Team Learning in a Military Context

ORIGINALPAPERInvestigatingTeamLearninginaMilitaryContextMarliesVeestraeten&EvaKyndt&FilipDochyReceived:11December2012/Accepted:29October2013/Publishedonline:21November2013#SpringerScience+BusinessMediaDordrecht2013AbstractAsteamshavebecomefundamentalpartsoftoday’sorganisations,theneedfortheseteamstofunctionandlearnefficientlyandeffectivelyiswidelyemphasised.Alsoinmilitarycontextsteamlearningisvital.Thecurrentarticleexaminesteamlearningbehaviourinmilitaryteamsasitaimstocross-validateateamlearningmodelthatwasoriginallydevelopedandtestedinaneducationalcontext.Thisteamlearningmodelincludesseveralsocio-cognitivefactorsthatprecede,constitute,andresultfromteamlearningbehaviour.Findingsbasedonpathanalysesindicatethatpsychologicalsafety,socialcohesionandgrouppotencyarepositivelyrelatedtoteamlearningbehaviourinmilitaryteams.Inaddition,teamlearningbehaviourdoesnotonlyfostertheconstructionofmutuallysharedcognitionandtransactivememorysystems,butalsorelatespositivelytotheeffectivenessofmilitaryteams.KeywordsTeamlearning.Psychologicalsafety.Sharedmentalmodels.MilitaryteamsIntroductionThegrowingrelianceonteam-basedstructuresintoday’suncertainorganisationalenvironmentscreatesanimperativetocomprehendthefactorsthatenableeffectiveteamwork(BalkundiandHarrison2006;Mathieuetal.2008;LePineetal.2008).Recentstudiesshowthatoneoftheprerequisitesforeffectiveteamworkisteammembers’engagementinteamlearning,asitfostersefficientinteractionandcoordi-nation,continuousadaptation,errordetectionandcorrection,andeffectiveperformance(Belletal.2012;Chanetal.2003;Kostopoulosetal.2011;SessaandLondon2008).VocationsandLearning(2014)7:75–100DOI10.1007/s12186-013-9107-3M.Veestraeten(*)ResearchCentreforOrganisationStudies,UniversityofLeuven,HOG,Naamsestraat69,3000Leuven,Belgiume-mail:Marlies.Veestraeten@kuleuven.beE.Kyndt:F.DochyCentreforResearchonProfessionalLearning&Development,andLifelongLearning,UniversityofLeuven,Leuven,BelgiumE.KyndtInstituteforEducationandInformationSciences,UniversityofAntwerp,Antwerp,BelgiumTeamlearningisgenerallydefinedasacompilationofon-goingsocialinteractionandexchangeprocessesamongteammembers(KozlowskiandIlgen2006),basedonwhichchangesanddevelopmentstakeplaceinteams,teammembers,andorganisa-tions(VandenBosscheetal.2006).Inteamlearningliteraturethreetypesofdefinitionsoftheteamlearningconstructaredistinguished(Decuyperetal.2010a).Thatis,teamlearningiseitherdefinedasaprocess(e.g.,Edmondson2002),anoutcome(e.g.,Ellisetal.2003),orathoroughcombinationofbothprocessesandoutcomes(e.g.,Argoteetal.2001).Teamlearningasaprocessrefersto‘theprocessinwhichtheteamtakesaction,obtainsandreflectsuponfeedbackandmakeschangestoadaptorimprove’(Edmondson2002,p.129).Teamlearningasanoutcomeisconceptualisedas‘arelativelypermanentchangeintheteam’scollectivelevelofknowledgeandskillproducedbythesharedexperienceoftheteammembers‘(Ellisetal.2003,p.822).Teamlearningasacombinationofbothprocessesandoutcomesisdefinedas‘thedevelopment,modificationandreinforcementofmentalmodelsthroughprocessesofgroupinteraction’(VandenBosscheetal.2011,p.286).Inordertoexpandourknowledgeonteamlearninginprofessionalcontexts,thegoalofthecurrentstudyistoreplicatethe“TeamLearningBeliefsandBehaviors”model(TLB&Bmodel)developedbyVandenBosscheetal.