a research team is an effective way to prepare

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

5 Tips for Building and Managing Research Teams

As one moves up higher on the academic ladder, it is inevitable that their responsibilities keep changing shape. At some point, every researcher grows from being a timid graduate student fumbling around in the lab to learning how to manage a research team of their own at an academic institution or at a research organization. The excitement of this new role might be accompanied with some anxiety regarding the challenges that one might face while figuring out how to build a research team and forming an effective research team structure. Team work in research is essential and any issue in the team reflects in the work. So, if you have ever wondered how to lead a research team and you are looking for avenues that can improve your managerial skills, this article can help you get started.

1. Identify the right people for your research team

When you think about the question how to build a research team, the first step is to choose the right people for the team. As an efficient team leader/manager, one of the primary responsibilities is building a research team and establishing a research team structure that can help you achieve the goals envisioned by your lab or institute. The first step toward this is identifying people that can not only perform delegated tasks effectively, but can also adapt smoothly to the culture of your institute. If you are leading a heterogeneous research team of technicians, interns, graduate students, and postdocs, it is important to consider their individual calibre and time availability while assigning specific roles. The question of how to manage a research team will become simpler to answer once you have gauged your teammates’ capabilities.

2. Utilize the strengths of individual research team members

Managing research teams goes beyond just ‘managing’. The key to becoming a good team manager is developing a thorough understanding of the core characteristics of individual members of the research team. Building one-on-one relationships with team members can help you understand them better and help them achieve their most optimal performance. Some individuals perform well under pressure and stringent deadlines, while others perform better at their own pace. Similarly, some members thrive in a competitive environment, while others in the research team prefer a collaborative environment. The more extroverted members of your research team might be better at handling people-oriented tasks, while introverted ones work better in solitude. Identifying each individual member’s core strengths will help you delegate tasks more efficiently and build a better research team structure, which will in turn lead to better performance and research team work.

3. Invest in mentoring and skill-building within your research team

The best tip for how to lead a research team is to prioritize your team’s growth. A good manager thrives the most when he/she engages in mentoring and capacity building of the research team. Motivating team members to pursue skill building, will help in building and managing a research team that is robust and confident. Investing time in understanding their individual long-term goals and providing them with useful guidance from time-to-time can help develop trust with each team member. As a result, you get a strong research team structure too since each member’s core strengths are further refined. It is also essential for a research team manager to establish a team culture that facilitates good research practices and fosters an attitude of integrity.

4. Keep the communication channels open with your research team

Lack of availability of the manager can directly translate to poor performance of the research team. To learn how to manage a research team, it is important to first consider whether your team is heterogeneous in nature – the younger and more inexperienced members will require your continued guidance and support. It is necessary to be open to feedback on how you can support the team better. This will help build the team’s trust and confidence in you. Hosting frequent lab meetings, albeit of short durations, to discuss urgent and pertinent issues can be one way to ensure that the communication channels remain active. Encouraging open communication can also be extremely helpful in identifying signs of conflict among team members and address the situation effectively.

5. Foster a collaborative attitude and celebrate the small wins

Appreciate the time, energy, and effort dedicated by each research team member, regardless of the outcome of their work. In academia, each failed experiment can be used to enhance the individual learning curve, and allowing research team members to grow through their mistakes will help in boosting their self-confidence. Academicians invariably end up harboring a competitive spirit, since the system is designed to reward individual performances more than collective research team work. This can have deleterious effects on individual well-being as well as projects involving multiple people. Fostering a collaborative attitude, organizing team-building activities, and creating a safe and inclusive environment for researchers from all backgrounds and with diverse viewpoints will help in the improved well-being of your research team.

Do you know the best thing about having a research team? Work on your plate gets divided. And that’s why, developing an empathetic attitude toward your team members is extremely essential. It is wise to acknowledge the fact that you have a limited control over their performance and can only motivate them to a certain extent. Thus, it is necessary to develop an adaptable mind that can readily accept modifications in the previously envisioned goals and strategies to ensure effective team work in research teams.

Additional reading:

• Five ‘power skills’ for becoming a team leader. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00178-2.
• How to lead a research team | Careers | Chemistry World. https://www.chemistryworld.com/careers/how-to-lead-a-research-team/4011327.article.

R Discovery is a literature search and research reading platform that accelerates your research discovery journey by keeping you updated on the latest, most relevant scholarly content. With 250M+ research articles sourced from trusted aggregators like CrossRef, Unpaywall, PubMed, PubMed Central, Open Alex and top publishing houses like Springer Nature, JAMA, IOP, Taylor & Francis, NEJM, BMJ, Karger, SAGE, Emerald Publishing and more, R Discovery puts a world of research at your fingertips.  

Try R Discovery Prime FREE for 1 week or upgrade at just US$72 a year to access premium features that let you listen to research on the go, read in your language, collaborate with peers, auto sync with reference managers, and much more. Choose a simpler, smarter way to find and read research – Download the app and start your free 7-day trial today !  

Related Posts

Research in Shorts: R Discovery’s New Feature Helps Academics Assess Relevant Papers in 2mins 

Research Paper Appendix: Format and Examples

Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Personal tools

• Log in/Register Register

https://www.vitae.ac.uk/doing-research/leadership-development-for-principal-investigators-pis/building-and-managing-a-research-team/building-and-managing-a-research-team

This page has been reproduced from the Vitae website (www.vitae.ac.uk). Vitae is dedicated to realising the potential of researchers through transforming their professional and career development.

• Vitae members' area

Building and managing a research team

Building your team, what is a research team.

What constitutes a research team in one department or institution might be described elsewhere as a research group, research centre, research unit or research institute. Regardless of the terminology used, the key characteristic of a research team is that it comprises a group of people working together in a committed way towards a common research goal.

Research team diversity

There are many different configurations of research teams in academia and boundaries can be 'fuzzy'. They may comprise co-investigators, fractional or pooled staff, technical and clerical staff and postgraduate research students. There may also be inter- and intra-institutional dimensions and increasingly international ones; some team members' contributions may well be largely virtual, via email, phone or videoconference.

Also, team members may have different disciplinary backgrounds, different motivations and aspirations, and different cultural backgrounds. Over time, team members' roles may change from being core (fully dedicated to the research goal) to peripheral (committed to this research goal, but also working in one or more other teams), and vice-versa.

Assessing the balance and composition of your team. 

Ideally, the balance and composition of the team in terms of skills, expertise and other contributions will be appropriate to achieve the team's objectives, i.e. for the  research goal the team is working towards. The research team leader needs to be confident that team members have, or can develop, the necessary skills and knowledge for the research in hand, and you will make recruitment decisions on that basis.

There is also another perspective on the effective team which it is good to consider. In addition to knowledge, experience and skills individuals have different behavioural traits or characteristics they bring to the way they carry out their work and these can be aligned to particular roles in the team: some are very good at seeing a big picture, others very good at detailed work. Some are very oriented towards action - good at just getting things done; others are natural communicators and networkers. The need for these different roles will emerge at different times and it is worth considering the composition of your team to ensure you have a balance of strengths. 

To find out more about specific team roles and the research by Meredith Belbin on which they are based, see the section further down this page. 

Managing your team

Your responsibilities as a manager of the group.

These are the responsibilities identified in Adair's action-centred leadership model :

• establish, agree and communicate standards of performance and behaviour
• establish style, culture, approach of the group - soft skill elements
• monitor and maintain discipline, ethics, integrity and focus on objectives
• anticipate and resolve group conflict, struggles or disagreements
• assess and change as necessary the balance and composition of the group
• develop team-working, cooperation, morale and team-spirit
• develop the collective maturity and capability of the group - progressively increase group freedom and authority
• encourage the team towards objectives and aims - motivate the group and provide a collective sense of purpose
• identify, develop and agree team- and project-leadership roles within group
• enable, facilitate and ensure effective internal and external group communications
• identify and meet group training needs
• give feedback to the group on overall progress; consult with, and seek feedback and input from the group.

Team  roles and development

A research team consists of people working together in a committed way towards a common research goal. Teams, like individuals and organisations mature and develop and have a fairly clearly defined growth cycle. Bruce Tuckman's 1965 four-stage model explains this cycle. It may be helpful  to reflect on your team's current stage of development  in order to identify relevant approaches to leadership and management. In addition to understanding the development of your team over time, having an understanding of the preferred ‘team roles', the characteristics and expected social behaviour, of individual team members, including the team leader, will help ensure that the team performs effectively together. Using team role or individual profiling tools can offer insights into building and maintaining an effective team, but team role analysis is most useful if all members evaluate their own and others' preferred roles, whichever tools are chosen.

There are a number of team role and individual profile tools available and your institution's staff development department or equivalent may have registered practitioners in one or more of these who can help you and your team understand your preferred team roles or working styles.

In the 1970s, Meredith Belbin and colleagues at the Henley Management College identified nine team roles, based on long-term psychometric tests and studies of business teams. Belbin defined team roles as "a tendency to behave, contribute and interrelate with others in a particular way". The resulting role definitions fall into three categories, each with strengths and allowable weaknesses, and have been used widely in practice for team development in the intervening decades. Further research by Belbin has led to the addition of a tenth ‘Specialist' role in recent years. Watch this short introduction to the work of Belbin , or read about the team roles.

Bookmark & Share

Manage My Research Team

Categories:

• Award Management
• Regulatory Compliance

There are many ways to go about building a research team—some more effective than others. If you are charged with or are interested in building a research team, there are several considerations to keep in mind:

Bring together members with diverse backgrounds and experiences to promote mutual learning.

Make sure each person understands his or her roles, responsibilities, and contributions to the team’s goals.

As a leader, establish expectations for working together; as a participant, understand your contribution to the end goal.

Recognize that discussing team goals openly and honestly will be a dynamic process and will evolve over time.

Be prepared for disagreements and even conflicts, especially in the early stages of team formation.

Agree on processes for sharing data, establishing and sharing credit, and managing authorship immediately and over the course of the project.

Regularly consider new scientific perspectives and ideas related to the research. 

Source:  Collaboration and Team Science: A Field Guide 

The Field Guide  discusses:

Team Science 

Preparing Yourself for Team Science

Building a Research Team

Fostering Trust

Developing a Shared Vision

Communicating About Science

Sharing Recognition and Credit 

 Handling Conflict

Strengthening Team Dynamics 

Navigating and Leveraging Networks and Systems

Created: 11.27.2020

Updated: 04.12.2021

Cultivating an Effective Research Team Through Application of Team Science Principles

Shirley L.T. Helm, MS, CCRP Senior Administrator for Network Capacity & Workforce Strategies

C. Kenneth & Dianne Wright Center for Clinical and Translational Research

Virginia Commonwealth University

Abstract: The practice of team science allows clinical research professionals to draw from theory-driven principles to build an effective and efficient research team. Inherent in these principles are recognizing team member differences and welcoming diversity in an effort to integrate knowledge to solve complex problems. This article describes the basics of team science and how it can be applied to creating a highly-productive research team across the study continuum, including research administrators, budget developers, investigators, and research coordinators. The development of mutual trust, a shared vision, and open communication are crucial elements of a successful research team and research project. A case study illustrates the team science approach.

Introduction

Each research team is a community that requires trust, understanding, listening, and engagement. Stokols, Hall, Taylor, Moser, & Syme said that:

“There are many types of research teams, each one as dynamic as its team members. Research teams may comprise investigators from the same or different fields. Research teams also vary by size, organizational complexity, and geographic scope, ranging from as few as two individuals working together to a vast network of interdependent researchers across many institutions. Research teams have diverse goals spanning scientific discovery, training, clinical translation, public health, and health policy.” 1 1 Stokols D, Hall KL, Taylor BK, Moser RP. The science of team science: overview of the field and introduction to the supplement. Am J Prev Med. 2008 Aug;35(2 Suppl):S77-89. Accessed 8/10/20.

Team science arose from the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health, which fund the work of researchers attempting to solve some of the most complex problems that require a multi-disciplinary approach, such as childhood obesity. 2 Team science is bringing in elements from various disciplines to solve these major problems. 3, 4 This article covers the intersection of team science with effective operationalizing of research teams and how teaming principles can be applied to the functioning of research teams.

Salas and colleagues state that, “a team consists of two or more individuals, who have specific roles, perform interdependent tasks, are adaptable, and share a common goal. . . team members must possess individual and team Knowledge, Skills, Attitudes ….” 5 Great teams have a plan for how people act and work together. There are three elements that must be aligned to ensure success: the individual, the team, and the task. Individuals have their own goals. These goals must align, and not compete with, goals of other individuals and team goals. Task goals are the nuts and bolts of clinical research. Like individuals, the team has an identity. It is necessary to provide feedback both as a team and as individuals.

In a typical clinical research team, the clinical investigator is at the center surrounded by the clinical research coordinators. The coordinator is the person who makes the team function. Other members of the typical clinical research team are:

· Research participant/family

· Financial/administrative staff

· Regulatory body (institutional review board)

· Study staff

· Ancillary services such as radiology or pathology

· Sponsor/monitor.

The Teaming Principles

Bruce Tuckman developed the teaming principles in 1965 and revised them in 1977 (Table 1). 6 Using the teaming principles is not a linear process. These principles start with establishing the team. The team leader does not have to establish the team. Any team member can use teaming principles to provide a framework and structure and systematically determine what the project needs. Storming is establishing roles and responsibilities, communications, and processes. The storming phase, when everybody has been brought together and is on board with the same goal, is a honeymoon period.

Norming is the heavy lifting of the team’s work. This involves working together effectively and efficiently. Team members must develop trust and comfort with each other. Performing focuses on working together efficiently, and satisfaction for team members and the research participants and their families.

Tuckman added adjourning or transforming to the teaming principles in 1977. The team might end or start working on a new project (study) with a new shared goal. Adjourning or transforming involves determining which processes can be transferred from one research study to another research study.

While the teaming principles seem intuitive and like common sense, people are not raised to be fully cooperative. Using the teaming principles provides framework and structure and takes the emotion out of teamwork. The teaming principles empower team members and provide the structure that is necessary for teams, which are constantly evolving and changing.

The shared goal at the center of the teaming principles provides a sense of purpose. This provides commitment, responsibility, and accountability, along with a clear understanding of roles, responsibilities, competencies, expectations, and contributions. In Dare to lead: Brave work. Tough conversations. Whole hearts, Brené Brown coined the phrase, “clear is kind, unclear is unkind.” 7 It is extremely important to define roles and ensure that each team member knows what the other team members are doing. This prevents duplication of effort and ensures that tasks do not fall through the cracks.

How to Use Teaming Principles

Table 2 briefly describes each of the five teaming principles. Forming begins with gathering the team members and involves determining who is needed on the team to ensure success. Each team member must be valued. The team may vary depending upon the study, project, and timelines. During the research study, team members may enter and exit from the team. Forming the team may mean working across boundaries with people and departments that team members do not know. It is also necessary to establish the required competencies and knowledge, skills, and attitudes of team members, and to recognize and celebrate differences. The team must have a shared goal and vision.

Storming the team involves establishing roles, responsibilities, and tasks. This includes determining who has the required competencies to perform tasks such as completing pre-screening logs or consenting research participants. Also, storming involves defining processes, including communication pathways and expectations. Simply sending an email is not an effective way to communicate. Team members need to know whether an email is providing information or requires a response. Expectations for responding to emails should be described and agreed upon by all team members. Emails might be color coded to show whether an email is informational or requires a response. If clinical research sites utilize a clinical trial management system, the process for updating it must be determined and clearly communicated.

Norming is how team members work together. The shared goal is re-visited often under norming. Team members are mutually dependent upon each other and must meet their commitments and established deadlines.

Trust lies at the heart of the team. Building trust takes work and does not come naturally. It is helpful to understand that there are several types of trust. Identity-based trust is based on personal understanding and is usually seen in relationships between partners, spouses, siblings, or best friends. This type of trust does not usually occur in the workplace.

Workplace trust resides in calculus-based trust and competence-based trust. Calculus-based trust is about keeping commitments, meeting deadlines, and meeting expectations. There are some people who can be counted upon to always do what they are supposed to do. These people have earned calculus-based trust. Competence-based trust is confidence in another person’s skills or competencies.

Swift trust is immediate and necessary during extreme situations where there is not time to develop deeper connections with individuals. It relies on personal experiences, stereotypes, and biases. Some people are naturally more trusting than other people.

The teaming principle of performing involves satisfaction in progressing toward the goal and being proactive in preventing issues from arising. There will always be issues; however, the most effective teams learn from issues and have processes for resolving them. This makes a team efficient. Performing also includes revisiting the shared goal, embracing diversity and differences, and continually improving knowledge, skills, and attitudes.

Adjourning/transforming is the completion of tasks and identification of lessons learned. Team members need to circle back and determine what worked well and can be applied to the next study. Celebrating successes and acknowledging the contributions of all team members are also an aspect of adjourning/transforming. When the author was managing a core laboratory, she performed tests for an oncology investigator’s study. Months later, the investigator gave her a thank-you card for her contribution to the study that was unexpected but greatly appreciated.

Strengthening the Team

Without a framework and structure, team dysfunction is likely. In The five dysfunctions of a team: A leadership fable , Lencioni presented team dysfunction as a pyramid. 8 Absence of trust is at the bottom of the pyramid. Absence of trust results in questioning everything people do and results in team members unwilling to share or to ask for help. Without asking for help, mistakes will be made.

Absence of trust leads to a fear of conflict and an inability to resolve issues or improve efficiencies. Fear of conflict leads to lack of commitment. Doubt prevails, team members lack confidence, and the goal is diminished. Team dysfunction leads to avoidance of accountability. Follow-through is poor and mediocrity is accepted, breeding resentment among team members.

At the top of the team dysfunction pyramid is inattention to results, which leads to loss of team members and future research studies. There are some teams where people are constantly moving in and out. This is

a symptom of team dysfunction. Loss of respect and reputation of the team, department, and individual team members is another consequence of inattention to results.

Table 3 highlights ways to strengthen the team. Recognizing the strengths of each team member starts with self-awareness. For example, the author had to understand her communication and learning style and how this is similar to and different than that of other team members. The VIA Institute of Character offers a free assessment that could be a fun activity for research teams.

There is no one road to self-awareness; however, each team member must recognize that other team members do not necessarily share their understanding or perceptions. There are many options and possibilities for how others may understand or perceive an experience, none of which are right or wrong. Each team member should appreciate that different understanding and perceptions of experiences do not have to threaten their identity or relationships.

One quick way to show this is through ambiguous images, in which people see entirely different things in the same image. Once they are aware that there are different ways of seeing the same thing, they can appreciate other perspectives. As Pablo Picasso said, “There is only one way to see things, until someone shows us how to look at them with different eyes.” Strengthening the team requires embracing demographic, educational, and personality diversity.

Open and honest communication should be encouraged. Team members should give and receive constructive feedback. This is a learned skill that is often difficult. However, tools are available for assessing communication and listening styles. Many institutions and human resource departments utilize the Crucial Conversations program by VitalSmarts, LC. One member of the team can participate in Crucial Conversations and bring the knowledge back to the team. Communication must include managing conflict and an awareness of cultural differences.

