The existing body of literature on teamwork behaviors is substantial and offers many different conceptualizations. However, there is a lack of consensus concerning the conceptual structure of teamwork behaviors. Many researchers pursue their own work without any attempt to build on and integrate the work of others. This article reviews the frameworks of teamwork behaviors in the literature on work teams and provides a way of integrating these frameworks. The behavioral dimensions included in this integrative framework are conceptually distinguished and arranged in a hierarchical conceptual structure based on theoretical approaches. Moreover, they are framed from the perspective of the timing of teamwork behaviors to clarify when these behaviors are most likely to have their intended effects. The proposed framework is then connected to the task conditions under which teamwork behaviors are most likely to facilitate collective task accomplishment. Finally, future directions for research regarding teamwork behaviors are discussed.
Allen, N. J., & Hecht, T. D. (2004). The “romance of teams”: Toward an understanding of its psychological underpinnings and implications. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 439-461.
2.
Alper, S., Tjosvold, D., & Law, K. S. (2000). Conflict management, efficacy, and performance in organizational teams. Personnel Psychology, 53, 625-642.
3.
Anderson, N. R., & West, M. A. (1998). Measuring climate for work group innovation: Development and validation of the team climate inventory. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 235-258.
4.
Argote, L., & McGrath, J. E. (1993). Group processes in organizations: Continuity and change. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology: Vol. 8 (pp. 333-389). New York: John Wiley.
5.
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.
6.
Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.
7.
Bales, R. F., & Cohen, S. P. (1979). SYMLOG: A system for the multiple level observation of groups. New York: Free Press.
8.
Benne, K. D., & Sheats, P. (1948). Functional roles of group members. Journal of Social Issues, 4, 41-49.
9.
Bowers, C. A., Morgan, B. B., Salas, E., & Prince, C. (1993). Assessment of coordination demand for aircrew coordination training. Military Psychology, 5, 95-112.
10.
Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., & Higgs, A. C. (1993). Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology, 46, 823-850.
11.
Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Tannenbaum, S. I., Salas, E., & Volpe, C. E. (1995). Defining competencies and establishing team training requirements. In R. A. Guzzo & E. Salas (Eds.), Team effectiveness and decision making in organizations (pp. 333-380). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
12.
Carson, C. M., Mosley, D. C., & Boyar, S. L. (2004). Goal orientation and supervisory behaviors: Impacting SMWT effectiveness. Team Performance Management, 10, 152-162.
13.
Cohen, S. G. (1994). Designing effective self-managing work teams. In M. M. Beyerlein & D. A. Johnson (Eds.), Advances in interdisciplinary studies of work teams: Theories of self-managed work teams (pp. 67-102). London: JAI.
14.
Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23, 239-290.
15.
Cohen, S. G., Ledford, G. E., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1996). A predictive model of self-managing work team effectiveness. Human Relations, 49, 643-676.
16.
Cohen, S. G., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310-357.
17.
Cooney, R. (2004). Empowered self-management and the design of work teams. Personnel Review, 33, 677-692.
18.
Devine, D. J. (2002). A review and integration of classification systems relevant to teams in organizations. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 291-310.
19.
Devine, D. J., Clayton, L. D., Philips, J. L., Dunford, B. B., & Melner, S. B. (1999). Teams in organizations: Prevalence, characteristics, and effectiveness. Small Group Research, 30, 678-711.
20.
Diefendorff, J. M., & Lord, R. G. (2003). The volitional and strategic effects of planning on task performance and goal commitment. Human Performance, 16, 365-387.
21.
Dominick, P. G., Reilly, R. R., & McGourty, J. W. (1997). The effects of peer feedback on team member behavior. Group & Organization Management, 22, 508-520.
22.
Drach-Zahavy, A., & Somech, A. (2001). Understanding team innovation: The role of team processes and structures. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 5, 111-123.
23.
Druskat, V. U., & Kayes, D. C. (1999). The antecedents of team competence: Toward a fine-grained model of self-managing team effectiveness. In R. Wageman (Ed.), Research on managing groups and teams: Vol. 2 (pp. 201-231). Stamford, CT: JAI.
24.
Eby, L. T., & Dobbins, G. H. (1997). Collectivistic orientation in teams: An individual and group-level analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 275-295.
