View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.

uk brought to you by CORE

provided by GSSRR.ORG: International Journals: Publishing Research Papers in all Fields
International Journal of Sciences:
Basic and Applied Research
(IJSBAR)
ISSN 2307-4531
(Print & Online)

http://gssrr.org/index.php?journal=JournalOfBasicAndApplied
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Effectiveness of Teamwork In the Workplace

Ashley M. Khawama*, Toni DiDonab, Brenda S. Hernándezc

a
Department of Psychology, Carlos Albizu University, 2173 NW 99th Avenue, Miami 33172, United States
b,c
Department of Psychology
a
Email: [email protected]
b
Email: [email protected]
c
Email: [email protected]

Abstract

Teamwork has been a key factor in the progress, evolution, and survival of humanity. Research suggests that
teamwork provides better results for organizations than individual work. Teamwork is considered one of the
most effective work forms. Working in teams also benefit the individual on a personal level as it fulfils needs
such as social interaction and affiliation. Regardless of the profuse research validating the effectiveness
teamwork brings to organizations, many management personnel still do little to build teams. The researchers
explored the differences in teamwork preference across ethnicities, and the differences in self-awareness across
genders. A 33-question survey was administered, thru SurveyMonkey to 225 participants across the country (n =
119 females, n = 106 males). The participants were recruited on a convenient basis utilizing snow ball sampling,
and social media (Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, emails, etc.). Participants were between the ages of 18 and
80, with a total of 44% between the ages of 25-34. Most of the sample were Hispanic/Latino (56%), followed by
White/Non-Hispanic (40%); while 4% represent other races. Results showed a significant difference between
ethnicity and teamwork preference, while surprisingly no significant difference was found between gender and
perceived self-awareness. Based on the findings, it is suggested that organizations that are open and supportive
of cultural diversity in the workplace are more likely to have effective work teams.

Keywords: cultural diversity; effectiveness; ethnicity; self-awareness; teamwork.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Corresponding author.

267
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

1. Introduction

Since the beginning of time humans have been driven to form groups and work together to achieve their goals,
solve problems, generate more ideas, develop skills, survival, among other purposes. Teamwork is one of the
most noticeable and essential work configurations of the 21st century. Teamwork is considered one of the most
effective work forms [1]. The 21st century has brought many changes to the Since the beginning of time humans
have been driven to form groups and work together to achieve their goals, solve problems, generate more ideas,
develop skills, survival, among other purposes. Teamwork is one of the most noticeable and essential work
configurations of the 21st century. The 21st century has brought many changes to the structure of organizations
and also to the nature of jobs. Levi [2] suggests that even though the use of teams in the workplace has a long
history, the past decades have shown that the notion of organizational teamwork has reformed. In the last
decades, many studies have been conducted on the effectiveness of teams (i.e. Sundstrom, McIntyre, Halfhill, &
Richards [3]; Kozlowski & Bell [4]; Salas, Stagl, & Burke [5]; Gil, Alcover, & Peiró [6]; Ilgen, Hollenbeck,
Johnson, & Jundt [7]; Nielsen, Sundstrom, & Halfhill [8]; Kozlowski & Ilgen [9]; Mathieu, Maynard, Rapp, &
Gilson [10]; Goodwin, Burke, Wildman, & Salas [11]. However, in this competitive and globalized economy,
organizations face many challenges due to their constant evolution. There is still limited knowledge about how
work teams function and many questions remain about how employers can successfully create productive and
effective work teams. Given the globalized economy of the 21st century, there is also a lot to learn about
multicultural teams. Additionally, there is much to learn about the support systems needed to manage this work
configuration [12].

Many organization’s workforces are using different types of teams, such as production teams, project teams,
service teams, and action teams to accomplish its different goals and stay competitive [13]. The literature based
on teamwork suggests many benefits for organizations and for individuals. Some of the benefits of teamwork
include their effectiveness at improving employee relations, employees’ technical and interpersonal skills,
quality of work life, job satisfaction and performance, organizational effectiveness growth, and flexibility.
Teamwork also provides social support, encourage cooperation, and make jobs more interesting and challenging
[2].

According to Hartenian [14], managers and supervisors are becoming more aware that teams are more effective
in providing results than employees working individually. This is one of the reasons the use of work teams has
become more popular. Alie, Beam, and Carey [15] speculate that teamwork is becoming the foundation in
organizations. As part of many reorganization agendas, many organizations are using work teams as the
principal component to staying competitive [16]. Cohen and Bailey [17] found that 85% of the organizations
composed of 100 employees or more are using work teams to achieve their goals, and in fact there is a strong
enthusiasm for this work configuration. Employers are confident that they can hire employees with the ability to
work in teams. Despite the many benefits teamwork brings, developing them is not always an easy task.
However, employers are under the notion that they can develop this dexterity in their team members through
training and mentoring. Hartenian’s [14] research study, about team member acquisition of team knowledge,
skills, and abilities found that work teams who were offered training and mentoring demonstrated higher team
skills than those who did not receive it. Stevens and Campion [12] performed a study with the purpose of

268
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

determining the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSA) required for teamwork and also with the purpose of
considering the implications of these teamwork KSAs for Human Resource management. After an extensive
literature review, Stevens and Campion [12] concluded that it is imperative for HR to understand the
requirements of the job, and KSAs required for teamwork, to effectively hire employees. It was also concluded
that HR needs to understand the tasks and role expectations, required trainings, job analysis, appraisals, among
others factors that can potentially affect the implementation of teamwork programs.