Opportunities for education and training to acquire new knowledge, skills, and attitudes/competencies should be provided. Education may be transportable across teams or may be study specific. Team members should be cross-trained, which may be accomplished through several methods. Positional clarification is where one person is told what another person is doing, which is primarily for information transfer. Positional modeling is receiving the information but also shadowing the other person while they perform the task/skill. Positional rotation is performing another person’s job. This is best for back-up positions, which are necessary for research teams.

Team success is facilitated by recognizing individual successes and commitment to shared goals. Recognizing individual successes reflects team success. For example, if a team member becomes a certified clinical research professional, this is a success for both the individual and the team. Also, the team must have a shared understanding of the goal or purpose. This shared goal must be linked to the individual goal of each team member.

Teamwork needs constant attention and annual evaluations, and team meetings are not sufficient. It is extremely important to regularly check in with people. Team members can check in with other team members simply to ask how things are going. Misunderstandings should be dealt with immediately. Clear direction, accountability, and rewards are necessary.

The author has a bell on her desk that team members ring when they have a success. This sounds cheesy, however, it is fun and team members really enjoy it. For example, when the author finished her slides for the SOCRA annual conference on time, she rang the bell. Her team members asked what happened, and they had a mini celebration. This small item helps to build and strengthen a team with small successes leading to larger successes.

Case Study Using the Teaming Principles

The following case study illustrates the application of the teaming principles to a team involving four major players. Olivia is a clinician with three clinic days and teaching duties who is a sought-after speaker for international conferences. In addition, Olivia is the clinical investigator for four clinical research studies: two studies are active, one is in long-term follow up, and one is in closeout. The studies are a blend of industry sponsored and investigator initiated. Olivia is also a co-clinical investigator on two additional studies and relies heavily upon Ansh for coordination of all studies and management of two research assistants.

Ansh is the lead research coordinator with seven years of experience in critical care research. Ansh is very detail-oriented and takes pride in error-free case report forms, coordinates with external monitors, and manages two research assistants as well as the day-to-day operations of Olivia’s research studies.

Bernita is a research assistant with six months of work experience in obtaining informed consents, scheduling study visits, and coordinating with ancillary services. Bernita is responsible for contacting participants for scheduled visits and providing participant payments. Bernita is developing coordinating skills, seeks out training and educational opportunities, and is a real people person.

Delroy is the regulatory affairs specialist for the Critical Care Department, which consists of eight clinicians (not all of whom are engaged in research). Studies include one multi-site clinical trial for which the clinical research site is the coordinating site, and one faculty-held Investigational New Drug/Investigational Device Exemption study. The department’s studies are a mixture of federal- and industry-funded studies. Delroy has been with the department for five years in this capacity. However, Delroy’s coworker recently and unexpectedly took family and medical leave, leaving Delroy to manage all regulatory issues for the department. Also, the department chair recently made growing the department’s industry-sponsored study portfolio a priority.

Olivia has received an invitation to be added as a clinical research site for a highly sought-after ongoing Phase II, multisite, industry-sponsored study comparing two asthma medications in an adult outpatient setting. The study uses a central institutional review board (IRB) and has competitive enrollment. It will require the following ancillary services: investigational pharmacy, radiology, and outpatient asthma clinic nursing. For the purposes of this case study, all contracts have been negotiated and all of the regulatory documents are available (e.g., FDA Form 1572, informed consent template, and the current protocol). The institution utilizes a clinical trial management system.

Oliva shares the study information and study enrollment goals with Ansh with the charge of getting this study activated and enrolling within 40 days. What are the potential barriers that might affect this outcome? One potential barrier to the study activation timeline is Delroy’s heavy workload. To ensure that the timeline is met, Ansh might contact Delroy and explain the situation, asking what Ansh can do to help facilitate study start-up to ensure that the timeline is met. Ansh should be clear in determining what Delroy needs for study activation, the deadlines for each item, and assist in facilitation of communicating to other members of the study activation team (e.g., ancillary services, IRB) what is needed. Priorities include the regulatory work and staff training. Barriers include managing the regulatory issues on time. This might be a good opportunity to connect with Bernita for providing Delroy some assistance, as Bernita is knowledgeable and eager to acquire additional skills and training. The shared goal of starting the study on time should be shared with all team members in order to meet the 40 day study activation and enrollment goal.

Nuggets for Success as a Team Member or Leader

Members of a research team must know the other team members and available resources. They need to know who is needed for a particular study. This will change during studies and across studies. Roles and responsibilities among the broader team should be identified.

Table 4 outlines nuggets of success as a team member or leader, starting with using the framework of the teaming principles. Next, the team member or leader should build and create networks for knowledge and access. A knowledge network enables team members to know who to contact to provide an answer to specific questions. Each team member is a knowledge network for someone else. Also, each team member should find a person who they admire to serve as a mentor, even informally.

Team members should take advantage of available training. LinkedIn has many free training programs, and the institution’s human resources department also offers training. Meeting times should be scheduled to set aside time for reflection. Team members should check in often with the team as a whole and individual team members, set realistic boundaries, and establish priorities. Team members should avoid making assumptions, and instead, communicate clearly and often. Other keys to team success are to be respectful and present, participate, and practice humanity.

This work was supported by CTSA award No. UL1TR002649 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent official views of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences or the National Institutes of Health.

Overview of the Teaming Principles

• Establish team (top-down and bottom-up)
• Establish roles and responsibilities, communications, and processes
• Working together effectively and efficiently
• Individuals develop trust and comfort
• Work together efficiently
• Focus on a shared vision
• Resolves issues
• Natural end:dissolution
• New project (study) with a new shared goal

Description of the Teaming Principles

• Team members may vary depending upon the study, project, and timelines
• Work across boundaries
• Appropriate competencies and knowledge, skills, and attitudes
• Recognize and celebrate differences
• Shared goal and vision
• Determining who has the competencies for specific study tasks
• Communication pathways and expectation
• Completing clinical trial management systems updates
• Revisit the shared goal often
• Requires mutual dependence
• Identity-based: personal understanding
• Calculus-based: keep commitments, meet deadlines, meet expectations
• Competence-based: confidence in skills, competencies of another
• Satisfaction in progressing toward goal
• Proactive in preventing issues from arising
• Revisit the shared goal
• Embrace diversity and differences
• Continuous improvement in knowledge, skills, and attitudes
• Completion of tasks
• Identify lessons learned
• Celebrate success and acknowledge the contributions of all
• Self-awareness and assessments
• Demographic
• Educational
• Personality
• Give and receive constructive feedback
• Acquire new knowledge, skills, and attitudes/competencies
• Cross-train
• Recognize individual success, which reflects team success
• Commit to shared goals

Nuggets of Success as a Team Member of Leader

• Use the teaming principles as a framework
• Build and create networks for knowledge and access
• Find a mentor
• Take advantage of training
• Schedule meeting times for reflection
• Check in with the team and team members
• Set boundaries and priorities
• Never make assumptions
• Be respectful and present
• Participate
• Practice humanity

1 Stokols D, Hall KL, Taylor BK, Moser RP. The science of team science: overview of the field and introduction to the supplement. Am J Prev Med. 2008 Aug;35(2 Suppl):S77-89. Accessed 8/10/20.

2 Bennett LM, Gadlin H, Marchand C. Team Collaboration Field Guide. Publication No. 18-7660, 2nd ed., National Institutes of Health; 2018. Accessed 8/10/20.

3 National Research Council. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2015. Accessed 8/10/20.

4 Teambuilding 1: How to build effective teams in healthcare. Nursing Times. Accessed 8/10/20.

5 Salas E, Dickinson TL, Converse SA. Toward an Understanding of Team Performance and Training. In: Swezey R W, Salas E, editors. Teams: Their Training and Performance. Norwood, NJ: Ablex; 1992. pp. 3–29.

6 Tuckman, BW, Jensen MA. Stages of small-group development revisited. Group and Organization Studies, 2. 1977: 419-427.

7 Brown B. Dare to lead: Brave work. Tough conversations. Whole hearts. New York: Random House, 2018.

8 Lencioni P. The five dysfunctions of a team: A leadership fable. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass: 2002.

One thought on “Cultivating an Effective Research Team Through Application of Team Science Principles”

Hey there! I just finished reading your article on cultivating an effective research team through the application of team science principles, and I couldn’t help but drop a comment. First off, kudos to you for sharing such valuable insights. Your article was not only informative but also highly engaging, making it a pleasure to read.

I particularly resonated with your emphasis on the importance of clear communication and collaboration within research teams. It’s incredible how these seemingly simple principles can make such a significant difference in the success of a research project. Your practical tips on fostering trust and encouraging diversity of thought were spot-on. I’ve had my fair share of experiences in research teams, and I can attest that when everyone is on the same page and feels heard, the results are remarkable. Your article has given me a fresh perspective on how to approach team dynamics in my future research endeavors, and I’ll definitely be sharing these insights with my colleagues. Thanks again for sharing your wisdom! Looking forward to more of your articles in the future.

Keep up the fantastic work, and please continue to share your expertise. Your writing style is not only informative but also very relatable, making complex topics like team science principles easy to grasp. I’ll be eagerly awaiting your next piece. Until then, wishing you all the best in your research and writing endeavors! 😊📚

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

33RD ANNUAL CONFERENCE

ACHIEVING EXCELLENCE IN CLINICAL RESEARCH :

FORGING STRATEGIC COLLABORATIONS

September 27 to 29

COUNTDOWN TO ANNUAL CONFERENCE

Join us for expert-led sessions, interactive workshops, a peer-driven poster program, an engaging exhibit program and unparalleled networking opportunities!

It looks like your browser is incompatible with our website.

If you are currently using IE 11 or earlier, we recommend you update to the new Microsoft Edge or visit our site on another supported browser.

OUR SYSTEMATIC REVIEW ENGINE IS COMING OCTOBER 13 th For Confident Regulatory Decision Making Join the Waitlist

• For Corporate
• For Individual
• For Academic
• Article Galaxy Browser Extension
• Reference Management
• Technology Landscape
• Clinical Trial Landscape
• Article Galaxy Widget
• Applied BioMath
• Boehringer Ingelheim
• Product Information
• Research and Reports
• Press Releases
• Release Notes
• Knowledge Base
• ROI Calculator
• Research Solutions

The Article Galaxy Blog

• BioTech/Pharma

Four Effective Strategies to Empower Your Research Team

Efficiently managing and tracking scientific content and sources can be a real challenge for researchers, especially when working together on projects.

As teams grow and projects become more complex and intricate, it’s easy to feel overwhelmed trying to keep everything organized and maintain a centralized literature repository. This is why finding effective solutions and strategies for managing sources is so important in research.

As researchers contend with these obstacles, tools like Article Galaxy References emerge as transformative solutions that effectively address collaboration pain points throughout the research process. Beyond benefitting individual researchers, References fosters teamwork and productivity by centralizing sources and streamlining workflows to facilitates seamless collaboration among teams, propelling innovative power.

Below, we delve into four effective strategies that research leaders can employ to enhance research outcomes and enhance team experiences. These insights provide practical solutions to elevate the quality of your research and drive progress in your projects.

1. Leverage advanced collaborative tools to improve communication and team workflows.

Collaboration lies at the heart of successful research teams, enabling the blending of diverse skills, knowledge, and perspectives. When researchers from different backgrounds and with varying skill sets come together, it creates an environment poised for true innovation and creativity.

Integrating tools and platforms designed to facilitate team collaboration into research workflows addresses key challenges in research management and teamwork.

For example, References’ unlimited folder structures allow researchers to organize large quantities of data and documents in a way that mirrors the complexity of their projects, making it easier to locate specific materials quickly. This organization, paired with the ability to share folders and set access levels, streamlines the collaboration process, allowing team members to easily contribute to and review shared materials.

Optimize collaboration and productivity across your organization with the ability to create, manage, and share folders with User Groups.

Furthermore, the integration of personal and shared spaces, along with the capability to annotate PDFs, fosters a more cohesive workflow, encouraging real-time feedback and discussion. Export functionalities and real-time updates also ensure that all collaborators are working with the most current data and findings, reducing administrative overhead and enhancing the efficiency of collaborative research efforts. 

2. Foster a culture of trust and accountability among team members with meticulous citation and knowledge management.

At the core of research lies a fundamental principle: the preservation of source integrity. By carefully managing and safeguarding the integrity of sources, teams can confidently build on previous findings, encourage innovation, and avoid misinformation. This fosters a culture rooted in trust and accountability, establishing a strong foundation for scholarly communication. These practices empower researchers to critically engage with existing literature and contribute new knowledge with credibility and reliability. 

Tools like Article Galaxy References offer improved approaches to streamlined citation management. Effective management facilitates access to relevant literature and resources, enabling team members to work more efficiently, while also allowing for the accurate reference of the original concepts and findings in published scientific literature. 

Auto-magically bulk update metadata from the selected folder, saving time and headaches, especially when exporting and sharing citation information.

By maintaining a well-organized repository of sources, teams can easily retrieve and reference materials, contributing to a more coherent and cohesive research effort.

Global search capabilities allows for efficient retrieval of documents and the inclusion of collaborative folders facilitates easy access to shared materials.

These robust citation practices, facilitated through software solutions, are foundational to the academic discourse, enabling researchers to build upon the work of their peers, challenge existing theories, and propose new insights. In essence, proper citation and literature management are essential for maintaining the integrity, efficacy, and progressive nature of collaborative research endeavors.

3. Create a standardized yet flexible system that’s tailored to your organization.

It's no great secret that organization enables individuals and teams to operate more efficiently, make better use of their time, and achieve their goals with less effort and stress. But sometimes putting this organization into practice is easier said than done. Management solutions equip researchers with the infrastructure and functionality necessary to develop a unified collaborative research approach that aligns with organizational goals and objectives.

For instance, custom fields offer an additional layer of organization within References. Admins have the option to set up global custom fields, ensuring consistency in organizational citation styles across all articles. Alternatively, team members can create custom fields at the folder level for more specific categorization. The intuitive interface enables easy modification of field names and options, streamlining customization without unnecessary complications and freeing up time for other tasks.

With the augmented functionality of our PDF Annotations Viewer, users can now view and select Custom Fields created for Personal or Shared Folders and Global Custom Fields deployed by Admins directly in the PDF reading environment. 

References also offers Microsoft Outlook and Word Add-Ins, allowing researchers to effortlessly insert citations and bibliographies, switching between a wide array of citation styles, ensuring all team members have access to the entire collection, and transforming team collaboration with this straightforward integration into daily communications.

Save time citing and writing in Microsoft Word with our Company PDF Library integration which streamlines citation in reports and articles throughout your organization.

Striking a balance between standardization and flexibility fosters seamless collaboration among team members, ensuring consistent quality and accuracy, while also adapting to the evolving needs of teams in a fast-paced, information-rich environment. This ultimately bolsters the integrity and impact of research findings across the board.

4. Grant your team with peace of mind by ensuring they know who is working with specific materials and that their work is secure.

Team members need to be able to collaborate with confidence, assured that their data is protected and that they are accessing the most up-to-date versions of materials.

The recent enhancements in alerting features for Shared and Company Shared Folders represent a significant stride in collaborative efficiency for research teams. Now, team members can receive email notifications about new additions, keeping them updated on the latest resources and findings without constant manual checking. Whether opting for daily or weekly summaries, these notifications align with the team's workflow, ensuring everyone has the most current information for discussions and decisions. Visual indicators and the "Date Added" column further streamline tracking updates and integrating new data into ongoing projects. Together, these tools create a more connected, productive, and organized research environment, allowing teams to advance their projects with unprecedented speed and cohesion.

We've introduced new alerting capabilities for recently added items in Shared Folders and Company Shared Folders.

Moreover, all organizational structures and citation entries within References are securely stored in the cloud, ensuring accessibility across various devices and platforms. This seamless accessibility empowers teams to efficiently manage their research workflow from any location and on any device. While facilitating organizational collaboration, this approach also upholds data security by restricting the sharing of folders and content with users outside the organization. This safeguards the confidentiality of sensitive research materials within the organizational framework.

Maximize Your Team's Potential with Article Galaxy References

Article Galaxy References offers comprehensive solutions that empower research teams to seamlessly manage and access relevant materials, customize their workflow, and streamline collaboration. By simplifying these processes, it enables researchers to focus more on their work, ultimately leading to increased productivity and advancements in knowledge and discovery.

To explore these innovative solutions and strategies further, we invite you to join us for our upcoming webinar or schedule a live demo . Our team is ready to guide you through each new feature, addressing any questions you may have along the way.

Related Blogs

An easy way to keep up with covid-19 resea....

In our previous post, we shared a number of efforts Research Solutions has implemented to help our customers (and the broader research community) during the coronavirus crisis—including the release...

How to Turn Your Team into A Collaborative...

Executing complex initiatives such as pharmaceutical breakthroughs or advancements in medical device technology requires a breadth of knowledge that is accessible, organized, and shared across large,...

Our new logo, from Reprints Desk to Resear...

As of November 2019, Reprints Desk, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Research Solutions, Inc. will begin to transition into Research Solutions. Research Solutions will act as the parent company for...

Ready to See Article Galaxy in Action?

Schedule a call with one of our advisors. We will get you started with a FREE 14-day trial, with no obligation.

REQUEST MORE INFORMATION

Schedule a call with a knowledgeable Research Solutions advisor. We'll get you started with a FREE 14-day trial, with no obligation.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

Advice for running a successful research team

Affiliation.

• 1 School of Nursing, Midwifery and Indigenous Health, Charles Sturt University, Bathurst, NSW, Australia.
• PMID: 26563930
• DOI: 10.7748/nr.23.2.36.s8

Aim: To explore what is meant by a 'research team' and offer practical suggestions for supporting an effective and productive, collaborative research team.

Background: Collaborative research has become one of the main objectives of most higher education institutions and running effective research teams is central to achieving this aim. However, there is limited guidance in the literature about how to run or steer a research team.

Data sources: Search engines/databases used: CINAHL, Nursing and Allied Health Source, Primo search, Google search and Health Collection to access research articles and publications to support this topic. Literature search was extended to the end of 2014.

Review methods: Publications were reviewed for relevance to the topic via standard literature search.

Discussion: Research teams vary in size and composition, however they all require effective collaboration if they are to establish successful and flexible working relationships and produce useful and trustworthy research outputs. This article offers guidance for establishing and managing successful collaborative research relationships, building trust and a positive research team culture, clarifying team member roles, setting the teams' research agenda and managing the teams' functions so that team members feel able to contribute fully to the research goals and build a culture of support and apply 'emotional intelligence' throughout the process of building and running a successful research team.

Conclusion: Collaboration is a central component of establishing successful research teams and enabling productive research outputs. This article offers guidance for research teams to help them to function more effectively and allow all members to contribute fully to each team's goals.

Implications for practice/research: Research teams that have established trust and a positive team culture will result in more efficient working relationships and potentially greater productivity. The advice offered reinforces the value of having research teams with diverse members from different disciplines, philosophical roots and backgrounds. Each of these members should be able to contribute skills and expertise so that the parts of the team are able to develop 'synergy' and result in more productive, positive and rewarding research experiences, as well as more effective research.

