The authors employed a longitudinal quasi-experimental design to examine individual- and team-level outcomes associated with an individually delivered, technology-based (CD) training program aimed at developing generic teamwork skills. Data were collected from 54 members of 8 trained and 8 quasi-control MBA student teams who competed in a business simulation. At the individual level of analysis, trained members exhibited higher teamwork knowledge scores and peer ratings of teamwork behaviors than did members of quasi-control teams. At the team level of analysis, trained teams exhibited increasingly improved performance over time relative to quasi-control teams. Additionally, team processes mediated the relationship between teamwork training and team performance. The authors discuss implications for the use of technology-based teamwork training programs and identify promising areas of future research.
Arrow, H., Poole, M.S., Henry, K.B., Wheelan, S. & Moreland, R. (2004). Time, change, and development: The temporal perspective on groups. Small Group Research, 35, 73-105.
3.
Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
4.
Bassi, L.J., & Van Buren, M.E. (1998). The ASTD state of the industry report. Training and Development, 52, 21-43.
5.
Belgard Group. (2005). Team tools interactive. Available from http://www.belgard.com
6.
Bliese, P.D., & Ployhart, R.E. (2002). Growth modeling using random coefficient models: Model building, testing, and illustrations. Organizational Research Methods, 5, 362-387.
7.
Cannon-Bowers, J.A., Tannenbaum, S.I., Salas, E., & Volpe, C.E. (1995). Defining team competencies and establishing team training requirements. In E. Salas (Ed.), Team effectiveness and decision making in organizations (pp. 333-380). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
8.
Chen, G., Donahue, L.M., & Klimoski, R.J. (2004). Training undergraduates to work in organizational teams. Academy of Management Learning andEducation, 3, 27-40.
9.
Chen, G., Mathieu, J.E., & Bliese, P.D. (2004). A framework for conducting multilevel construct validation. In F. J. Yammarino & F. Dansereau (Eds.), Research in multilevel issues: Multilevel issues in organizational behavior and processes (Vol. 3, pp. 273-303). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
10.
Devine, D.J., & Phillips, J.L. (2001). Do smarter teams do better: A meta-analysis of cognitive ability and team performance. Small Group Research, 32, 507-532.
11.
Ellis, A.P.J., Bell, B.S., Ployhart, R.E., Hollenbeck, J.R., & Ilgen, D.R. (2005). An evaluation of generic teamwork skills training with action teams: Effects on cognitive and skill-based outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 58, 641-672.
12.
Gagne, R.M. (1984). Learning outcomes and their effects. American Psychologist, 39, 377-385.
13.
George, J.M., & Jones, G.R. (2000). The role of time in theory and theory building . Journal of Management, 26, 657-684.
14.
Gersick, C.J.G. (1988). Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal , 31, 9-41.
15.
Gladstein, D.L. (1984). Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness . Administrative Science Quarterly,29, 499-517.
16.
Goldstein, I.L., & Ford, J.K. (2002). Training in organizations. Boston: Wadsworth.
17.
Guzzo, R.A., & Shea, G.P. (1992). Group performance and intergroup relations in organizations. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 269-313). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists.
18.
Hackman, J.R. (1983). A normative model of work team effectiveness (Technical Report No. 2). New Haven, CT: Yale School of Organization and Management.
19.
Hackman, J.R., & Morris, C.G. (1975). Group tasks, group interaction process, and group performance effectiveness: A review and integration. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 45-99). New York: Academic Press.
20.
Ilgen, D. (1999). Teams embedded in organizations. American Psychologist, 54, 129-139.
21.
Ilgen, D.R., Hollenbeck, J.R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D. (2005). Teams in organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annual Review ofPsychology, 56, 517-543.
22.
James, L.R., & Brett, J.M. (1984). Mediators, moderators, and tests for mediation . Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 307-321.
23.
James, L.R., Demaree, R.G., & Wolf, G. (1984). Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 85-98.
24.
Kanfer, R. & Ackerman, P.L. (1989). Motivation and cognitive abilities: An integrative/ aptitude-treatment interaction approach to skill acquisition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 657-689.
25.
Kenny, D.A., Korchmaros, J.D., & Bolger, N. (2003). Lower level mediation in multilevel models. Psychological Methods, 8, 115-128.
26.
Kirkman, B.L., Rosen, B., Tesluk, P.E., & Gibson, C.B. (2006). Enhancing the transfer of computer-assisted training proficiency in geographically-distributed teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 706-716.
27.
Kozlowski, S.W.J. (1998). Training and development in adaptive teams: Theory, principles and research. In J. A. Cannon-Bowers & E. Salas (Eds.), Decision making under stress: Implications for training and simulation (pp. 115-153). Washington, DC: American Psychological Organization .