Collaboration is necessary for tasks that require creativity, problem solving, and innovation [18]. Collaboration
is a competitive method for achieving difficult goals and tasks. As globalization keeps forcing organizations to
face more challenges, more tasks are assigned to and performed by work teams. Fitz-Enz [19] speculates that
work teams are the most noticeable indicator that organizations are changing towards a collaborative
environment. Organizational management is becoming more aware that jobs are becoming more complex.
Wheelan [18] suggests that this complexity is requiring employees to work in teams to ensure organizational
success. The implementation of work teams is known to be one of the most effective organizational
interventions for improving organizational performance [20]. Gwynne [21] suggests that a key aspect
considered in helping organizations and industries stay competitive is the transition from individual work to
teamwork. Recent findings by Manzoor, Ullah, Hussain and Ahman [22] suggest that teamwork is the most
significant independent variable having a strong relationship with the dependent variable of employee
performance. Manzoor [22] research study analyzed the effect of teamwork on employee performance of the
staff members of an Education Department. It revealed that teamwork when properly implemented is of
significant importance, which brings benefits in terms of increased product quality and quantity, competitive
advantage and higher productivity, and performance [22].

Amongst the different types of teams mentioned by Sundstrom [13], the use of production teams has motivated
several studies to demonstrate their effectiveness in specific scenarios [23,20,17]. Sundstrom [23] concluded
that specific context factors in teamwork effectiveness, such as organizational context, boundaries, and team
development, were to be assessed by organizations to ensure team effectiveness. Guzzo and Dickson [20]
reviewed all the available literature about team effectiveness and performance in the organizational context.
They found that indicators of performance show the highest improvements when multiple changes are
simultaneously done in aspects such as human resource management practices [20]. Additionally, they found
that organizations employing sets of practices that included teams as an important element of organizational
design are inclined to excel on several performance areas.

Levine and Tyson [24] argued that high representative, consultative and substantive participation by employees
result in a significant and long-lasting increase in productivity. It was also found that substantive participation is
obtained primarily through work teams. Levine and Tyson also suggest that work teams succeed the most when
these conditions are implemented: profit sharing or gain sharing, guaranteed long term employment, narrow
wage differentials, and guarantees of workers’ rights. All of these conditions foster cooperation, cohesiveness,
and solidarity.

Campion, Medsker, and Higgs’ [25] research study revealed that there is evidence of member's preference for

269
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

teamwork related to effectiveness. This research study was conducted in a large financial services company
where 19 group characteristics, representing composition, context interdependence, job design, and process,
were evaluated by workers and executives. These characteristics were then compared to effectiveness criteria
which included employee satisfaction, productivity, and manager judgments. Data was collected from 39
employees, 70 managers, and archival records for 80 work groups. It was found that all three effectiveness
criteria were predicted by the characteristics, and nearly all characteristics predicted some of the effectiveness
criteria [25]. Campion [25] suggests that the motivational value of work group comes because such work
designs, especially self-managed groups, increase the motivational quality of member’s job. Stevens and
Campion’s [12] research study, about the importance and effect HR has in the process and effectiveness of
forming work groups supports Campion’s [25] research study.

A Cross-sectional survey data by Chuang, Dill, Morgan and Konrad [26] submitted to 661 Frontline Health Care
workers in 13 large health care employers was collected between the years 2007 - 2008. The data was studied
using both regression and fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis [26]. Their research found that supervisor
support and team-based work practices were identified as necessary for high job satisfaction and high quality of
care. However, supervisor support and team-based work practices were not sufficient to achieve these results
unless implemented in combination with other high-performance work practices. In this same study, it was also
found that several configurations of high-performance work practices were associated with either high quality of
care or high job satisfaction. Nonetheless, only one configuration of high-performance work practices was
enough for both: flexible work, performance-based incentives, the combination of supervisor support and team-
based work [26].

Although there are many benefits for using teamwork, research on the subject has also revealed that there are
problems; many people don’t like to work in teams. Work teams have gained so much popularity that sometimes
they are used in situations where other approaches, like individual work, are more suitable [2]. Many of the
studies on quality circles demonstrate team ineffectiveness, while studies on factories have widely inconstant
outcomes [20].

Saratoga Institute's [19] research study on team performance produced mixed results regarding the effectiveness
of teamwork. Saratoga Institute surveyed 61 U.S. companies about their methodology in regards to
compensation, performance measurement and team design. It was found that more than 50% of the
organizations reported progress in surpassing the risks linked with teamwork and in attaining their operational
goals. This result suggests that half of the companies are not meeting their goals [19]. This implies that the
team-based structure still has a long way to go before it becomes truly effective. Organizational work teams
need to have precise objectives and goals. The objectives and goals need to be measurable, stimulating, and
always shared with the team. These objectives and goals must support the business culture, values and
strategies, and should be tied to business results [19].