Keywords: Collaborative research; group collaboration; nursing research; research processes; research team; team management teamwork.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

• Understanding the distinct experience of rural interprofessional collaboration in developing palliative care programs. Gaudet A, Kelley ML, Williams AM. Gaudet A, et al. Rural Remote Health. 2014;14(2):2711. Epub 2014 May 14. Rural Remote Health. 2014. PMID: 24825066
• How has the impact of 'care pathway technologies' on service integration in stroke care been measured and what is the strength of the evidence to support their effectiveness in this respect? Allen D, Rixson L. Allen D, et al. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2008 Mar;6(1):78-110. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-1609.2007.00098.x. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2008. PMID: 21631815
• Learning about teams by participating in teams. Magrane D, Khan O, Pigeon Y, Leadley J, Grigsby RK. Magrane D, et al. Acad Med. 2010 Aug;85(8):1303-11. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181e5c07a. Acad Med. 2010. PMID: 20671456
• Does Synergy Exist in Nursing? A Concept Analysis. Witges KA, Scanlan JM. Witges KA, et al. Nurs Forum. 2015 Jul-Sep;50(3):189-95. doi: 10.1111/nuf.12109. Epub 2014 Aug 17. Nurs Forum. 2015. PMID: 25130592 Review.
• Applying research to practice. Practical guidelines for occupational health nurses. Salazar MK. Salazar MK. AAOHN J. 2002 Nov;50(11):520-5; quiz 526-7. AAOHN J. 2002. PMID: 12465209 Review.
• Practicalities of implementing burden of disease research in Africa: lessons from a population survey component of our multi-partner FOCAL research project. Desta BN, Gobena T, Macuamule C, Fayemi OE, Ayolabi CI, Mmbaga BT, Thomas KM, Dodd W, Pires SM, Majowicz SE, Hald T. Desta BN, et al. Emerg Themes Epidemiol. 2022 Jun 7;19(1):4. doi: 10.1186/s12982-022-00113-y. Emerg Themes Epidemiol. 2022. PMID: 35672710 Free PMC article.
• Lessons Learned from an Academic, Interdisciplinary, Multi-Campus, Research Collaboration. Nguyen E, Xu X, Robinson R. Nguyen E, et al. Innov Pharm. 2020 Apr 30;11(2):10.24926/iip.v11i2.3202. doi: 10.24926/iip.v11i2.3202. eCollection 2020. Innov Pharm. 2020. PMID: 34007604 Free PMC article.
• Search in MeSH
• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

4-2 Working Collaboratively: Building a Research Team

Yusuf Yilmaz and Sandra Monteiro

Collaboration is critical to conducting good research and designing good education or innovations. In any discipline, it is a rare situation where an individual has all the knowledge, skills and perspectives required to identify a good idea and develop it to completion and dissemination (1,2). An individual cannot manage all tasks in an efficient or short amount of time.

Critically, health professions education is a rich, multidisciplinary environment that requires collaboration across diverse professions, epistemologies and identities. A scientist may not be able to appreciate the nuances of clinical practice if they do not collaborate to understand the key issues. A clinician educator may not have the capacity to translate all aspects of education science without the support of a researcher. Simply put, we all have gaps in our ability to understand the unique education challenges that we are interested in exploring and can rely on various kinds of experts to supplement our knowledge.

This form of collaboration can create a richer, more complete understanding, but can also be more efficient as experts are much faster than novices at handling tasks within their scope.

Key Points of the Chapter

By the end of this chapter the learner should be able to:

• Describe the importance of teamwork for research
• Identify the priorities when setting up a new research team
• Recognize the challenges for collaboration with novel research teams or team members

Samir decided to talk to his supervisor about the challenge he perceived regarding getting such a diverse team to successfully coordinate their schedules and write together. She suggested that he apply his expert organizational skills to create the writing plan, but then involve the others on the team to complete some of the tasks. She also suggested that he take advantage of available online applications, like Google Docs and Microsoft Teams to create shared space for idea generation, without the need for synchronous meetings.

Deeper Dive into this Concept

Organization and clarity are key to the collaborative writing process. Whether you are writing collaboratively to produce an academic manuscript, or to design new learning objectives and activities for a new curriculum, there are some key principles that can help keep you on track.

First, it helps to identify a leader – not everyone can steer a ship all at the same time – so pick a captain who will be responsible for keeping everyone on task. It is also the leader’s responsibility to make sure there is a shared model of the goal, that everyone on the team understands how they can contribute to the goal and that everyone agrees on the key timeline and checkpoints. Although it can be a challenge managing multiple busy schedules, attempt to start with one synchronous group meeting to create a shared model of the goal. Online applications like Doodle (3) polls or When2meet (4) can be useful in achieving this goal. Also consider holding the meeting online in Zoom (5) or Microsoft Teams (6) as this will allow you to easily record the meeting discussion, which can be transcribed for future review by the group or individuals who could not attend.

Second, be clear on roles and authorship. Review the ICMJE authorship criteria so everyone understands the standards for authorship (7). For academic manuscripts, it is conventional to list all contributors’ names in the order of their level of contribution. The key author positions that are often important for those who write in academic medicine are: first author (the team leader), second (the second-in-command), and senior (the supervisor and/or mentor of the first author and/or the person responsible for a broader program of research). It helps to be clear on these positions at the start of a project, although circumstances may require flexibility over time. The first author is most likely to create the first draft or outline. Ideally, the first author is also the team leader, however this may not be the case for every team. Sometimes, the person elected to manage timelines and expectations is someone in the middle or the senior author.

Third, explain the writing process to everyone on the team and assign roles accordingly. It may seem like common sense, but all writing starts with the first and worst draft. The team members take turns editing it to a better version. Ideally, one person is responsible for the final edit in a consistent voice and style. Moreover, supplementary roles that may be required are a content expert – perhaps someone leading the field who can offer consultation. This person may already be on the team, or can be invited at a later stage of writing to consult. Because this consultant would not meet authorship criteria ( see ICMJE criteria ), they can be mentioned in the acknowledgments.

Fourth, collaborative writing can be highly efficient with the support of various online applications. A common application is Google Docs (8) which allows multiple team members to log in simultaneously, or asynchronously, to edit a single document. It is worth your time to learn how to track edits using the version history and make suggestions (i.e., tracking changes style of annotated suggestions). Google Docs also allow using third party citation managers. Zotero is one free and open source tool that fully integrates with Google Docs and provides citation management in a document (9). The table (4.2.1) below, taken from Yilmaz et al. identifies several online resources that can be used in an asynchronous fashion to facilitate collaborative writing, without having to schedule group meetings to write together (10).

Key Takeaways

In summary, when approaching a collaborative activity, whether research design, curriculum design or innovation, always be clear about individual and group expectations.

• Sharing – Create shared accessible material that helps everyone track progress and understand their role.
• Be Explicit – Identify key tasks and connect them explicitly with individuals and deadlines.
• Structure – Ensure that there is a transparent structure to your project. Whether you are building a research team or writing a paper, it is vital to spend time and effort making sure everyone on the team understands the goals, deadlines and their role within the team.
• Support – Encourage psychological safety within your team so that when team members encounter barriers or challenges they can ask for help. Establish checkpoints to make sure everyone can celebrate their progress or can ask for help with their tasks
• Flexibility – Be prepared to change the plan when necessary. As clear as the plan is at the beginning, there is always a chance that new data will lead you to reconsider your original goals or research questions.
• Walker DHT, Davis PR, Stevenson A. Coping with uncertainty and ambiguity through team collaboration in infrastructure projects. Int J Proj Manag. 2017;35(2):180-190. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.11.001
• Bennett LM, Gadlin H. Collaboration and Team Science: From Theory to Practice. J Investig Med. 2012;60(5):768-775. doi:10.2310/JIM.0b013e318250871d
• Doodle. Doodle: Explore features for the world’s favorite scheduling tool. Accessed November 18, 2021. https://doodle.com/en/features/
• When2meet. When2meet. Accessed November 18, 2021. https://www.when2meet.com/
• Zoom. Video Conferencing, Web Conferencing, Webinars, Screen Sharing. Zoom Video. Accessed March 31, 2020. https://zoom.us/
• Video Conferencing, Meetings, Calling | Microsoft Teams. Accessed November 18, 2021. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-teams/group-chat-software
• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. ICMJE | Recommendations | Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors. Accessed March 25, 2021. http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html
• Google Docs: Free Online Document Editor | Google Workspace. Accessed November 18, 2021. https://www.google.ca/docs/about/
• Zotero | Your personal research assistant. Accessed May 1, 2020. https://www.zotero.org/
• Yilmaz Y, Gottlieb M, Calderone Haas MR, Thoma B, Chan TM. Remote Collaborative Writing A Guide to Writing within a Virtual Community of Practice.  Manuscript submitted.

Other suggested resources

1. MacPFD Google Docs Template for Academic Writing

The above hyperlink leads you to a template that you can use to kickstart your team’s writing. It has the ICMJE criteria listed as well as a grid for scaffolding your initial co-authorship discussions as well.

2. MacPFD Scholarly Secrets – Collaborative Writing – Part 1: Overview of Google docs & Zotero (38 mins)

2. MacPFD Scholarly Secrets – Collaborative Writing – Part 2: The Benefits of Collaborative Writing & Tips (35 mins)

3. MacPFD Scholarly Secrets – Collaborative Writing – Part 3: Timelines, Coordination & Outlines (15 mins)

About the authors

name: Yusuf Yilmaz

institution: McMaster University / Ege University

website: https://yilmazyusuf.com

Yusuf Yilmaz is a postdoctoral fellow ithin the Office of Continuing Professional Development and the McMaster Education Research, Innovation, and Theory (MERIT) program, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University. He is a researcher-lecturer in the Department of Medical Education at Ege University, Izmir, Turkey.

name: Sandra Monteiro

institution: McMaster University

Sandra Monteiro is an Associate Professor within the Department of Medicine, Division of Education and Innovation, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University. She holds a joint appointment within the Department of   Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact ,  Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University.

4-2 Working Collaboratively: Building a Research Team Copyright © 2022 by Yusuf Yilmaz and Sandra Monteiro is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• Open access
• Published: 14 January 2020

How to grow a successful – and happy – research team

• Kylie Ball   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2893-8415 1 &
• David Crawford 1  

International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity volume  17 , Article number:  4 ( 2020 ) Cite this article

13k Accesses

3 Citations

253 Altmetric

Metrics details

Changing academic landscapes, including the increasing focus on performance rankings and metrics, are impacting universities globally, contributing to high-pressure environments and anxious academic staff. However, evidence and experience shows that fostering a high performing academic team need not be incompatible with staff happiness and wellbeing.

The changing academic landscape

Global academic rankings have become a key indicator of the success of universities. Ranking systems are used by universities to mark improvement over time and in comparison to other institutions, and as evidence of progress when requesting government funding. They are also used by consumers to evaluate higher education opportunities [ 9 ]. This intensified focus has led to pressure on universities to improve their performance and position in rankings tables [ 3 ].

Reputation and research citations account for the majority of the rankings. Advice on improving rankings has hence focused on strategies such as hiring research ‘stars’ and increasing research volume; that is, on strategies for growing research. Relatively little attention has focused on growing researchers. For example, a Times Higher Education list of 20 tips for improving rankings included “no pain no gain” (in making tenure decisions) as one tip, yet featured only two fleeting references to strategies focused on nurturing academics [ 4 ].

In addition to the increased pressures associated with achievement of research metrics and rankings, other expectations of academics have increased over the last decade. For example, the impact agenda demands research that makes a difference, that is engaged with industry, community or political partners. Such research requires new tasks, networks and skillsets for which many academics are not trained. At the same time, government funding for research and research staff has declined in many countries, including North America, the UK and Australia. The academic workforce has become increasingly characterised by short-term contracts, workforce casualisation and lack of longer-term job security and pathways. In some countries the sector has also been impacted by the rise of national assessments of research quality (e.g. through the UK Research Excellence Framework; the Excellence in Research for Australia Framework; or the Netherlands’ Standard Evaluation Protocol). The time required to both prepare and assess submissions for these exercises is substantial.

What are the impacts of the changing academic landscape on staff? Academics appear to be generally unhappy. A recent (June 2019) Google search showed the following suggestions based on common searches for ‘academia is’:

Universities have been described as “Anxiety Machines” [ 6 ]. Mental health problems are at levels described as ‘epidemic’, with one study showing staff referrals for counselling increasing by between 50% to over 300% between 2009 and 2016 [ 6 ]. These problems have been linked at least in part to excessive workloads and demands in an increasingly competitive culture.

Are high performance and happiness incompatible?

Highly successful academic teams require intensive focus and effort; this may be perceived as incommensurate with a happy workplace. A web scan of publically available university strategic plans shows that many focus heavily on performance yet lack consideration of strategies that can foster enhanced staff happiness and wellbeing. Possibly, the latter are generally not considered as important in the ‘rankings race’.

Happiness makes people more productive at work. One study found that happiness resulted in a 12% increase in employee productivity, whereas unhappy workers were 10% percent less productive than average [ 7 ]. Psychological wellbeing is also positively correlated with staff retention [ 10 ], which is particularly important in a university context considering the long lead times required to build a successful research program. Promoting happiness among university staff is a worthy goal.

Our experience shows that fostering a high performing academic team is not incompatible with staff happiness. Our School has been twice ranked number one globally in its discipline (Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) 2016, 2017; 3rd in 2018) ( www.shanghairanking.com ). In addition, our staff survey and Early-Mid Career Researcher (EMCR) evaluation results show that our staff feel happier and more supported when benchmarked against the broader university sector. Staff survey results show, for example, that on measures of feeling supported in research (‘I am given enough support to achieve my research goals’), our staff score 27 percentage points higher than the sector average. On indicators of wellness (‘I feel emotionally well at work’; ‘I am able to manage stress at work’), our staff score 5–8 percentage points higher, and on various measures of job satisfaction our staff score 4–6 percentage points higher than the sector average. Similarly, evaluation showed that our School’s EMCR initiatives were associated with increased career satisfaction and morale, and decreased perceived distress.

We’ve implemented initiatives that focus on people and their happinness, as well as performance. These include a dedicated role with oversight of the development, care and support of early- and mid-career researchers through a range of mentorship, face-to-face and virtual support channels.

Academic workloads are an often-cited source of stress, and evidence shows that researchers who are happy are those who have time (particularly unfragmented time) to do research [ 2 ]. We designed strategies to create uninterrupted time, including batched teaching within semesters, and an ‘internal sabbatical’ program to free up extended time for staff to advance their research without teaching commitments.

Other strategies we have implemented include providing flexibility to allow staff to work to their strengths; adhering to publication guidelines whereby authorship is truly representative of inputs; greater recognition of not just winning funding but having a go; and encouraging and modeling a team-based approach in which individuals are not just working in a group, but encouraging colleagues to look out for and after each other at all levels. This is consistent with evidence that shows building social interactions and high-quality connections fosters knowledge-intensive workers’ happiness at work [ 8 ]

Other leading groups have adopted similar initiatives. The University of Ghent has recently initiated an approach that directly addresses the signs of increasing pressure on academic staff. Their new model emphasises staff development; collegiality rather than competitiveness; reduced reliance on quantitative metrics; and being a ‘caring’ employer ( https://www.u4network.eu/index.php/news/2707-ghent-university-is-changing-course-with-a-new-career-model-for-professorial-staff-press-release-ghent-17-september-2018 ).

A successful and happy research team does not just happen. To grow research, you need to grow and nurture researchers. This means more than the usual professional development opportunities, annual performance meetings, perks such as subsidised gyms or childcare and performance bonuses. In our experience, leadership is the key. Modern reseach leadership is not about being the most successful or highest-cited academic - it is about a commitment to supporting and developing others, and creating an environment in which they can succeed. Leadership styles which focus on people have greater impact on happiness at work compared to transactional leadership styles [ 8 ].

Nurturing a successful and happy research team

Based on our experience and the existing evidence, we advocate a shift in academic leadership, cultures, training and practice, towards a kinder, more people-focused approach. Our top tips for academic leaders interested in growing successful and happy research teams include:

Focus on individuals and their career development

Facilitate career conversations and pathways that offer opportunities for development. Set up one-to-one mentoring relationships and a culture in which senior staff are expected to mentor not only their direct reports but others from whom they stand to gain no ‘KPI’ benefit.

Prioritise staff happiness and wellbeing

Seek ways to reduce, not increase, staff workloads. Allow staff to set their own schedules and enable uninterrupted times for scholarly contemplation and research. Encourage and model a balanced perspective, with sensible working hours, in which work is not the only or most important component of life. Support collegial social events.

Foster a culture of kindness

Academia is very good at teaching us to be critical, but neglects to skill staff in practices embodying kindness, despite evidence that such practices improve organisational effectiveness [ 1 ]. Encourage workplace kindness through expressing appreciation and gratitude to staff. Tell staff what you value about them. Share and celebrate staff successes, and foster a caring attitude to ‘rejections’. Embody a leadership approach that is both empathic and holistic, considerate to the ups and downs of non-work, as well as working life (for example through allowing greater flexibility in terms of staff work hours and locations during challenging life circumstances). Model respectful treatment of colleagues and compassionate support. When hiring new staff, seek those who are caring as well as competent.

Challenge cultures and workplace models

  - in which all academics must be all things. Instead endorse essentialism [ 5 ]: the disciplined pursuit of less. Recognise that performance can be judged collectively across teams in which people have strengths across different domains – some are outstanding writers; others, great orators/teachers; others masters at industry engagement; others science communicators or policy influencers. Allow people flexibility to specialise and channel time and effort into making the best possible contribution to the most meaningful and important activities as part of a successful team.

Advocate for a kinder approach to metrics

Foster collaborative, team-based approaches focused on improving the research quality of the team, rather than on metrics per se. For example, a focus on strengthening team members’ research skills and shared learning can both improve team ethos and raise collective rankings. We advocate that new rankings should incorporate a focus on the happiness of staff, given the strong case that happy, engaged workplaces foster both staff wellbeing and organisational productivity.

Availability of data and materials

Cameron K, Mora C, Leutscher T, Calarco M. J Appl Behav Sci. 2011;47(3):266–308.

Article   Google Scholar  

Duncan R, Tillbrook K, Krivokapic-Skoko B. Aust Univ Rev. 2015;57(1):5–12.

Google Scholar  

Goglio V. J High Educ Policy Manag. 2016;38(2).

Goodall A. 2013. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/top-20-ways-to-improve-your-world-university-ranking/410392.article . Accessed 9 Jan 2020.

McKeown G. Essentialism: The Disciplined Pursuit of Less. 1st ed. New York: Crown Business, Random House LLC; 2014.

Morrish L. Pressure vessels: the epidemic of poor mental health among higher education staff. HEPI occasional paper 20. 2019. https://www.hepi.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/HEPI-Pressure-Vessels-Occasional-Paper-20.pdf . Accessed 9 Jan 2020.

Oswald A, Proto E, Scroi D. J Labor Econ. 2015;33(4):789–822.

Salas-Vallina A, Alegre J, Guerrero RF. Eur Res Manag Bus Econ. 2018;24:149–59.

Vernon MM, Balas EA, Momani S. PLoS One. 2018;13(3):e0193762.

