A test of a tripartite framework of team strategy development
This study provided further insight into the process (or processes) of team strategy development and its relationship with team performance. Building upon the taxonomies introduced by Marks, Mathieu, & Zaccaro (in press) and Wood and Locke (1990), this thesis attempted to test a tripartite frame...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Others |
| Published: |
FIU Digital Commons
2000
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/etd/1875 http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3089&context=etd |
| Summary: | This study provided further insight into the process (or processes) of team strategy development and its relationship with team performance. Building upon the taxonomies introduced by Marks, Mathieu, & Zaccaro (in press) and Wood and Locke (1990), this thesis attempted to test a tripartite framework of team strategy development. Specifically, this model posits that strategy development consists of three unique, though interrelated, processes: deliberate planning, contingency planning, and reactive adaptation. It was hypothesized that 1) task complexity would moderate the relationship between the three types of strategy development and team performance, and 2) that the three types of strategy formation occur in specific time periods of team performance.
The results of this study provided mixed findings. Correlational analyses provided discriminant evidence for the uniqueness of the three processes in their relationships with one another and with other variables. Furthermore, support was found for hypothesis 2, providing evidence that the three processes occur primarily in specific periods of team performance. However, contrary to the existing literature, complexity was not found to be a moderator of the relationship between strategy development and team performance. |
|---|