Skip to main content
Search
Search
    Quick Search anywhere
    Quick search in Citations
Advanced Search
Skip main navigationClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Previous article
Next article
Multistudy Report

Capturing the Four-Phase Team Adaptation Process With Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS)

Published Online:December 19, 2018https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000503

Abstract

Abstract. As a response to the lack of quantitative and reliable measures of the team adaptation process, the aim of the present study was to develop and validate an instrument for assessing the four phases of the team adaptation process as described by Rosen and colleagues (2011). Two trained raters and two subject matter expert groups contributed to the development of four behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS) that span across the spectrum of team processes involved in each team adaptation phase. To validate the four BARS, two different trained raters assessed independently the team adaptation phases of 66 four-person teams. The validation study provided empirical support for the BARS’ psychometric adequacy. The BARS measures overcame the common middle anchor problem, showed sensitivity in differentiating between teams and between the four phases, showed evidence for acceptable reliability, construct, and criterion validity, and supported the theoretical team adaptation process assumptions. The study contributes to research and praxis by enabling the direct assessment of the overall team adaptation process, thereby facilitating our understanding of this complex phenomenon. This allows the identification of behavioral strengths and weaknesses for targeted team development and comprehensive team adaptation studies.

References

  • Ambuel, B., Hamlett, K. W., Marx, C. M., & Blumer, J. L. (1992). Assessing distress in pediatric intensive care environments: The COMFORT Scale. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 17, 95–109. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/17.1.95 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. (1992). Bridging the boundary: External activity and performance in organizational teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 634–665. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393475 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Baard, S. K., Rench, T. A., & Kozlowski, S. W. (2013). Performance adaptation: A theoretical integration and review. Journal of Management, 40, 48–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206313488210 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Baggaley, A. R., & Hull, A. L. (1983). The effect of nonlinear transformations on a Likert scale. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 6, 483–491. https://doi.org/10.1177/016327878300600408 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Baker, D. P., Day, R., & Salas, E. (2006). Teamwork as an essential component of high-reliability organizations. Health Services Research, 41, 1576–1598. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00566.x First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Borman, W. C., Buck, D. E., Hanson, M. A., Motowidlo, S. J., Stark, S., & Drasgow, F. (2001). An examination of the comparative reliability, validity, and accuracy of performance ratings made using computerized adaptive rating scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 965–973. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.5.965 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Bownas, D. A., & Bernardin, H. J. (1988). Critical incident technique. In S. GaelEd., The job analysis handbook for business, industry, and government (pp. 1120–1137). New York, NY: Wiley. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Salas, E., Pierce, L., & Kendall, D. (2006). Understanding team adaptation: A conceptual analysis and model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1189–1207. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1189 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Bush, G. P., & Hattery, L. H. (1956). Teamwork and creativity in research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1, 361–372. https://doi.org/10.2307/2390929 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Cicchetti, D. V. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6, 284–290. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Conte, J. M., Landy, F. J., & Mathieu, J. E. (1995). Time urgency: Conceptual and construct development. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 178–185. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.80.1.178 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Cronin, M. A., Weingart, L. R., & Todorova, G. (2011). Dynamics in groups: Are we there yet? Academy of Management Annals, 5, 571–612. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2011.590297 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Debnath, S. C., Lee, B. B., & Tandon, S. (2015). Fifty years and going strong: What makes behaviorally anchored rating scales so perennial as an appraisal method? International Journal of Business and Social Science, 6, 16–25. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Georganta, E., & Brodbeck, F. C. (2016, July). Team adaptation: The benefits of learning to adapt. Poster session presented at the 11th Annual Interdisciplinary Network for Group Research conference, Helsinki, Finland First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Glowinski, D., Bracco, F., Chiorri, C., & Grandjean, D. (2016). Music ensemble as a resilient system, managing the unexpected through group interaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01548 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Gorman, J. C., Cooke, N. J., & Amazeen, P. G. (2010). Training adaptive teams. Human Factors, 52, 295–307. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720810371689 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Harpe, S. E. (2015). How to analyze Likert and other rating scale data. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 7, 836–850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2015.08.001 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Harrell, A., & Wright, A. (1990). Empirical-evidence on the validity and reliability of behaviorally anchored rating scales for auditors. Auditing, 9, 134–149. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hauenstein, N. M. A., Brown, R. D., & Sinclair, A. L. (2010). BARS and those mysterious, missing middle anchors. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 663–672. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-9180-7 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1, 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312450709336664 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Hom, P. W., DeNisi, A. S., Kinicki, A. J., & Bannister, B. D. (1982). Effectiveness of performance feedback from behaviorally anchored rating scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 568–576. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.67.5.568 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Klein, K. J., Ziegert, J. C., Knight, A. P., & Xiao, Y. (2006). Dynamic delegation: Shared, hierarchical, and deindividualized leadership in extreme action teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51, 590–621. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2015). Advancing research on team process dynamics: Theoretical, methodological, and measurement considerations. Organizational Psychology Review, 5, 270–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386614533586 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Labovitz, S. (1967). Some observations on measurement and statistics. Social Forces, 46, 151–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2574595 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Landy, F. J., Farr, J. L., Saal, F. E., & Freytag, F. E. (1976). Behaviorally anchored rating scales for rating the performance of police officers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 750–768. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.61.1.750 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • LeBreton, J. M., & Senter, J. L. (2008). Answers to 20 questions about interrater reliability and interrater agreement. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 815–852. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106296642 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • MacDonald, H. A., & Sulsky, L. M. (2009). Rating formats and rater training redux: A context-specific approach for enhancing the effectiveness of performance management. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 41, 227–240. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015165 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • MacMillan, J., Entin, E. B., Morley, R., & Bennett, W. J. (2013). Measuring team performance in complex and dynamic military environments: The SPOTLITE method. Military Psychology, 25, 266–279. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0094968 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Marques-Quintero, P., Curral, L., Passos, A., & Lewis, K. (2013). And now what do we do? The role of transactive memory systems and task coordination in action teams. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research & Practice, 17, 194–206. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033304 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Martin-Raugh, M., Tannenbaum, R. J., Tocci, C. M., & Reese, C. (2016). Behaviorally anchored rating scales: An application for evaluating teaching practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 414–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.07.026 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Maynard, M. T., & Kennedy, D. M. (2016). Team adaptation and resilience: What do we know and what can be applied to long-duration isolated, confined, and extreme contexts (NASA Report TM-2016-218597). Retrieved from https://ston.jsc.nasa.gov/collections/TRS/_techrep/TM-2016-218597.pdf First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Maynard, M. T., Kennedy, D. M., & Sommer, S. A. (2015). Team adaptation: A fifteen-year synthesis (1998–2013) and framework for how this literature needs to “adapt” going forward. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24, 652–677. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2014.1001376 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Motowidlo, S. J., & Borman, W. C. (1977). Behaviorally anchored scales for measuring morale in military units. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 177–183. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.62.2.177 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Ohland, M. W., Loughry, M. L., Woehr, D. J., Bullard, L. G., Felder, R. M., Finelli, C. J., … Schmucker, D. G. (2012). The comprehensive assessment of team member effectiveness: Development of a behaviorally anchored rating scale for self- and peer evaluation. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 11, 609–630. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2010.0177 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Resick, C. J., Murase, T., Bedwell, W. L., Sanz, E., Jiménez, M., & DeChurch, L. A. (2010). Mental model metrics and team adaptability: A multi-facet multi-method examination. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 14, 332–349. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018822 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Rosen, M. A., Bedwell, W. L., Wildman, J. L., Fritzsche, B. A., Salas, E., & Burke, C. S. (2011). Managing adaptive performance in teams: Guiding principles and behavioral markers for measurement. Human Resource Management Review, 21, 107–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2010.09.003 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Salas, E., Shuffler, M. L., Thayer, A. L., Bedwell, W. L., & Lazzara, E. H. (2015). Understanding and improving teamwork in organizations: A scientifically based practical guide. Human Resource Management, 54, 599–622. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21628 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Schwab, D. P., Heneman, H. G., & DeCotiis, T. A. (1975). Behaviorally anchored rating scales: A review of the literature. Personnel Psychology, 28, 549–562. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01392.x First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Smith, P. C., & Kendall, L. M. (1963). Retranslation of expectations: An approach to the construction of unambiguous anchors for rating scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 47, 149–155. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0047060 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Space Alert [Board Game]. (2008). Buchen Germany: Heidelberger Spieleverlag. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Waller, M. J. (1999). The timing of adaptive group responses to nonroutine events. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 127–137. https://doi.org/10.2307/257088 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • West, M. A., & Anderson, N. R. (1996). Innovation in top management teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 680–693. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.81.6.680 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Ziegler, M., & Bensch, D. (2013). Lost in translation: Thoughts regarding the translation of existing psychological measures into other languages. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 29, 81–83. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000167 First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar