DOCSLIB.ORG

The Impact of Personality, Informal Roles, and Team Informal

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Impact of Personality, Informal Roles, and Team Informal THE IMPACT OF PERSONALITY, INFORMAL ROLES, AND TEAM INFORMAL ROLE CONFIGURATION ON TEAM EFFECTIVENESS A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Purdue University by David E. Caughlin In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science August 2010 Purdue University Indianapolis, Indiana ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Dennis Devine, John Hazer, and Leslie Ashburn-Nardo for serving on my committee and providing ongoing support during every phase of this project, the office staff of the department for scheduling experiment rooms and lending keys when needed, and Sarah Pinto for her assistance running participant sessions. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. iv LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................v ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... vi CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................1 1.1. Conceptual Framework .............................................................................................2 1.2. Previous Theory and Research ..................................................................................4 1.3. Present Study ..........................................................................................................20 CHAPTER 2. METHOD ...................................................................................................26 2.1. Participants ..............................................................................................................26 2.2. Design .....................................................................................................................26 2.3. Task .........................................................................................................................27 2.4. Measures .................................................................................................................28 2.5. Procedure ................................................................................................................34 2.6. Statistical Analyses .................................................................................................36 CHAPTER 3. RESULTS ...................................................................................................42 3.1. Preliminary Analyses ..............................................................................................42 3.2. Hypothesis Tests .....................................................................................................45 3.3. Follow-Up Analyses ...............................................................................................48 CHAPTER 4. DISCUSSION .............................................................................................51 4.1. Contributions...........................................................................................................53 4.2. Limitations and Future Research ............................................................................59 4.3. Conclusion ..............................................................................................................62 LIST OF REFERENCES ...................................................................................................64 TABLES ............................................................................................................................71 FIGURES ...........................................................................................................................82 APPENDICES Appendix A ....................................................................................................................87 Appendix B ..................................................................................................................145 Appendix C ..................................................................................................................163 Appendix D ..................................................................................................................179 Appendix E ..................................................................................................................180 iv LIST OF TABLES Table Page Table 1 ...............................................................................................................................71 Table 2 ...............................................................................................................................72 Table 3 ...............................................................................................................................73 Table 4 ...............................................................................................................................74 Table 5 ...............................................................................................................................75 Table 6 ...............................................................................................................................76 Table 7 ...............................................................................................................................77 Table 8 ...............................................................................................................................78 Table 9 ...............................................................................................................................79 Table 10 .............................................................................................................................80 Table 11 .............................................................................................................................81 v LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page Figure 1 ..............................................................................................................................82 Figure 2 ..............................................................................................................................83 Figure 3 ..............................................................................................................................84 Figure 4 ..............................................................................................................................85 Figure 5 ..............................................................................................................................86 vi ABSTRACT Caughlin, David E. M.S., Purdue University, August 2010. The Impact of Personality, Informal Roles, and Team Informal Role Configuration on Team Effectiveness. Major Professor: Dennis J. Devine. As organizations use more and more work teams, selecting and assembling effective teams is becoming increasingly important. Past research and theory has demonstrated that informal roles serve as a critical linking mechanism between individual-level characteristics such as personality and team-level effectiveness. The present study builds upon this area of research and theory by testing the individual-level link between personality and informal roles and the team-level link between team informal role configuration and team effectiveness. These links were tested using a sample of 152 undergraduate students participating in 38 teams of four. The teams engaged in an information-sharing business simulation where the goal was to generate the highest possible profits across two simulated business years. At the individual level, the Big Five personality dimension Agreeableness positively and significantly correlated with the adoption of the Communicator role, while the relationship between Conscientiousness and the Contractor role approached significance. With regard to the team level, a positive relationship was found between the number of Completer roles performed within a team and the level of team effectiveness for the first simulated vii business year, and the relationship between the total number of informal roles performed within a team and team effectiveness in the first simulated year was found to be marginally significant. Using a criterion profile analysis approach, two criterion patterns were identified in which optimal informal role configuration patterns yielded high levels of team effectiveness. Overall, results from this study lend some support to the demonstrated links between personality and informal roles and informal role configuration and team effectiveness, which have important implications for organizational selection and employee development. 