What makes a good team player? Personality and team effectiveness

More documents

Recommendations

Info

266 DRISKELL, GOODWIN, SALAS, AND O’SHEAinant-low affiliation leader. There is no questionthat he was a great general, but he may havebeen somewhat lacking in interpersonal relations(his widely reported response to a hospitalizedsoldier who said he did not think hecould take it anymore was to slap him with hisgloves). General Douglas MacArthur, who wewould envision as a high dominance-high affiliationleader, may represent a more effectiveleader prototype for modern times.Finally, we believe this model suggests anumber of practical applications. For the purposeof selecting good team players, the type ofclassification presented in Table 2 should proveto be useful, subject to further empirical confirmation.However, in real-world settings, teamsare often intact and selection or replacement ofteam members may not be a relevant option. Forsuch existing teams, the model presented inTable 2 suggests an approach to assessing existingteam member capabilities and targetingtraining to support behaviors that may be deficient.For example, if assessment indicates alow score on trust for a specific team member,we propose that this will most likely be manifestedin activities related to performance monitoringand feedback, interpersonal relations,and decision making (i.e., scanning across theappropriate row of Table 2). Efforts to implementtraining for this team member should focuson these dimensions. This model shouldalso be useful for diagnosis of team deficiencies.If assessment of team processes indicatespoor team management, then (scanning downthe appropriate column of Table 2), we canderive what team member facets are relevant tothese activities. Even if selection is not possible,team members can be assigned to specific roleson the team to maximize the fit between individualcapabilities and teamwork requirements.Further research is needed to examine themalleability of traits and the value of training todevelop more effective team members. Onequestion that is of significant practical importanceis: Can you train someone who is dispositionallycompetitive to be more cooperative?Judge et al. (1998) noted that the fact that traitsshow considerable temporal stability does notmean that they cannot be changed. Moreover, thesuccess with which well-developed training programshave led to improved teamwork in appliedsettings (e.g., Smith-Jentsch, Salas, & Brannick,2001) suggests the utility of this approach.Further research should also address issuesrelated to assessment. Typically, assessment ofpersonality is almost exclusively self-report, viaendorsement of descriptive statements. Thismay be problematic under some circumstancesfor the assessment of teamwork. Although oursociety is not as collectivist as some, few wouldwant to be seen as a poor team player. Moreover,in organizations that have placed a publicvalue on teamwork (e.g., the military has aparticularly strong team culture), the individualwho would endorse the item “I prefer to workalone” may not only be nonaffiliative but alsooblivious to organizational preferences. Questionsrelated to faking as well as research onalternative approaches to self-report should receivefurther attention.It is somewhat traditional to conclude bybemoaning the state of progress in the field.However, we are pleased to announce that thestudy of personality and team performance isburgeoning. Our goal was to contribute to andextend this research in two ways. First, ourmodel extends current work on trait predictionof team performance by linking lower-levelfacet predictors with lower-level teamwork behaviors.Second, by linking team member personalitycharacteristics to teamwork dimensions,this model provides a foundation for applicationand testing of this approach forpurposes of selection, training, and team design.ReferencesAmbady, N., Hallahan, M., & Rosenthal, R. (1995).On judging and being judged accurately in zeroacquaintancesituations. Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 69, 518–529.Ashton, M. C. (1998). Personality and job performance:The importance of narrow traits. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 19, 289–303.Aube, C. & Rosseau, V. (2005). Team goal commitmentand team effectiveness: The role of taskinterdependence and supportive behaviors. GroupDynamics, 9, 189–204.Baker, D. P., & Salas, E. (1992). Principles for measuringteamwork skills. Human Factors, 34, 469–475.Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (2001). Select onconscientiousness and emotional stability. In E. A.Locke (Ed.), Handbook of principles of organizationalbehavior (pp. 15–28). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