Sherwood [27] conducted an executive-level survey in which it was found that being a team player, working
hard, being creative and performing quality work, are the most important factors for job satisfaction. Sherwood
surveyed 200 executives of Goodrich & Sherwood Co. It was found that 94% of the participants responded that

270
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

the quality of their work was very important to their job satisfaction and success. A total of 6% of the
participants responded that the quality of their work is somewhat important to their job satisfaction and success.
Results also found that 88% of the participants responded that being creative and introducing new ideas is very
important. The remaining 12% responded that being creative and introducing new ideas is somewhat important.
Results revealed that 87% of the participants responded that working hard is very important, while 12%
responded that working hard is somewhat important. To the question of the importance of being a team player,
83% of the participants responded that being a team player is very important, while 17% responded that being a
team player is somewhat important [27]. These results leave many questions as to what are the reasons there is
still 17% of employees who do not think team work is important or satisfying, a total of 50% of companies not
meeting their goals, and studies revealing some degree of team ineffectiveness. Therefore, one of the questions
motivating this study was to identify what population is more willing to work in teams.

Despite the abundance of valid research regarding the positive effects teamwork can have in a work
environment, as well as the value it can add to the overall organizational culture, most organizations still do
little to build teamwork. At the individual level, something to consider when building teams is the different
personality traits each employee has and how well they would work with those of other team members. Golonka
and Mojsa-Kaja [28] discuss Emotional Intelligence and how it correlates teamwork and its effectiveness.
Emotional Intelligence can be defined as the awareness of one’s emotions, the ability to control and express
those emotions and handling of relationships in that same regard. The objective of Golonka and Mojsa-Kaja’s
[28] research was to describe the relationship between the concept of team roles and these psychosocial factors.
To measure such, they distributed two instruments to students and results showed a significant positive
correlation between ability to perceive and manage emotions and (the) roles assigned to each person in a group
[28]. Through the research by Golonka and Mojsa-Kaja [28] it was also suggested that the more diverse a team
is, the higher its potentiality and possibility for achieving success.

Golonka and Mojsa-Kaja [28] make an important note that the ability to deal with one’s own emotions allows
the members of a team to be driven to listen and be open to the perspectives of others and look for common
ground solutions without feeling susceptible by the likelihood of being mistaken. In this sense, having emotional
intelligence can contribute significantly to individual and team performance, and therefore improving overall
effectiveness of teamwork in the workplace. Golonka and Mojsa-Kaja [28] often referenced effective and
efficient teams as the foundation and best method to achieving organizational objectives. Since the sample used
for this study was quite small, a follow-up step to take with this study would be to test it on a larger scale. If the
researchers could retrieve a significant positive correlation with a small sample, it would then be important to
replicate the results on a larger scale to determine significance, if possible.

Aside from personality traits, teamwork research has often focused on the impact of interpersonal relationships
as well. What has not been well documented in teamwork research, is the significance of the different team
skills between men and women [29]. As previously mentioned, at the individual level, personality traits can
have a lot to do with how one works in a team; additionally, Metcalfe and Linstead [29] discuss more
specifically how flexibility and commitment in organizations influence men and women differently. This alludes
to the idea that how flexible and committed one is, not just to their organization but to their team as well, can

271
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

greatly affect the outcome. Research on teamwork is for the most part very positive, apart from failed teamwork
and the reasoning behind it. Metcalfe and Linstead [29] further evaluate the role gender plays in teamwork, and
suggest that by conducting additional research on gender differences we might be able to uncover more
information about why some teams fail. They hypothesize that the neglect of gender, more specifically, the
neglect of the female gender, is what may be causing team disconnect.

The terms masculine and feminine are often used to describe different team characteristics and roles, resulting in
segregation of genders and disrupting what could be a powerful working relationships. Metcalfe and Linstead
[29] suggest that the attitudes and behaviors of team members, as well as their concern for others, are directly
linked to their performance impact. For example, being supportive of one another, consensual in decisions and
the ability to collaborate are all highly encouraged traits in all team members, yet are still considered to be
feminine traits. Metcalfe and Linstead [29] follow the progress of the company Nylons, to see where they their
faults lie in terms of teamwork and gender bias. The company is described to be comprised of mostly male filled
leadership positions, with a few exceptions. One of those exceptions, being a female named Nia, who often
works in teams. Nia recognizes the gender differences and the impact it has on team success. Despite how hard
she has worked to be in the position she is in, her male colleagues associate her success with her having
masculine traits and management style. Nia respectfully disagrees with these opinions and observes that what
sets women apart from men in the workplace and makes women more beneficial to employers are the different
skill set females possess, such as teamwork, communication and interpersonal skills [29]. This could easily be a
generalization based on Nia’s personal observations in her workplace, but an interesting theory that could be
addressed in ongoing research.

A study conducted by Lanaj and Hollenbeck [30] took gender bias a step further and looked at leadership over-
emergence, which can be defined as a situation in which an individual’s leadership emergence is greater than
their leadership effectiveness. One important characteristic related to this concept is gender. Lanaj and
Hollenbeck decided to examine the role of gender with respect to this concept by distributing a survey to 181
MBA students at three different points in time and measuring their leadership emergence, leadership
effectiveness and leadership over-emergence. It was hypothesized that men will over emerge as leaders in self-
managing teams due to gender bias [30]. This was proposed due to the pre-conceived notion that men tend to
believe themselves to be stronger leaders than women. Not with much surprise, results supported this hypothesis
by showing gender having a significantly larger effect on leadership emergence than on effectiveness [30].
These results allude to the idea of women, in fact, being more effective leaders. Whether this again be due to
gender bias, women work harder to try to compete with status of men, or another factor would have to be
considered further.

Expanding back out a bit to look at teamwork in a more general light, and without going into individual and
gender based skills, teamwork has many benefits. Gallie, Zhou, Felstad, and Green [31] notes that teamwork can
help enhance performance for employees through its ability to push individuals to use their knowledge, skills
and abilities to work with others and achieve a common goal. The concept of teamwork can cover a wide range
of potential forms in addition to the ones previously listed, such as improving job satisfaction, personal skill
development, creativity to ways of dealing with stress [31]. It truly can impact all aspects of an organization and

272
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

change it for the better. Of utmost significance is the ability of teamwork to facilitate employee learning and
gaining of new skills as a result of sharing of ideas and collaboration often used in teamwork. Additionally, a
team environment may be more supportive for the development of skills as the team members can provide
constructive feedback and advice on how to improve and better succeed [31].

Gallie, Zhou, Felstad, and Green [31] make an important note that there is not one specific pattern all teams
should follow to obtain positive results, as teamwork will affect everyone differently. To measure the impact of
skill development as a result of teamwork, a survey was distributed within an organization that included three
question indicators of strength based on team learning culture. Results showed a strong support for teams being
in a positive work context that is more encouraging of skill formation, however, these results were only
regarding teams with significant decision making responsibilities [31]. Of high interest were the result from the
third question indicator that referred to an individual’s willingness to learn new skills; Gallie [31] reported that
the coefficients for these results remain positive for both non-self-directed teams and self-managed teams. As
this study was more of a general standpoint, more detailed analysis of these results and identification of any
correlations between gender and those who were considered more willing to learn new skills, might provide
further insight into the differences between males and females in the workplace.

Griffin, Patterson, and West [32] investigated the relation between job satisfaction and teamwork by researching
a sample of 48 companies, consisting of around 4780 employees. The questionnaire itself measured teamwork
and job enrichment on an organizational level and an individual level. Control measures were also included to
account for any outside factors, such as firm size and company productivity [32]. Results suggested that the link
between teamwork and job satisfaction was partially described by job enrichment practices associated with
teamwork [32]. Effective team implementation can increase the motivational properties of work and ensure that
there is a team behind the employee supporting him/her. This in turn can increase job satisfaction as the
workplace becomes a more inclusive environment in which an individual’s role can actually make a difference,
especially within a team.

Additionally, the researchers in this study wanted to explore the different ways changes in leadership roles could
influence overall job satisfaction in teams [32]. The results suggested that the strong determinants of employee
job satisfaction are the consideration and support of their supervisors [32]. When implementing teams into a
workplace, leadership roles are bound to change, mostly because of the way in which a team flows as everyone
has more of a say in certain matters and therefore reduces supervisory support. Although the development of
teams may lower the amount of supervisory support provided, that is not to say this support is unimportant,
especially because it is still shown to help increase job satisfaction [32]. Despite these revelations, what remains
unknown are the different ways supervisors provide can support within teams; obtaining this information can
produce future practical applications for better design and management of teamwork [32]. It is known that
supervisory support on an individual level improves satisfaction, so it would be interesting to see if support still
has as much of an impact on an individual’s satisfaction once they are in a team and that individual’s support
has decreased.

Drach-Zachary and Freund [33] conducted a study regarding another way in which teamwork can have a

273
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

positive effect; they examined whether working under stressful conditions, which in nature places demands on
teams or individuals, limits or increases team effectiveness. Considering the structure of a team, it makes sense
that having that implemented would help to reduce stress. Despite the increasing demand of work among a team
and the notion that more output is expected as there is more than one person, having people stand behind you,
who know what you are going through and understand what is expected will help support each other through
those stressful times. Drach-Zachary and Freund [33] state that when a team faces stressful circumstances its
performance may benefit from the availability of a wide range of viewpoints, which its members can discuss
and evaluate to come up with the needed solution. As each person in a group comes to the table with their own
set of skills and expertise, the sharing of ideas between these team members is what helps the others learn more
to expand their knowledge base and come up with creative ways of solving problems. While there is no single
answer to the questions of how to structure teams working under stress, Drach-Zachary and Freund [33] allude
to the idea of team members under stress being more receptive to the task inputs of others due to a selfish need
of preventing increased individual responsibility. This in turn not only increases the effectiveness of teamwork
in the workplace, but also increases individual effectiveness. Being open to the opinions and criticism of others
in the field, and taking their advice into consideration can encourage an individual to perfect their skills and
learn new ones. Drach-Zachary and Freund [33] discuss the scarcity of research on how team effectiveness
changes because of stress, and how further research should focus on ways to maneuver between the contrasting
perspectives of structuring teams working under stress to obtain a superior structuring process. Additional
research on this topic would be excellent in showing organizations that already have teams in place, what they
could do to better it and reduce stress, thus improving overall job satisfaction.