1 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION The term team refers to an interdependent collection of individuals working together toward a shared and valued goal, objective, or mission (Hackman, 1987). Estimates suggest that nearly half of all organizations in the United States employ at least one or more work teams (Devine, Clayton, Philips, Dunford, & Melner, 1999). Typically, these teams are used to accomplish tasks, meet goals, and achieve objectives (Ilgen, Major Hollenbeck, & Sego, 1993). Teams are made up of individuals, and as these individuals work together, they engage in behaviors that may or may not contribute to their team‘s effectiveness. As such, there is value in investigating and identifying behaviors that contribute to team effectiveness. Stewart,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Effects of Diversity in Teams and Workgroups: a Qualitative Systematic Review
    International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology Vol. 7, No. 2, June 2017 Effects of Diversity in Teams and Workgroups: A Qualitative Systematic Review Seyhan Güver & Renate Motschnig University of Vienna Faculty of Computer Science Vienna, Austria Abstract Over the past few decades, scholars have attempted to explore the effects of diversity on teams and workgroups. This study aims to assess the state of the art, to expose new trends in diversity research, and to consolidate the results of previous studies in order to infer common wisdom about effects of diversity on teams/workgroups in organizations. In this paper, 122laboratory and field studies, and 17 review studies conducted between 1959 and 2016were qualitatively and systematically analyzed. It has been observed that although there is no single commonly accepted effect of diversity on performance per se, it tends to have a negative impact on cohesion, communication, and integration, and is likely to increase conflict and turnover. On the positive side, diversity - up to a certain limit - tends to improve decision-making and problem-solving processes through higher creativity and innovation potential. Furthermore, it was demonstrated that reactions of team members to diversity vary; there is no straightforward association between diversity and team dynamics, as many factors influence this association. Nevertheless, this paper investigates how leaders/managers of multicultural can make the best of a diverse team based on the insights of this review. Keywords: diversity, heterogeneity, teams, workgroups, review, qualitative analysis 1. Introduction Organizations have been employing diverse teams and workgroups - either ‘by preference’ or ‘by compulsion’ -, in order to increase their competitiveness in this age of globalization, industrial developments, andrapid dissemination of information.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Big Five Personality Traits on Group Performance in AL-HIKMAH
    Effects of Big Five Personality Traits on Group Performance in AL-HIKMAH AREMU, Moriam Adeyemi1, OLAONIPEKUN, Wahid Damilola2 & KU'AIBA Lame Mu'azu1 1 Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Management Sciences, Al-Hikmah University, Ilorin. Kwara State Nigeria 2 Department of Business Administration, Summit University Offa, Kwara State Nigeria Organisation consists of people who come together to achieve common goals and objectives. The collective performance of the INTRODUCTION employees as a group is very germane to the success of an organization. Thus, if individuals in an organization cannot work Group performance in every organization is as a group, then the organizations objectives cannot be achieved. important as it depicts the overall performance of the Despite the germane role that employee teams and group plays, organization. If various individuals in an group are still unable to produce to their fullest capacity because of different personality traits which sometimes leads to personality organization cannot work as a group, then the clashes. The main objective of the research work was to examine organizations performance both financial and personality and its effect of group performance in Al-Hikmah operational will never be maximized. Group efforts University, Ilorin. Primary data were collected using a structured and team work is the major ingredient in every questionnaire. A total of 205 out of 227 copies of questionnaire representing a response rate of 90.3% were used for the study. successful organization, hence the need to make sure While 22 copies of questionnaire representing 9.7% was invalid. that the personality of every member in the group is Multiple Regression analysis technique and Pearson Product okay for group/organizational goals to be achieved.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effects of Group Personality Composition on Project Team Performance: Operationalizations and Outcomes
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 5-2014 The Effects of Group Personality Composition on Project Team Performance: Operationalizations and Outcomes Mark Collins University of Tennessee - Knoxville, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Part of the Business Administration, Management, and Operations Commons, and the Organizational Behavior and Theory Commons Recommended Citation Collins, Mark, "The Effects of Group Personality Composition on Project Team Performance: Operationalizations and Outcomes. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2014. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/2684 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Mark Collins entitled "The Effects of Group Personality Composition on Project Team Performance: Operationalizations and Outcomes." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Business Administration. Anne D. Smith, Major Professor We
    [Show full text]
  • Personality and Team Performance: a Meta-Analysisy
    European Journal of Personality Eur. J. Pers. 20: 377–396 (2006) Published online 25 May 2006 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/per.588 Personality and Team Performance: A Meta-Analysisy MIRANDA A. G. PEETERS,1* HARRIE F. J. M. VAN TUIJL,1 CHRISTEL G. RUTTE1 and ISABELLE M. M. J. REYMEN2 1Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, The Netherlands 2University of Twente, The Netherlands Abstract Using a meta-analytical procedure, the relationship between team composition in terms of the Big-Five personality traits (trait elevation and variability) and team performance were researched. The number of teams upon which analyses were performed ranged from 106 to 527. For the total sample, significant effects were found for elevation in agreeableness (r ¼ 0.24) and conscientiousness (r ¼ 0.20), and for variability in agreeableness (r ¼0.12) and conscientiousness (r ¼0.24). Moderation by type of team was tested for professional teams versus student teams. Moderation results for agreeableness and conscientiousness were in line with the total sample results. However, student and professional teams differed in effects for emotional stability and openness to experience. Based on these results, suggestions for future team composition research are presented. Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Key words: Big-Five; personality; team performance; meta-analysis INTRODUCTION Teamwork appears to be the trend within many organizations (e.g. West, Borill, & Unsworth, 1998; West, 1996). The rationale behind structuring work into teams is that the combination of complementary employee skills, knowledge, attitudes, and other characteristics will result in optimal achievement of organizational goals. Scholars set out to find out whether this rationale actually holds true, focusing on teamwork and its effects.
