CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,623Team Dynamics and PerformanceJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorSocial and Intergroup Psychology

Enhancing the Effectiveness of Work Groups and Teams

Kozlowski, Steve W.J., Ilgen, Daniel R.·2006·Psychological Science in the Public Interest
DOI 10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00030.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Teams of people working together for a common purpose have been a centerpiece of human social organization ever since our ancient ancestors first banded together to hunt game, raise families, and defend their communities. Human history is largely a story of people working together in groups to explore, achieve, and conquer. Yet, the modern concept of work in large organizations that developed in the late 19th and early 20th centuries is largely a tale of work as a collection of individual jobs. A variety of global forces unfolding over the last two decades, however, has pushed organizations worldwide to restructure work around teams, to enable more rapid, flexible, and adaptive responses to the unexpected. This shift in the structure of work has made team effectiveness a salient organizational concern. Teams touch our lives everyday and their effectiveness is important to well-being across a wide range of societal functions. There is over 50 years of psychological research—literally thousands of studies—focused on understanding and influencing the processes that underlie team effectiveness. Our goal in this monograph is to sift through this voluminous literature to identify what we know, what we think we know, and what we need to know to improve the effectiveness of work groups and teams. We begin by defining team effectiveness and establishing the conceptual underpinnings of our approach to understanding it. We then turn to our review, which concentrates primarily on topics that have well-developed theoretical and empirical foundations, to ensure that our conclusions and recommendations are on firm footing. Our review begins by focusing on cognitive, motivational/affective, and behavioral team processes—processes that enable team members to combine their resources to resolve task demands and, in so doing, be effective. We then turn our attention to identifying interventions, or “levers,” that can shape or align team processes and thereby provide tools and applications that can improve team effectiveness. Topic-specific conclusions and recommendations are given throughout the review. There is a solid foundation for concluding that there is an emerging science of team effectiveness and that findings from this research foundation provide several means to improve team effectiveness. In the concluding section, we summarize our primary findings to highlight specific research, application, and policy recommendations for enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00030.x

Cites

317 of 317 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 35

  1. Ancona D.G., 1996, Research in Organizational Behavior, 8, 251
  2. Argote L., 1993, International review of industrial and organizational psychology, 8, 333
  3. Barsade S.G., 1998, Composition: Research on managing groups and teams, 1, 81
  4. Bliese P.D., 2000, Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations, 349
  5. Brown K.G., Kozlowski S.W.J. (1999, April). Toward an expanded conceptualization of emergent organizational phenomena: Dispersion theory . Paper presented at the 14th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Atlanta, GA .
  6. Burke C.S., Leadership Quarterly
  7. Burns J.M., 1978, Leadership
  8. Burns T., 1961, The management in innovation
  9. Cannon-Bowers J.A., Learning, training, and development in organizations
  10. Chao G.T., Kozlowski S.W.J., Major D.A., Gardner P. (1994, April). The effects of individual and contextual factors on organizational socialization and outcomes. In S.W.J. Kozlowski (Chair), Transitions during organizational socialization: Newcomer expectations, information-seeking, and learning outcomes . Symposium presented at the 9th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Nashville, TN .
  11. DeShon R.P., Milner K.R., Kozlowski S.W.J., Toney R.J., Schmidt A., Wiechmann D., Davis C. (1999, April). The effects of team goal orientation on individual and team performance . Paper presented at the 14th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Atlanta, GA .
  12. Dyer J.C., 1984, Human factors review, 285
  13. Ellis A.P.J., 2005, Understanding teams: A volume in research in management, 1
  14. Flin R., 2001, Improving teamwork in organizations, 217
  15. Galbraith J., 1972, Organizational planning: Cases and concepts, 530
  16. Graen G.B., 1987, Research in organizational behavior, 9, 175
  17. Hackman J.R., 1976, Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, 1455
  18. Hackman J.R., 1992, Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, 3, 199
  19. Human Technology., 1993, Training and development framework and descriptions of best practices
  20. Kozlowski S.W.J., Group learning
  21. Kozlowski S.W.J., 2000, Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations, 157
  22. Kozlowski S.W.J., 1996, Research in personnel and human resource management, 14, 253
  23. Kozlowski S.W.J., 1999, The changing nature of work performance: Implications for staffing, personnel actions, and development, 240
  24. Lee C., 1991, Training, 28, 447
  25. Mathieu J.E., Journal of Applied Psychology
  26. Mathieu J.E., Academy of Management Journal
  27. Ployhart R.E., 2005, Handbook of personnel selection, 495
  28. Salas E., 1992, Teams: Their training and performance, 3
  29. Schiflett S.C., 1982, The definition and measurement of team functions (Rep. No. ARRO-3068-FR-R81-4)
  30. Schmidt A.M., Journal of Applied Psychology
  31. Schneider B., 2000, Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations, 91
  32. Shea G.P., 1987, Research in personnel and human resource management, 5, 323
  33. Smolek J., 1999, Supporting work team effectiveness, 24
  34. Swezey R.W., 1992, Teams: Their training and performance, 219
  35. Zachary W. (2004, Dec). Computational modeling and teams, Towards the Next Frontier in Research on Team Effectiveness . Workshop sponsored by the US Army Research Institute and the University of Central Florida. Orlando, FL .

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Ilgen, D. R.
Affiliations
Michigan State University (US)
Corresponding author
Kozlowski, Steve W.J.
ORCID
Kozlowski, Steve W.J.
Venue
Psychological Science in the Public Interest
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2006-12
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
77-124
ISSN
  • 1539-6053 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-1006
DOI
10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00030.x
OpenAlex
W2111859378
Semantic Scholar
2bd8f5a11c4e6f3e7b596fe1d79c1ec510531191
Cited by
2,623
References
317
Citations by year
2026: 158 · 2025: 173 · 2024: 203 · 2023: 174 · 2022: 153 · 2021: 151 · 2020: 153 · 2019: 163 · 2018: 157 · 2017: 164 · 2016: 114 · 2015: 136 · 2014: 144 · 2013: 123 · 2012: 139
FWCI
51.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Gothic.net (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
team effectiveness, work teams, team processes, cognitive processes, motivational processes, emotional processing, behavioral processes, team-based intervention, organizational restructuring

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