Effective teamwork is beneficial for organizations on Earth, but is a sine qua non for teams venturing into outer space. The prospect of sending a team to Mars by the year 2030 invites organizational scientists to take stock of what we know and what we still need to know about teams. The team endeavoring to Mars will be multicultural and interdisciplinary, living and working in uncomfortable and dangerous conditions, and doing so in close collaboration with distant teams back on Earth. Tackling the teamwork challenges associated with a mission to Mars present an opportunity to rapidly accelerate the science of teams. In this conceptual review, we explore seven complexities of teams that are both important and understudied. Results of structured interviews with experts on human space exploration regarding the nature of teamwork in long-duration space exploration illuminate seven complexities, or key features of teams, in general, that serve as a catalyst for identifying, informing, and motivating future directions of inquiry about teams. These features, and the research they inspire, may enable organizations to build more effective teams on Earth and beyond.
AlderferC. P. (1977). Group and intergroup relations. In HackmanJ. R.SuttleJ. L. (Eds.), Improving life at work (pp. 227-296). Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear.
2.
AllportD. A.StylesE. A.HsiehS. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In UmiltàC.MoscovitchM. (Eds.), Attention and performance XV (pp. 421-452). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
3.
ArrowH.McGrathJ. E.BerdahlJ. L. (2000). Small groups as complex systems: Formation, coordination, development, and adaptation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4.
AschS. E. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 70(9), 1-70.
5.
AsencioR.MuraseT.DeChurchL. A.CholletB.ZaccaroS. J. (2016). Bridging the boundary without sinking the team: Countervailing forces in multiteam systems. Manuscript submitted for publication.
6.
BaardS. K.RenchT. A.KozlowskiS. W. (2014). Performance adaptation: A theoretical integration and review. Journal of Management, 40, 48-99.
7.
BalkundiP.HarrisonD. A. (2006). Ties, leaders, and time in teams: Strong inference about network structure’s effects on team viability and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 49-68.
8.
BealD. J.CohenR. R.BurkeM. J.McLendonC. L. (2003). Cohesion and performance in groups: A meta-analytic clarification of construct relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 989-1004.
9.
BellS. T. (2007). Deep-level composition variables as predictors of team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 595-615.
10.
ButtsC. T. (2008). A relational event framework for social action. Sociological Methodology, 38, 155-200.
11.
CarronA. V.EysM. A.BurkeS. M.JowettS.LavalleeD. (2007). Team cohesion: Nature, correlates, and development. In JowettS.LavalleeD. (Eds.), Social psychology in sport (pp. 91-101). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
12.
ChenG.KanferR.DeShonR. P.MathieuJ. E.KozlowskiS. W. (2009). The motivating potential of teams: Test and extension of cross-level model of motivation in teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110, 45-55.
13.
ContractorN. S. (1999). Self-organizing systems research in the social sciences: Reconciling the metaphors and the models. Management Communication Quarterly, 13, 154-166.
14.
CourtrightS. H.ThurgoodG. R.StewardG. L.PierottiA. J. (2015). Structural interdependence in teams: An integrative framework and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 1825-1846.
15.
CrawfordE. R.LePineJ. A. (2013). A configural theory of team processes: Accounting for the structure of taskwork and teamwork. Academy of Management Review, 38(1), 32-48.
16.
CsikszentmihalyiM. (1996). Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
17.
DaftR. L.LengelR. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32, 554-571.
18.
DavisonR. B.HollenbeckJ. R.BarnesC. M.SleesmanD. J.IlgenD. R. (2012). Coordinated action in multiteam systems. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 808-824.
19.
DeChurchL. A.CarterD. R.AsencioR.WaxA. M.SeelyP. W.DalrympleK.. . . Mesmer-MagnusJ. R. (in press). From teams in organizations to organizing in teams. In OnesD. S.AndersonN.ViswesvaranC.SinangilH. K. (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work, and organizational psychology (2nd ed.). Sage.
20.
DeChurchL. A.MarksM. A. (2006). Leadership in multiteam systems. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 311-329.
21.
DeChurchL. A.Mesmer-MagnusJ. R. (2010). The cognitive underpinnings of effective teamwork: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 32-53.
22.
DeChurchL. A.ZaccaroS. J. (2013). Innovation in scientific multiteam systems: Confluent and countervailing forces. A presentation made to The National Academy of Sciences Workshop on Science Team Dynamics and Effectiveness. Washington, DC.
23.
De DreuC. K.WeingartL. R. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 741-749.
24.