    [Show full text]
  • Personality Effects
    10.1177/1046496404268538SMALLHalfhill et GROUP al. / GROUP RESEARCH PERSON / FebruaryALITY COMPOSITION 2005 GROUP PERSONALITY COMPOSITION AND GROUP EFFECTIVENESS An Integrative Review of Empirical Research TERRY HALFHILL Pennsylvania State University ERIC SUNDSTROM University of Tennessee JESSICA LAHNER WILMA CALDERONE University of North Texas TJAI M. NIELSEN The George Washington University This review examines relationships between group personality composition (GPC) and group effectiveness, focusing on four questions: (a) How have researchers operationalized GPC? (b) What criteria have been used as measures of group effectiveness? (c) Is GPC related to group effectiveness? (d) Under what conditions is GPC associated with group effectiveness? A review of 31 studies yielding 334 unique relationships distinguished task and relationship predictors and criteria. Findings indicate operational definitions of GPC are varied, variance scores correlate negatively with group effectiveness, and minimum scores predict as well as mean scores. GPC is related to group effectiveness, and the effect is stronger in field studies than lab studies. Implications are discussed. Keywords: group personality composition; personality; work teams; work groups Several events in the past 20 years have led to a resurgence of interest in the personality composition of work teams. First, per- sonality has increasingly been found to be a valid predictor of per- formance (Hogan, Hogan, & Roberts, 1996), in part, because of the SMALL GROUP RESEARCH, Vol. 36 No. 1, February 2005 83-105 DOI: 10.1177/1046496404268538 © 2005 Sage Publications 83 84 SMALL GROUP RESEARCH / February 2005 influence of the Big Five model of personality (Costa & McCrae, 1988; Digman, 1990). Second, research on groups has increased (Moreland, Hogg, & Haines, 1994; Neilsen, Sundstrom, & Halfhill, in press; Sanna & Parks, 1997; Sundstrom, McIntyre, Halfhill, & Richards, 2000).
    [Show full text]
  • Enhancing Effectiveness of Team Science (PDF)
    THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS This PDF is available at http://www.nap.edu/19007 SHARE Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science DETAILS 280 pages | 6 x 9 | PAPERBACK ISBN 978-0-309-31682-8 | DOI: 10.17226/19007 AUTHORS BUY THIS BOOK Nancy J. Cooke and Margaret L. Hilton, Editors; Committee on the Science of Team Science; Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences; Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and FIND RELATED TITLES Education; National Research Council Visit the National Academies Press at NAP.edu and login or register to get: – Access to free PDF downloads of thousands of scientific reports – 10% off the price of print titles – Email or social media notifications of new titles related to your interests – Special offers and discounts Distribution, posting, or copying of this PDF is strictly prohibited without written permission of the National Academies Press. (Request Permission) Unless otherwise indicated, all materials in this PDF are copyrighted by the National Academy of Sciences. Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science ENHANCING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TEAM SCIENCE Nancy J. Cooke and Margaret L. Hilton, Editors Committee on the Science of Team Science Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.
