To transfer or not to transfer? Investigating the combined effects of trainee characteristics, team leader support, and team climate.

Abstract

Eighty pilots participated in a study of variables influencing the transfer process. Posttraining performance was assessed in a flight simulation under 1 of 2 conditions. Those in the maximum performance condition were made aware of the skill to be assessed and the fact that their teammates were confederates, whereas those in the typical performance condition were not. The results indicated that (a) simulator ratings correlated with a measure of transfer to the cockpit for those in the typical condition only; (b) team leader support, manipulated in a pretask brief, moderated the disparity between maximum and typical performance; (c) team climate mediated the impact of support on performance in the typical condition; (d) those with a stronger predisposition toward the trained skill viewed their climate as more supportive; and (e) perceptions of team climate were better predictors of performance for those with a more external locus of control.

Understanding the Emergence of State Goal Orientation in Organizational Work Groups: The Role of Leadership and Multilevel Climate Perceptions.

“…Leaders supportive of learning facilitate a shared-unit climate for learning (e.g., Smith-Jentsch, Salas, & Brannick, 2001;Tracey, Tannebaum, & Kavanagh, 1995). Leaders who avoid failure contribute to a shared-unit climate in which group members perceive the avoidance of committing and admitting errors as valued behaviors (Edmondson, 1996;Hofmann & Stetzer, 1998).…”

Predicting Typical and Maximum Performance with Measures of Motivation and Abilities

“…Prior research has employed relatively strong manipulations, with assessments of maximum performance lasting only a few minutes (e.g., ForsterLee, 2007;Klehe & Anderson, 2007a, 2007bKlehe, Anderson, & Hoefnagels, 2007;Mangos et al, 2007;Sackett et al, 1988;Smith-Jentsch et al, 2001), hours (e.g., Kirk & Brown, 2003;Ones & Viswesvaran, 2007), or at most a couple of days (e.g., Marcus et al, 2007;Ployhart et al, 2001). Such short observation time-periods, especially when assessing socio-psychological variables such as teamplaying, are open to at least two threats to validity when compared to longer observation periods (Cascio, 1998).…”

“…It reflects what a person 'chooses to do' in drawing upon ability to execute a task. As Janz (1989, p. 164) stated, "Maximum performance focuses on competencies, whereas typical performance focuses on choices" -even though such choices are affected by an individual's ability.The distinction between typical and maximum job performance has implications for work settings (e.g., Dewberry, 2001;Smith-Jentsch, Salas, & Brannick, 2001;Thorsteinson & Balzer, 1999), particularly personnel selection (e.g., Ackerman & Humphreys, 1990;Arvey & Murphy, 1998;Borman, 1991;Klehe & Anderson, 2005). Guion (1991) proposed that the relatively low correlation between measures of typical and maximum performance on the same task explains in part the low criterion-related validity coefficients found for many predictors of job performance.…”

I get by with a little help from my supervisor: Creative-idea generation, idea implementation, and perceived supervisor support

“…Thus, the PSS manipulations emphasized constructive feedback, relationship quality, supervisor openness, clarifying objectives, actively providing instrumental help and socioemotional support, positive reinforcement, and encouragement (James & James, 1989;Ashford, Rothbard, Piderit, & Dutton, 1998;Smith-Jentsch et al, 2001;Amabile et al, 2004).…”