Wright TA, Bonett DG. J Manag. 2007;33(2):141–60.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Author information, authors and affiliations.

Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia

Kylie Ball & David Crawford

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Both authors drafted the commentary. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kylie Ball .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

N/A (data cited are from existing reports).

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

The authors declare the following competing interests: KB receives income from a Career Development consultancy, Indago Academy, which she founded.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Ball, K., Crawford, D. How to grow a successful – and happy – research team. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 17 , 4 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-019-0907-1

Download citation

Received : 06 November 2019

Accepted : 23 December 2019

Published : 14 January 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-019-0907-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Academic wellbeing
• Research culture

International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

ISSN: 1479-5868

• Submission enquiries: Access here and click Contact Us
• General enquiries: [email protected]

How to Lead a Research Team

• First Online: 01 January 2020

Cite this chapter

• Aimee-Noelle Swanson 2  

1345 Accesses

Leadership. Organizational culture. Managing dynamic teams. Providing effective feedback. Did you miss this course in your advanced training? Is this the class that you slept through only to show up for the final exam – or was that really just a dream? You didn’t, and it was only a dream. Being an intentional leader and building the culture you want to maximize workflow and employee satisfaction is not something that is taught in graduate school. Very few institutions provide a didactic to scientists on how you build an effective organizational structure to deliver the best science possible. In academia, you are taught to think critically; to be a careful, well-reasoned scientist and clinician; and to approach problems with an objective eye, determine the root cause, and create impactful solutions. You are not taught how to be an effective leader, how to hire the right staff, how to engage teams in work during stressful periods, how to provide effective feedback to enhance performance, and how to build trust in a diverse team. However, you do have all of the tools that you need to do all of these things. You’ve been doing them for years and have seen them all around you. Now it’s just a matter of recognizing them for what they are and connecting with them in a way that serves your goals and objectives. That is the point of this chapter. In this chapter we will cover building an intentional organizational culture, being a thoughtful leader, and managing a research team so that with some foresight and effort, you can focus on your science while engaging your staff in meaningful, high-impact work as a team.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Leading Change

Promoting Yourself into Leadership: Leading from Above, Beside, Below, and Outside

Working Open-Mindedly

Suggested reading.

These texts are valuable management and leadership tools for scientists. Consider these as key reference materials to set yourself up for success.

Google Scholar  

Allen D. Getting things done: the art of stress-free productivity, revised edition. New York: Penguin Books; 2015.

Barker K. At the Helm: leading your laboratory. 2nd ed. Cold Spring Harbor: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; 2010.

Cohen CM, Cohen SL. Lab dynamics: management and leadership skills for scientists. 2nd ed. Cold Spring Harbor: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; 2012.

The Harvard Business Review (HRB). 10 Must Reads book series covers a wide range of topics with terrific resources and references.

Making the right moves: a practical guide to scientific management for postdocs and new faculty. 2nd ed. Burroughs Wellcome Fund and Howard Hughes Medical Institute; 2006. https://www.hhmi.org/developing-scientists/making-right-moves .

Patterson K, Grenny J, McMillan R, Switzler A. Crucial conversations: tools for talking when stakes are high. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Education; 2011.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA

Aimee-Noelle Swanson

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aimee-Noelle Swanson .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Laura Weiss Roberts

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Swanson, AN. (2020). How to Lead a Research Team. In: Roberts, L. (eds) Roberts Academic Medicine Handbook. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31957-1_34

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31957-1_34

Published : 01 January 2020

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-31956-4

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-31957-1

eBook Packages : Medicine Medicine (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Job Seekers

Business Solutions

Contractors

Synergy Scientific Solutions

Commercial Services

Staffing Solutions

• Executive & Technical Search
• Managed Service Provider & Contingent Workforce Solutions
• Pre-Clinical Discovery Science
• Early Talent in STEM
• Recruitment Process Outsourcing and Permanent Workforce Solutions

Statement of Work (SOW)

• Salary Benchmarking
• News & Insights
• Guides & Reports
• Podcasts & Webinars
• Career Advice

Global Talent Trends and Insights 2024

Meet the team

• CSR & Partnerships

Refer A Friend

How to Lead a Research Team in 4 Steps

Share Our Blog

Carol Jennings

Despite talent management in research being  the greatest driver of research success , researchers are seldom taught how to lead a research team well.

In fact,  research from the Wellcome Trust  where over 4,000 scientists were surveyed, reveals that while 80% of lead researchers say they have the skills to manage a diverse team, less than half of research leaders have had any management training.

Successfully implementing talent management practices in a time-sensitive laboratory environment can be complex and  remains a key area in need of improvement even for industry leaders  in the scientific field.

However, when leaders do rise to the challenge, they can generate an environment of continual improvement, increased efficiency and greater satisfaction.  In this article, I’ll outline 4 key steps, inspired by Psychologist Bruce Tuckman’s notorious  theory of group development .  Expect to find: 

• 4 steps to successful leadership
• Research and insights on laboratory leadership
• Key skills information for research leaders

Four key steps to leadership success

Step 1 – form a vision and set your strategy.

While mission statements involve describing the purpose of your research itself, a vision statement should outline the project’s full trajectory while staying connected to the mission. 

Your wider strategy and vision statement should include details around:

• Staff career plans – understanding your team’s ideal career trajectory will enable you to better share opportunities and responsibilities.
• Timelines for the project – clarifying clear timelines from the start can improve your chances of gaining additional funding.
• Communication channels – find reliable ways to maintain communication, ideally through weekly updates.
• Financial goals – aim for any additional funding opportunities from the project’s outset.
• Approach to work-life balance – understanding your team’s need for a work-life balance will help shape the trajectory of the project, and timelines, by setting realistic goals
• Development opportunities – describe any additional training and development opportunities that are available over the course of the project
• Enabling innovation – foster a creative environment from the outset, creating a psychologically safe environment where people can suggest new ideas.
• Building connections – collaboration can open up a wealth of opportunity and resource.

Vision statements should be a collaborative affair, where your team contribute their perspectives to shape a realistic and meaningful vision for the project. 

A strong research vision describes the unique way a challenge will be addressed in context of its wider societal, environmental or even industrial impact.

Syngenta  accomplish this with the vision statement below:

“Our vision is a bright future for smallholder farming. To strengthen smallholder farming and food systems, we catalyze market development and delivery of innovations, while building capacity across the public and private sectors” Leadership tip: While creativity is often regarded as key to research culture,  75% of researchers believe it’s being stalled.  Overcoming this takes conscious action, and psychological safety.  Google’s research  shows that psychological safety is one of the greatest drivers for successful teamwork. Leaders can achieve a more innovative, and successful team culture by showing concern for wellbeing alongside success. 

Step 2 – Bridge communication gaps and work through the challenges

Once you’ve successfully set up the vision and strategy behind your project, your attention can shift onto working through the challenges that arise and bridging any communication gaps that emerge. Your focus as a leader should be on promoting learning and providing the constructive feedback needed to help your team turn mistakes into lessons learned. 

When faced with a hurdle, consider additional training where skills are insufficient, and stay committed even if the project isn’t going at the pace you expected.

Leadership tip: It’s also important to practice self-awareness and identify whether any research challenges could be down to your leadership style. If you don’t find your leadership style to be driving your team’s motivation, be prepared to change up your approach.  Research  shows you can do this by asking ‘what’ you can do to change, rather than focusing too much on ‘why’ your approach wasn’t successful. 

Step 3 – Sustain performance

Now your project has overcome its growing pains, it’s likely that productivity has increased and that you’re looking for ways to keep that momentum going. 

Emphasising project ownership and accountability is integral at this stage and can help  sustain motivation and commitment  to the research. As the research continues, it’s important to leverage communication channels, and keep conversations and ideas flowing – doing so, will better enable problem solving if further issues do arise. 

Your responsibilities will largely shift at this point to monitoring:

• Time – the time it takes to complete projects, as well as the time the team are spending in the lab.
• Money – how finances are progressing, and whether further resourcing may be required.
• Quality of work – the quality of work should take a greater focus over the quantity of work, although both are important.
• Work-life balance – refer back to the vision for the project; is the same work-life balance being maintained?
• Burnout – monitor employee wellbeing and try to identify signs of employee burnout early.

Leadership tip: To maintain productivity, it’s important to move away from a competitive culture.  78% of researchers think that high levels of competition in the laboratory have created unkind, and aggressive conditions . Celebrate achievements and consider how you can help encourage team growth and development rather than focusing on a competitive environment.

Step 4 - Prepare for wrap-up

As the project draws to a close, your role as a leader should shift on to developing your team member’s career beyond the project. You can refer back to your project vision, as well as actively communicate with your wider team to ensure that every member is accessing the opportunities that they need to transition to their next research project and role.

You could organise a final event for the team to celebrate personal achievements alongside overall team achievements to close the project in a positive way.

Leadership tip: Establishing a successful offboarding process as a leader is crucial to maintaining a strong network with wider research teams, even after project completion. 

Skills breakdown:

Key skills Research Managers require to  achieve laboratory success  are:

• Self-awareness
• Time management
• Accountability

Looking for resource support?

Synergy Scientific Solutions provide specialist teams that boost laboratory capability, potential and efficiency from within.

Our links with SRG’s expansive talent networks mean we can source, manage and develop teams on behalf of our clients across the clinical and biotech industries.

Want to learn more? Get in touch with our team at:  [email protected]  

Latest News, Events & Insights

Synergy Scientific Services: Showcasing the Power of Continuous Improvement

Continuous Improvement is a vital component of making high-impact, long-lasting changes to a laboratory and the way it functions, as these insights from Neil Jones highlight.

3 Keys to Managing Capacity in the Laboratory

The Synergy Scientific Services team explore the fundamentals behind managing capacity in today’s laboratory landscape.

Business Continuity Solutions and Challenges in Clinical Research

Looking for business continuity solutions? Get actionable advice to the most critical talent challenges in clinical research today.

How To Manage Resource Constraints In Laboratory Workflow Management

Overcome resource constraints by optimising your laboratory workflows. Read on to find out how...

How to Overcome the Top 4 Pharma Supply Chain Challenges

Learn how to overcome the top 4 pharma supply chain challenges today with advice from Associate Director, Robin Aris.

What is the Future of the Smart Medical Devices Market?

The smart medical devices industry has exploded in recent years, and with technology developing at a breakneck pace. The influence of medical device developments is set to soar in the STEM and clinical industry.

Outsourcing Pharma - 5 Questions for Leaders to Consider

Considering outsourcing pharma development or manufacture? Neil Jones explores 5 essential questions to ask before you outsource.

5 Drug Discovery and Development Challenges and How to Solve Them

Synergy scientific solutions delve into the key business challenges facing drug discovery, and how to solve them.

Want to Know More?

Subscribe to our newsletter.

Stay up to date with SRG

Latest Salary Survey

SRG are industry leaders and work with 3rd party vendors for market intelligence

Get in Touch

[email protected]

For Job Seekers

• Meet the Team
• SRG Scotland
• Case Studies
• Whistleblowing policy
• Accessibility
• Carbon Reduction Plan
• ED&I statement
• Gender Pay Gap Report
• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Modern Slavery Statement
• Terms and conditions
• Complaints Procedure
• Section 172

© 2024 SRG.

• Gender pay gap report

Cover Story

What makes teams work?

Psychologists are pinpointing the factors that make teams gel—research that has far-reaching implications for health care, education, research, industry and more

By Kirsten Weir

September 2018, Vol 49, No. 8

Print version: page 46

15 min read

• Healthy Workplaces

The lone wolf is becoming an endangered species. In fields from health care to hospitality, startups to big business, teamwork has become the favored way to get things done. "The world is so complex, no one person has the skills or knowledge to accomplish all that we want to accomplish," says Susan McDaniel, PhD, a psychologist at the University of Rochester Medical Center and 2016 APA president known for her dedication to team-based work. "Interdisciplinary teams are the way to make that happen."

While humans have always joined forces with one another to achieve shared goals, psychologists are zeroing in on the methods and processes that make those collaborations more efficient and successful. "What's changing is the understanding and appreciation that there is a science behind how to manage teams," says Suzanne Bell, PhD, an associate professor of industrial/organizational (I/O) psychology at DePaul University in Chicago.

Now, a special issue of American Psychologist (Vol. 73, No. 4, 2018) details what psychologists have learned—and need to learn—about working in teams. "The Science of Teamwork," co-edited by McDaniel and colleague Eduardo Salas, PhD, of Rice University in Houston, in cooperation with American Psychologist editor-in-chief Anne E. Kazak, PhD, offers 21 articles that delve into the theory, research and applications of team science.

Here, we look at some of the most significant findings in the special issue, particularly the ways that team processes matter for psychologists, whether they're working in health care, research, industry, the military or education.

Building a dream team

Sometimes teams seem to click without too much effort, working together seamlessly and producing great work as a result. Other collaborations crash and burn. A team's success often depends on its composition, as Bell and her co-authors describe in their contribution to the special issue.

Surface-level attributes of individual team members—such as age, gender and reputation—can be important to the team's overall function, but they aren't necessarily the factors that matter most, Bell says. Instead, it's the "deep-level" factors you can't see at a glance, such as the members' personality traits, values and abilities, that tend to have a much bigger impact on work teams, studies suggest.

Those deep-level factors shape what researchers call the ABCs of teamwork: the attitudes, behaviors and cognitive states that collectively influence whether a team achieves its goals. Those elements depend to some degree on the context and on the team's objectives, Bell says. If the goal is to design an innovative new digital device, it's a good idea to build a team with diverse thinkers who bring a range of knowledge, skills and abilities to the project. But if a team's goal is to be more efficient, diverse attitudes might be less critical.

Team success also hinges on some basic tenets of team composition, say Bell and her co-authors. One person's mood and outlook can spread within a team, so a pessimistic team member could negatively influence the way the whole group views its goals. Individuals who value working in groups tend to be both more confident and more cooperative in a team setting. When team members are high in conscientiousness, they are better at self-regulating their teamwork. And groups composed of high-ability members who are able to learn, reason, adapt and solve problems are more likely to work well together.

Researchers are working to design algorithms that help organizations create effective teams for specific goals. In a project with NASA, for instance, Bell and colleagues are developing algorithms to identify crew members suited to working together on long-distance space missions.

Ultimately, such tools can help organizations create the best possible teams from the outset and tailor interventions for the unique needs of a team with a specific composition. "Teams are complex systems," Bell says. "The more you can manage them using a scientific basis, the better your teams will be."

The secret sauce: Cooperation in the military

Using scientific methods to understand teams isn't a new trend. Military researchers have been studying teamwork systematically for more than half a century, as Gerald F. Goodwin, PhD, of the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, and colleagues describe in an article in the special issue. "The military has been really central in supporting and executing research on teams since the 1950s," he says. "That support has been critical to moving this science forward."

That distinction might seem obvious, says Goodwin, but understanding the elements that allow teams to function well—team cohesion and shared mental models, for example—is important for training teams as well as evaluating their performance. "How well people work together may be more important than how well they work on the tasks," he says. "The secret sauce comes from the teamwork."

Research from military settings has also clarified the importance of team cognition—what teams think, how they think together and how well synchronized their beliefs and perceptions are. Team cognition is what allows team members to understand intuitively how their teammates will think and act, whether on the battlefield, in a surgical suite or on a basketball court. "Team cognition is really important for teams that have to quickly adapt to dynamic circumstances without having the opportunity to communicate a lot," Goodwin says.

Many of the empirical findings from military research apply to civilian teams as well. From the earliest studies, military and civilian researchers have openly shared findings and worked together to grow the science of teamwork, Goodwin says. The military, for instance, has made use of results from team research in aviation. Meanwhile, findings from military-funded research have informed processes in many industries, health care in particular.

Teaming up for better health

Teams in the military and in health care share an important commonality: They can be operating in situations in which team coordination can be a matter of life or death. Some of the earlier research on health-care teams focused on hospital settings, where teamwork failures can lead to patient harms such as misdiagnoses, medication mistakes, surgical errors and hospital-acquired infections. In a paper for the special issue, Michael Rosen, PhD, an associate professor of anesthesiology and critical care medicine at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, and colleagues describe how medical team coordination affects patient safety and the quality of patient care.

Unlike teams in a business setting that might collaborate with one another for months at a time, health-care teams are often fluid, especially in hospitals. Medical personnel including physicians, nurses, surgical assistants and pharmacists might have to jump into a new care team at each shift change or for each new patient. The fundamentals of good collaboration are the same no matter how transient the team, Rosen says: "It's about having clear roles, clear goals and a clear plan of care."

Teams are also becoming increasingly important in primary-care settings. "I think the industry is recognizing that we don't have a choice. Health care has become too complex, and the current model isn't working very well," says Kevin Fiscella, MD, a professor of family medicine at the University of Rochester Medical Center who co-authored a special issue article with McDaniel on the science of primary-care teams. "It's not a question of whether we adopt teamwork [in primary care], but how we do it—and how we begin addressing the barriers to teams."

Unfortunately, those barriers are not insignificant, Fiscella adds. One challenge is simply changing the way that many physicians think about primary care. "I graduated from medical school in 1980, and our whole training was that care is about me and the patient, and everybody else is there to support that relationship," he says. While that mentality is changing, it's not dead yet. "That unfortunate mental model of what it means to provide primary care can make it difficult" to move toward team thinking, he adds.

Systemic challenges also make collaboration difficult in primary-care settings. Clinicians such as family physicians, specialists and mental health professionals might be spread out in different locations. "It makes it harder to support other team members who are making important contributions," Fiscella says.

The traditional fee-for-service payment model also makes it difficult for medical professionals to prioritize teamwork, Fiscella and McDaniel add. Research has shown, for example, that when primary-care teams have short "huddles" before a visit to coordinate their care plans, they routinely report better teamwork and more supportive practice climates. Similarly, short team debriefings at the end of the day to hash out what worked and what didn't can boost learning and performance among team members and improve outcomes for patients.

Yet due to scheduling challenges, it can be tough for primary-care teams to find even a few minutes to come together for huddles or debriefings. "Time is money. If you take time out for a team meeting, that's lost revenue," Fiscella says.

Teamwork in the lab

Academia is famous for its departmental silos, but that, too, is changing as multidisciplinary research becomes the norm across all fields of science. Team science is gaining momentum for good reason, says Kara Hall, PhD, director of the Science of Team Science Team at the National Cancer Institute and co-author of a special issue article about collaboration in science.

Globalization and technology have made the pressing problems of society ever more complex, Hall says. Take the public health problem of reducing tobacco use, for instance. To address that challenge, you need an understanding of the genetic, neural, psychological and behavioral factors related to tobacco dependence, not to mention related social forces and the public policy context. "If you want to solve an applied global health problem, you need people who can bring their specialized knowledge to bear," she says. "Multidisciplinary teams can really [create] movement on these big problems."

Research on team science has found that collaborating across organizational and geographic boundaries increases productivity and scientific impact. And cross-disciplinary teams produce more academic publications and publish in more diverse outlets, Hall and her colleagues report.

Despite proven benefits, it can be hard for a researcher to wrap his or her head around team science. Most scientists were trained in an apprenticeship model, learning the ropes from a single mentor. "Historically, our scientists haven't been trained to work in teams or to lead teams," Hall says.

Even if scientists are prepared to take the leap to team-based research, their institutions might not be. Tenure and promotion are usually based on outputs such as academic publications, with more weight given to a paper's lead author and to articles published in journals in a researcher's own discipline. That model rewards competition, with the potential for tension as team members hash out who should be credited as first author. Team science is built instead on interdisciplinary cooperation—but so far, only a few academic institutions reward those cooperative efforts.

Because of the lack of team training and the institutional hurdles, Hall says, a research project may be technically and scientifically well-conceived yet fail to yield anticipated outcomes. If a cross-disciplinary team fails to meet its goals, was it because the topic was better suited to intradisciplinary science? Was it a problem with the way the team was composed? Or could the team have succeeded if members had received more institutional support and training?

Still, some early patterns are emerging to guide the way toward improved science teams, Hall and her co-authors report. Some studies have found that small teams are best for generating ideas that shake up the status quo, for instance, while larger teams are better at further developing those big ideas. And while cultural diversity can increase a science team's impact, diverse teams might benefit from more team science principles to head off challenges such as miscommunication.

Multicutural questions

The role of diversity in teamwork is a topic that needs a lot more attention, not just for scientific teams but in all areas of teamwork, says Jennifer Feitosa, PhD, an assistant professor of I/O psychology at the City University of New York, Brooklyn College. In the special issue, Feitosa and her co-authors describe the ways in which multicultural teams may function differently from teams in which all members share the same cultural background.

Yet it can take longer for a diverse team to find its groove than a team with similar backgrounds and mindsets. Individuals in multicultural teams are more likely to have different ways of doing things and might not understand where their fellow team members are coming from. "If you take a snapshot of a multicultural team at the beginning, it doesn't look so promising. They often need more time to all get on the same page," Feitosa says.

In both multicultural teams and more homogenous teams, trust is a key component for effective collaboration, Feitosa and her colleagues reported. But because of their differences, members of multicultural teams might have difficulty trusting each other at first.

"Focusing on shared goals can really help to develop that trust," she says.

In other ways, diverse teams operate quite differently from teams with cultural similarities. In the general teamwork literature, for example, research suggests that it's important to address and manage team conflict head-on. But when team members come from cultures that emphasize harmony and avoid conflict, calling out the elephant in the room can make people extremely uncomfortable and interfere with the teamwork dynamic, Feitosa says.

Differences in leadership style can also hinder multicultural teams. In North America, organizations are moving toward giving individuals greater autonomy and opportunities for self-management, Feitosa notes. "In very collectivistic and high power-distance cultures, people might rely more heavily on direction from team leaders and might rather be told what to do."

Fortunately, teams can prevent cultural differences from becoming obstacles by creating a "hybrid" culture, the authors report. "It's about establishing team norms that aren't entirely your culture or entirely my culture, but a little bit of everyone's," Feitosa says.

The research on multicultural teams can guide those looking to create collaborations that are both diverse and high-functioning. But to fully harness the value of cross-cultural perspectives and talents, Feitosa and her colleagues conclude, much more needs to be done to integrate findings from research on single-culture teams and multicultural teams. "Teamwork is a complex phenomenon, so we need to get more creative in how we look at this," she says.

Intervening to improve teamwork

Although researchers have more work to do to fully understand team processes, especially in multicultural contexts, it's not too early to apply what we know, Salas says. For the special issue, Salas and colleagues described evidence-based approaches for improving teamwork.

Organizations are clamoring for tools to make their teams more effective. "Team building is probably the No. 1 human resources intervention in the world," Salas says. Yet the results of such programs are mixed. If you send a group of executives into the wilderness for two days, they might have fun and learn something about one another—but it doesn't mean they'll magically develop new teamwork skills.

Put them into evidence-based team trainings, however, and the story is different. "Team training works," Salas says. "We know how to design, develop and evaluate it."

In particular, Salas and his colleagues describe four types of team development interventions that have been shown to benefit team performance: team training, team building, leadership training and debriefing.

Team training describes formalized learning experiences that aim to improve specific team skills or competencies. Structured team training has been shown to improve teamwork functioning and outcomes in industries such as education, engineering and health care. A prime example is TeamSTEPPS , an intervention to reduce medical errors by improving communication and teamwork skills among health-care professionals (see sidebar). Team-building interventions, meanwhile, aim to better teams by improving interpersonal relationships, clarifying roles and improving problem-solving. Such interventions might focus on increasing trust or setting challenging yet specific goals, for example. Leadership training targets a team leader's knowledge, skills and abilities, and improvements to these areas have been shown to support effective overall team processes. When leaders are trained in occupational safety, for instance, their teams exhibit safer behaviors on the job. Finally, team debriefings of the sort used in primary-care settings have been shown to improve performance in a variety of settings, including aviation and military teams.

There's power in numbers, and high-performing teams can be more than the sum of their parts. It's fortunate, then, that teamwork processes can be measured and improved with targeted interventions. But to keep sharpening the science, psychologists must continue exploring the conditions that allow teams to succeed, Salas says.

There's certainly no shortage of demand, he adds. "There's a tremendous amount of interest in trying to understand collaboration and teamwork—in health care, aviation, academia, the military, space exploration, the corporate world. I hope this special issue will inspire people to improve their teams, and to look for new ways of motivating their teams using psychological science."

To read the full American Psychologist special issue on teamwork, go to http://psycnet.apa.org/PsycARTICLES/journal/amp/73/4 .

Further resources

APA: A Curriculum for an Interprofessional Seminar on Integrated Primary Care www.apa.org/education/grad/curriculum-seminar

National Cancer Institute: Team Science Toolkit www.teamsciencetoolkit.cancer.gov

Related Articles

• Team building in health care

Letters to the Editor

• Send us a letter

• Google Chrome
• Internet Explorer

Get the Advanced UnSpot plan for $5 $2.5/month per user Fix this Price

• Meeting rooms
• Desk Booking
• Work Schedule Planning
• Workspace Analytics
• Meeting Room Display
• Internal Help Desk
• Space Management
• Hybrid Work Software
• Workspace Optimization
• Returning from Remote Work
• Enhanced Workplace Experience
• Help Center

How to Run an Effective Team Meeting

Team meetings serve different purposes, like making decisions, brainstorming, sharing information, or offering guidance. They help your team connect and stay on track. But here’s the issue — only about half of meeting time is actually useful and engaging. We’re all familiar with pointless meetings that are not just frustrating but also waste time and money.

It’s time to rethink how to do meetings. Whether it’s a big company meeting or a quick daily check-in, meetings should be meaningful. We've put together a few simple tips you can hold meetings that energize your team and keep everyone focused and ready to move forward.

Basic Principles of Conducting More Effective Meetings

Regardless of the meeting’s nature, these elements should always be there:

Necessity. A meeting should be truly necessary, with clear consequences if it does not take place. It shouldn’t be held simply out of habit or to exercise control over the team.

Clarity of purpose. Objectives should be documented and communicated to all participants ahead of time.

Agenda. This provides a clear outline of topics to be covered and the order in which they will be addressed.

Need to attend. Participants should be selected based on their ability to contribute to the meeting’s goals. Each attendee’s role should be clear, and only those who can actively help achieve the meeting’s objectives should be invited.

Rapport. Meetings should foster a welcoming environment through basic courtesies and respect.

Recording. Accurate documentation involves taking notes that capture key decisions and actions, with the level of detail varying based on the meeting’s nature.

Timing. Meetings should follow a set time plan, with brief pauses to assess progress and make adjustments if necessary.

Continuous improvement. Get feedback on how the meeting went to see what worked and what could be better next time.

Contribution. All participants should have the opportunity to share their insights.

Openness and honesty. It’s important to deal with hidden agendas and make sure everyone communicates clearly to solve problems and have productive discussions.

👉 The Key to a Successful Meeting But the true key to a successful meeting is structure. A well-organized meeting can turn an unproductive session into a valuable chance for progress and teamwork. Structure gives the meeting a clear framework and sets expectations, making sure time is used wisely.In a meeting without structure, conversations may stray off-topic, some people might dominate the discussion, or attendees might leave without clear action steps. So, maintain structure to make the meeting count.

Types of Meetings

Now that we have a clear understanding of what makes a meeting effective, let’s get into the various types of meetings commonly held in the business world. These include:

Traditional Meetings

In a traditional meeting, everyone gathers in a conference room, often dressed formally. Attendees sit around a table in a room, usually without specific seating assignments. Some people may have designated roles, like taking notes, leading the meeting, or guiding the discussion.

Daily Meetings

Daily meetings, also known as daily standups or check-ins, last 15-30 minutes. These are quick catch-ups, held in person or over the phone, that help teams stay aligned and review their work. It bridges the gap between larger, less frequent meetings.

Weekly Team Meetings

Weekly meetings are set times for teams or workgroups to come together. These sessions are used to share updates, talk about ongoing projects, address challenges and obstacles, ask questions, and plan for the week ahead.

Brainstorming Sessions

These sessions are all about coming up with fresh ideas. The goal is to innovate by working together to generate creative solutions. In brainstorming meetings, team members share ideas in a relaxed, informal setting. Everyone should have an equal chance to contribute. 

SWOT Analysis Meetings

A SWOT analysis meeting brings together key team members to review the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats related to a project or initiative. The goal is to spot potential risks and issues early so they can be managed before they turn into bigger problems.

It’s a good idea to hold these SWOT meetings regularly — at least once every three months.

Round-Robin Meetings

A round robin is organized as an open forum where each person gets a set time to share their thoughts. The meeting follows a structured approach, with each participant taking their turn to speak in a specific order.

Unlike regular business meetings, workshops require more preparation and usually last longer. They are led by a central trainer or facilitator who, along with a group of sponsors, plans the agenda, arranges collaborative activities, and ensures that the workshop achieves its goals. Workshops focus on hands-on participation and active involvement.

Hybrid Meetings

A hybrid meeting involves participants being in different locations. Some people attend the meeting in person, and others join via phone or online conference. 

During hybrid meetings, it is important to provide a level playing field for all participants to actively participate in the discussion, regardless of their location. It can be challenging because you can’t always depend on everyone having the same technology or using physical tools like sticky notes. But they can be more manageable with the right hybrid work solution.

For a successful meeting, it is important to prepare and inform all participants in advance about the time, place and agenda of the meeting. For example, with modern meeting room booking and meeting management systems, you can easily select the right time and room, automatically notify all participants and calculate the optimal time based on different time zones. Such solutions save time and eliminate problems associated with meeting organization.

Open forum for employees

These are large meetings where management addresses all employees. In these sessions, everyone in the company comes together to discuss ideas, ask questions, and talk about important changes. These meetings help both employees and leaders connect, share their perspectives, and understand each other better.

Rules and Methods for Conducting Effective Meetings

Here are some tips for running meetings that will help you lead productive, successful sessions every time. These guidelines work well for different personalities and work styles.

Fishbone or Ishikawa Methods

This method helps identify and visualize the root causes of problems during a meeting with 6Ms: material, method/process, machine, measurement, manpower, and mother nature (environment).

The 5P Rule

To make your meetings more effective, follow the 5 P’s:

• Purpose. Clarify what your goals are before setting up the meeting.
• Preparation. Send out the agenda and any related materials before the meeting.
• Progress. Keep the meeting on track and note any additional issues for later.
• Participation. Encourage everyone to contribute and make sure all voices are heard.
• Process. Start and end on time. Follow the agenda, record key points, and clearly assign tasks.

The 5S Rule

For better meetings, you can also apply the 5S approach:

• Sort. Eliminate unnecessary topics and tasks. Focus only on what’s essential for the meeting's goals.
• Set in order. Organize your agenda, documents, and any tools or resources so they are easy to access and use during the meeting.
• Shine. Keep the meeting environment well-prepared. Check that all equipment works and materials are up-to-date.
• Standardize. Establish consistent procedures for meetings, like using regular agenda templates and setting clear roles.
• Sustain. Maintain improvements by regularly reviewing meeting practices.

The SMART Method

Set SMART goals to guide your meetings. SMART stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound . This framework helps make your objectives clear, attainable, and meaningful.

For example, in the meeting, you could brainstorm and pick three possible solutions for a customer feedback issue using a voting system. You might also review the project’s current status, identify the main risks and opportunities for the next quarter, and assign tasks to each team member.

The RACI Method

A RACI meeting is a standard team meeting with a RACI matrix to guide task assignments. RACI stands for Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed . It helps bring structure to projects by outlining who does what, who oversees tasks, who needs to be consulted, and who should be kept updated. 

While you don’t use the RACI chart during the meeting itself, it helps clarify roles and responsibilities beforehand.

The 10:10:10 Method

The 10:10:10 method helps you make better decisions by looking at their impact over different times:

• Think about how you’ll feel about the decision in just 10 minutes . This shows the immediate effects.
• Consider how you’ll feel about the decision in 10 months . This helps you see how it fits with your longer-term goals.
• Imagine how you’ll feel about the decision in 10 years . This guarantees the decision fits with your company’s principles and objectives.

Using this method in meetings helps you make choices that are good now and in the future.

Steps for Conducting an Effective Meeting: Preparation, Execution, Final

Preparation is the first phase and is essential for setting up a successful meeting. It involves defining clear goals, creating an agenda, and organizing materials. It lays the groundwork for a focused and organized team meeting.

The execution phase is where the meeting actually occurs. Here, the organizer needs to make sure the meeting stays on track and achieves its objectives, while also keeping participants engaged and productive.

The final phase is post-meeting actions, which involve sharing meeting notes and collecting feedback. This phase is key for making sure decisions are carried out, tasks are assigned, and future meetings are improved.

We'll talk more about each stage next ⬇️

Preparation Phase: How to Start Meeting 

Making a strong first impression is important in business meetings, just like it is with introductions. If you’ve prepared well, learning how to do meetings should be easy.

Determine the Purpose and Have an Agenda

As the meeting organizer, you need to clarify the purpose and details. Ask yourself:

• Why is this meeting taking place?
• Who absolutely needs to be there, and what should they contribute?
• What are the main results you want to accomplish?

Clearly define these to set your meeting up for success and provide a plan to follow from beginning to end. Share the agenda with everyone involved, preferably a week before the meeting.

Choose the Best Time

Try scheduling meetings during natural breaks in people’s days — like after they’ve settled in the morning, before or after lunch, and so on. Also, add some buffer time between meetings. This will allow team members to finalize their tasks and gives extra time if discussions run over.

Assign Meeting Roles

For weekly team meetings or standups, assign different roles to team members and rotate them each time to build leadership skills. Here’s a quick rundown:

• Facilitator/moderator that manages the meeting;
• Timekeeper that monitors the clock and notifies the group if they’re running out of time for agenda items;
• Vibes watcher that helps manage participation and keeps an eye on comments or questions;
• Note-taker that records key points and decisions and distributes meeting notes and recordings.

Ask Participants to Prepare Questions

Ask everyone to think of any questions or topics they want to discuss. You might say, “Please come prepared with any questions or topics you’d like to cover. This will help us make the most of our time together.”

Make Sure to Prepare Mentally

Take some time to review the plan and key topics ahead of the meeting. Think about any potential questions or issues that might come up. Also, mentally rehearse any important points or decisions you need to make.

Prepare Technically

If you’re joining online, check your camera and microphone beforehand to make sure they’re working properly. Test your internet connection and make sure you’re familiar with any meeting software you'll be using.

For in-person meetings, inspect the room setup. Make sure any presentation equipment, like projectors or screens, is functioning correctly. Arrange seating so that everyone can see and hear clearly to facilitate good communication.

Prepare Visual Aids

If you're using presentations, check that your slides are well-organized and free of errors. Test the presentation on the equipment you’ll use to avoid any technical glitches.

For other materials, such as handouts or charts, make sure they are ready and easy to understand. Provide these materials to participants in advance if possible.

Confirm Meeting Location/Platform

For virtual meetings, confirm the platform details and see if the link or access code is correct. Test the platform beforehand to check that it’s working properly and that you’re familiar with its features.

Send Notifications to Participants

Send out reminders with key details such as the date, time, location, or virtual meeting link. You might say, “Just a reminder about our meeting tomorrow at 10:00 A.M. Here’s the agenda and the link to join the virtual session.”

📝 Main points about the preparatory phase Start the meeting by defining its purpose and creating a clear agenda so that all participants know what to expect. Choose a convenient time to accommodate breaks throughout the day and leave some time between meetings for preparation. Assign roles such as moderator and timekeeper to maintain order and efficiency. Ask participants to prepare questions in advance to focus on important topics. Check technical equipment and send reminders to ensure everyone is ready for the meeting.

Execution Phase: What to Do During the Team Meeting

Once your team meeting begins, use your time wisely. What you do during it really makes a difference. In this section, we’ll cover tips and strategies to keep your meeting going well.

Arrive on Time

As the meeting leader, respect everyone’s time by beginning promptly. While some delays are unavoidable, plan for a short grace period and then move on with your agenda. No one enjoys waiting around and making small talk while the meeting gets started.

You might say something like, “Hi everyone, welcome! We’ll wait a minute or two for others to join and then get started.”

Greet Participants

In virtual meetings, it’s especially crucial to check that everyone’s microphones, audio, and cameras (if needed) are working properly. Do this while waiting for everyone to join.

You could say, “Can everyone hear me? I just shared my screen, so let me know if it’s not showing up.” If it’s a brainstorming session, try, “Let’s make sure everyone’s audio is working. Could everyone say their name so we can check that we can all hear each other?”

This gives team members a chance to fix any audio or camera issues before the meeting starts. Also, keep an eye on the “waiting room” or “lobby” of your video conference to admit anyone who might be waiting.

Follow the Agenda

After welcoming everyone, take a moment to review the meeting’s goals and plan. This shows you value their time and keeps the meeting focused. Also, go over any ground rules to keep things on track.

You might say, “Let’s start. Our goals today are to go over the three software options and decide which one to pick.”

Here are a few more tips:

• Write the agenda on a whiteboard or display it where everyone can see it.
• For longer meetings (30+ minutes), break down the agenda into time slots so everyone knows how long each topic will take.
• If the discussion goes off track, refer back to the agenda.

Manage Time Effectively

Stick to time references to manage meeting time better. A time reference is simply a set time next to each agenda item. For example, it could be a broad time frame, like 20 minutes, or a specific period, such as from 2:00 P.M. to 2:20 P.M. This way, you’ll know exactly when and how long to spend on each topic. 

If you’re unsure, it’s better to allocate a bit more time than you think you’ll need, like giving 30 minutes for a task you estimate will take 15.

Engage Participants

Make meetings more engaging by adding some fun incentives, like giving an extra 15 minutes for lunch to someone who asks a great question. Encourage everyone to ask questions and share their ideas. Also, find out what the team wants from the meeting.

Address All Questions

When participants ask questions, answer them on the spot if possible. If a question requires more detailed research, acknowledge it and let everyone know you’ll follow up with an answer after the meeting.

Thank Participants and Close the Meeting

At the end of the meeting, take a moment to thank everyone for their time and contributions. You might say, “Thank you all for your contributions and involvement today. We’ve covered everything on the agenda and have clear next steps.” Next, recap the main points, decisions, and action items to make sure everyone is aligned.