25.
Erez, A., Lepine, J. A., & Elms, H. (2002). Effects of rotated leadership and peer evaluation on the functioning and effectiveness of self-managed teams: A quasi-experiment. Personnel Psychology, 55, 929-948.
26.
Frese, M., & Zapf, D. (1994). Action as the core of work psychology: A German approach. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology: (Vol. 4, 2nd ed., pp. 271-340). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists.
27.
Futoran, G. C., Kelly, J. R., & McGrath, J. E. (1989). TEMPO: A time-based system for analysis of group interaction process. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 10, 211-232.
28.
George, J. M., & Brief, A. P. (1992). Feeling good-doing good: A conceptual analysis of the mood at work-organizational spontaneity relationship. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 310-329.
29.
Gladstein, D. L. (1984). Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 499-517.
30.
Goodman, P. S., Devadas, R., & Griffith Hughson, T. L. (1988). Groups and productivity: Analyzing the effectiveness of self-managing teams. In J. P. Campbell, R. J. Campbell, & Collaborators (Eds.), Productivity in organizations: New perspectives from industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 295-327). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
31.
Guzzo, R. A., & Dickson, M. W. (1996). Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and effectiveness. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 307-338.
32.
Hacker, W. (2003). Action regulation theory: A practical tool for the design of modern work processes. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 12, 105-130.
33.
Hackman, J. R. (1987). The design of work teams. In J. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 315-342). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
34.
Hackman, J. R. (2002). Leading teams: Setting the stage for great performances. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
35.
Hoegl, M., & Gemuenden, H. G. (2001). Teamwork quality and the success of innovative projects: A theoretical concept and empirical evidence. Organization Science, 12, 435-449.
36.
Hollenbeck, J. R., & Klein, H. J. (1987). Goal commitment and the goal-setting process: Problems, prospects, and proposals for future research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 212-220.
37.
House, J. S. (1981). Work stress and social support.Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
38.
Ilgen, D. R. (1999). Teams embedded in organizations: Some implications. American Psychologist, 54, 129-139.
39.
Ilgen, D. R., Hollenbeck, J. R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D. (2005). Teams in organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 517-543.
40.
Janssen, O., Van De Vliert, E., & Veenstra, C. (1999). How task and person conflict shape the role of positive interdependence in management teams. Journal of Management, 25, 117-142.
41.
Janz, B. D., Colquitt, J. A., & Noe, R. A. (1997). Knowledge worker team effectiveness: The role of autonomy, interdependence, team development, and contextual support variables. Personnel Psychology, 50, 877-904.
42.
Jehn, K. A. (1997). A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimensions in organizational groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 530-557.
43.
Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (1993). The wisdom of teams: Creating the high-performance organization. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
44.
Komaki, J. L., Zlotnick, S., & Jensen, M. (1986). Development of an operant-based taxonomy and observational index of supervisory behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 260-269.
45.
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.), Handbook of psychology: Industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 333-375). London: Wiley.
46.
Kozlowski, S. W. J., Gully, S. M., Nason, E. R., & Smith, E. M. (1999). Developing adaptive teams: A theory of compilation and performance across levels and time. In D. R. Ilgen & E. D. Pulakos (Eds.), The changing nature of performance: Implications for staffing, motivation, and development (pp. 240-292). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
47.
Langfred, C. W. (2000). The paradox of self-management: Individual and group autonomy in work groups. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 563-585.
48.
Latané, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 822-832.
49.
Levine, J. M., & Moreland, R. L. (1998). Small groups. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindsey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 415-469). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
50.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
51.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57, 705-717.
52.
Man, D. C., & Lam, S. S. K. (2003). The effects of job complexity and autonomy on cohesiveness in collectivistic and individualistic work groups: A cross-cultural analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 979-1001.
53.
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.
54.
Marks, M. A., & Panzer, F. J. (2004). The influence of team monitoring on team processes and performance. Human Performance, 17, 25-41.
55.
Mathieu, J. E., Heffner, T. S., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2000). The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 273-283.
56.
McGrath, J. E. (1964). Social psychology: A brief introduction. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
57.
McGrath, J. E. (1991). Time, interaction, and performance (TIP): A theory of groups. Small Group Research, 22, 147-174.
