Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

It is my hope that in the next decade our field fully embraces complexity while clearly communicating practicality. Teams are inherently dynamic systems, and progress will require moving beyond static models that regress performance on aggregated individual differences. I highlight three interrelated sources of complexity: temporal dynamics (e.g., episodic, event-based, and longitudinal change), inter-relational dynamics (evolving and multiplex relationships), and dynamic inputs (e.g., dynamic team composition). Advances in unobtrusive data collection and analytic approaches—from accessible word counts to sophisticated natural language processing—now enable rigorous tests of long-standing temporal and relational theories. Yet complexity must be paired with application. By partnering with organizations and conducting field experiments, scholars can translate nuanced models into actionable interventions, where even small effects meaningfully shift outcomes. Looking ahead, the field’s promise lies in integrating new phenomena, including AI, without losing theoretical continuity or practical relevance.

Keywords

composition time group process field study

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bliese

P. D.

Lang

J. W.

(2016). Understanding relative and absolute change in discontinuous growth models: Coding alternatives and implications for hypothesis testing. Organizational Research Methods, 19(4), 562–592. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428116633502

Crawford

E. R.

LePine

J. A.

(2013). A configural theory of team processes: Accounting for the structure of taskwork and teamwork. Academy of Management Review, 38(1), 32–48. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2011.0206

Marks

M. A.

Mathieu

J. E.

Zaccaro

S. J.

(2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26(3), 356–376. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2001.4845785

Mathieu

J. E.

Wolfson

M. A.

Park

Luciano

M. M.

Bedwell-Torres

W. L.

Ramsay

P. S.

Klock

E. A.

Tannenbaum

S. I.

(2022). Indexing dynamic collective constructs using computer-aided text analysis: Construct validity evidence and illustrations featuring team processes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(4), 533–559. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000856

McGrath

J. E.

(1984). Groups: Interaction and performance. Prentice Hall.

McGrath

J. E.

(1991). Time, interaction, and performance (TIP) a theory of groups. Small Group Research, 22(2), 147–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496491222001

Morgeson

F. P.

Mitchell

T. R.

Liu

(2015). Event system theory: An event-oriented approach to the organizational sciences. Academy of Management Review, 40(4), 515–537. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2012.0099

Pandey

S. K.

(2019). Applying natural language processing capabilities in computerized textual analysis to measure organizational culture. Organizational Research Methods, 22(3), 765–797. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428117745648

Park

Mathieu

J. E.

Grosser

T. J.

(2020). A network conceptualization of team conflict. Academy of Management Review, 45(2), 352–375. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2016.0472

10.

Ployhart

R. E.

Vandenberg

R. J.

(2010). Longitudinal research: The theory, design, and analysis of change. Journal of Management, 36(1), 94–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630935211

11.

Rink

Kane

A. A.

Ellemers

Van der Vegt

(2013). Team receptivity to newcomers: Five decades of evidence and future research themes. Academy of Management Annals, 7(1), 247–293. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2013.766405

12.

Stuart

H. C.

(2017). Structural disruption, relational experimentation, and performance in professional hockey teams: A network perspective on member change. Organization Science, 28(2), 283–300. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2017.1112

13.

Summers

J. K.

Humphrey

S. E.

Ferris

G. R.

(2012). Team member change, flux in coordination, and performance: Effects of strategic core roles, information transfer, and cognitive ability. Academy of Management Journal, 55(2), 314–338. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0175

14.

Wolfson

M. A.

D’Innocenzo

Bell

S. T.

(2022). Dynamic team composition: A theoretical framework exploring potential and kinetic dynamism in team capabilities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(11), 1889–1906. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001004

15.

Wolfson

M. A.

Mathieu

J. E.

(2018). Sprinting to the finish: Toward a theory of Human Capital Resource Complementarity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(11), 1165–1180. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000323

Embracing Complexity While Communicating Practicality

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References