(2006)inwhichteamlearningisacentralelement.VandenBosscheandcolleagues(2006)arguethat,inordertomorefullyunderstandteamlearning,bothinterpersonalandsocio-cognitivefactorsneedtobeconsideredinteamlearningresearch.Inthatrespect,theTLB&Bmodelprovidesatheoreticalframeworkforconceptualizingteamlearningattheteam-level,whichtakesabroadperspectivebyincludingfactorsthatprecede,constituteandresultfromteamlearning.Ontheonehand,theTLB&Bmodelfocusesonthewayinwhichinteractionalsocio-cognitiveexchangeprocesseswithintheteam(cfr.teamlearningbehaviours)giverisetocognitivedevelopmentsattheteam-level(cfr.mutuallysharedcognition),while,ontheotherhand,ittakesintoaccountsocial,interpersonalfactorsthatprecedetheseinteractionalsocio-cognitiveexchangeprocesses(cfr.beliefsoftheinterpersonalcontext).IntheTLB&BmodelofVandenBosscheetal.(2006),andconsequently,alsointhecurrentstudy,teamlearningisconceptualisedasathoroughcombinationofbothprocessesandoutcomes.Thatis,teamlearningisdefinedasacompilationofsocio-cognitiveinteractionprocessesamongthemembersofateamthatresultsinthedevelopmentofsharedcognitionattheteam-level(VandenBosscheetal.2006).Thesesocio-cognitiveinteractionprocessesconsistofconversationalpatternsandsocialexchangeprocessesintheteam,whichmanifestthemselvesasseriesofcom-municativebehavioursandactivities,includingseekingfeedback,askingquestions,overtlyreflectingontasks,discussingerrorsorunforeseensituations,etc.(Ortegaetal.2013;VandenBosscheetal.2011).Teamlearning,thus,unfoldsthroughtheconver-sationallearningbehavioursinwhichteammembersengage,andthroughwhichtheybuildandsharecollectiveknowledge(KozlowskiandKlein2000).TheTLB&Bmodelwasoriginallydevelopedandtestedinaneducationalcontextusingstudentteams.Inordertoassessthevalueofitsrationaleanditsconstitutingcomponentsforothercontexts,theaimofthecurrentstudyistocross-validatethisteamlearningmodelbyapplyingittoamilitarysetting.Becausetheantecedents,processes,andoutcomesofteamlearningmayvaryaccordingtothecontextoftheteam,itisfruitfultoexaminewhetherateamlearningmodelfromonesetting(i.e.studentteams)canalsofurtherourunderstandingofteamlearninginadifferentcontext(i.e.military76M.Veestraetenetal.teams).Seizingcross-fertilisationopportunitiesmay,indeed,providethefieldwithamorethoroughunderstandingofteamlearning.Furthermore,theTLB&Bmodeliswell-suitedforsuchacross-validationendeavourfortworeasons.First,themodelconceptualisesteamlearninginaholisticway,asitdefinesteamlearningasathoroughcombinationofbothsocio-cognitiveprocesses(cfr.teamlearningbehaviours),andoutcomes(cfr.mutuallysharedcognition)attheteam-level.Second,themodelenablesanembedded,contextualisedviewofteamlearningasittakesintoaccountseveralaspectsoftheinterpersonalcontextthatmayprecedeandinfluenceteamlearningbehaviour.Assuch,theTLB&Bmodelcanbeappliedtodifferentteamtypesandsettingswithoutlosingsightofthecontextspecificities(VandenBosscheetal.2006;VandenBosscheetal.2011).TheoreticalBackgroundOverthepastdecade,thetopicofteamlearninghasreceivedalotoftheoreticalandempiricalattention,anduptillnowavarietyofteamtypeshasbeenincludedinteamlearningresearch(Edmondsonetal.2008;Decuyperetal.2010b).Asteamlearningrequiresinteractionsbetweenindividualsitisconceptualisedasaninherentlysocialphenomenonthatemergesinteamsasbehaviours,cognitions,andemotionsaresharedamongteammembers(KayesandBurnett2006).Teamlearningtakesplaceattheteam-leveland,therefore,itisanemergentpropertyofateam.Consequently,scholarsdistinguishteamlearningfromindividuallearningwithinthecontextofagrouporteam(Wilsonetal.2007).BeforeweturntoanelaboratedescriptionoftheTLB&Bmodel,weprovideadescriptionofmilitaryteamsandemphasizetheroleofteamlearninginsuchhighresponsibilityteams.MilitaryTeamsandTeamLearningTeamsconstitutethecoreunitsofmilitaryestablishmentsandoperationsasformanyimportantoperationaltasksmilitaryorganisationsrelyontheperformanceofteams,platoons,squads,battalions,etc.(Carronetal.2012;Salasetal.1995).Militaryteamsshareseveralcharacteristicswithconventionalteamsinordinaryorganisations,buttheyalsodifferinessentialwaysbecauseofthenatureofmilitaryteamwork,whichcanbeextremelystressfulandmayimplicatelife-or-deathsituations(Essensetal.2009).Thehighstakesandconstraintsunderwhichmilitaryteamsoperatemayseverelycompli-catetheirtasksandmissions,andtheactionsandoperationsoftheseteamscanhavefar-reachingconsequencesfortheirmembersandthirdparties.Therefore,followingHagemanetal.(2012),militaryteamsaredefinedashighresponsibilityteams(HRTs)astheseteamsnotonlyhavehigh-stakeresponsibilities,butalsoneedtoperformtheirdutiesandtasksinhighlycomplexenvironmentsthatarefullofstressors(e.g.,uncertaincontexts),pressures(e.g.,timelimits),andthreats(e.g.,high-risktasks).Militaryteamsoftenneedtobeabletocopewithdemandsofcomplexity,adaptflexiblytofluctuatingconditions,andtocoperesponsiblyandsuccessfullywithnewsituationsinordertopreventerrorsandachievepredefinedobjectiveswithhighquality(Hagemanetal.2012).Forexample,inthecontextofmilitaryoperations,membersofmilitaryteamsmaynotonlyberesponsibleforguardingorsavingthelivesofexternalInvestigatingTeamLearninginaMilitaryContext77personsandtheirteammates,theyalsopotentiallyputtheirownlivesintodangerduringspecificteamtasks(OkrayandLubnau2004).Inordertocoordinateactions,preventerrors,andachievehighqualityperformanceundersuchcomplexandfluctuatingconditionscontinuouscommunicationandeffi-cientinteractionamongthemembersofHRTsisvital(Cannon-Bowersetal.1995;Hagemanetal.2012;Stoutetal.1997;Vashdietal.2007;Yammarinoetal.2010).Inthisrespect,itisimportantthatteammemberscanshareinformationwiththeirteammates,andmakesuggestionsandcontributionsthataretakenintoaccountandbuilduponbytheotherteammembers(VandenBosscheetal.2006).Moreover,theroleofsharedmentalmodelshasbeenemphasisedinmilitaryresearch,asmilitaryteamsespeciallybenefitfromcollectivelybuiltknowledgestructuresthatenablebettercoordinationandmoreeffectivetaskexecution(Cannon-Bowersetal.1993;LimandKlein2006;Mathieuetal.2000;Smith-Jentschetal.2008).Ampleresearchhasbeenexecutedonteamwork(e.g.,Salasetal.2000),teamtraining(e.g.,Dwyeretal.1999;PrinceandSalas1993;Salasetal.2006;Spainetal.2012),andteameffectivenessinmilitaryteams(e.g.,Carronetal.2012;Shuffleretal.2012;Walleretal.2004),aswellasonthedevelopmentanduseofsharedmentalmodelsinsuchteams(e.g.,Cannon-Bowersetal.1993;Mathieuetal.2000;Uitdewilligenetal.2010).However,despitethestrongrelatednessofteamlearningtoeachofthesetopics(cfr.VandenBosscheetal.2006),andthenecessityofmilitaryorganisationstogenerateandfosterteamlearning(Abb2000)uptodatetherearenoempiricalstudiesavailableonteamlearninginoperatingmilitaryteams.Althoughteamlearninghasbeeninvestigatedinawiderangeofcontexts,suchassurgeryteams,manufacturingteams,studentteams,productdevelopmentteams,etc.