Introduction
Why do some teams perform flawlessly under high-pressure
situations while others flounder? While this question is as old as time, the
culmination of decades of research brings us one step closer to understanding
what makes teams click. The leading note researchers have made is that we have to
see past teamwork as just task execution. Rather, the idea of shared cognition
must be embraced, the collective understanding that allows teams to function as
a “shared brain” anticipating and adapting in unison (Salas et al., 2024).
However, this requires adopting concepts such as shared mental models and
transactive memory systems, which enable the development of a clear,
evidence-based roadmap for building a high-performing team. Thus, in this
article, the concepts of shared mental models will be unpacked first.
Nevertheless, understanding and using these components alone is not enough;
psychological safety must also be introduced, as it is an essential foundation
that enables the creation of a “team brain” (Kozlowski, 2006).
The Power of a Shared Mental Model
You are likely left wondering what constitutes a shared
mental model, given how crucial it is to build a high-performance team. In
short, it can be thought of as a team’s shared playbook. Indeed, it is the
collective, long-lasting knowledge that team members have about the task, the
tools at their disposal, and, most importantly, each other’s roles and skills
(Cooke et al., 2000). Ultimately, it is the aspects of a team that go beyond
individual expertise; it is about the common understanding that forms the very
fabric of a team, which can only be tailored through training, experience, and
communication.
In turn, this shared mental model can galvanize a team to
perform at its best. It enables team members to develop mutual expectations,
leading them to anticipate each other's needs and the actions of their
teammates. Consequently, they can coordinate implicitly, without the need to
communicate explicitly, a crucial element to navigate high-pressure situations
(Cooke et al., 2000). Furthermore, situations are interpreted in a consistent
way; hence, even when they change suddenly, the team remains on the same page.
In sum, this allows for compatible decisions to be carried out and coordinated
smoothly.
For example, on an effective software development team,
everyone understands the system's overall architecture, coding standards, and
each member's responsibilities. Therefore, when an unexpected bug occurs, there
is no time wasted on who should handle it; instead, the team mobilises and
moves in sync, because, whether conscious or not, each team member has that
shared mental model in their head. Nevertheless, while knowing the playbook is
critical, it is not enough on its own. What happens when one team member has a
unique skill that the others do not? This brings us to the second component of
the “team brain”: transactive memory systems, or who knows what.
The Team’s Knowledge Directory
While a shared mental model may be imagined as a team's
playbook, transactive memory systems are an unspoken directory of “who knows
what.” This directory constitutes the collective awareness of who within the
team has the specific expertise and information needed for any given situation
(Kozlowski, 2006). In turn, not every member needs to be an expert on
everything; rather, a system for encoding, storing, and retrieving knowledge is
developed and distributed among members. This system prevents team members from
wasting time solving an issue themselves if they know a colleague with the
specific knowledge to do so more efficiently. Indeed, they can quickly access
the right information from the right person.
However, like shared mental models, transactive memory
systems need to be actively built and encouraged. Research shows that there are
several ways to achieve this. Firstly, teams must train and learn together, as
beyond teaching team members task skills, they learn each other's strengths,
weaknesses, and areas of expertise. Managers can further accelerate this
process by explicitly highlighting each team member's roles and skills and
making team members aware that some may possess unique information (Salas et
al., 2024). Finally, cross-training, a technique in which team members are
trained in their colleagues' tasks and responsibilities, can be a powerful
tool. It helps team members develop a better understanding of how the unique
knowledge of their colleagues can be used in specific contexts, thereby
building a more accurate and detailed mental directory of the team's expertise
(Kozlowski, 2006)
While the playbook and knowledge directory serve as powerful
tools, they are quite useless if your team is too afraid to use them.
Therefore, more than anything else, psychological safety is the bedrock upon
which the “team brain” is built, and the research backs this up. Broadly,
psychological safety is defined as the shared belief that the team is a place
where one can take interpersonal risks (e.g., sharing ideas, disagreeing
publicly, and speaking up) without the fear of punishment or humiliation (Salas
et al., 2024).
The Foundation of a Shared Team Brain
Psychological safety is a critical driver of team
performance. Indeed, previous elements of the team brain are built upon
constant communication, questioning, and learning. Psychological safety enables
these behaviours to develop (Cooke et al., 2000). Without this safety net, team
members will hesitate to share unique knowledge, ask clarifying questions, or
admit gaps in their understanding; thus, a climate of communication and
learning, needed for the development of shared mental models and transactive
memory, cannot occur.
A manager’s actions and leadership are antecedent to the
creation of an atmosphere of psychological safety. There are two main tools at
their disposal to achieve such an environment. Firstly, the provision of
effective coaching is a manager’s primary tool for building psychological
safety. Such coaching involves directly interacting with the team to guide
their process and reinforce behaviours. If done effectively, it helps establish
the shared belief that the team is a safe space for interpersonal risk-taking
(Kozlowski, 2006). Second, managers must enable learning behaviors. This means
a manager must actively encourage and model the following: seeking feedback,
sharing information, experimenting with ideas, asking for help, and discussing
errors and mistakes constructively (Kozlowski, 2006).
Putting it All Together and Building Your Team’s Shared
Brain
Ultimately, building a high-performing team is the
deliberate process of turning a group of skilled individuals into a single
cohesive unit. This transformation hinges on the ability to create a shared
brain capable of skillfully navigating complexity and pressure.
This process starts with the creation of a shared mental
model, so that everyone understands their role. It is further reinforced by the
creation of a transactive memory system that enables the team to efficiently
leverage each member's unique expertise. But most importantly, an environment
of psychological safety has to be created to foster an environment of trust,
the communication, learning, and vulnerability necessary for a shared brain to
flourish can happen. While fostering these elements takes a lot of training, it
is more than worth it for any ambitious team. Team training is not a “soft
skill”; it is a strategic investment with proven ROI. Decades of research from
diverse fields in business, military, and healthcare settings provide
overwhelming evidence that team training and the formation of a shared brain
have a significant positive impact on team performance (Salas et al., 2024).
Ultimately, creating teams that don’t just perform but excel.
Citations:
Cooke, N. J., Salas, E., Cannon-Bowers, J. A., & Stout,
R. J. (2000). Measuring team knowledge. Human Factors, 42(1),
151–173. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872000779656561
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing
the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the
Public Interest, 7(3), 77–124. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00030.x
Mohammed, S., & Dumville, B. C. (2001). Team mental
models in a team knowledge framework: Expanding theory and measurement across
disciplinary boundaries. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(2),
89–106. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.86
Salas, E., Cooke, N. J., & Rosen, M. A. (2008). On
teams, teamwork, and team performance: Discoveries and developments. Human
Factors, 50(3), 540–547. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872008X288457
Salas, E., Linhardt, R., & Castillo, G. F. (2024). The
science (and practice) of teamwork: A commentary on forty years of progress... Small
Group Research, 56(3), 392–425. https://doi.org/10.1177/10464964241274119
0 Commentaires