The above researches come together to suggest that teamwork is truly considered more effective than other work
forms, such as working independently [1]. As discussed in the article by Drach-Zachary and Freund [33], it is
not only the individuals within a team that can improve effectiveness, but also the structuring of the team
overall. Richter [1] note that several researchers have previously suggested that the very tasks teams perform
may represent an important contingency influencing a team’s effectiveness. This idea follows the fact that
sometimes there are tasks that just simply would be done best in an individual setting rather than as a team, and
vice versa. That being said, it is equally important for supervisors to provide teams with tasks that would be best
done in that type of setting. Richter [1] also discuss the benefits of teamwork on an individual and on a personal
level; they state that working in teams fulfills some of employees’ social needs, such as the needs for social
interaction and affiliation. The feeling of being included, being a part of something (a team), can not only create
a trust between team members to provide for a strong support system, but can also create a more open and
comfortable working environment for all. A basic overview of how teamwork can affect different characteristics
of a job role has been provided in this review, such as job satisfaction, increased innovation, decreased stress
and improvement in attitude. Seeing the many effects teamwork can have on an organizational and individual
level, there is much to support the increased use of teams as opposed to simply individual work, however, there
still so much more to be examined.

Having a more open working environment, especially while working in a team, provides opportunity for
increased feedback and constructive criticism. Collaborating with other members on a project or topic, there is
bound to be feedback provided. This feedback can be taken in many different ways, it could allow an individual

274
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

to listen to what his/her members have to say and use the new information for self-enhancement, or a member
could look at it in a negative light. Mo, Burlap, Trujillo, James, and Xiang [34] decided to take a deeper dive on
this subject, and see what factors contribute to how receptive an individual may be to feedback. More
specifically, Mo [34] were interested in studying what difference, if any, age would have on perceptiveness to
feedback. The study conducted specifically addresses the relationships between feedback and reactions to
feedback. They were interested in seeing if age correlated with perceptions of feedback favorability, delivery
and quality, and how those perceptions would influence their reactions [34]. As younger adults are typically
newer to the working environment, they should be willing to do what they can and accept all advice to help
them build credibility, skills and advance on the corporate ladder. Mo [34] hypothesized that younger adults
focus more on values of social relationships to help facilitate increased learning and personal growth, rather than
focus on the emotional aspect of those social relationships. Mo [34] administered a survey to an organization of
623 employees, the survey intended to measure feedback orientation, feedback characteristics, and feedback
reactions. Results showed that it was the older workers who had higher levels of feedback orientation on social
awareness, however there was a stronger positive association between feedback quality and reactions for
younger workers [34]. Simply put, older workers focused more on social awareness, the emotional aspect, while
younger workers focused on the quality of feedback provided and ultimately had a positive reaction to any
feedback received.

Prior research on effectiveness of teamwork in the workplace has shown the concept of teamwork to have a very
positive effect on both the individual and organization levels. We have seen further research on what makes
these teams effective and saw significant results due to factors such as leadership, personality traits, attitudes. In
reviewing the literature on this topic, what is still missing in this field of teamwork research, is a deeper dive
into factors such as age and gender for any significant correlations. Further research on these factors may
provide valuable insight as to how teams should be structured for maximum effectiveness. It is hypothesized
that there is a significant difference across gender in self-reported measures of social awareness. It is also
hypothesized that there is a significant difference between Hispanic/Latino and Non-Hispanic/Latino preference
for teamwork

2. Materials and Methods

2.1 Participants

To assess the effectiveness of teamwork in the workplace, a sample of 265 respondents were recruited to
participate in this study, however 40 responses were deemed incomplete leaving only 225 responses to be
analyzed. The participants were recruited on a convenient basis utilizing snow ball sampling, and social media
(i.e. Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, emails). Participants were equally recruited by gender and from a mix of
ethnic/racial backgrounds and ages. The sample consisted of two groups (n = 119 female participants, n = 106
male participants). The average age of respondents in both sample groups combined was 35.44 years (SD =
12.03), ranging between the ages of 18 and 80. A total of 56% of the participants were Hispanic/Latinos, 40%
were White/Non-Hispanics, 3% were Black/African American, while 1% belongs to other races. To analyze the
relationship between ethnicity and teamwork preference, the sample was combined and divided into two ethnic

275
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

categories, Hispanic/Latino (56%) and Non-Hispanic/Latino (44%). On average, the participants reported to
have 16.15 years of formal education, which translates to a bachelor’s degree. While 86% of the participants
were employed, only 14% were unemployed, retired, or other. In regards to job level, the overall sample mainly
consisted of professionals (60%). Participants reported an average of 6.15 years of job experience. The average
annual income reported by the participants was 30,000 – 50,000. U.S. Dollars. A total of 49.8% of participants
were married, 39.6% were single, while the rest of them (10.6%) reported to be separated, divorced, widowed or
other. While 44% of the participants reported not having children, 56% reported having between 1 and 4
children. Single income household (56%) and dual income household (41%) were rather evenly distributed.

