action teams are typical for various teams in high-risk work environments in health care and other industries, aviation and offshore industries among them, and deserve more scientific attention (Ishak & Ballard, 2012).…”