Effects of Team Composition On Ranked Team Effectiveness

The composition of 3-man military teams was varied experimentally by assigning members according to team composition in terms of all possible combinations of levels of ability and motivation. The teams (64 in all) performed real military tasks in a military field setting and unit commanders ranked the effectiveness of their performance at the end of 2 months of military activity. It was found that both ability and motivation had an additive effect on crew performance, thus leading to the conclusion that when teams perform highly interdependent tasks, performance is apparently unlikely to be affected in a nonadditive manner by team composition. The data were analyzed with a new statistical procedure developed to substitute for the Friedman two-way analysis of variance, argued to be inappropriate for testing the significance of main effects and interactions in a blocked fractional factorial design.

[1]  C. Pinder,et al.  Work motivation : theory, issues, and applications , 1985 .

[2]  S. Dolan,et al.  Identifying Female Officer Potential: An Exploration in Predictors' Payoff , 1985 .

[3]  N. Kerr.  Motivation losses in small groups: a social dilemma analysis , 1983 .

[4]  Herbert H. Blumberg,et al.  Small Groups and Social Interaction , 1983 .

[5]  G. W. Hill.  Group versus individual performance: are n + 1 heads better than one?" psychological bulletin , 1982 .

[6]  Abraham B. Shani,et al.  Pygmalion goes to boot camp: Expectancy, leadership, and trainee performance. , 1982 .

[7]  D. W. Johnson,et al.  Effects of group and individual contingencies on academic performance and social relations of special needs students. , 1982, The Journal of social psychology.

[8]  John Rohrbaugh,et al.  Improving the quality of group judgment: Social judgment analysis and the nominal group technique , 1981 .

[9]  T. Egerbladh.  The function of group size and ability level on solving a multidimensional complementary task. , 1976 .

[10]  C. H. Castore,et al.  A Longitudinal Field Investigation of the Impact of Group Composition on Group Performance and Cohesion. , 1976 .

[11]  M. Reeb,et al.  Differential test validity for ethnic groups in the Israel army and the effects of educational level. , 1976 .

[12]  E. E. Jones.  Group dynamics: The psychology of small group behavior. 2nd ed. , 1976 .

[13]  J. Hackman,et al.  Group tasks, group interaction process, and group performance effectiveness: A review and proposed integration , 1975 .

[14]  Marshall B. Jones.  Regressing group on individual effectiveness. , 1974 .

[15]  Edwin E. Ghiselli,et al.  THE VALIDITY OF APTITUDE TESTS IN PERSONNEL SELECTION , 1973 .

[16]  E. Ramsden.  Group Process and Productivity , 1973 .

[17]  B. J. Winer,et al.  Statistical Principles in Experimental Design, 2nd Edition. , 1973 .

[18]  P. John.  Statistical Design and Analysis of Experiments , 1971 .

[19]  David J. Senn,et al.  Attraction as a function of similarity-dissimilarity in task performance. , 1971 .

[20]  S. Sharan,et al.  Peer nomiations as a predictor of multistage promotions in a ramified organization. , 1970 .

[21]  G. O'brien,et al.  Effects of organizational structure on correlations between member abilities and group productivity. , 1969 .

[22]  J. S. Hunter,et al.  The 2 k — p Fractional Factorial Designs , 1961 .