PERSONALITY AND TEAM EFFECTIVENESS267Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Judge, T. A. (2001).Personality and performance at the beginning ofthe new millennium: What do we know and wheredo we go next? International Journal of Selectionand Assessment, 9, 9–30.Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., Neubert, M. J., &Mount, M. K. (1998). Relating member ability andpersonality to work-team processes and team effectiveness.Journal of Applied Psychology, 83,377–391.Barry, B., & Stewart, G. L. (1997). Composition,process, and performance in self-managed groups:The role of personality. Journal of Applied Psychology,82, 62–78.Barsade, S. G. (2002). The ripple effects: Emotionalcontagion and its influence on group behavior.Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 644–675.Baumeister, R. F. (1997). Identify, self-concept, andself-esteem: The self lost and found. In R. Hogan,J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personalitypsychology (pp. 681–710). San Diego,CA: Academic Press.Borman, W. C., White, L. A., & Dorsey, D. W.(1995). Effects of ratee task performance and interpersonalfactors on supervisor peer performanceratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 168–177.Borman, W. C., White, L. A., Pulakos, E. D., &Oppler, S. H. (1991). Models of supervisory jobperformance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology,76, 863–872.Brown, J. D., & Marshall, M. A. (2001). Self-esteemand emotion: Some thoughts about feelings. Personalityand Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 575–584.Bruch, M. A., Gorsky, J. M., Collins, T. M., &Berger, P. A. (1989). Shyness and sociability reexamined:A multicomponent analysis. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 57, 904–915.Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Tannenbaum, S. I., Salas, E.,& Volpe, C. E. (1995). Defining competencies andestablishing team training requirements. In R.Guzzo and E. Salas (Eds.), Team effectiveness anddecision making in organizations, (pp. 333–380).San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding incommunication. In: L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, &S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on sociallyshared cognition (pp. 127–149). Washington, DC:American Psychological Association.Conn, S. R., & Rieke, M. L. (1994). The 16PF fifthed. technical manual. Champagne, IL: Institute forPersonality and Ability Testing, Inc.Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEOPersonality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and Five FactorInventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual.Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Costanzo, M. (1992). Training students to decodeverbal and nonverbal cues: Effects on confidenceand performance. Journal of Educational Psychology,84, 308–313.Cramton, C. D. (2001). The mutual knowledge problemand its consequences for dispersed collaboration.Organizational Science, 12, 346–371.Crocker, J., & Wolfe, C. T. (2001). Contingencies ofself-worth. Psychological Review, 108, 593–623.Curtis, R. C., & Miller, K. (1986). Believing anotherlikes or dislikes you: Behaviors making the beliefscome true. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,51, 284–290.Davis, J. H. (1969). Group performance. Reading,MA: Addison Wesley.DeGroot, T., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1999). Why visualand vocal interview cues can affect interviewer’sjudgments and predict job performance. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 84, 986–993.Devine, D. J. (2002). A review and integration ofclassification systems relevant to teams in organizations.Group Dynamics, 6, 291–310.Devine, D. J., & Philips, J. L. (2001). Do smarterteams do better: A Meta-analysis of cognitive abilityand team performance. Small Group Research,32, 507–532.Dirks, K. T. (1999). The effects of interpersonal truston work group performance. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 84, 445–455.Dodgson, P. G., & Wood, J. V. (1998). Self-esteemand the cognitive accessibility of strengths andweaknesses after failure. Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 75, 178–197.Driskell, J. E., Hogan, R., & Salas, E. (1987). Personalityand group performance. In C. Hendrick(Ed.), Review of Personality and Social Psychology(Vol. 9, pp. 91–112). Newbury Park, CA:Sage.Driskell, J. E., Olmstead, B., & Salas, E. (1993). Taskcues, dominance cues, and influence in taskgroups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 51–60.Driskell, J. E., & Radtke, P. H. (2003). The effect ofgesture on speech production and comprehension.Human Factors, 45, 445–454.Driskell, J. E., & Salas, E. (1992). Collective behaviorand team performance. Human Factors, 34,277–288.Dudley, N. M., Orvis, K. A., Lebiecki, J. E., &Cortina, J. M. (2006). A meta-analytic investigationof conscientiousness in the prediction of jobperformance: Examining the intercorrelations andthe incremental validity of narrow traits. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 91, 40–57.Ellemers, N., de Gilder, & van den Heuvel, H.(1998). Career-oriented versus team-oriented commitmentand behavior at work. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 83, 717–730.
Page 2 and 3: 250 DRISKELL, GOODWIN, SALAS, AND O

What makes a good team player? Personality and team effectiveness

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?