Finally, let participants know what the next steps are and when they can expect any follow-up. For example, “I’ll send out the meeting notes later today, and we’ll reconvene next week to check on our progress.”

📝 Main points about the execution phase During team meetings, it's crucial to use time wisely by starting promptly and greeting participants to ensure their equipment is working properly. Follow a clear agenda to maintain focus, manage time effectively by assigning specific time slots to each topic, and keep the meeting on track. Engage participants by encouraging questions and addressing them immediately or noting them for follow-up. Conclude the meeting by thanking everyone, summarizing key points, and outlining next steps to ensure everyone is aligned and aware of upcoming actions.

Final Phase: What to Do After the Meeting

After the meeting, it’s key to follow up properly. What you do next will help make sure everything discussed gets done.

Send Out Presentation and Notes

Summarize the main points in a document or email and send it to all attendees and anyone else who should be informed. Your summary should include:

• Key topics discussed;
• Action items with assigned team members and deadlines;
• Any issues or questions to address later.

Writing this up helps everyone understand what was decided and what the next steps are. It also provides a record to review in future meetings.

Collect and Process Feedback

Whether the meeting went well or not, get some feedback by sending out a survey or asking a few experienced team members for their thoughts. This isn’t about seeking praise but getting honest, constructive criticism.

Look into the details if you hear that the meeting wasn’t effective. Ask open-ended questions to understand the root cause without leading their responses.

Most importantly, act on the feedback! Ignoring it will make team members feel unvalued and discourage them from sharing their thoughts in the future.

Review and Address Mistakes in Future Meetings

Start by acknowledging any mistakes from past ones. Identify what went wrong, like miscommunication or missed tasks. In your next meeting, briefly talk about these issues and suggest improvements.

Then, put these changes into action and see if they help. Keep checking if the adjustments are working, and be open to further changes.

📝 Main points about the final phase After a meeting, follow up by sending a summary of key topics, action items, and any outstanding questions to all relevant participants. Collect feedback through surveys to identify areas for improvement and act on it to enhance future meetings. Address any mistakes from past meetings by acknowledging them and implementing changes. Continuously assess the effectiveness of these adjustments and remain open to further improvements.

Common Meeting Mistakes and How to Avoid Them

Sometimes, meetings can use up a lot of time and resources without achieving much, which is frustrating and confusing for everyone involved. To avoid these problems, you should know what can go wrong in a good meeting and how to prevent it. Here are seven common pitfalls to be aware of ⬇️

Meetings Running Too Long

When meetings drag on or go off schedule, they tend to lead to tiredness and loss of interest. To avoid this, plan your meeting structure carefully and set specific time limits for each topic. Appoint someone as a timekeeper to help keep the meeting on track. 

If discussions veer off-topic, consider saving those for a follow-up meeting or email instead. It’s better to cover fewer topics thoroughly instead of trying to address too many things.

Lack of Participant Questions

When participants don’t ask questions, it’s probably because they don’t feel there’s space for them. 

To encourage questions, create an open environment where everyone feels comfortable speaking up. You can prompt participants by asking specific questions yourself or using tools like anonymous question submissions to help them voice their concerns. 

Overly Formal Meetings Without Interaction

Meetings that don’t involve participants quickly become dull and disengaging. 

To keep everyone interested, invite attendees to share their thoughts and feedback. Make the meeting more interactive by using methods like live polls, question boxes, or interactive activities. Be sure to recognize and address their input throughout the meeting.

No Moderation

What exactly is moderation? It involves guiding the discussion, managing time, addressing disruptions, and keeping the conversation focused. If there is no meeting lead, productivity tends to go down. 

The solution is simple: have someone make certain that the formal discussion follows the rules and happens without problems.

Lack of a Presentation

This refers to the absence of a visual or structured guide, like slides or handouts, that organizes and communicates the key points of a meeting. Without it, discussions can become scattered, and participants may struggle to follow along or grasp important information.

Try to prepare something for participants to lock eyes on. It helps keep them engaged, and it also makes it easier for the presenter to stick to the intended structure.

Failure to Summarize Meeting Outcomes

Without a clear summary, people might leave with different ideas about what was decided. In the end, it can lead to inconsistent actions.

To avoid this, always recap the main points, decisions, and next steps at the end of the meeting. Share this recap with everyone quickly so that everyone understands what needs to be done.

Inconsistent Meeting Frequency

With hybrid work and changing employee schedules, many companies face the challenge of inconsistent meeting frequency. When teams work in different modes — some in the office and others remotely — it becomes more difficult to schedule regular meetings. Inconsistent meetings can lead to a loss of communication between team members and reduced productivity.

To make meetings clearer and avoid booking conflicts, office management systems can be used. These systems can track available rooms with the right equipment and instantly book them for the right time. And if something changes in the schedule of colleagues, the system will send a notification about the rescheduling of the meeting and help to find a new time and place.

Another feature of office management systems is analytical tools to track the frequency and duration of meetings, as well as the efficiency of their implementation. This helps to better manage team time and improve meeting productivity.

In addition, such a system will help to analyze the potential of the office as a whole and will tell you how many more employees you can accommodate with the current format of work.

5 Tips to Motivate Your Team for Productivity

Create a friendly atmosphere at the meeting

Start by welcoming everyone warmly and thanking them for their time. Encourage everyone to speak up and share their ideas. Use praise to acknowledge good contributions and keep the meeting organized to ensure a good mood.

Do your best to resolve conflicts in an environmentally friendly way

If conflicts happen to arise during a meeting, address them calmly and quickly. Listen to each person’s point of view without interrupting. Stay neutral and focused on solving the problem, and use strategies like compromise to reach a solution that works for everyone.

Adapt meetings for all participants, including virtual teams

For remote meetings, use a reliable video conferencing tool with features like screen sharing and chat. Send clear instructions before the meeting to avoid technical issues. Get everyone involved by using interactive tools.

Avoid unnecessary meetings to avoid taking up other people's time

Before scheduling a meeting, ask if you can achieve the same goals with an email or document. Think about whether the meeting will really help or if it’s just a routine check-in. Make sure the people you invite are essential to the discussion.

Come up with strategies to help minimize stress and fatigue during long meetings

To make long meetings easier, take regular breaks so people can rest. Involve everyone by switching speaking roles or adding interactive elements to keep things interesting. 

For in-person meetings, provide snacks and drinks. For remote meetings, suggest having refreshments available and taking breaks as needed.

Checklist for Conducting an Effective Meeting

Before meeting.

• Clearly outline why the meeting is happening and what you aim to achieve
• Set the meeting at a time that suits everyone
• Decide who will lead the meeting, take notes, and handle other tasks
• Request participants to prepare questions or topics they want to discuss beforehand
• Get ready by reviewing the agenda and key points
• Ensure all technical aspects, like video conferencing tools or presentations, are set up and tested
• Create any slides or handouts needed to support the meeting
• Double-check where the meeting will take place or which online platform will be used
• Inform participants about the meeting details

During meeting

• Start the meeting promptly to respect everyone’s time
• Welcome everyone and set a positive tone
• Stick to the plan to keep the meeting focused
• Make sure each topic gets enough time and keep the meeting on track
• Encourage participation from all attendees
• Answer questions as they come up and clarify any doubts
• Appreciate everyone’s contributions and close the meeting on a good note

After meeting

• Distribute any presentation materials and meeting notes if needed
• Ask participants for their thoughts on how the meeting went
• Identify what worked well and what didn’t, and use this feedback to make future meetings better
• Meetings often feel like a drain when they don’t tap into your team’s ideas or skills, and distractions creep in easily. But by checking off these key steps, you can transform meetings from a chore into something your team genuinely looks forward to. When you get these right, your meetings go from “meh” to “let’s go!”

Share this article

You might be interested.

Workplace Experience

All about the flexible workplace: why your team needs a flex schedule and...

Hybrid Work

Comparison of Hybrid & Remote Formats, Their Pros and Cons + Checklis...

What is a hybrid policy and how to make a hybrid policy template in 6 steps

150 Creative Meeting Names and Tips on How to Choose the Best One

Leave a request for a call and we will contact you.

Warning: The NCBI web site requires JavaScript to function. more...

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it's official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Browse Titles

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Committee on the Science of Team Science; Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences; Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education; National Research Council; Cooke NJ, Hilton ML, editors. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2015 Jul 15.

Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science.

• Hardcopy Version at National Academies Press

3 Overview of the Research on Team Effectiveness

This chapter summarizes the research literature on team effectiveness, highlighting findings on the key features that create challenges for team science outlined in Chapter 1 . Based on its review of the literature (e.g., Marks, Mathieu, and Zaccaro, 2001 ; Kozlowski and Ilgen, 2006 ; Salas, Goodwin, and Burke, 2009 ), the committee defines team effectiveness as follows:

Team effectiveness, also referred to as team performance, is a team's capacity to achieve its goals and objectives. This capacity to achieve goals and objectives leads to improved outcomes for the team members (e.g., team member satisfaction and willingness to remain together) as well as outcomes produced or influenced by the team. In a science team or larger group, the outcomes include new research findings or methods and may also include translational applications of the research.

More than half a century of research on team effectiveness ( Kozlowski and Ilgen, 2006) provides a foundation for identifying team process factors that contribute to team effectiveness, as well as actions and interventions that can be used to shape the quality of those processes. As noted in Chapter 1 , this evidence base consists primarily of studies focusing on teams in contexts outside of science, such as the military, business, and health care. These teams share many of the seven features that can create challenges for team science introduced in Chapter 1 . For example, in corporations, top management teams and project teams are often composed of members from diverse corporate functions, and these teams seek to deeply integrate their diverse expertise in order to achieve business goals. Therefore, the committee believes the evidence on teams in other contexts can be translated and applied to improve the effectiveness of science teams and larger groups.

This chapter begins by presenting critical background information—highlighting key considerations for understanding team effectiveness and presenting theoretical models that conceptualize team processes as the primary mechanisms for promoting team effectiveness. The chapter then highlights those team process factors shown to influence team effectiveness ( Kozlowski and Bell, 2003 , 2013 ; Ilgen et al., 2005 ; Kozlowski and Ilgen, 2006 ; Mathieu et al., 2008) , based on well-established research (i.e., meta-analytic findings [see Box 3-1 ] or systematic streams of empirical research). Next, the discussion turns to interventions that can be used to improve team processes and thereby contribute to team effectiveness; these are discussed in greater detail in subsequent chapters. This is followed by a discussion of how this foundational knowledge can inform team science, a description of models of team science and effectiveness, and a discussion of areas in which further research is needed to address the challenges emerging from the seven features outlined in Chapter 1 .

What Is a Meta-Analysis. The foundation of scientific research is based on primary studies that collect data under a given set of conditions (i.e., experiments or field studies) and examine effects on, or relationships among, the observed variables of (more...)

• BACKGROUND: KEY CONSIDERATIONS AND THEORETICAL MODELS AND FRAMEWORKS

Key Considerations

One key consideration regarding team effectiveness is that it is inherently multilevel, composed of individual-, team-, and higher-level influences that unfold over time ( Kozlowski and Klein, 2000 ). This means that, at a minimum, three levels of the system need to be conceptually embraced to understand team effectiveness (i.e., within person over time, individuals within team, and between team or contextual effects; Kozlowski, 2012) . Broader systems that encompass the organization, multiple teams, or networks are obviously even more complex. Moreover, individual scientists may be part of multiple research projects spread across many unique teams and thus are “partially included” in their teams ( Allport, 1932) . As noted in Chapter 1 , a recent study suggests that scientists' level of participation (i.e., inclusion) in a team is related to team performance, with higher participation related to increased performance ( Cummings and Haas, 2012) .

A second critical consideration for understanding, managing, and improving team effectiveness is the degree of complexity of the workflow structure of the team task ( Steiner, 1972) . In simple structures, team members' individual contributions are pooled together or constructed in a fixed serial sequence. For example, in a multidisciplinary team, members trained in different disciplines combine their expertise in an additive way. Complex structures incorporate the integration of knowledge and tasks through collaboration and feedback links, making the quality of team member interaction more important to team effectiveness.

A final key consideration is the dynamic interactions and evolution of the team over time. According to Kozlowski and Klein (2000 , p. 55):

A phenomenon is emergent when it originates in the cognition, affect, behaviors, or other characteristics of individuals, is amplified by their interactions, and manifests as a higher-level, collective phenomenon.

In other words, emergent phenomena arise from interactions and exchange among individuals over time to yield team-level characteristics. Emergent phenomena unfold over time as part of the team development process. Time is also pertinent with respect to how teams themselves evolve. For example, Cash et al. (2003) reported on the evolution of a transdisciplinary group focused on developing improved varieties of wheat and corn. The authors reported that a strictly sequential approach—in which scientists first developed new crops in the laboratory or field and then later handed them over to native farmers—did not lead to widespread use of the new crops. However, when the native farmers were brought into the research at an earlier point in time, as valued participants and partners with the scientists, the group produced new crops that were widely used. Relatedly, teams have different time frames for interaction (i.e., their life cycle or longevity), and this too will alter the emergent dynamics (e.g., Kozlowski et al., 1999 ; Kozlowski and Klein, 2000 ; Marks, Mathieu, and Zaccaro, 2001 ).

Theoretical Models and Frameworks

Most of the research on team effectiveness has been substantially influenced by the input-process-output (IPO) heuristic posed by McGrath (1964) . Inputs comprise (a) the collection of individual differences across team members that determine team composition; (b) team design characteristics (e.g., information, resources); and (c) the nature of the problem that is the focus of the team's work activity. Processes comprise the means by which team members' cognition, motivation, affect, and behavior enable (or inhibit) members to combine their resources to meet task demands.

Although team processes are conceptually dynamic, researchers generally assess them at a single point in time. Hence, they are often represented in the research literature by static perceptions or emergent states ( Marks, Mathieu, and Zaccaro, 2001 ). More recently, team processes have been represented by dynamic or sequential patterns of communications ( Gorman, Amazeen, and Cooke, 2010 ) or actions ( Kozlowski, in press ). In this report, the committee uses the term “team processes” to refer to both dynamic team processes (e.g., communication patterns) and the emergent perceptual states that result from these processes (e.g., cohesion).

Contemporary theories of team effectiveness build on the IPO heuristic but are more explicit regarding its inherent dynamics. For example, Kozlowski et al. (1996 , 1999 ) and Marks, Mathieu, and Zaccaro (2001) emphasized the cyclical and episodic nature of the IPO linkages. Similarly, Ilgen et al. (2005) and Mathieu et al. (2008) are explicit about the feedback loop linking team outputs and subsequent inputs. Accordingly, various authors have urged more attention to team dynamics in research (e.g., Cronin, Weingart, and Todorova, 2011 ; Cooke et al., 2013) and advances in research design ( Kozlowski et al., 2013 ; Kozlowski, in press ) to better capture these dynamics and more clearly specify the relationships between variables. Moving from broad heuristics to more well-defined theoretical models would benefit the field.

In their monograph, Kozlowski and Ilgen (2006) adopted the dynamic IPO conceptualization and focused on those team processes with well-established, empirically supported contributions to team effectiveness. They then considered actions and interventions in three aspects of a team—composition, training, and leadership—that shape team processes and thus can be used to enhance team effectiveness (as shown in the shaded areas of Figure 3-1 ). Given the preponderance of literature that follows the IPO conceptualization, we emulate that approach in this chapter.

Theoretical framework and review focus. SOURCE: Reproduced from Kozlowski and Ilgen (2006). Reprinted with permission.

• TEAM PROCESSES: THE UNDERPINNINGS OF TEAM EFFECTIVENESS

Team processes are the means by which team members marshal and coordinate their individual resources—cognitive, affective, and behavioral—to meet task demands necessary for collective goal accomplishment. When a team's cognitive, motivational, and behavioral resources are appropriately aligned with task demands, the team is effective. Thus, team processes are the primary leverage point for enhancing team effectiveness. The committee's review in this section examines team cognitive, motivational and affective, and behavioral processes, discussed below.

Cognitive Team Processes

Teams have been characterized as information processing systems ( Hinsz, Tindale, and Vollrath, 1997 ) such that their collective cognition drives task-relevant interactions. Here we discuss several cognitive and perceptual processes that are related to team effectiveness: team mental models and transactive memory, cognitive team interaction, team climate, and psychological safety.

Team Mental Models and Transactive Memory

Team mental models are conceptualized as shared understandings about “task requirements, procedures, and role responsibilities” that guide team performance ( Cannon-Bowers, Salas, and Converse, 1993 , p. 222). Whereas team mental models represent common understandings, transactive memory captures the distribution of unique knowledge across team members ( Wegner, Giuliano, and Hertel, 1985 ), especially their shared understanding of “who knows what” such that they can access and direct relevant knowledge ( Liang, Moreland, and Argote, 1995 ; Austin, 2003 ; Lewis, 2003 , 2004 ; Lewis, Lange, and Gillis, 2005 ; Lewis et al., 2007) . Meta-analytic findings indicate that both processes are positively related to team processes (ρ = .43) and team performance (i.e., effectiveness) (ρ = .38) ( DeChurch and Mesmer-Magnus, 2010) .

Studies of science teams and larger groups have also found that shared mental models enhance team effectiveness. To cite just a few examples, a study of research and development teams in India ( Misra, 2011) found that shared mental models were positively related to team creativity. A study focusing on larger groups of European scientists participating in interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary environmental research found that those groups whose members developed a shared understanding of the research goals were much more likely to succeed in synthesizing their perspectives to achieve those goals than those who did not develop shared understandings ( Defila, DiGiulio, and Scheuermann, 2006 ). In a recent qualitative study of the National Cancer Institute's Transdisciplinary Research on Energetics and Cancer Center, investigators and trainees reported that articulating concrete shared goals (through grant applications, for example) and investing time and effort in developing mutual understanding were essential to successfully carrying out their research projects ( Vogel et al., 2014) .

Both team mental models and transactive memory have the potential to be shaped in ways that enhance team effectiveness. For example, a number of studies demonstrate that mental models can be influenced by training, leadership, shared or common experiences, and contextual conditions ( Cannon-Bowers, 2007 ; see also Kozlowski and Bell, 2003 , 2013 ; Kozlowski and Ilgen, 2006 ; Mathieu et al., 2008 ; Mohammed, Ferzandi, and Hamilton, 2010 , for reviews). Similarly, transactive memory systems are formed through shared experiences in working together and training ( Bell et al., 2011 ; see also Blickensderfer, Cannon-Bowers, and Salas, 1997 ; Kozlowski and Bell, 2003 , 2013 ; Kozlowski and Ilgen, 2006 ; Mathieu et al., 2008 ; Mohammed, Ferzandi, and Hamilton, 2010 , for reviews). Accordingly, it is often recommended that training be designed to foster development of appropriate team mental models and transactive memory systems and that leaders shape early team developmental experiences to build shared mental models and transactive memory ( Kozlowski and Ilgen, 2006) .