(e.g.,Edmondson1999;Edmondsonetal.2001;SarinandMcDermott2003;VandenBosscheetal.2006),toourknowledge,noresearchattentionhasyetbeendevotedtothesocio-cognitiveprocessesamongmembersinmilitaryteamsthatbringouttheconstructionofteammentalmodels(KozlowskiandKlein2000).Inaddition,althoughteammentalmodels,conceptualisedascatalystemergentstatesthatresultfromandimmediatelyreinforceandfosterteamlearning(Decuyperetal.2010a),havebeenthesubjectofstudiesincommandandcontrolteams(e.g.,Cannon-Bowersetal.1993;Mathieuetal.2000),noempiricalresearchyetinvestigatedthespecificroleofteamlearninginthedevelopmentofsuchsharedcognitivestructuresinmilitaryteams.Examiningtheconnectionbetweenteammentalmodels,andteamlearningandteamoutcomesis,however,neededinordertomorefullyunderstandthesecognitivephenomena.Inthisrespect,MohammedandDumville(2001)arguethatapproachesthatcombinedifferentliteraturesandperspectivesonteamknowledgestructures(cfr.teammentalmodelsandtransactivememorysystems)ontheonehand,andgrouplearningontheotherhand,areusefulinadvancingourunderstandingofthesephenomena.Insum,becausetheprocessesofteamlearning,aswellasthecognitiveoutcomesthatresultfromtheseprocesses,maycontributetothecriticalmissionsuccessfactorsofmilitaryteams(Bijlsma2009;Essensetal.2009;Shanahanetal.2007),itisvaluabletoinvestigateteamlearningasacontributingfactortomilitaryteameffectiveness.Basedontheseissues,wearguethatcross-validatingtheTLB&Bmodel,byapplyingittoamilitarycontext,willnotonlyincreaseourinsightinteamlearningingeneral,butwillalsoresultinamorethoroughunderstandingoftheroleofteamlearninginHRTs.78M.Veestraetenetal.The“TeamLearningBeliefsandBehaviors”ModelAswasmentionedearlier,theobjectiveofthepresentstudyistoreplicatetheTLB&BmodeldevelopedbyVandenBosscheetal.(2006).Wearguethatthisteamlearningmodel,althoughoriginallytestedinstudentteamswithinaneducationalcontext,isapplicabletomultipletypesofteamsasitcontainsbeliefsoftheinterpersonalcontext,teamlearningprocesses,aswellasteam-leveloutcomesthatarecommonlyobservedinteams(Edmondson1999;KozlowskiandChao2012).Indeed,interpersonalaspects,teamlearningbehaviours,andsharedmentalmodelshavebeenproventoinfluenceteamfunctioningandeffectivenessinteams(Akkermanetal.2007;Edmondsonetal.2008;MohammedandDumville2001;VandenBosscheetal.2011).InthecontextoftheTLB&Bmodel,teamlearningisdefinedasacombinationofbothprocessesandoutcomes(Argoteetal.2001).Morespecifically,teamlearningisreferredtoasacompilationofconversationalpatternsanddiscursiveprocessesattheteamlevel,whichmanifestthemselvesinteamlearningbehaviours(VandenBosscheetal.2011).Theteamlearningbehavioursthatconstitutethelearningcomponentofthemodel–construction,co-construction,andconstructiveconflict–areconceptualisedasconversationalactivitiesinwhichteammemberscollectivelyengageduringthecourseoftheirteamwork.Theseteamlearningbehavioursinclude,ontheonehand,knowl-edgeconstructionpractices,suchassharingandcombininginformationandbuildingcollectivemeaning.Ontheotherhand,theteamlearningbehaviourcomponentinthemodelincludesengagementinconstructiveconflicts,whichreferstomembers’in-volvementindiscussions,considerationofdifferencesinopinions,andcriticalexam-inationofothermembers’contributions(VandenBosscheetal.2006).Basically,VandenBosscheetal.