The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Team roles, team balance and performance
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to test the relationship between team composition and team performance by applying the construct of Ten Haaf, Bikker and Adriaanse. Design/methodology/approach: Data were collected from a sample of 39 teams out of a population of 234 undergraduate MBA students. Four performance indices of each team were tested against the Ten Haaf et al. scores by using Spearman's rank test. Findings: A statistical relation between team composition according to Ten Haaf et al. and team performance was not found. It is argued that Ten Haaf et al. and other authors do not use constructs according to Belbin's theory of balancing teams. Research limitations/implications: There is need for a construct, which is isomorphic with Belbin's notions of team balancing. The relation between this construct and performance should be tested. Practical implications: The current team balancing constructs in literature are of limited use. As the various constructs give differing assessments of balance these constructs should not be used. Implications are suggested for more prescriptive algorithms for designing balanced teams. Originality/value: The team composition algorithm of Ten Haaf et al. has not been tested up to now with regard to team performance. The study amplifies on the ambiguity of the concept of team balance.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“These expectations and assumptions consequently also prevail in human-AI teams in which humans work on an equal footing with AI-based team members (van de Water et al. 2008).”
From Elaborating Team Roles for Artificial Intelligence-based Teammates in Human-AI Collaboration (2022) · cites this paper as van de Water et al. 2008
In the citing paper
“Functioning teams are made up of different members who have distinct skills and exhibit diverse behaviors (van de Water et al. 2008).”
From Elaborating Team Roles for Artificial Intelligence-based Teammates in Human-AI Collaboration (2022) · cites this paper as van de Water et al. 2008
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- Belbin, R.M. (1993), Team Roles at Work, Butterworth‐Heinemann, Oxford.
- Fisher, S.G., Hunter, T. and Macrosson, W.D.K. (1998), “The structure of Belbin's team roles”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 71 No. 3, pp. 283‐8. · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8325.1998.tb00677.x
- Paris, C.R., Salas, E. and Cannon‐Bowers, J.A. (2000), “Teamwork in multi‐person systems: a review and analysis”, Ergonomics, Vol. 43 No. 8, pp. 1052‐75. · DOI · Paper page
- Park, W‐W. and Bang, H. (2002), “Team role balance and team performance”, paper presented at Belbin's Biennial Conference.
- Partington, D. and Harris, H. (1999), “Team role balance and team performance: an empirical study”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 18 No. 8, pp. 694‐705. · doi:10.1108/02621719910293783
- Senior, B. (1997), “Team roles and team performance: Is there ‘really’ a link”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 70, pp. 241‐58. · DOI
- Ten Haaf, W., Bikker, H. and Adriaanse, D.J. (2002), Fundamentals of Business Engineering and Management: A Systems Approach to People and Organizations, DUP Science, Delft, pp. 486‐515.
- Van de Water, T., Van de Water, H. and Bukman, C. (2007), “A balanced team‐generating model”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 180 No. 2, pp. 885‐906. · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2006.04.017
Cited by
Elaborating Team Roles for Artificial Intelligence-based Teammates in Human-AI Collaboration
Siemon, D. (2022) · Group Decision and Negotiation · doi:10.1007/s10726-022-09792-z · Cited by 179
Metadata
- Authors
- van de Water, H., Ahaus, K., & Rozier, R.
- Venue
- Journal of Management Development
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2008-05-23
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 499-512
- ISSN
- 0262-1711
- Cited by
- 30
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
- Licence
- www.emerald.com/insight/site-policies (tdm)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