2.2 Materials

Materials required for this study included, a computer or mobile computer device that can be connected to the
internet to access the survey link hosted on SurveyMonkey, an online survey software.

2.3 Procedure

The questionnaire administered to the participants began with an informed consent disclosure requiring the
respondent’s acceptance to proceed, as well as an introduction informing them of the researchers who were
administering the survey, approximately how long the survey would take and that their responses would remain
confidential and anonymous. Following the instructions were 22 questions regarding the constructs being
measured and finally 11 questions for demographic purposes only (see Appendix B). The inclusion criteria for
the study included understanding English, being 18 years of age or older, and agreeing on signing the consent
form. The exclusion criteria included those participants who were 17 years of age or younger.

2.4 Instrumentation

The survey was created with the online program SurveyMonkey, and was presented to the participants in an
electronic format. Participants were asked to complete a 5-point rating scale of five statements regarding social
Awareness (see Appendix C), four statements on Teamwork (see Appendix D) and 1 statement on
Judgment/Open-mindedness (see Appendix E) on which the individual rated their agreement with the statement
between strongly disagree to strongly agree. Additionally, participants were asked to complete a 5-point rating
scale of five statements regarding Teamwork (see Appendix D), three statements on Accountability (see
Appendix F) and four statement on Independence (see Appendix G) on which the participant rated their
agreement with the statement between strongly disagree to strongly agree.

3. Results

To determine if there is a (a) statistically significant difference in self-awareness score across genders, there
were a total of 225 respondents recruited for this study and separated into one of two groups, males and females.
The t test for (a) difference in self-awareness score across genders revealed the mean score for self-awareness
for Group 1 (females) is 3.76 while Group 2 (males) had a mean score of 3.72. The ANOVA table reveals that
the significance of these means is (p) .600 which is more than the α level of .05. This suggests that there is no

276
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

statistically significant difference between the mean scores of these groups. As seen in the results (Fig. 9), on
average, females rated themselves 0.033 points higher than males (3.756 v 3.723). Using a .05 α level, the p
value of .600 suggests that this difference is not statistically significant and therefore, the researchers fail to
reject H0 and reject H1. In this case, it is safe to assume the results do not support the first hypothesis and gender
is not related to perceived self-awareness.

Table 1: T Test Results (Descriptives and ANOVA tables) For (a) Difference in Self-Awareness Score Across
Genders

95% Confidence Interval for

Mean
N Mean Std. Std. Lower Bound Upper Bound Minimum Maximum
Deviation Error
Female 119 3.756 .4991 .0458 3.666 3.847 2.4 4.7
Male 106 3.723 .4580 .0445 3.634 3.811 2.3 4.8
Total 225 3.740 .4794 .0320 3.677 3.803 2.3 4.8

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Group .064 1 .064 .275 .600
Within groups 51.418 223 .231
Total 51.482 224

To determine if there is a statistically significant difference in teamwork preference score across ethnicities,
there were a total of 225 respondents recruited for this study and separated into one of two groups,
Hispanic/Latinos and Non-Hispanic/Latinos. The original set of ethnicity categories were White/Non-Hispanic,
Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, and Other. The category of Hispanic/Latino was separated out and
the other 3 categories were combined to be identified as Non-Hispanic/Latino. This combining of categories was
done to ensure that pre-test criteria would be met and to simplify data results. The t test for (b) teamwork
preference across ethnicities revealed the mean score for teamwork preference for Group 1 (Hispanic/Latinos) is
3.02 while Group 2 (Non-Hispanic/Latinos) had a mean score of 3.42. The ANOVA table reveals that the
significance of these means is (p) .000 which is less than the α level of .05. This suggests that there is a
statistically significant difference between the mean scores of these groups at the .05, .01, and .001 α levels. As
seen in the results (Fig. 10), on average, Non-Hispanic/Latinos rated themselves 0.402 points higher than
Hispanic/Latinos (3.016 v 3.418). Using a .05 α level, the p value of .000 suggests that this difference is
statistically significant and therefore, the researchers reject H0 and fail to reject H1. In this case, it is safe to
assume that the second hypothesis was in fact supported and ethnicity is related to teamwork preference.

277
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

Table 2: T Test Results (Descriptives and ANOVA tables) For (b) Teamwork Preference Across Ethnicities

95% Confidence Interval

for Mean
N Mean Std. Std. Lower Upper Minimum Maximum
Deviation Error Bound Bound
Hispanic 126 3.0166 .48085 .04284 2.9318 3.1014 1.75 4.50
Nonhispanic 99 3.4181 .41302 .04151 3.3357 3.5005 2.42 4.50
Total 225 3.1932 .49352 .03290 3.1284 3.2581 1.75 4.50

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Group 8.937 1 8.937 43.684 .000
Within groups 45.620 223 .205
Total 54.557 224

4. Discussion

The main findings of this study are that there is no significant difference across genders in self-reported
measures of social awareness, and that there is a significant difference across ethnicities in teamwork
preference.