Cognitive Team Interaction

Team mental models and transactive memory focus on cognitive structure or knowledge and how that knowledge is shared or distributed among team members. Although knowledge certainly contributes to team cognition, it is not equivalent to team-level cognitive processing. Teams often actively engage in cognitive processes, such as decision making, problem solving, situation assessment, planning, and knowledge sharing ( Brannick et al., 1995 ; Letsky et al., 2008) . The interdependence of team members necessitates cognitive interaction or coordination, often manifested through communication, the essential building block of team cognition ( Cooke et al., 2013) . These interactions facilitate information and knowledge sharing processes that are foundational to decision making, problem solving, and the other collaborative cognitive processes mentioned above ( Fiore et al., 2010a) .

The theory of interactive team cognition proposes that team interaction, often in the form of explicit communication, is at the heart of team cognition and in many cases accounts more than knowledge inputs for variance in team effectiveness ( Cooke et al., 2013) . In addition, unlike internalized knowledge states, team interaction in the form of communication is readily observable and can be examined over time, thus providing ready access to the temporal dynamics involved ( Cooke, Gorman, and Kiekel, 2008 ; Gorman, Amazeen, and Cooke, 2010 ).

Another approach to team cognition, focused more on the development of shared problem models, is the macrocognition in teams model ( Fiore et al., 2010b) . This model is based upon a multidisciplinary theoretical integration that captures the cognitive processes engaged when teams collaboratively solve novel and complex problems. It draws from theories of externalized cognition, team cognition, group communication and problem solving, and collaborative learning ( Fiore et al., 2010a) . It focuses on team processes supporting movement between internalization and externalization of cognition as teams build knowledge in service of problem solving. Recently the model has been examined in complex contexts such as problem solving for mission control, in which scientists and engineers were required to collaborate to understand and solve problems on the International Space Station (Fiore et al., 2014).

As with other interpersonal processes, interventions can improve cognitive interaction and ultimately team effectiveness. Training that exposes teams to different ways of interacting ( Gorman, Cooke, and Amazeen, 2010 ), as well as team composition changes ( Fouse et al., 2011 ; Gorman and Cooke, 2011) , have been found to lead to more adaptive and flexible teams. Similarly, training or professional development designed to support knowledge-building activities has been shown to enhance collaborative problem solving and decision making, leading to improved effectiveness ( Rentsch et al., 2010 , 2014 ). These and other professional development approaches are discussed in more detail in Chapter 5 .

Science teams and larger groups, like teams in general, are interdependent and require interaction to build new knowledge. They need to manage a range of technological and social factors to coordinate their tasks and goals effectively. Salazar et al. (2012) have proposed a model of team science, discussed later in this chapter, in which social integration processes support cognitive integration processes. These processes can help foster deep knowledge integration in science teams or larger groups.

Many of the features that create challenges for team science described in Chapter 1 introduce challenges to cognitive interaction, and, therefore, interventions that bolster cognitive interaction, such as professional development or training to expose teams to different ways of interacting, may be particularly helpful for science teams.

Team Climate

Climate represents shared perceptions about the strategic imperatives that guide the orientation and actions of team or group members ( Schneider and Reichers, 1983 ; Kozlowski and Hults, 1987) . It is always shaped by a particular team or organizational strategy. For example, if a team's goal is to innovate, then the team may have a climate of innovation ( Anderson and West, 1998) ; if the goal is to provide high-quality service, then the team may have a service climate ( Schneider, Wheeler, and Cox, 1992 ); if safety is critical for team or organizational success, then the team or the larger organization may have a safety climate ( Zohar, 2000) .

Climate has been studied for more than seven decades, and the relationship of climate to important work outcomes is well established (e.g., Carr et al., 2003 ; Zohar and Hofmann, 2012 ; Schneider and Barbera, 2013) .

Several types of interventions can shape team or group climate. For example, organizations communicate strategic imperatives through policies, practices, and procedures that define the mission, goals, and tasks for teams and larger groups within the organization ( James and Jones, 1974) . Team leaders shape climate through what they communicate to their teams from higher levels of management and what they emphasize to their team members ( Kozlowski and Doherty, 1989 ; Zohar, 2000 , 2002 ; Zohar and Luria, 2004 ; Schaubroeck et al., 2012) . And team members interact, share their interpretations, and develop shared understandings of what is important in their setting (Rentsch, 1990).

Psychological Safety

Psychological safety is a shared perception among team members indicative of an interpersonal climate that supports risk taking and learning ( Edmondson, 1999) . The research on psychological safety has been focused primarily on its role in promoting effective error management and learning behaviors in teams ( Bell and Kozlowski, 2011 ; Bell et al., 2011) . Learning from errors (i.e., to identify, reflect, and diagnose them and develop appropriate solutions) is particularly important in science as well as in other teams charged with innovation ( Edmondson and Nembhard, 2009) , and therefore, fostering psychological safety may be uniquely valuable for science teams and larger groups. Although research on this process has not yet been summarized in a published meta-analysis, support for its importance is provided by a systematic stream of theory and research (e.g., Edmondson, 1996 , 1999 , 2002 , 2003 ; Edmondson, Bohmer, and Pisano, 2001 ; Edmondson, Dillon, and Roloff, 2007 ).

Research on psychological safety has focused on the role of team leaders in coaching, reducing power differentials, and fostering inclusion to facilitate psychological safety, so that team members feel comfortable discussing and learning from errors and developing innovative solutions (e.g., Edmondson, Bohmer, and Pisano, 2001 ; Edmondson, 2003 ; Nembhard and Edmondson, 2006) . Hall et al. (2012a) proposed that creating an environment of psychological safety is critical to lay the groundwork for effective transdisciplinary collaboration. Thus, the research base suggests that appropriate team leadership is a promising way to promote psychological safety, learning, and innovation in science teams and larger groups.

Motivational and Affective Team Processes

Key factors that capture motivational team processes—team cohesion, team efficacy, and team conflict—have well-established relations with team effectiveness.

Team Cohesion

Team cohesion—defined by Festinger (1950 , p. 274) to be “the resultant of all the forces acting on the members to remain in the group”—is among the most frequently studied team processes. It is multidimensional, with facets focused on task commitment, social relations, and group pride, although this latter facet has received far less research attention ( Beal et al., 2003) . Our primary focus is on team task and social cohesion because that is where most of the supporting research is centered.

There have been multiple meta-analyses of team cohesion, with two of the more recent ones ( Gully, Devine, and Whitney, 1995 ; Beal et al., 2003) being the most thorough and rigorous. Both papers concluded that team cohesion is positively related to team effectiveness and that the relationship is moderated by task interdependence such that the cohesion-effectiveness relationship is stronger when team members are more interdependent. For example, Gully et al. (1995) reported that the corrected effect size (ρ) for cohesion and performance was .20 when interdependence was low, but .46 when task interdependence was high. Because high task interdependence is one of the features that creates challenges for team science, fostering cohesion may be particularly valuable for enhancing effectiveness in science teams and larger groups.

Remarkably, although team cohesion has been studied for more than 60 years, very little of the research has focused on antecedents to its development or interventions to foster it. Theory suggests that team composition factors (e.g., personality, demographics; see Chapter 4 ) and developmental efforts by team leaders (e.g., Kozlowski et al., 1996 , 2009 ) are likely to play an important role in its formation and maintenance.

Team Efficacy

At the individual level, research has established the important contribution of self-efficacy perceptions to goal accomplishment ( Stajkovic and Luthans, 1998) . Generalized to the team or organizational level, similar, shared perceptions are referred to as team efficacy ( Bandura, 1977) . Team efficacy influences the difficulty of goals a team sets or accepts, effort directed toward goal accomplishment, and persistence in the face of difficulties and challenges. The contribution of team efficacy to team performance is well established (ρ = .41) ( Gully et al., 2002) , across a wide variety of team types and work settings ( Kozlowski and Ilgen, 2006) . As with team cohesion, Gully et al. (2002) reported that team efficacy is more strongly related to team performance when team members are more interdependent (ρ = .09 when interdependence is low, and ρ = .47 when interdependence is high).

Antecedents of team efficacy have not received a great deal of research attention. However, findings about self-efficacy antecedents at the individual level can be extrapolated to the team level. These antecedents include individual differences in goal orientation (i.e., learning, performance, and avoidance orientation; Dweck, 1986 ; VandeWalle, 1997) and experiences such as enactive mastery, vicarious observation, and verbal persuasion ( Bandura, 1977) . To develop team efficacy, leaders may consider goal orientation characteristics when selecting team members, but these characteristics can also be primed (i.e., encouraged) by leaders. Similarly, leaders can create mastery experiences, provide opportunities for team members to observe others succeeding, and persuade a team that it is efficacious (see Kozlowski and Ilgen, 2006 , for a review).

Team Conflict

Team or group conflict is a multidimensional construct with facets of relationship, task, and process conflict:

Relationship conflicts involve disagreements among group members about interpersonal issues, such as personality differences or differences in norms and values. Task conflicts entail disagreements among group members about the content and outcomes of the task being performed, whereas process conflicts are disagreements among group members about the logistics of task accomplishment, such as the delegation of tasks and responsibilities ( de Wit, Greer, and Jehn, 2012 , p. 360).

Although conflict is generally viewed as divisive, early work in this area concluded that although relationship and process conflict were negative factors for team performance, task conflict could be helpful for information sharing and problem solving provided it did not spill over to prompt relationship conflict (e.g., Jehn, 1995 , 1997 ). However, a meta-analysis by De Dreu and Weingart (2003) found that relationship and task conflict were both negatively related to team performance. A more recent meta-analysis ( de Wit, Greer, and Jehn, 2012 ) has shown that the relationships are more nuanced. For example, all three types of conflict had deleterious associations with a variety of group factors including trust, satisfaction, organizational citizenship, and commitment. In addition, relationship and process conflict had negative associations with cohesion and team performance, although the task conflict association with these factors was nil. Thus, this more recent meta-analysis suggests that task conflict may not be a negative factor under some circumstances, but the issue is complex.

Group composition that yields demographic diversity and group faultlines or fractures is associated with team conflict ( Thatcher and Patel, 2011) . Because diverse membership is one of the features that creates challenges for team science introduced in Chapter 1 , science teams and groups can anticipate the potential for conflict. Many scholars suggest that teams and groups should be prepared to manage conflict when it manifests as a destructive and counterproductive force. Two conflict management strategies can be distinguished ( Marks, Mathieu, and Zaccaro, 2001 )—reactive (i.e., working through disagreements via problem solving, compromise, and flexibility) or preemptive (i.e., anticipating and guiding conflict in advance via cooperative norms, charters, or other structures to shape conflict processes) ( Kozlowski and Bell, 2013 ).

Team Behavioral Processes

Ultimately, team members have to act to combine their intellectual resources and effort. Researchers have sought to measure the combined behaviors of the team members, or team behavioral processes, in several ways, including by looking at team process competencies and team self-regulation.

Team Process Competencies

One line of research in this area focuses on the underpinnings of good teamwork based on individual competencies (i.e., knowledge and skill) relevant to working well with others. For example, Stevens and Campion (1994) developed a typology of individual teamwork competencies with two primary dimensions (interpersonal knowledge and self-management knowledge) that are each assessed with a set of more specific subdimensions. Based on this typology, they also developed an assessment tool, although empirical evaluations of this tool have yielded somewhat mixed results ( Stevens and Campion, 1999) .

Others have focused on behavioral processes at the team level. Integrating many years of effort, Marks, Mathieu, and Zaccaro (2001) developed a taxonomy of team behavioral processes focusing on three temporal phases: (1) transition, which involves preparation (e.g., mission, goals, strategy) before task engagement and reflection (e.g., diagnosis, improvement) after; (2) action, which involves active task engagement (e.g., monitoring progress, coordination); and (3) interpersonal processes (e.g., conflict management, motivation), which are viewed as always important.

A recent analysis by LePine and colleagues (2008) extended the Marks, Mathieu, and Zaccaro (2001) taxonomy to a hierarchical model that conceptualized the discrete behavioral processes as first-order factors loading onto second-order transition, action, and interpersonal factors, which are then loaded onto a third-order, overarching team process factor. Their meta-analytic confirmatory factor analysis found that the first- and second-order processes were positively related to team performance (mostly in the range of ρ = .25 to in excess of .30.).

Team Self-Regulation

For teams focused on reasonably well-specified goals, team processes and performance can be related to the team's motivation and self-regulation, similar to models of the relationship between motivation and performance at the individual level. Feelings of individual and team self-efficacy, discussed above ( Gully et al., 2002) , are jointly part of a multilevel dynamic motivational system of team self-regulation. Team self-regulation affects how team members allocate their resources to perform tasks and adapt as necessary to accomplish goals ( DeShon et al., 2004 ; Chen, Thomas, and Wallace, 2005 ; Chen et al., 2009) . In addition, there is meta-analytic support for the efficacy of group goals for group performance ( O'Leary-Kelly, Martocchio, and Frink, 1994 ; Kleingeld, van Mierlo, and Arends, 2011 ).

Finally, there is meta-analytic support ( Pritchard et al., 2008) for the effectiveness of an intervention designed to increase team regulation by measuring performance and providing structured feedback—the Productivity Measurement and Enhancement System (ProMES; Pritchard et al., 1988) . On average and relative to baseline, productivity under ProMES increased 1.16 standard deviations.

Measuring Team Processes

To assess team processes and intervene to improve them, team processes must be measured. Team process factors such as making a contribution to the team's work, keeping the team on track, and appropriately interacting with teammates have traditionally been measured through self or peer reports of team members ( Loughry, Ohland, and Moore, 2007 ; Ohland et al., 2012) .

Instruments relying on behavioral observation scales and ratings of trained judges have also been used to measure processes associated with collaborative problem solving and conflict resolution as well as self-management processes such as planning and task coordination ( Taggar and Brown, 2001) . Brannick et al. (1995) evaluated judges' ratings of processes of assertiveness, decision making/mission analysis, adaptability/flexibility, situation awareness, leadership, and communication. The ratings were found to be psychometrically sound and with reasonable discriminant validity, though the importance of task context was also noted: that is, process needs to be assessed in relation to the ongoing task. “Team dimensional training” was developed to measure a set of core team processes of action teams (e.g., Smith-Jentsch et al., 1998) and has since been validated in numerous settings (e.g., Smith-Jentsch et al., 2008) . Another approach that provides for context is the use of checklists of specific processes that are targeted for observation ( Fowlkes et al., 1994) .

Researchers have measured cognitive processes somewhat differently, relying typically on indirect knowledge elicitation methods such as card sorting to identify team mental models ( Mohammed, Klimoski, and Rentsch, 2000 ) and assess their accuracy (e.g., Smith-Jentsch et al., 2009) . In addition, concept maps corresponding to team member mental models have been developed by instructing participants to directly create them (e.g., Marks, Zaccaro, and Mathieu, 2000 ; Mathieu et al., 2000) or by indirectly creating them through similarity ratings of pairs of concepts analyzed using graphical techniques such as Pathfinder ( Schvaneveldt, 1990) . Transactive memory systems focusing on team members' knowledge of what each member knows have been measured both via self-assessment ( Lewis, 2003) and via communications coding ( Hollingshead, 1998 ; Ellis, 2006) . Cooke et al. (2000) reviewed different measurement approaches for measuring team mental models (including process tracing and conceptual methods), pointing out challenges related to knowledge similarity for heterogeneous team members and methods of aggregation.

Recent work in this area has focused on developing measures that are unobtrusive to the teamwork and can capture its complex dynamics (e.g., videorecording, team work simulations, and sociometric badges; Kozlowski, in press ). Communication data, for example, can be captured with relatively little interference and provide a continuous record of team interaction ( Cooke, Gorman, and Kiekel, 2008 ; Cooke and Gorman, 2009) . This research has identified changes in patterns of simple communication flow (who talks to whom) that are associated with changes in the state of the team (such as loss of situation awareness or conflict). These continuous methods provide a rich view of team process, not captured by static snapshots in time.

• INTERVENTIONS THAT SHAPE TEAM PROCESSES AND EFFECTIVENESS

Table 3-1 identifies actions and interventions that have been found to influence team processes related to three aspects of a team—its composition, professional development, and leadership. This section and the associated three chapters that follow provide detail on each of these three aspects.

Team Processes Related to Team Effectiveness: Interventions and Support.

Team Composition: Individual Inputs to Shape Team Processes

Team composition results from the process of assembling a combination of team members with the expertise, knowledge, and skills necessary for accomplishing team goals and tasks. At the individual level, the logic of staffing is based on selecting individuals with knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics that fit job requirements. At the team level, staffing is more complex because one is composing a combination of members who must collaborate well, not merely matching each person to a well-defined job ( Klimoski and Jones, 1995) . Chapter 4 takes a detailed look at how team composition and assembly are related to team processes and effectiveness.

Professional Development to Shape Team Processes

Once a team has been assembled, its effectiveness can be facilitated by formal professional development programs (in the research literature, these are referred to as training programs). Although much of the research on team training has focused on programs developed for military teams ( Swezey and Salas, 1992 ; Cannon-Bowers and Salas, 1998 ), these teams face many of the same process challenges as science teams and groups, resulting from features, such as high diversity of membership, geographic distribution, and deep knowledge integration. Further evidence supporting training as an intervention to facilitate positive team processes is reviewed in Chapter 5 , along with discussion of educational programs dedicated to preparing individuals for future participation in team science.

Leadership to Shape Team Processes

Research has shown the influence of leadership on team and organizational effectiveness. Most of this research, however, focuses on the leader, rather than the team, and measures the effectiveness of the leader based on individual perceptions rather than measuring team effectiveness. The leadership literature is also rich with theories of leadership, some of which seem particularly relevant for science teams and larger groups. There is also promising new work on the concept of shared leadership by all team members. Moreover, recent meta-analytic findings provide support for the positive relationship between shared leadership and team effectiveness (42 samples, ρ = .34; Wang, Waldman, and Zhang, 2014 ), suggesting that it may be a useful concept for science teams. Team science leadership is discussed further in Chapter 6 .

• CONNECTING THE LITERATURE TO TEAM SCIENCE

New Models of Team Science

Researchers have developed and begun to study models of team science and effectiveness. Moving beyond traditional models of group development, such as Tuckman's (1965) phases of storming, norming, forming, and performing, these models incorporate elements specific to science teams and larger groups, such as deep knowledge in interdisciplinary teams, to meet scientific and societal goals. They provide different windows into team science and serve different purposes with respect to team science practice and policy. For instance, Hall et al. (2012b) proposed a model that serves as a heuristic for considering the broad research process. The model delineates four dynamic and recursive phases: development, conceptualization, implementation, and translation (see Box 3-2 ). Key team and group processes from the literature on teams and organizations are then linked to each of four phases. One of the unique contributions of this model is to highlight the breadth of collaborative and intellectual work that can be done in the early stages of developing a team science research project. Currently, such work in the development phase is often carried out hastily because of resource constraints. This part of the model helps to highlight the need for planning, institutional support, and funding specifically for the development phase. Overall, the model emphasizes key team and larger group processes that may, across the four phases, increase the comprehensiveness and sophistication of the science and effectiveness of the collaboration.

Two Models of Team Science. In the first model, Hall et al. (2012b) proposed that transdisciplinary team science includes four phases: development, conceptualization, implementation, and translation: In the development phase, the primary goal is to define (more...)

