China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Applying Crew Resource Management Theory and Methods to the Operational Environment
Published in Pamela S. Tsang, Michael A. Vidulich, Principles and Practice of Aviation Psychology, 2002
Team performance, assessed as the degree of effectiveness a team demonstrates in achieving its goals, can be viewed from a systems perspective (Hughes et al., 1999). This perspective is predicated on a model generically known as the Input-Process-Outcome (IPO) model (Helmreich & Foushee, 1993; Maurino, 1993; see also Tannenbaum, Beard, & Salas, 1992). Table 13.1 contains a generalized list of inputs, processes, and outcomes.
Team Performance in Air Combat: A Teamwork Perspective
Published in The International Journal of Aerospace Psychology, 2023
Heikki Mansikka, Kai Virtanen, Don Harris, Juha Järvinen
Taskwork describes activities linked directly to team’s performance output and is often described in the form of an ‘Input – Process – Output’ (IPO) model (Hackman, 1987; Kozlowski et al., 1999; Mansikka et al., 2019a; McGrath, 1984). Where taskwork deals with what teams do, the literature on teamwork mainly concentrates on team processes and emergent states (especially the cognitive ones) and explains how and why inputs influence team effectiveness and outcomes (Ilgen et al., 2005; Kozlowski & Ilgen, 2006; Marks et al., 2001). Team processes refer to the functions performed by team members to accomplish a team’s goals; the cognitive emergent states are cognitive properties of the team, such as team situation awareness (TSA; Endsley, 1995; Helmreich et al., 1999) and transactive memory (Marks et al., 2001). Although the emergent states are not processes per se, they evolve based on team members’ interaction within the process phase of the IPO model. They underpin team processes and performance outputs, and eventually inputs (for example, by directing the search for new information (Li & Harris, 2007)) once a new performance episode begins (Marks et al., 2001). There is an abundance of teamwork models suggesting how different competencies affect teamwork (see, e.g., LePine et al., 2008; Salas et al., 2005; Shuffler et al., 2012). Determining the similarities and differences between the different competencies is complicated by the interchangeable use of terms. However, the most prominent teamwork models have more in common than their terminology suggests, and many of the terms can be mapped onto a few key team competencies, or team skills, knowledge and attitudes (Salas et al., 2009).
Human-agent teaming and trust calibration: a theoretical framework, configurable testbed, empirical illustration, and implications for the development of adaptive systems
Published in Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 2023
Philip Bobko, Leanne Hirshfield, Lucca Eloy, Cara Spencer, Emily Doherty, Jack Driscoll, Hannah Obolsky
Many books and articles have been written about team processes, and the vast amount of research continues. Teams involve collections of entities that share overlapping and interdependent tasks which require coordination and communication (Mathieu et al. 2018). The teams literature almost universally adopts a three-stage, input-process-output (IPO) model (Driskell et al. 2018; Mathieu et al. 2018). Input factors include individual (e.g. personal attributes) and group level (e.g. size) variables. Process factors include conflict management and other emergent states (see next paragraph). Output (outcome) factors include performance (e.g. speed/accuracy) and non-performance (e.g. cohesion) variables.
Collaboration on large interactive displays: a systematic review
Published in Human–Computer Interaction, 2021
Magdalena Mateescu, Christoph Pimmer, Carmen Zahn, Daniel Klinkhammer, Harald Reiterer
The in-depth analyses of the 41 studies involved the reading, re-reading, extracting and summarizing of information on experimental design and empirical results based on the following categories and subcategories: input (influencing factors), collaborative processes and task-related, social or knowledge outcomes (see Figure 2). These categories were extracted from the Input-Process-Output (IPO) model, which proved to be a robust framework for conceptualizing research in HCI, CSCW/CSCL and small group research (Marks, Mathieu, & Zaccaro, 2001; Mathieu, Maynard, Rapp, & Gilson, 2008; McGrath et al., 1993; Pinsonneault & Kraemer, 1989).