DeShonR. P.KozlowskiS. W. J.SchmidtA. M.MilnerK. R.WiechmannD. (2004). A multiple-goal, multilevel model of feedback effects on the regulation of individual and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1035-1056.
25.
EloS.KyngäsH. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62, 107-115.
26.
EmeryF. E.TristE. L. (1965). The causal texture of organizational environments. Human Relations, 18(1), 21-32.
27.
EngwallM.JerbrantA. (2003). The resource allocation syndrome: The prime challenge of multi-project management?International Journal of Project Management, 21, 403-409.
28.
FarajS.SproullL. (2000). Coordinating expertise in software development teams. Management Science, 46, 1554-1568.
29.
FestingerL. (1950). Informal social communication. Psychological Review, 57, 271-282.
30.
FischerU.MosierK. (2015). Communication protocols to support collaboration in distributed teams under asynchronous conditions. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 59, 1-5.
31.
FletcherT. D.MajorD. A. (2006). The effects of communication modality on performance and self-ratings of teamwork components. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11, 557-576.
32.
GalbraithJ. R. (1971). Matrix organization designs: How to combine functional and project forms. Business Horizons, 14(1), 29-40.
33.
GersickC. J. (1988). Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 9-41.
34.
GilsonL. L.GoldbergC. B. (2015). Editors’ comment: So, what is a conceptual paper?Group and Organization Management, 40, 127-130.
35.
GilsonL. L.MaynardM. T.YoungN. C. J.VartiainenM.HakonenM. (2015). Virtual teams research 10 years, 10 themes, and 10 opportunities. Journal of Management, 41, 1313-1337.
36.
GlaserB. S.StraussA. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. London, England: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
37.
GoldrattE. M. (1997). Critical chain. Great Barrington, MA: North River Press.
38.
GrewalR.LilienG. L.MallapragadaG. (2006). Location, location, location: How network embeddedness affects project success in open source systems. Management Science, 52, 1043-1056.
39.
GuineaA.WebsterJ.StaplesD. (2012). A meta-analysis of the consequences of virtualness on team functioning. Information & Management, 49, 301-308.
40.
GulatiR.WestphalJ. D. (1999). Cooperative or controlling? The effects of CEO-board relations and the content of interlocks on the formation of joint ventures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 473-506.
41.
GullyS. M.IncalcaterraK. A.JoshiA.BeaubienJ. M. (2002). A meta-analysis of team-efficacy, potency, and performance: Interdependence and level of analysis as moderators of observed relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 819-832.
42.
HackmanJ. R. (1983). A normative model of work team effectiveness (No. TR-2). Arlington, VA: Office of Naval Research.
43.
HackmanJ. R. (2003). Learning more by crossing levels: Evidence from airplanes, hospitals, and orchestras. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 905-922.
44.
HeJ.ButlerB. S.KingW. R. (2007). Team cognition: Development and evolution in software project teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24, 261-292.
45.
HoffmanS. J.KaplanD. I. (1997). Human exploration of Mars: The reference mission of the NASA Mars exploration study team (Research Report No. NASA-SP-6107, NAS 1.21:6107). Retrieved from http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19980037039
46.
HollenbeckJ. R.BeersmaB.SchoutenM. E. (2012). Beyond team types and taxonomies: A dimensional scaling conceptualization for team description. Academy of Management Review, 37, 82-106.
47.
HueyB. M.WickensC. D. (1993). Workload transition. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
48.
HumphreyS. E.AimeF. (2014). Team microdynamics: Toward an organizing approach to teamwork. The Academy of Management Annals, 8, 443-503.
49.
HuntfordR. (2010). Race for the South Pole: The expedition diaries of Scott and Amundsen. London, England: Continuum International.
50.
HusserlE. (1970). The crisis of European sciences and transcendental phenomenology: An introduction to phenomenological philosophy. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
51.
IlgenD. R.HollenbeckJ. R.JohnsonM.JundtD. (2005). Teams in organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 517-543.
52.
JettQ. R.GeorgeJ. M. (2003). Work interrupted: A closer look at the role of interruptions in organizational life. Academy of Management Review, 28, 494-507.
53.
KahnR. L.WolfeD. M.QuinnR. P.SnoekJ. D.RosenthalR. A. (1964). Organizational stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity. Oxford, UK: John Wiley.
54.
KangE. (2008). Director interlocks and spillover effects of reputational penalties from financial reporting fraud. Academy of Management Journal, 51, 537-555.
55.
KarasekR.TheorellT. (1992). Healthy work: Stress, productivity, and the reconstruction of working life. New York, NY: Basic Books.
56.
KarrenR. J.BarringerM. W. (2002). A review and analysis of the policy-capturing methodology in organizational research: Guidelines for research and practice. Organizational Research Methods, 5, 337-361.
57.
KieselA.SteinhauserM.WendtM.FalkensteinM.JostK.PhilippA. M.KochI. (2010). Control and interference in task switching—A review. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 849-874.
58.
KozlowskiS. W.ChaoG. T.GrandJ. A.BraunM. T.KuljaninG. (2013). Advancing multilevel research design capturing the dynamics of emergence. Organizational Research Methods, 16, 581-615.
59.
KozlowskiS. W.IlgenD. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7, 77-124.
LanajK.HollenbeckJ. R.IlgenD. R.BarnesC. M.HarmonS. J. (2013). The double-edged sword of decentralized planning in multiteam systems. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 735-757.
LeendersR.ContractorN. S.DeChurchL. A. (2016). Once upon a time: Understanding team dynamics as relational event networks. Organizational Psychology Review, 6, 92-115. doi:10.1177/2041386615578312
64.
LeonardiP. M. (2011). When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: Affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies. MIS Quarterly, 35, 147-167.
65.
LeonardiP. M. (2013). Theoretical foundations for the study of sociomateriality. Information and Organization, 23, 59-76.
66.
LePineJ. A.PiccoloR. F.JacksonC. L.MathieuJ. E.SaulJ. R. (2008). A meta-analysis of teamwork processes: Tests of a multidimensional model and relationships with team effectiveness criteria. Personnel Psychology, 61, 273-307.
67.
LevineJ. M.MorelandR. L. (1990). Progress in small group research. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 585-634.
68.
LewisM. W. (2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of Management Review, 25, 760-776.
69.
LuvisonD.MarksM. A. (2013). Team coordination in strategic alliances: Identifying conditions that reduce team willingness to cooperate. International Journal of Strategic Business Alliances, 3(1), 1-22.
70.
MarksM. A.DeChurchL. A.MathieuJ. E.PanzerF. J.AlonsoA. (2005). Teamwork in multiteam systems. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 964-971.
71.
MarksM. A.MathieuJ. E.ZaccaroS. J. (2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26, 356-376.
72.
MarksM. A.SabellaM. J.BurkeC. S.ZaccaroS. J. (2002). The impact of cross-training on team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 3-13.
73.
MarksM. A.ZaccaroS. J.MathieuJ. E. (2000). Performance implications of leader briefings and team-interaction training for team adaptation to novel environments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 971-986.
74.
Martínez-MorenoE.González-NavarroP.ZornozaA.RipollP. (2009). Relationship, task and process conflicts on team performance: The moderating role of communication media. International Journal of Conflict Management, 20, 251-268.
75.
MathieuJ. E.MarksM. A.ZaccaroS. J. (2001). Multiteam systems. International Handbook of Work and Organizational Psychology, 2, 289-313.
76.
MaynardM. T.GilsonL. L. (2014). The role of shared mental model development in understanding virtual team effectiveness. Group & Organization Management, 39, 3-32.
77.
MaynardM. T.MathieuJ. E.RappT. L.GilsonL. L. (2012). Something(s) old and something(s) new: Modeling drivers of global virtual team effectiveness. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, 342-365.
78.
MaznevskiM. L.ChudobaK. M. (2000). Bridging space over time: Global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness. Organization Science, 11, 473-492.
79.
McDonaldJ.DeChurchL. A.Mesmer-MagnusJ. R.AsencioR.CarterD. R. (2015, October). Team task switching: A conceptual framework for understanding functional work shifts. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society conference. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
80.
McGrathJ. E.KellyJ. R. (1986). Time and human interaction: Toward a social psychology of time. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Mesmer-MagnusJ. R.DeChurchL. A. (2009). Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 535-546.
83.
Mesmer-MagnusJ. R.DeChurchL. A.Jimenez-RodriguezM.WildmanJ.ShufflerM. (2011). A meta-analytic investigation of virtuality and information sharing in teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115, 214-225.
84.
Mesmer-MagnusJ. R.DeChurchL. A.WaxA. (2012). Moving emotional labor beyond surface and deep acting: A discordance-congruence perspective. Organizational Psychology Review, 2(1), 6-53.
85.
MintzbergH. (1979). The structuring of organizations: A synthesis of the research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
86.
MonsellS. (2003). Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 134-140.
87.
MortensenM.WoolleyA. W.O’LearyM. (2007). Conditions enabling effective multiple team membership. In CrowstonK.SieberS.WynnE. (Eds.), Virtuality and virtualization (pp. 215-228). Boston, MA: Springer.
88.
MuraseT.CarterD. R.DeChurchL. A.MarksM. A. (2014). Mind the gap: The role of leadership in multiteam system collective cognition. The Leadership Quarterly, 25, 972-986.
NijstadB. A.StroebeW.LodewijkxH. F. (2003). Production blocking and idea generation: Does blocking interfere with cognitive processes?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 531-548.
92.
O’LearyM. B.MortensenM.WoolleyA. W. (2011). Multiple team membership: A theoretical model of its effects on productivity and learning for individuals and teams. Academy of Management Review, 36, 461-478.
93.
OrlikowskiW. J.ScottS. V. (2008). 10 sociomateriality: Challenging the separation of technology, work and organization. The Academy of Management Annals, 2, 433-474.
ParmiggianiE.MikalsenM. (2013). The facets of sociomateriality: A systematic mapping of emerging concepts and definitions. In AanestadM.BratteteigT. (Eds.), Nordic contributions in IS research (pp. 87-103). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
96.
Pirola-MerloA.MannL. (2004). The relationship between individual creativity and team creativity: Aggregating across people and time. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 235-257.
97.
ReagansR.ZuckermanE. W. (2001). Networks, diversity, and productivity: The social capital of corporate R&D teams. Organization Science, 12, 502-517.
98.
RochlinG. I.La PorteT. R.RobertsK. H. (1987). The self-designing high-reliability organization: Aircraft carrier flight operations at sea. Naval War College Review, 51, 97-113.
99.
RogersR. D.MonsellS. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207-231.
100.
RosenbergM. J. (1969). The conditions and consequences of evaluation apprehension. In RosenthalR.RosnowR. L. (Eds.), Artifacts in behavioral research (pp. 279-349). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
101.
SalasE.TannenbaumS. I.KozlowskiS. W. J.MillerC. A.MathieuJ. E.VesseyW. B. (2015). Teams in space exploration: A new frontier for the science of team effectiveness. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24, 200-207.
102.
SchweitzerL.DuxburyL. (2010). Conceptualizing and measuring the virtuality of teams. Information Systems Journal, 20, 267-295.
103.
ScottS. V.OrlikowskiW. J. (2013). Sociomateriality: Taking the wrong turning? A response to Mutch. Information and Organization, 23, 77-80.
SherifM. (1936). The psychology of social norms. Oxford, UK: Harper.
106.
SmithJ. A. (2007). Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
107.
SmithW. K.LewisM. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36, 381-403.
108.
StarksH.TrinidadS. B. (2007). Choose your method: A comparison of phenomenology, discourse analysis, and grounded theory. Qualitative Health Research, 17, 1372-1380.
109.
StewartG. L.FulmerI. S.BarrickM. R. (2005). An exploration of member roles as a multilevel linking mechanism for individual traits and team outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 58, 343-365.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In AustinW.WorchelS. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-48). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
112.
TraftonJ. G.MonkC. A. (2007). Task interruptions. Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 3(1), 111-126.
113.
VancouverJ. B.WeinhardtJ. M. (2012). Modeling the mind and the milieu: Computational modeling for micro-level organizational researchers. Organizational Research Methods, 15, 602-623.
114.
VroomV. H. (1964). Work and motivation. Oxford, UK: Wiley.
115.
WagemanR.GardnerH.MortensenM. (2012). The changing ecology of teams: New directions for teams research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, 301-315.
116.
WeickK. E.RobertsK. H. (1993). Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 357-381.
117.
WeickK. E.SutcliffeK. M. (2011). Managing the unexpected: Resilient performance in an age of uncertainty (Vol. 8). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley.
118.
WeingartL. R. (1997). How did they do that?Research in Organizational Behavior, 19, 189-239.
119.
WickensC. D.SantamariaA.SebokA. (2013, September). A computational model of task overload management and task switching. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 57, 763-767.
120.
YooY.KanawattanachaiP. (2001). Developments of transactive memory systems and collective mind in virtual teams. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9, 187-208.
121.
ZedeckS. (1977). An information processing model and approach to the study of motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 18, 47-77.
122.
Zika-ViktorssonA.SundströmP.EngwallM. (2006). Project overload: An exploratory study of work and management in multi-project settings. International Journal of Project Management, 24, 385-394.