In contrast, Salazar et al. (2012) presented a model that specifically focuses on enhancing a team's integrative capacity through the interplay of social, psychological, and cognitive processes (see Box 3-2 ). Hadorn and Pohl (2007) presented a model of the transdisciplinary research process that discusses elements of both research and integration processes. The three phases of the model include (1) problem identification and structuring, (2) problem analysis, and (3) bringing results to fruition. This model is specifically designed for incorporating the community perspective (i.e., via “real-world actors”) and includes strategies linked to these phases. It draws heavily on a European perspective of transdisciplinarity, science policy, and sustainability research. Reid et al. (2009) and Cash et al. (2003) also discussed models of engaging and integrating knowledge from community stakeholders for sustainability. For instance, Cash et al. (2003) identified key mechanisms for information exchange, transfer, and flow that facilitate communication, translation, and mediation across boundaries in transdisciplinary team science projects.

Existing models of team science have primarily focused on specific aspects of research and knowledge integration processes, but work has recently begun on a team science systems map project that would provide a broader, holistic understanding of the system of factors involved in the context, processes, and outcomes of team science ( Hall et al., 2014 a). Such a map would aid in identifying possible leverage points for interventions to maximize effectiveness, as well as areas where further research is needed.

Features That Create Challenges for Team Science and Team Processes

Most of the key features that create challenges for science teams and larger groups have direct impacts on team processes:

• As noted by Hall et al. (2012b) and Salazar et al. (2012) , science teams or larger groups with high diversity of membership (feature #1) face challenges particularly in the area of team process. Communication across scientific disciplines or university boundaries, for instance, may prove difficult.
• Deep knowledge integration (feature #2) is required to achieve the objectives of interdisciplinary or transdisciplinary team science projects, yet also points to team process as a central mechanism for effectiveness. Strategies and interventions to foster positive team processes (described more fully in Chapters 4 , 5 , and 6 ) are critical for effective collaboration within science teams and larger groups that have diverse membership and seek to foster deep knowledge integration.
• The research on how team process influences effectiveness described in this chapter has primarily been based on relatively small teams of 10 or less, as few researchers have attempted to conduct empirical team research on larger groups (feature #3). As noted in Chapter 1 , most science teams include 10 or fewer members, suggesting that the findings in this chapter are relevant to science teams. Although it is unclear whether the findings scale to larger groups, the committee assumes that increasing size poses a challenge to group processes and ultimately group effectiveness.
• Large science groups composed of subteams that may be misaligned with other subteams (feature #4), as well as teams or groups of any size with permeable boundaries (feature #5), may also be less cohesive than other teams or groups. When team or group membership changes to meet the changing goals of different phases of a transdisciplinary research project, leaders need to make renewed efforts to develop shared understandings of the project goals and individual roles ( Hall et al., 2012b) . Such efforts, along with other leadership strategies described in Chapter 6 , can help to address these features.
• Geographic dispersion (feature #6) limits face-to-face interaction and development of transactive memory and thereby places a toll on cognitive interaction in a team or group. Some ways to address this particular challenge are described in Chapter 7 .
• High task interdependence (feature #7) is often exaggerated in science teams or groups because of the complex demands of scientific research that may involve sharing highly sophisticated technology or carrying out tasks with experts from a different discipline. Increasing task interdependence creates increasing demand for such team processes as shared mental models (shared understanding of research goals and member roles) and transactive memory (knowledge of each team members' expertise relevant to the research goals).

The seven features create challenges through the processes in which science teams engage. The features of diversity, large size, permeable boundaries, and geographic dispersion push team or group members apart, impacting cohesion and conflict and generally challenging cognitive interaction. On the other hand, features such as the need for deep knowledge integration in interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary team or groups and high task interdependence demand enhanced team processes. Thus these features demand high-quality team processes while also posing barriers that thwart them, creating a team process tension.

• SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

Based on its review of the robust research on teams in contexts outside of science and the emerging research on team science, the committee concludes that team processes (such as shared understanding of goals and team member roles, team cohesion, and conflict) are related to effectiveness in science teams and larger groups, and that these processes can be influenced. The committee assumes that research-based actions and interventions developed to positively influence these processes and thereby increase effectiveness in contexts outside of science can be extended and translated to similarly increase the effectiveness of science teams and larger groups. Actions and interventions targeting team composition, team leadership, and team professional development are discussed further in the following chapters.

CONCLUSION. A strong body of research conducted over several decades has demonstrated that team processes (e.g., shared understanding of team goals and member roles, conflict) are related to team effectiveness. Actions and interventions that foster positive team processes offer the most promising route to enhance team effectiveness; they target three aspects of a team: team composition (assembling the right individuals), team professional development, and team leadership .

• Cite this Page Committee on the Science of Team Science; Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences; Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education; National Research Council; Cooke NJ, Hilton ML, editors. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2015 Jul 15. 3, Overview of the Research on Team Effectiveness.
• PDF version of this title (2.1M)

In this Page

Recent activity.

• Overview of the Research on Team Effectiveness - Enhancing the Effectiveness of ... Overview of the Research on Team Effectiveness - Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Connect with NLM

National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894

Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

Help Accessibility Careers

Search suggestions update instantly to match the search query.

Single-use plastic bans: research shows three ways to make them effective

How to make England’s new ban a success.

13 January 2023

Governments around the world are introducing single-use plastic product bans to alleviate pollution.

Zimbabwe banned plastic packaging and bottles as early  as 2010 . Antigua and Barbuda banned  single-use catering and takeaway items  in 2016, and the Pacific island of Vanuatu did the same for  disposable containers in 2018 .

The EU prohibited cotton buds, balloon sticks,  plastic catering items and takeaway containers , including those made from expanded polystyrene,  in 2021 .

The UK government has followed suit by announcing a ban on the supply of single-use plastic plates, cutlery, balloon sticks, and polystyrene cups and containers supplied to restaurants, cafes and takeaways in England. The measure will start in April 2023. The same products sold in supermarkets and shops will be exempt from the ban, but subject to new regulations expected in 2024.

While the forthcoming ban is a step in the right direction, the production, use and disposal of plastics typically spans several countries and continents. The success of any policy aimed at restricting the use of plastic products in one country should not be taken for granted.

Our research continues to highlight that policies which influence what consumers buy, such as bans, taxes or charges, lack the reach to confront  the global scale of pollution . The effect of banning single-use plastic items is limited to the jurisdiction in which it is implemented, unless it inspires a wider shift in public or commercial behaviour across international boundaries.

Without supporting measures, or by failing to treat the ban as the beginning of a broader phase-down of plastic, banning some items does little to change the attitudes which reinforce a  throwaway culture .

The  Global Plastics Policy Centre  of the University of Portsmouth  reviewed 100 policies  aimed at tackling plastic pollution worldwide in 2022 to understand what makes them successful. Here are three key lessons which can make the new English ban more effective.

1. Make it easy to use alternatives

Consumers and businesses are less likely to comply with a ban if they are expected to go entirely without plastic overnight. Ensuring businesses can source affordable alternatives is critical. Antigua and Barbuda did this by investing in the research of more sustainable materials and listing approved alternatives to plastic, such as  bagasse , a byproduct of sugar-cane processing.

To maintain public support, it helps if there are measures which prevent cost hikes being passed directly on to consumers.

Alternative materials or products must have a lower environmental impact than the banned product, but this isn’t always guaranteed. Substituting plastic bags for paper, for example, may not be the best idea when the entire life cycle of a  product  is accounted for.

2. Phase in a ban

A phased approach to a ban improves how well it works but requires consistent and clear messaging about what products are banned and when. In Antigua and Barbuda, phased plastic bag bans in 2016 and 2017 generated  support for banning other plastic products  between 2017 and 2018.

In both cases, importing these products was restricted first, followed by a ban on distributing them, which gave suppliers time to find alternatives and use up existing stock.

This approach was used to good effect in an English ban on plastic straws, cotton buds and stirrers in 2020, allowing retailers to use up their supplies during the  six months  following the ban’s introduction.

3. Involve the public

Information campaigns which explain why a ban is needed, what it means for the public and businesses and what alternatives are available serve to support a ban. This was evident from Vanuatu, where the inclusion of diapers in a ban was  postponed  due to public concerns around the availability of sustainable alternatives.

Working closely with the public like this can also encourage innovation. For example, in Vanuatu in 2018, weavers and  crafting communities  filled the gap left by banned plastic bags and polystyrene takeaway containers with natural alternatives made locally, including bags and food containers woven from palm leaves.

Single-use plastic bans can inspire wider changes to social systems and the relationship each person has with plastic. But without planned access to alternatives, a phased introduction, efforts to nurture public support and broader consideration of the entire life cycle of plastic, product bans have a limited effect on plastic pollution, and can even give the false impression of progress.

Steve Fletcher  is a Professor of Ocean Policy and Economy at the  School of the Environment and Life Science  in the  Faculty of Science and Health , and Director of the  Sustainability and the Environment Research Theme .

Antaya March  is Senior Research Associate in  School of the Environment and Life Sciences  in the  Faculty of Science & Health .

Tegan Evans is a PhD candidate and a research assistant with Revolution Plastic .

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons Licence.  Read the original article .

More The Conversation Articles...

The Conversation is an independent source of news analysis and informed comment written by academic experts, working with professional journalists who help share their knowledge with the world.

How marine fisheries can add millions of tonnes to Africa’s catch

30 June 2022

Why the UK needs to stop exporting plastic waste

Steve Fletcher

25 November 2022

Plastic waste treaty: expert Q&A on the promise of a global agreement to reduce pollution

7 March 2022

The University of Chicago The Law School

Innovation clinic—significant achievements for 2023-24.

The Innovation Clinic continued its track record of success during the 2023-2024 school year, facing unprecedented demand for our pro bono services as our reputation for providing high caliber transactional and regulatory representation spread. The overwhelming number of assistance requests we received from the University of Chicago, City of Chicago, and even national startup and venture capital communities enabled our students to cherry-pick the most interesting, pedagogically valuable assignments offered to them. Our focus on serving startups, rather than all small- to medium-sized businesses, and our specialization in the needs and considerations that these companies have, which differ substantially from the needs of more traditional small businesses, has proven to be a strong differentiator for the program both in terms of business development and prospective and current student interest, as has our further focus on tackling idiosyncratic, complex regulatory challenges for first-of-their kind startups. We are also beginning to enjoy more long-term relationships with clients who repeatedly engage us for multiple projects over the course of a year or more as their legal needs develop.

This year’s twelve students completed over twenty projects and represented clients in a very broad range of industries: mental health and wellbeing, content creation, medical education, biotech and drug discovery, chemistry, food and beverage, art, personal finance, renewable energy, fintech, consumer products and services, artificial intelligence (“AI”), and others. The matters that the students handled gave them an unparalleled view into the emerging companies and venture capital space, at a level of complexity and agency that most junior lawyers will not experience until several years into their careers.

Representative Engagements

While the Innovation Clinic’s engagements are highly confidential and cannot be described in detail, a high-level description of a representative sample of projects undertaken by the Innovation Clinic this year includes:

Transactional/Commercial Work

• A previous client developing a symptom-tracking wellness app for chronic disease sufferers engaged the Innovation Clinic again, this time to restructure its cap table by moving one founder’s interest in the company to a foreign holding company and subjecting the holding company to appropriate protections in favor of the startup.
• Another client with whom the Innovation Clinic had already worked several times engaged us for several new projects, including (1) restructuring their cap table and issuing equity to an additional, new founder, (2) drafting several different forms of license agreements that the company could use when generating content for the platform, covering situations in which the company would license existing content from other providers, jointly develop new content together with contractors or specialists that would then be jointly owned by all creators, or commission contractors to make content solely owned by the company, (3) drafting simple agreements for future equity (“Safes”) for the company to use in its seed stage fundraising round, and (4) drafting terms of service and a privacy policy for the platform.
• Yet another repeat client, an internet platform that supports independent artists by creating short films featuring the artists to promote their work and facilitates sales of the artists’ art through its platform, retained us this year to draft a form of independent contractor agreement that could be used when the company hires artists to be featured in content that the company’s Fortune 500 brand partners commission from the company, and to create capsule art collections that could be sold by these Fortune 500 brand partners in conjunction with the content promotion.
• We worked with a platform using AI to accelerate the Investigational New Drug (IND) approval and application process to draft a form of license agreement for use with its customers and an NDA for prospective investors.
• A novel personal finance platform for young, high-earning individuals engaged the Innovation Clinic to form an entity for the platform, including helping the founders to negotiate a deal among them with respect to roles and equity, terms that the equity would be subject to, and other post-incorporation matters, as well as to draft terms of service and a privacy policy for the platform.
• Students also formed an entity for a biotech therapeutics company founded by University of Chicago faculty members and an AI-powered legal billing management platform founded by University of Chicago students.
• A founder the Innovation Clinic had represented in connection with one venture engaged us on behalf of his other venture team to draft an equity incentive plan for the company as well as other required implementing documentation. His venture with which we previously worked also engaged us this year to draft Safes to be used with over twenty investors in a seed financing round.

More information regarding other types of transactional projects that we typically take on can be found here .

Regulatory Research and Advice

• A team of Innovation Clinic students invested a substantial portion of our regulatory time this year performing highly detailed and complicated research into public utilities laws of several states to advise a groundbreaking renewable energy technology company as to how its product might be regulated in these states and its clearest path to market. This project involved a review of not only the relevant state statutes but also an analysis of the interplay between state and federal statutes as it relates to public utilities law, the administrative codes of the relevant state executive branch agencies, and binding and non-binding administrative orders, decisions and guidance from such agencies in other contexts that could shed light on how such states would regulate this never-before-seen product that their laws clearly never contemplated could exist. The highly varied approach to utilities regulation in all states examined led to a nuanced set of analysis and recommendations for the client.
• In another significant research project, a separate team of Innovation Clinic students undertook a comprehensive review of all settlement orders and court decisions related to actions brought by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for violations of the prohibition on unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts and practices under the Consumer Financial Protection Act, as well as selected relevant settlement orders, court decisions, and other formal and informal guidance documents related to actions brought by the Federal Trade Commission for violations of the prohibition on unfair or deceptive acts or practices under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, to assemble a playbook for a fintech company regarding compliance. This playbook, which distilled very complicated, voluminous legal decisions and concepts into a series of bullet points with clear, easy-to-follow rules and best practices, designed to be distributed to non-lawyers in many different facets of this business, covered all aspects of operations that could subject a company like this one to liability under the laws examined, including with respect to asset purchase transactions, marketing and consumer onboarding, usage of certain terms of art in advertising, disclosure requirements, fee structures, communications with customers, legal documentation requirements, customer service and support, debt collection practices, arrangements with third parties who act on the company’s behalf, and more.

Miscellaneous

• Last year’s students built upon the Innovation Clinic’s progress in shaping the rules promulgated by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) pursuant to the Corporate Transparency Act to create a client alert summarizing the final rule, its impact on startups, and what startups need to know in order to comply. When FinCEN issued additional guidance with respect to that final rule and changed portions of the final rule including timelines for compliance, this year’s students updated the alert, then distributed it to current and former clients to notify them of the need to comply. The final bulletin is available here .
• In furtherance of that work, additional Innovation Clinic students this year analyzed the impact of the final rule not just on the Innovation Clinic’s clients but also its impact on the Innovation Clinic, and how the Innovation Clinic should change its practices to ensure compliance and minimize risk to the Innovation Clinic. This also involved putting together a comprehensive filing guide for companies that are ready to file their certificates of incorporation to show them procedurally how to do so and explain the choices they must make during the filing process, so that the Innovation Clinic would not be involved in directing or controlling the filings and thus would not be considered a “company applicant” on any client’s Corporate Transparency Act filings with FinCEN.
• The Innovation Clinic also began producing thought leadership pieces regarding AI, leveraging our distinct and uniquely University of Chicago expertise in structuring early-stage companies and analyzing complex regulatory issues with a law and economics lens to add our voice to those speaking on this important topic. One student wrote about whether non-profits are really the most desirable form of entity for mitigating risks associated with AI development, and another team of students prepared an analysis of the EU’s AI Act, comparing it to the Executive Order on AI from President Biden, and recommended a path forward for an AI regulatory environment in the United States. Both pieces can be found here , with more to come!

Innovation Trek

Thanks to another generous gift from Douglas Clark, ’89, and managing partner of Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati, we were able to operationalize the second Innovation Trek over Spring Break 2024. The Innovation Trek provides University of Chicago Law School students with a rare opportunity to explore the innovation and venture capital ecosystem in its epicenter, Silicon Valley. The program enables participating students to learn from business and legal experts in a variety of different industries and roles within the ecosystem to see how the law and economics principles that students learn about in the classroom play out in the real world, and facilitates meaningful connections between alumni, students, and other speakers who are leaders in their fields. This year, we took twenty-three students (as opposed to twelve during the first Trek) and expanded the offering to include not just Innovation Clinic students but also interested students from our JD/MBA Program and Doctoroff Business Leadership Program. We also enjoyed four jam-packed days in Silicon Valley, expanding the trip from the two and a half days that we spent in the Bay Area during our 2022 Trek.

The substantive sessions of the Trek were varied and impactful, and enabled in no small part thanks to substantial contributions from numerous alumni of the Law School. Students were fortunate to visit Coinbase’s Mountain View headquarters to learn from legal leaders at the company on all things Coinbase, crypto, and in-house, Plug & Play Tech Center’s Sunnyvale location to learn more about its investment thesis and accelerator programming, and Google’s Moonshot Factory, X, where we heard from lawyers at a number of different Alphabet companies about their lives as in-house counsel and the varied roles that in-house lawyers can have. We were also hosted by Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati and Fenwick & West LLP where we held sessions featuring lawyers from those firms, alumni from within and outside of those firms, and non-lawyer industry experts on topics such as artificial intelligence, climate tech and renewables, intellectual property, biotech, investing in Silicon Valley, and growth stage companies, and general advice on career trajectories and strategies. We further held a young alumni roundtable, where our students got to speak with alumni who graduated in the past five years for intimate, candid discussions about life as junior associates. In total, our students heard from more than forty speakers, including over twenty University of Chicago alumni from various divisions.

The Trek didn’t stop with education, though. Throughout the week students also had the opportunity to network with speakers to learn more from them outside the confines of panel presentations and to grow their networks. We had a networking dinner with Kirkland & Ellis, a closing dinner with all Trek participants, and for the first time hosted an event for admitted students, Trek participants, and alumni to come together to share experiences and recruit the next generation of Law School students. Several speakers and students stayed in touch following the Trek, and this resulted not just in meaningful relationships but also in employment for some students who attended.

More information on the purposes of the Trek is available here , the full itinerary is available here , and one student participant’s story describing her reflections on and descriptions of her experience on the Trek is available here .

The Innovation Clinic is grateful to all of its clients for continuing to provide its students with challenging, high-quality legal work, and to the many alumni who engage with us for providing an irreplaceable client pipeline and for sharing their time and energy with our students. Our clients are breaking the mold and bringing innovations to market that will improve the lives of people around the world in numerous ways. We are glad to aid in their success in any way that we can. We look forward to another productive year in 2024-2025!