ENHANCING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF
TEAM SCIENCE
Nancy J. Cooke and Margaret L. Hilton, Editors
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
OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C.
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by the National Science Foundation under Contract No. OCI-1248170 and by Elsevier. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-31682-8
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-31682-0
Library of Congress Control Number: 2015940916
Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 3607, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2015 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Suggested citation: National Research Council. (2015). Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science. Committee on the Science of Team Science, N.J. Cooke and M.L. Hilton, Editors. Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.
This page intentionally left blank.
COMMITTEE ON THE SCIENCE OF TEAM SCIENCE
NANCY J. COOKE (Chair), Human Systems Engineering, The Polytechnic School, Arizona State University
ROGER D. BLANDFORD (NAS), Department of Physics, Stanford University
JONATHON N. CUMMINGS, Fuqua School of Business, Duke University
STEPHEN M. FIORE, Department of Philosophy, University of Central Florida
KARA L. HALL, Behavioral Research Program, National Cancer Institute
JAMES S. JACKSON (IOM), Institute for Social Research and Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
JOHN L. KING, School of Information, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
STEVEN W. J. KOZLOWSKI, Department of Psychology, Michigan State University
JUDITH S. OLSON, Department of Informatics, University of California, Irvine
JEREMY A. SABLOFF (NAS), Santa Fe Institute
DANIEL S. STOKOLS, School of Social Ecology, University of California, Irvine
BRIAN UZZI, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University
HANNAH VALANTINE, Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health
MARGARET L. HILTON, Study Director
TINA WINTERS, Associate Program Officer
MICKELLE RODRIGUEZ, Program Coordinator (until July 2013)
JATRYCE JACKSON, Program Coordinator (until October 2014)
TENEE DAVENPORT, Program Coordinator
BOARD ON BEHAVIORAL, COGNITIVE, AND SENSORY SCIENCES
SUSAN T. FISKE (Chair) (NAS), Department of Psychology and Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University
LAURA L. CARSTENSEN, Department of Psychology, Stanford University
JENNIFER S. COLE, Department of Linguistics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
JUDY R. DUBNO, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina
ROBERT L. GOLDSTONE, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University
DANIEL R. ILGEN, Department of Psychology, Michigan State University
NINA G. JABLONSKI, Department of Anthropology, Pennsylvania State University
JAMES S. JACKSON (IOM), Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan
NANCY G. KANWISHER (NAS), Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
JANICE KIECOLT-GLASER (IOM), Department of Psychology, Ohio State University College of Medicine
WILLIAM C. MAURER, School of Social Sciences, University of California, Irvine
JOHN MONAHAN (IOM), School of Law, University of Virginia
STEVEN E. PETERSEN, Department of Neurology and Neurological Surgery, School of Medicine Washington University Medical School
DANA M. SMALL, Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine
TIMOTHY J. STRAUMAN, Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University
ALLAN R. WAGNER (NAS), Department of Psychology, Yale University
JEREMY M. WOLFE, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Departments of Ophthalmology and Radiology, Harvard Medical School
BARBARA A. WANCHISEN, Director
TENEE DAVENPORT, Program Coordinator
Acknowledgments
The committee and staff thank the many individuals and organizations who assisted us in our work and without whom this study could not have been completed. First, we acknowledge the generous support of the National Science Foundation and Elsevier.
Many individuals at the National Research Council (NRC) assisted the committee. Special thanks are due to Barbara A. Wanchisen, director, Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences, whose leadership was invaluable throughout the study process. Additionally, we are grateful to associate program officer Tina Winters, whose many contributions included facilitating information-gathering workshops and drafting sections of the final report. We thank Patricia Morison, who provided assistance in developing a clear and concise report summary, and Kirsten Sampson-Snyder, who shepherded the report through the NRC review process. We are grateful to Mickelle Rodriguez, who arranged logistics for three committee meetings, and Tenee Davenport, who assisted with final preparation of the report.
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the NRC’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Barry C. Barish, Department of Physics, California Institute of Technology; Edward J. Hackett, School of Human Evolution and Social Change, Arizona State University; Christine Hendren, Center for the Environmental Implications of NanoTechnology, Duke University; Nina G. Jablonski, Department of Anthropology, Pennsylvania State University; Barbara V. Jacak, Nuclear Science Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory;
Robert P. Kirshner, Department of Astronomy, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics; Julie T. Klein, Department of English, Wayne State University; Marshall Scott Poole, Institute for Computing in the Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences, Department of Communication, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign; Maritza R. Salazar, Organizational Behavior, Claremont Graduate University; Wesley M. Shrum, Department of Sociology, Louisiana State University, and Agricultural and Mechanical College; Kathryn C. Zoon, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the content of the report, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. Huda Akil, The Molecular and Behavioral Neuroscience Institute, University of Michigan, and Barbara Torrey, visiting scholar and guest researcher, Division of Behavioral and Social Research, National Institute on Aging, oversaw the review of this report. Appointed by the NRC, they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authors and the institution.
Finally, we thank our colleagues on the committee for their enthusiasm, hard work, and collaborative spirit in thinking through the conceptual issues and challenges associated with addressing the charge to the study committee and in writing this report.
Nancy J. Cooke, Chair
Margaret L. Hilton, Study Director
Committee on the Science of Team Science
Contents
Key Features That Create Challenges for Team Science
Learning from Research on Teams in Other Contexts
The Value of Multiple Approaches and the Promise of Team Science
2 Science to Inform Team Science
Other Contributing Fields of Research
PART II: THE INDIVIDUAL AND TEAM LEVELS
3 Overview of the Research on Team Effectiveness
Background: Key Considerations and Theoretical Models and Frameworks
Team Processes: The Underpinnings of Team Effectiveness
Interventions That Shape Team Processes and Effectiveness
Connecting the Literature to Team Science
4 Team Composition and Assembly
Methods for Facilitating Composition and Assembly of Science Teams and Groups
Addressing the Seven Features That Create Challenges for Team Science
Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendation
5 Professional Development and Education for Team Science
Goals and Effectiveness of Team Training
Promising Professional Development Interventions
New Professional Development Interventions for Team Science
Addressing the Seven Features That Create Challenges for Team Science
Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendation
Defining Leadership and Management
Research Findings on General Leadership and Potential Implications for Team Leadership
Research Findings on Team Leadership
Research Findings on Team Science Leadership
Leadership Development for Team Science Leaders
Addressing the Seven Features That Create Challenges for Team Science
Summary, Conclusion, and Recommendation
PART III: THE INSTITUTIONAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL LEVEL
7 Supporting Virtual Collaboration
Special Challenges for Geographically Dispersed Larger Groups or Teams
How Organizations Can Support Virtual Collaboration
Technology to Support Virtual Collaboration
How Technology and Social Practices Can Address the Challenges of Virtual Collaboration
Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations
8 Institutional and Organizational Support for Team Science
The Organizational Perspective
University Policies and Practices
Organizational Contexts for Team Science
Optimizing Physical Environments for Team Science
Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendation
9 Funding and Evaluation of Team Science
Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations
10 Advancing Research on the Effectiveness of Team Science
Team Processes and Effectiveness
Support for Virtual Collaboration
Institutional and Organizational Support for Team Science
Funding and Evaluation of Team Science