Multiteam Systems: An Introduction
2012
Over the last 2 decades, the operating work environment has become
exceedingly more challenging and complex (Ilgen & Pulakos, 1999). To
wit, communication and information technology has grown exponentially,
increasing the pace, scope, and scale of work (Hesketh & Neal, 1999). Such
technology has also increased the globalism and geographic dislocation of
organizational work (Ireland & Hitt, 1999). Because of the global reach of
today’s business, and the increasing immediacy afforded by current technology, strategic issues, problems, and implications have greater interconnectivity across organizational boundaries. Traditional organizational
forms have been typically insufficient to respond effectively to such changes.
Accordingly, a number of different organizational forms that complement
more conventional structures have emerged, including matrix and virtual
organizations, as well as cross-functioning and ad hoc project teams.
One of these forms includes different kinds of collaborations thatcan exist across traditional team and organizational boundaries. Such
cross-boundary collaborations have been observed in the past, of course,
in the face of large-scale crisis events that require the interdependent
responsiveness of multiple agencies (e.g., see response to Hurricane
Katrina; Moynihan, 2007). The collectives formed from such requirements do not resemble traditional organizations or large-scale teams. Nordo such collectives reflect more recent forms such as team-based organizations, virtual organizations, or matrix organizations. Instead, current environmental challenges have increasingly given rise to a form of
aggregation that includes tightly coupled constellations of teams, where
the different teams may possess very different core missions, expertise,
structures, norms, and operating procedures to the collective effort.
However, the performances of such constellations reflect the kinds of integrated and interdependent actions typical of more traditional teams and
organizations.
Mathieu, Marks, and Zaccaro (2001) defined these kinds of organiza-tions as multiteam systems (MTSs), and argued that they represented a
relatively new collective form that has emerged as adaptive responses
to the aforementioned environmental challenges. Thus, they noted that
“MTSs are usually formed or develop naturally to deal with highly turbulent environments that place a premium on the ability to transform
work units and to respond rapidly to changing circumstances” (Mathieu
et al., 2001, p. 290). They also asserted that existing organizational or team
theories and models do not provide sufficient means of understanding the
processes and dynamics of MTSs. Accordingly, they cited the need to recognize and study such collectives in the organizational sciences. Since the
publication of Mathieu et al. (2001), several other studies, both empirical
and conceptual, have been published that have provided some insight into
MTSs (e.g., Coen, 2006; DeChurch & Marks, 2006; DeChurch & Mathieu,
2009; Hoegl & Weinkauf, 2005; Liu & Simaan, 2004a, 2004b; Liu, Simaan,
& Cruz, 2003; Marks, DeChurch, Mathieu, Panzer, & Alonso, 2005; Marks,
Mathieu, & Zaccaro, 2004; Mathieu, Cobb, Marks, Zaccaro, & Marsh,
2004; Standifer & Bluedorn, 2006). Other studies have examined specific
types of MTSs, such as incident command systems (Moynihan, 2007),
multisystem coordination in space missions (Caldwell, 2005), multi-unit
human-robot systems (Hsu & Liu, 2005), and joint venture teams and
other kinds of business alliances (Johnson, Korsgaard, & Sapienza, 2002;
Marks & Luvison, 2008). MTSs have also been the subject of several conference papers and symposia at recent annual meetings of the Society for
Industrial and Organizational Psychology (e.g., Burke, DeChurch, Salas,
& Goodwin, 2008; DeChurch, 2010; DeChurch & Burke, 2009; DeChurch
& Marks, 2008; DeChurch et al., 2010; Marks et al., 2010; Wooten et al.,
2009), Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (e.g., Dean et al., 2008),
Academy of Management (e.g., DeChurch, 2006), and InterdisciplinaryNetwork for Group Research (e.g., DeChurch, Burke, & Salas, 2009;
DeChurch & Resick, 2006; Lyons et al., 2008).
In June 2008, a conference sponsored by the U.S Army Research Institutebrought together several scholars to explore in more detail the concept
of MTSs. This conference highlighted the necessity for an expanded and
deeper focus on the nature of MTSs that (a) describes these organizational
forms more fully, (b) builds conceptual frames that can guide research on
such forms, and (c) begins developing tools to improve the study of MTSs.
The purpose of this book is to respond to these needs. This book contains
a series of chapters that expand prior conceptual frames of MTSs, defining
in more detail the compositional and linkage attributes that characterize
such units. It also explores how such systems emerge and develop, as well
as the methods for studying MTSs. The intent, therefore, is to establish
and nurture a strong conceptual and methodological foundation that can
guide future research and practice with MTSs.
In this first chapter, we provide a summary of the core concepts thatdefine MTSs. We then provide a listing of characteristics and dimensions
that distinguish different forms of MTSs. We conclude with a brief summary of the major sections and chapters of the book.
Keywords:
- Correction
- Source
- Cite
- Save
- Machine Reading By IdeaReader
0
References
43
Citations
NaN
KQI