Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

The Relationships of Team Role- and Character Strengths-Balance With Individual and Team-Level Satisfaction and Performance


Gander, Fabian; Gaitzsch, Ines; Ruch, Willibald (2020). The Relationships of Team Role- and Character Strengths-Balance With Individual and Team-Level Satisfaction and Performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 11:566222.

Abstract

Teamwork has been argued to play an increasingly important role in numerous jobs, and several studies focused on the effects of team composition for work-related outcomes. Recent research has also identified individuals’ character strengths and positive team roles (e.g., idea creator and relationship manager) as conducive to work-related outcomes. However, there is a scarcity of research on the role of character strengths or positive team roles on the level of teams. In the present study, we extend theoretical assumptions of team role theories to the study of character strengths and positive team roles: We examined the associations between character strengths and team roles with work-related outcomes on the individual (i.e., job satisfaction, self- and supervisor-rated performance) and the team level (i.e., teamwork quality, self- and supervisor-rated team performance). Further, we examined how the team composition relates to the outcomes, that is, whether balanced teams (i.e., all team roles or character strengths are represented in the current team) go along with desired outcomes and whether an overrepresentation of team roles or character strengths in a team (i.e., a team role or character strengths is represented by multiple team members) goes along with undesired outcomes. We studied a sample of 42 teams (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 284 individuals) who completed measures of team roles, character strengths, teamwork quality, job satisfaction, and self-rated individual and team performance. Further, supervisor ratings of individual and team performance were collected. Results corroborated the relationships of team roles and character strengths with individual outcomes such as that specific roles and character strengths go along with individual performance and work satisfaction. Further, the results suggested that teams in which more team roles are represented report higher performance and teamwork quality. Also, teams with higher average levels of the character strengths of teamwork and fairness, and teams with more members scoring high in fairness and prudence report higher teamwork quality. Further, there is no evidence that having too many members with a particular character strength has detrimental effects on teamwork quality, work satisfaction, or performance. We conclude that extending the study of character to the level of teams offers an important advancement.

Abstract

Teamwork has been argued to play an increasingly important role in numerous jobs, and several studies focused on the effects of team composition for work-related outcomes. Recent research has also identified individuals’ character strengths and positive team roles (e.g., idea creator and relationship manager) as conducive to work-related outcomes. However, there is a scarcity of research on the role of character strengths or positive team roles on the level of teams. In the present study, we extend theoretical assumptions of team role theories to the study of character strengths and positive team roles: We examined the associations between character strengths and team roles with work-related outcomes on the individual (i.e., job satisfaction, self- and supervisor-rated performance) and the team level (i.e., teamwork quality, self- and supervisor-rated team performance). Further, we examined how the team composition relates to the outcomes, that is, whether balanced teams (i.e., all team roles or character strengths are represented in the current team) go along with desired outcomes and whether an overrepresentation of team roles or character strengths in a team (i.e., a team role or character strengths is represented by multiple team members) goes along with undesired outcomes. We studied a sample of 42 teams (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 284 individuals) who completed measures of team roles, character strengths, teamwork quality, job satisfaction, and self-rated individual and team performance. Further, supervisor ratings of individual and team performance were collected. Results corroborated the relationships of team roles and character strengths with individual outcomes such as that specific roles and character strengths go along with individual performance and work satisfaction. Further, the results suggested that teams in which more team roles are represented report higher performance and teamwork quality. Also, teams with higher average levels of the character strengths of teamwork and fairness, and teams with more members scoring high in fairness and prudence report higher teamwork quality. Further, there is no evidence that having too many members with a particular character strength has detrimental effects on teamwork quality, work satisfaction, or performance. We conclude that extending the study of character to the level of teams offers an important advancement.

Statistics

Citations

Altmetrics

Downloads

10 downloads since deposited on 14 Dec 2020
10 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:06 Faculty of Arts > Institute of Psychology
Dewey Decimal Classification:150 Psychology
Uncontrolled Keywords:General Psychology
Language:English
Date:30 November 2020
Deposited On:14 Dec 2020 16:11
Last Modified:14 Dec 2020 16:11
Publisher:Frontiers Research Foundation
ISSN:1664-1078
OA Status:Gold
Free access at:Publisher DOI. An embargo period may apply.
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.566222

Download

Gold Open Access

Download PDF  'The Relationships of Team Role- and Character Strengths-Balance With Individual and Team-Level Satisfaction and Performance'.
Preview
Content: Published Version
Language: English
Filetype: PDF
Size: 773kB
View at publisher
Licence: Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)