Earlier, this study identified possible reasons as to why there would be a significant difference in gender across
self-reported social awareness and feedback acceptance. The first hypothesis predicted that females have a
strong perceived self-awareness level as they seem to pay attention to detail more. Atwater and Yammarino [35]
define self-awareness as the individual’s ability to assess other’s evaluations of the self and to incorporate those
assessments into one’s self-evaluation. It was a surprise to find no significant difference in self-awareness across
genders, as the results imply that men perceive self-awareness just as well as women. These results are contrary
to the results of a study by Veslor, Taylor, and Leslie [36] that showed gender difference do exist in both rated
self-awareness and in one of its subcomponents, knowledge of self. The results of this study do not suggest that
the level of self-awareness is equal across genders, despite the fact there is no statistical significance between
the two.

Regarding the second hypothesis, in the beginning this study identified reasoning as to why some ethnicities
would have a difference in teamwork preference. Although there is no specific definition for teamwork
preference, Shaw and Duffy [37] note that preference for group work is a dimension of the broader
individualism-collectivism construct. It refers to the level at which an individual has preferences for working in
a group rather than autonomous work. The second hypothesis predicted that that differences in teamwork
preference are related to the culture of difference ethnicities, more specifically, between Hispanic/Latinos and

278
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

Non-Hispanic/Latinos. The results supported the second hypothesis and validated the researcher’s prediction
that there are significant differences across ethnicities in regards to teamwork preference. Specifically, the data
implies that there is a difference in teamwork preference between Hispanic/Latinos and Non-Hispanic/Latinos.
The Hispanic/Latino culture has strong ties to a collectivist mentality while Americans (for example) are more
individualistic. Harms [38] states that people characterized by high collectivism will prefer working in groups.
Nowak [39] explains that members of collectivist cultures tend to be interdependent and define their self-
concepts in terms of relationships and social obligations, which would be why they prefer working in groups.
On the other hand, Nowak [39] notes that members of individualist cultures tend to strive for independence and
put importance on their own aspirations and achievements, which would imply individuals of this culture would
prefer working alone rather than in a team. The results of this study show contrary to this with Non-
Hispanic/Latinos having a higher average score of teamwork preference.

4.1. Limitations

This study used a snowball sampling method, which lowered the ability of this data to be fully reflective of the
entire population. If the sample were truly randomized, it is possible the results might have shown a difference.
Further limitations included sample size for each ethnicity, as this study did not have a big enough sample for all
four ethnic categories, three of the four needed to be combined. This could explain why Hispanic/Latinos (a
typically collectivist culture) scored lower, as there could be other ethnicities in the Non-Hispanic/Latino sample
that would also be considered from a collectivist culture.

4.2. PracticalImplication
The practical implications of this study apply to organization management systems and HR practices regarding
hiring and training. By knowing the conditions and circumstances under which teams become more effective,
organizations can take advantage from all the benefits this work configuration brings, and stay competitive.
Knowing what ethnic groups have a preference for team work, cannot only assist in building such teams, but in
helping to increase job satisfaction, productivity and its overall effectiveness. Another incentive of knowing
which groups are more prone to teamwork is that it becomes easier for HR to target those groups who need
more training, coaching, and support in becoming effective team players. Practical implications of the above
results can also apply to the initial implementation of work teams and/or the transition from individual work to
group work. Knowing that certain personality traits or cultural backgrounds have influence on teamwork allows
management to build more easily build effective teams. Combining employees with a collectivist mindset and
those with a non-collectivist mindset encourages employee growth, as well as allows employees to expand their
skill set, and better collaborate as a team. Improvement of collaboration skills provides advantages not just for
work teams, but for the overall organization. An organization with a workforce that can easily transition from
completing individual assignments to group assignments, while effectively working together to efficiently solve
problems has competitive edge over others.

5. Conclusion

Taking into account the limitations the researchers had to endure, this study was still able to accomplish what it
sought out to do. It took a seemingly general population, categorized it and compared it against values that had

279
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

not often been studied before. The building and incorporating of teams in the workplace is still a growing
method, while not all organizations use work teams, higher management are at least starting to see the benefit
they can provide. This change in work method gives even more reason as to why this topic should be studied.
Now that it is known teams can be useful, what can be done to make them most effective? There are a lot of
factors that tie into teamwork effectiveness, gender and ethnicity being two major components. The research in
this study sheds light as to how teams should be built, meaning who they should be comprised of, as well as
which individuals may work best together. However, this study only touches the tip of the iceberg. There are
more components that now need to be considered, such as employment history, experience, skill level,
education, salary, and age. What this study certainly could improve on is taking a deeper dive and separating
the population sample into more specific and narrowed criteria. Further analysis on the data could help those in
the field better understand what to look for in employees when selecting individuals for a work team.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the support and guidance of their instructor, Professor Doctor Toni
DiDona of Carlos Albizu University.