(2006)theorisethatteamlearningbehavioursamongteammemberspavethewayforthedevelopmentofmutuallysharedcognitionaboutthesituationandthetasksathand.Thatis,construction,co-construction,andconstructiveconflictinstatiateandenablethecreationofsharedmentalmodelsthat,inturn,enableeffectiveteamfunctioning.Inaddition,theteamlearningbehavioursandtheresultingcognitiveteamoutcomesareembeddedintheinterpersonalcontextoftheteam,astheTLB&Bmodelindicatesthatteamlearningbehaviourisinfluencedbythebeliefsmembersholdabouttheinterper-sonalteamcontext.Morespecifically,collectivelyheldbeliefsabouttheextenttowhichpsychologicalsafety,cohesion,interdependency,andgrouppotencyarecharacterisingtheteam,aretakenintoaccountascontextualelementsthatprecedeteamlearningbehaviour.InFig.1theoriginalTLB&BmodelofVandenBosscheetal.(2006)isshown.TeamLearningBehaviourAswasindicatedearlier,teamlearningbehaviourreferstotheinteractionsthroughwhichteammembersacquire,share,andcombine.IntheTLB&Bmodeltheteamlearningcomponentconsistsofthreeconversationalknowledge-constructingactivities:construction,co-constructionandconstructiveconflict.Theseteamlearningbehavioursarereferredtoascommunicativebehaviourswhichareinherentlypresentinintra-teamactivitiessuchasexchanginginformation,discussingerrors,askingquestions,seekingfeedback,etc.(Argoteetal.2001).InvestigatingTeamLearninginaMilitaryContext79ConstructionandCo-constructionTheconstructionofmeaningisinitiatedinateamwhenoneofthemembersmakesacontributionbyarticulatinganopinion,posingastatement,orsharinganidea.This‘insertion’ofmeaningintotheteamisthefirstphaseintheteam’slearningprocess(VandenBosscheetal.2006).Aftertheinitiallyconstructedmeaningisuttered,itistakenupinthesocialcontextoftheteamasfellowteammembersactivelylistentotheofferedcontributionandtrytograspitbythinkingitthrough.Theinitialcontributionisthenconsideredbythefellowteammem-bers,andisrefined,modified,andbuildupon(Baker1994).Inthisway,teammemberscollectivelyengageinaprocessofco-constructingmeaningbyjointlyshapingandreshapingtheinitialoffer.Basedonsuchco-constructionprocessesnewcollectivemeaningsarecreatedthatwerenotpreviouslyavailabletotheteam(VandenBosscheetal.2011).ConstructiveConflictAsteammembersoftenhavedifferingbackgrounds,fieldsofexpertise,andperspectives,controversiesorconflictsmayariseduringthecollectivecreationofmeaning.However,onlywhenmembersarecapableofopenlyaddressingdifferentopinionsandjointlyassessingdissentingpointsofview,conflictscanleadtonewideasandsolutionsinsteadofangeranddisaffection.Inthisrespect,Ensleyetal.(2002,p.366)arguethat“paradoxically,conflictcanbeacatalystforcreativityandunderstandingaswellasforanimosityandresentment”.Therefore,effectiveteamsareteamsthatareabletoembracethepossiblebenefitsofintragroupconflictsbyusingthemasabasisforfurthercommunicationandnegotiation(DeDreuandWeingart2003).Constructivediscussionsenableteammemberstoadaptandrefinepreviouslybuildmeaningconstructionsandknowledgestructures.Basedonconstructiveconflicts,whichinitiatefurtheradaptationandelaborationofinitially(co-)constructedmeanings,mutuallysharedcognitionisbuilt(VandenBosscheetal.2006).TheOutcomesofTeamLearningBehaviourIngeneral,scholarsareconvincedofthefactthatteamlearningprocessesgenerateteamrelatedoutcomes(e.g.,Decuyperetal.2010b;Fransenetal.2011;vanWoerkomandCroon2009).IntheTLB&BmodelofVandenBosscheetal.