58.
McIntyre, R. M., & Dickinson, T. L. (1992). Systemic assessment of teamwork processes in tactical environments (N61339-91-C-0145). Norfolk, VA: Old Dominion University.
59.
McIntyre, R. M., & Salas, E. (1995). Measuring and managing for team performance: Emerging principles from complex environments. In R. A. Guzzo & E. Salas (Eds.), Team effectiveness and decision making in organizations (pp. 9-45). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
60.
Morgan, B. B., Glickman, A. S., Woodward, E. A., Blaiwes, A. S., & Salas, E. (1986). Measurement of team behaviors in a navy environment (NTSC TC-86-014). Orlando, FL: Naval Training System Center.
61.
Morgan, B. B., Jr., Salas, E., & Glickman, A. S. (1993). An analysis of team evolution and maturation. The Journal of General Psychology, 120, 277-291.
62.
Morris, C. G. (1966). Task effects on group interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 545-554.
63.
Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
64.
O'Leary-Kelly, A. M., Martocchio, J. J., & Frink, D. D. (1994). A review of the influence of group goals on group performance. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1285-1301.
65.
Pearce, J. A., & Ravlin, E. C. (1987). The design and activation of self-regulating work groups. Human Relations, 40, 751-782.
66.
Porter, C. O. L. H., Hollenbeck, J. R., Ilgen, D. R., Ellis, A. P. J., West, B. J., & Moon, H. (2003). Backing up behaviors in teams: The role of personality and legitimacy of need. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 391-403.
67.
Prince, A., Brannick, M. T., Prince, C., & Salas, E. (1997). The measurement of team process behaviors in the cockpit: Lessons learned. In M. T. Brannick, E. Salas, & C. Prince (Eds.), Team performance assessment and measurement: Theory, methods, and applications(pp. 289-310). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
68.
Prince, C., & Salas, E. (1993). Training and research for teamwork in the military aircrew. In E. L. Wiener, B. G. Kanki, & R. L. Helmreich (Eds.), Cockpit resource management(pp. 337-366). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
69.
Rasker, P. C., Post, W. M., & Schraagen, M. C. (2000). Effects of two types of intra-team feedback on developing a shared mental model in command and control teams. Ergonomics, 43, 1167-1189.
70.
Rentsch, J. R., Heffner, T. S., & Duffy, L. T. (1994). What you know is what you get from experience. Group & Organization Management, 19, 450-474.
71.
Rosenfeld, L. B., & Richman, J. M. (1997). Developing effective social support: Team building and the social support process. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 9, 133-153.
72.
Rothrock, L., Harvey, C. M., & Burns, J. (2005). A theoretical framework and quantitative architecture to assess team task complexity in dynamic environments. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 6, 157-172.
73.
Salas, E., Bowers, C. A., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (1995). Military team research: 10 years of progress. Military Psychology, 7, 55-75.
74.
Salas, E., Sims, D. E., & Burke, C. S. (2005). Is there a “big five” in teamwork?Small Group Research, 36, 555-599.
75.
Smith-Jentsch, K. A., Johnston, J. H., & Payne, S. C. (1998). Measuring team-related expertise in complex environments. In J. A. Cannon-Bowers & E. Salas (Eds.), Making decisions under stress: Implications for individuals and team training (pp. 61-87). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
76.
Spreitzer, G. M., Cohen, S. G., & Ledford, G. E. (1999). Developing effective self-managing work teams in service organizations. Group & Organization Management, 24, 340-366.
77.
Spreitzer, G. M., Noble, D. S., Mishra, A. K., & Cooke, W. N. (1999). Predicting process improvement team performance in an automotive firm: Explicating the roles of trust and empowerment. Research on Managing Groups and Teams, 2, 71-92.
78.
Stanton, N. (1996). Team performance: Communication, co-ordination, co-operation and control. In N. Stanton (Ed.), Human factors in nuclear safety (pp. 197-215). London: Taylor & Francis.
79.
Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group process and productivity.New York: Academic Press.
80.
Stevens, M. J., & Campion, M. A. (1994). The knowledge, skill, and ability requirements for teamwork: Implications for human resource management. Journal of Management, 20, 503-530.
81.