28.
Kozlowski, S.W.J., & Bell, B.S. (2003). Work groups and teams in organizations. In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen, & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), Comprehensive handbook of psychology: Industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 333-375). New York: Wiley.
29.
Kozlowski, S.W.J., Brown, K.G., Weissbein, D.A., Cannon-Bowers, J.A., & Salas, E. (2000). A multilevel approach to training effectiveness . In S. W. J. Kozlowski & K. J. Klein (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations (pp. 157-210). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
30.
Kozlowski, S.W.J., & Salas, E. (1997). A multilevel organizational systems approach for the implementation and transfer of training. In J. K. Ford (Ed.), Improving training effectiveness in work organizations (pp. 247-287). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
31.
Kraiger, K., Ford, J.K., & Salas, E. (1993). Application of cognitive, skill-based, and affective theories of learning outcomes to new methods of training evaluation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 311-328.
32.
Leedom, D.K., & Simon, R. (1995). Improving team coordination: A case for behavior-based training. MilitaryPsychology, 7, 109-122.
33.
Leidner, D.E., & Jarvenpaa, S.L. (1995). The use of information technology to enhance management school education: A theoretical view. MIS Quarterly, 19, 265-291.
34.
Marks, M.A., Mathieu, J.E., & Zaccaro, S.J. (2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26, 356-376.
35.
Mathieu, J.E., & Schulze, W. (2006). The influence of team knowledge and formal plans on episodic team process-performance relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 605-619.
McIntyre, R.M., & Salas, E. (1995). Measuring and managing for team performance: Emerging principles from complex environments. In R. Guzzo & E. Salas (Eds.), Team effectiveness and decision making in organizations (pp. 149-203). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
38.
Mitchell, T.R., & James, L.R. (2001). Building better theory: Time and the specification of when things happen. Academy of Management Review, 26, 530-547.
39.
Morgan B.B., Glickman, A.S., Woodward, E.A., Blaiwes, A., & Salas, E. (1986). Measurement of team behaviors in a Navy environment (NTSC Report No. 86-104). Orlando, FL: Naval Training System Center.
40.
Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R., & Ives, B. (2001). Web-based virtual learning environments: A research framework and a preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic IT skills training. MIS Quarterly, 25, 401-426.
Salas, E., Burke, C.S., Bowers, C.A., & Wilson, K.A. (2001). Team training in the skies: Does crew resource management (CRM) training work?Human Factors, 43, 641-674.
43.
Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J.A. (2001). The science of training: A decade of progress. Annual Review ofPsychology, 52, 471-499.
44.
Salas, E., Cannon-Bowers, J.A., Rhodenizer, L. & Bowers, C.A. (1999). Training in organizations: Myths, misconceptions, and mistaken assumptions. PersonnelHuman Resources Management , 17, 123—161.
45.
Salas, E., Dickinson, T.L., Converse, S.A., & Tannenbaum, S.I. (1992). Toward an understanding of team performance and training. In R. W. Swezey & E. Salas (Eds.), Teams: Their training and performance (pp. 3-29). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
46.
Salas, E., Fowlkes, J., Stout, R.J., Milanovich, D.M., & Prince, C. (1999). Does CRM training improve teamwork skills in the cockpit? Two evaluation studies. Human Factors, 41, 326-343.
47.
Salas, E., Stagl, K.C., & Burke, C.S. (2004). 25 years of team effectiveness in organizations: Research themes and emerging needs. In C. L. Robertson (Ed.), International review of industrial organizational psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 47-92). New York: Wiley.
48.
Stout, R.J., Salas, E., & Carson, R. (1994). Individual task proficiency and team process behavior: What's important for team functioning? MilitaryPsychology , 6, 177-192.
49.
Stout, R.J., Salas, E., & Fowlkes, J.E. (1997). Enhancing teamwork in complex environments through team training. Group dynamics: Theory, research, and practice , 1, 169-182.
50.
Swezey, R.W., & Salas, E. (1992). Guidelines for use in team-training development . In R. W. Swezey & E. Salas (Eds.), Teams: Their training and performance (pp. 219-245). Norwood, NJ: Ablex .
51.
Tannenbaum, S.I., Beard, R.L., & Salas, E. (1992) Team building and its influence on team effectiveness: An examination of conceptual and empirical developments. In K. Kelly (Ed.), Issues, theory, and research in industrial/organizational psychology (pp. 117-153). New York: Elsevier.
52.
Thompson, A.A., & Stappenbeck, G.L. (2001). Player's manual for the Business Strategy Game: A global simulation. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
