| Despite the popularity of teams in the workplace, little is understood about how to train teams to achieve optimal performance. The present study proposes an examination of the input-process-outcome (I-P-O; Hackman, 1982) model of team effectiveness in which training is a precursor to the model. The training context (i.e., task and team training by position or as an intact team) was expected to influence inputs, specifically task and team shared mental models. Task and team shared mental models were hypothesized to impact team processes which, in turn, were expected to influence team performance. It was further hypothesized the quality of team member's mental models would influence subsequent team process and performance. It was further hypothesized teams receiving training in different contexts would display different initial statuses of performance and different performance change trajectories. Participants were assigned to two-person teams ({dollar}n=74{dollar}) and received task and team skills training for a complex computer flight simulation. Repeated measures multiple regression demonstrated the degree of sharedness of team members' task and team mental models significantly, positively influenced team process. Team process, in turn, significantly positively influenced team performance. Neither the task skills training, team skills training, nor their interaction influenced the degree of sharedness of the task or team mental models. The mean quality of team members' mental models contributed significantly, positively to the prediction of team process and performance. Hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) revealed the training context did not influence either the team's initial status or performance trajectory. The teams skills training, however, did significantly negative influence the performance trajectory. The results of this study suggest trainees receive team and task training as individuals rather than as an intact team. They also suggest the understanding team members have of team processes contributes more to team effectiveness than does their understanding of the task. This paper concludes with suggestions for future research and practical implications for team training. |