Stewart, G. L. (2006). A meta-analytic review of relationships between team design features and team performance. Journal of Management, 32, 29-54.
82.
Stock, R. (2004). Drivers of team performance: What do we know and what have we still to learn?Schmalenbach Business Review, 56, 274-306.
83.
Stogdill, R. M. (1959). Individual behaviors and group achievement. New York: Oxford University Press.
84.
Stout, R. J., Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Salas, E., & Milanovich, D. M. (1999). Planning, shared mental models, and coordinated performance: An empirical link is established. Human Factors, 41, 61-71.
85.
Sundstrom, E., DeMeuse, K. P., & Futrell, D. (1990). Work teams: Applications and effectiveness. American Psychologist, 45, 120-133.
86.
Taggar, S., & Brown, T. C. (2001). Problem-solving team behaviors: Development and validation of BOS and a hierarchical factor structure. Small Group Research, 32, 698-726.
87.
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. Kelley (Ed.), Issues, theory, and research in industrial/organizational psychology (pp. 117-153). New York: Elsevier Science.
88.
Tesluk, P. E., & Mathieu, J. E. (1999). Overcoming roadblocks to effectiveness: Incorporating management of performance barriers into models of work group effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 200-217.
89.
Tesluk, P. E., Mathieu, J. E., Zaccaro, S. J., & Marks, M. (1997). Task aggregation issues in the analysis and assessment of team performance. In M. T. Brannick, E. Salas, & C. Prince (Eds.), Team performance assessment and measurement: Theory, methods and applications (pp. 197-224). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
90.
Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organization in action. Chicago: McGraw-Hill.
91.
Tjosvold, D. (1984). Cooperation theory and organizations. Human Relations, 37, 743-767.
92.
Tjosvold, D. (1998). Cooperative and competitive goal approach to conflict: Accomplishments and challenges. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 47, 285-342.
93.
Tschan, F. (1995). Communication enhances small group performance if it conforms to task requirements: The concept of ideal communications cycles. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 371-393.
94.
Tschan, F. (2002). Ideal cycles of communication (or cognitions) in triads, dyads, and individuals. Small Group Research, 33, 615-643.
95.
Tschan, F., & von Cranach, M. (1996). Group task structure, process and outcome. In M. A. West (Eds.), Handbook of work group psychology (pp. 95-121). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
96.
Van de Ven, A. H., Delbecq, A. L., & Koenig, R. (1976). Determinants of coordination modes within organizations. American Sociological Review, 41, 322-338.
97.
Van der Vegt, G., & Van de Vliert, E. (2002). Intragroup interdependence and effectiveness: Review and proposed directions for theory and practice. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 17, 50-67.
98.
Wageman, R. (1995). Interdependence and group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 145-180.
99.
Wagner, J. A., III. (1995). Studies of individualism-collectivism: Effects on cooperation in groups. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 152-172.
100.
Wall, T. D., Kemp, N. J., Jackson, P. R., & Clegg, C. W. (1986). Outcomes of autonomous work-groups: A long-term field experiment. Academy of Management Journal, 29, 280-304.
101.
Weingart, L. R. (1992). Impact of group goals, task component complexity, effort, and planning on group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 682-693.
102.
Weldon, E., Jehn, K. A., & Pradhan, P. (1991). Processes that mediate the relationship between a group goal and improved group performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 555-569.
103.
Weldon, E., & Weingart, L. R. (1993). Group goals and group performance. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 307-334.
104.
West, M. A., Borrill, C. S., & Unsworth, K. L. (1998). Team effectiveness in organizations. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 13, pp. 1-48). New York: John Wiley.
105.
Wilczenski, F. L., Bontrager, T., Ventrone, P., & Correia, M. (2001). Observing collaborative problem-solving processes and outcomes. Psychology in the Schools, 38, 269-281.
106.
Wittenbaum, G. M., Hollingshead, A. B., Paulus, P. B., Hirokawa, R. Y., Ancona, D. G., Peterson, R. S., et al. (2004). The functional perspective as a lens for understanding groups. Small Group Research, 35, 17-43.
107.
Wood, R. E. (1986). Task complexity: Definition of the construct. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 60-82.
108.
Yeatts, D. E., & Hyten, C. (1998). High-performing self-managed work teams. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