    [Show full text]
  • Team Personality Composition, Emergent Leadership and Shared Leadership in Virtual Teams: a Theoretical Framework☆
    Human Resource Management Review 27 (2017) 678–693 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Human Resource Management Review journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/humres Team personality composition, emergent leadership and shared leadership in virtual teams: A theoretical framework☆ Julia E. Hoch a,⁎, James H. Dulebohn b a Nazarian College of Business, California State University, 18111 Nordhoff Street Juniper Hall, Northridge, CA 91330, United States b School of Human Resources and Labor Relations, Michigan State University, 368 Farm Lane, East Lansing, MI 48824, United States article info abstract Keywords: Limited theory and research has been devoted to the role of team personality composition, as Virtual teams well as emergent and shared leadership, in virtual teams. In an effort to provide a theoretical Emergent leadership basis for the role of team personality composition, as well as emergent and shared leadership, Shared leadership in virtual teams, we propose a virtual team framework that portrays the team personality com- Big Five position as predictors of emergent and shared leadership. These in turn are expected to impact virtual team performance. We further posit that the relationships between team personality composition and virtual team performance are indirect, through emergent leadership and shared leadership. Finally, we present team virtuality as a moderator between team composi- tion and team processes. Suggestions for future research and implications for the management of virtual teams are presented. © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. The use of virtual teams has continued to grow as organizations widely adopt virtual team structures to perform work. Virtual teams work across geographic distance and different time zones to accomplish joint goals; virtual teams are often comprised of members from different cultural and national backgrounds (Cramton & Hinds, 2005; Gibson & Gibbs, 2006; Hinds, Liu, & Lyon, 2011; Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014).
    [Show full text]
  • How Agreeableness Affects Team Performance Over Time
    SGR44610.1177/1046496413507609Small Group ResearchBradley et al. 507609research-article2013 View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by SHAREOK repository Article Small Group Research 44(6) 680 –711 Team Players and © The Author(s) 2013 Reprints and permissions: Collective Performance: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1046496413507609 How Agreeableness sgr.sagepub.com Affects Team Performance Over Time Bret H. Bradley1, John E. Baur1, Christopher G. Banford1, and Bennett E. Postlethwaite2 Abstract Previous research on teams has found that agreeableness is one of the strongest personality predictors of team performance, yet one of the weakest personality predictors of individual-level job performance. In this study, we examined why teams with more agreeable members perform better. Data were collected across 4 months at 5 points in time from 107 project teams. We found that agreeableness affects performance through communication and cohesion and that communication precedes cohesion in time. Furthermore, we found that virtualness moderated the relationships between agreeableness and communication, as well as between agreeableness and team performance, such that teams only benefitted from high levels of agreeableness when interacting face-to-face. Keywords agreeableness, team performance, communication, cohesion, virtual teams 1University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA 2Pepperdine University, Malibu, CA, USA Corresponding Author: Bret H. Bradley, University of Oklahoma, 307 West Brooks, Room AH6A, Norman, OK 73019, USA. Email: [email protected] Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OKLAHOMA on January 20, 2016 Bradley et al. 681 The increasingly important role of teams in organizations has led to a height- ened need to understand how to help teams become more effective (Kozlowski & Ilgen, 2006).
    [Show full text]
  • The Relationship of Personality Traits to Satisfaction with the Team: a Study of Interdisciplinary Teacher Teams in Rhode Island Middle Schools Michele D
    University of Connecticut OpenCommons@UConn Northeastern Educational Research Association NERA onfeC rence Proceedings 2010 (NERA) Annual Conference Fall 10-20-2010 The Relationship of Personality Traits to Satisfaction with the Team: A Study of Interdisciplinary Teacher Teams in Rhode Island Middle Schools Michele D. Humbyrd Johnson & Wales University, [email protected] Robert K. Gable Johnson & Wales University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://opencommons.uconn.edu/nera_2010 Part of the Education Commons Recommended Citation Humbyrd, Michele D. and Gable, Robert K., "The Relationship of Personality Traits to Satisfaction with the Team: A Study of Interdisciplinary Teacher Teams in Rhode Island Middle Schools" (2010). NERA Conference Proceedings 2010. 17. https://opencommons.uconn.edu/nera_2010/17 1 The Relationship of Personality Traits to Satisfaction with the Team: A Study of Interdisciplinary Teacher Teams in Rhode Island Middle Schools ABSTRACT Shared practice in schools has emerged; teachers are moving from isolation to team collaboration where personality traits could be related to quality interactions. Team personality traits and team satisfaction were examined. A survey and interview approach was used for N = 244 full-time teachers from N = 49 interdisciplinary teams at N = 7 middle schools. Descriptive, correlational, multiple regression analyses and coded themes about team members’ personalities and interactions were employed. No significant relationships were found between the BFI traits and Satisfaction with the Team. Team-level analysis indicated a significant negative correlation between Satisfaction with theTeam and Extraversion and Agreeableness. Qualitative data revealed team climate, team member personality, and team personality configuration were related to Satisfaction with the Team.