(2006)thecognitiveFig.1The“TeamLearningBeliefsandBehaviors”modelofVandenBosscheetal.(2006)80M.Veestraetenetal.outcomethatisincludedasamediatorintherelationshipbetweenteamlearningbehaviourandteameffectivenessismutuallysharedcognition.However,basedondevelopmentsinliteratureregardingthecognitiveunderpinningsofeffectiveteamfunctioning,andinordertoprovideamoreholisticviewonteamcognition(cfr.DeChurchandMesmer-Magnus2010;Lewisetal.2005;MorelandandArgote2003),weaddacognitivecomponenttotheoriginalTLB&Bmodelbyincludingtransactivememorysystemsasasecondcognitiveoutcomeofteamlearningbehaviour.Becausebothsharedmentalmodelsandtransactivememorysystemshavebeenproventobeimportantfactorsinunderstandingteamprocessesandoutcomes(Austin2003;Cannon-BowersandSalas2001;Stoutetal.1999),weincludebothmutuallysharedcognitionandtransactivememorysystemascognitiveconstructsinthisstudy.MutuallySharedCognitionInteamliterature,avarietyofsynonymsisusedtorefertoconceptofsharedmentalmodels,suchas,groupcognition,sharedcognition,groupmemory,sharedknowledgestructures,andteammentalmodels(RoschelleandTeasley1995;Decuyperetal.2010b).VandenBosscheetal.(2006)refertosharedmentalmodelsbytheconceptofmutuallysharedcognition,andconceptualisethissharedcognitionattheteam-levelastheconceptualstructuresthatarecollectivelyconstructedbyteammembersinthecourseoftheircollaboration.Throughoutrepeatedcyclesofbuilding,confirming,andreconstructingmeaningteammemberscreatea‘jointprob-lemspace’inwhichsharedunderstandingsaboutteamandtaskaspectsprovidethebasisforshared‘strategies’thatguidecollaborativeactionsofteammembers(Barron2003;Decuyperetal.2010a).Basedonrepeatedinteractions,teammembersdevelopsharedcognitiveconstructions,whichcrystalliseattheteam-leveland,subsequently,guideactionsandinteractionswithintheteam(KozlowskiandIlgen2006;Smith-Jentschetal.2008).Sharedmentalmodelsenableteammemberstoholdsimilarexpectationsonteamgoals,problems,rolesandresponsibilities,andtoconductteamworkunderthesameassumptions(Marksetal.2002).Memberswithsimilarmentalmodelscananticipateeachother’sresponses,whichenablesthemtofunctioneffectivelyevenwhenthereareonlylimitedopportunitiesfordirectcommunication(Mathieuetal.2000).Byemployingsharedmentalmodels,teamscancoordinatetheiractionsandperformefficientlywithouttheneedfordirect,overtcommunication(DeChurchandMesmer-Magnus2010).Researchindeedindicatesthatsharedmentalmodelsfacilitateefficientteamwork,decision-making,highperformanceandadaptabilityinchallengingandnovelsituations(Ellis2006;JohnsonandLee2008).Althoughtheconceptualisationofatransactivememorysystem(TMS)resemblesthatofasharedmentalmodel,thetwoconstructsdifferfromeachotherinthatthelatterfocusesonthesimilarityofteammembers’mentalrepresentations,whiletheformer’sfocusisonthedistributionofdifferentknowledgeandexpertiseacrosstheteam(KozlowskiandChao2012).Thatis,definitionsofTMSsimplya‘distributed’viewonexpertisesharingamongteammembers,whileconceptualisationsofsharedmentalmodelsincludereferencesto‘similarity’or‘heldincommon’understandings(MohammedandDumville2001).However,itisarguedthatexclusivelyfocussingoncommonandsimilarunderstandingsamongteammembers(cfr.onsharedmentalmodels)may“…failtocapturethebenefitsofdistributedexpertiseinateambecauseasharedmentalmodelapproachonl