    [Show full text]
  • Design Teams and Personality : Effects of Team Composition on Processes and Effectiveness
    Design teams and personality : effects of team composition on processes and effectiveness Citation for published version (APA): Peeters, M. A. G. (2006). Design teams and personality : effects of team composition on processes and effectiveness. Technische Universiteit Eindhoven. https://doi.org/10.6100/IR608719 DOI: 10.6100/IR608719 Document status and date: Published: 01/01/2006 Document Version: Publisher’s PDF, also known as Version of Record (includes final page, issue and volume numbers) Please check the document version of this publication: • A submitted manuscript is the version of the article upon submission and before peer-review. There can be important differences between the submitted version and the official published version of record. People interested in the research are advised to contact the author for the final version of the publication, or visit the DOI to the publisher's website. • The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review. • The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.
    [Show full text]
  • How Agreeableness Affects Team Performance Over Time
    SGR44610.1177/1046496413507609Small Group ResearchBradley et al. 507609research-article2013 Article Small Group Research 44(6) 680 –711 Team Players and © The Author(s) 2013 Reprints and permissions: Collective Performance: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1046496413507609 How Agreeableness sgr.sagepub.com Affects Team Performance Over Time Bret H. Bradley1, John E. Baur1, Christopher G. Banford1, and Bennett E. Postlethwaite2 Abstract Previous research on teams has found that agreeableness is one of the strongest personality predictors of team performance, yet one of the weakest personality predictors of individual-level job performance. In this study, we examined why teams with more agreeable members perform better. Data were collected across 4 months at 5 points in time from 107 project teams. We found that agreeableness affects performance through communication and cohesion and that communication precedes cohesion in time. Furthermore, we found that virtualness moderated the relationships between agreeableness and communication, as well as between agreeableness and team performance, such that teams only benefitted from high levels of agreeableness when interacting face-to-face. Keywords agreeableness, team performance, communication, cohesion, virtual teams 1University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA 2Pepperdine University, Malibu, CA, USA Corresponding Author: Bret H. Bradley, University of Oklahoma, 307 West Brooks, Room AH6A, Norman, OK 73019, USA. Email: [email protected] Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at UNIV OF OKLAHOMA on January 20, 2016 Bradley et al. 681 The increasingly important role of teams in organizations has led to a height- ened need to understand how to help teams become more effective (Kozlowski & Ilgen, 2006). One focus of performance research is on the composition of teammates’ characteristics such as their knowledge, skills, abilities, or per- sonalities (J.
    [Show full text]
  • Modeling the Effects of Personality on Performance Outcomes in Student Teams
    International Journal of Business and Social Science Vol. 8, No. 5, May 2017 Modeling the Effects of Personality on Performance Outcomes in Student Teams William R. Forrester, Ph.D. & Armen Tashchian, Ph.D. Department of Marketing and Professional Sales Coles College of Business Kennesaw State University 560 Parliament Garden Way NW MB0406 Kennesaw, GA 30144 USA Abstract This paper discusses relationships between team personality elevation and diversity and team work performance outcomes in the context of student teams engaged in academic coursework. A model is presented proposing that team effort, team effectiveness, and team work satisfaction are influenced by elevation and diversity of the Big Five personality dimensions and that these effects are mediated by group communications and workload sharing. The model proposes that the influence of personality elevation and diversity on performance outcomes is mediated by communication within the group and by group workload sharing. Relationships among these components are presented as propositions to guide future research. Keywords: Big Five Personality, Team Performance, Team Communications, Workload Sharing Introduction Researchers have directed considerable effort to investigating effects of team composition on the outcomes of team work. As a result, it is widely accepted that team work outcomes are influenced by both surface level traits of team members such as ethnicity, gender, and age, as well as deep traits such as personalities, attitudes, and beliefs (Hsiao-Yun, Shih and Chiang 2015). It is generally agreed that work outcomes are influenced by both the mean levels of these deep traits and their diversity within teams, and that trait effects are mediated by team structure and team processes (van Knippenberg and Mell (2016).
    [Show full text]