References

[1] A. W. Richter, J. F. Dawson and M. A. West (2011). “The effectiveness of teams in organizations: A
meta-analysis”. International Journal of Human Resource Management. [On-line] 22(13), pp. 2749-
2769. Available: doi:10.1080/09585192.2011.573971

[2] D. Levi. Group dynamics for teams (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage. (2014).

[3] E. Sundstrom, M. McIntyre, T. Halfhill and H. Richards. “Work groups: From the Hawthorne studies to
work teams of the 1990s and beyond”. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, vol. 4(1), pp.
44-67, 2000.

[4] S.W. J. Kozlowski and B. Bell. “Work groups and teams in organizations”. In W.C. Borman, D.R.
Ilgen, & R.J. Klimoski (Eds.), Industrial and Organizational Psychology Chichester: John Wiley &
Sons, 2003, pp. 333-375.

[5] E. Salas, K.C. Stagl and C.S. Burke. “25 years of team effectiveness in organizations: Research themes
and emerging needs”. In C.L. Cooper, & I. T Robertson (Eds.), International Review of Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, vol. 19, pp. 47-91, 2004. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

[6] F. Gil, C.M. Alcover, and J.M Peiró. “Work team effectiveness in organizational contexts: Recent
research and applications in Spain and Portugal”. Journal of Managerial Psychology, vol. 20, pp. 193-
218, 2005.

[7] D.R. Ilgen, J.R. Hollenbeck, M. Johnson and D. Jundt. “Teams in organizations: From I-P-O models to

280
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

IMOI models”. Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 56, pp. 517-544, 2005.

[8] T.M. Nielsen, E.D. Sundstrom and T.R. Halfhill. “Group dynamics and effectiveness: Five years of
applied research”. In S.A. Wheelan (Ed.), The Handbook of Group Research and Practice. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage, 2005, pp. 285- 311.

[9] S.W.J. Kozlowski and D.R. Ilgen. “Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams”.
Psychological Science in the Public Interest, vol. 7, pp. 77-124.

[10] J. Mathieu, M.T. Maynard, T. Rapp and L. Gilson. “Team effectiveness 1997-2007: A review of recent
advancements and a glimpse into the future”. Journal of Management, vol. 34, pp. 410-476, 2008.

[11] G.F. Goodwin, C.S. Burke, J.L. Wildman, and E. Salas, E. “Team effectiveness in complex
organizations: An overview”. In E. Salas, G.F. Goodwin, & C.S. Burke (Eds.), Team Effectiveness in
Complex Organizations. Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives and Approaches, pp. 3-16, 2009. New York:
Psychology Press

[12] M.J. Stevens and M.A. Campion (1994). “The knowledge, skill, and ability requirements for
teamwork: Implications for human resource management”. Journal of Management. [On-line]. 20(2),
pp. 503-530. Available:
http://www.krannert.purdue.edu/faculty/campionm/Knowledge_Skill_Ability.pdf

[13] E. Sundstrom. “The challenges of supporting work team effectiveness”. In E. Sundstrom (Ed.),
Supporting Work Team Effectiveness. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1999, PP. 2-23.

[14] L.S. Hartenian. “Team member acquisition of team knowledge, skills, and abilities”. Journal of Team
Performance Management, vol. 9(1/2), pp. 23-30, 2003.

[15] R.E. Alie, H. Beam, T.A. Carey. “The use of teams in an undergraduate management Program”.
Journal of Management Education, vol. 22(6), pp. 707-19, 1998.

[16] S. Mohrman, S. Cohen and A. Mohrman. Designing team-based organizations. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass, 1995.

[17] S.G. Cohen and D.E. Bailey. “What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop
floor to the executive suite”. Journal of Management, vol. 23, pp. 239-290, 1997.

[18] S. Wheelan. Creating effective teams: A guide for members and leaders (4th ed). Thousand Oaks:
Sage, 2013.

[19] J. Fitz-Enz, J. (1997, June). “Measuring team effectiveness. Managing team performance: Evaluation,
measurement, rewards”. HR Focus, vol. 74(8) 3(1). Available: http://infotrac-college.cengage.com

281
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

[20] R. Guzzo and M. Dickson. “Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and
Effectiveness”. Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 47, pp. 307-338, 1996.

[21] S. Gwynne. “The right stuff”. Time, pp. 74-84, 1990.

[22] S.R. Manzoor, H. Ullah, M. Hussain and Z.M. Ahmad (2011, Jun). “Effect of teamwork on employee
performance”. International Journal of Learning & Development, vol. 1(1), pp. 110-126. Available:
http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/ijld.v1i1.1110 Doi:10.5296/ijld.v1i1.1110.

[23] E. Sundstrom, K.P. DeMeuse, and D. Futrell, D. “Work teams: Applications and Effectiveness”.
American Psychologist, vol. 45, pp. 120-133, 1990.

[24] D.I. Levine, and L. Tyson, L. “Participation, productivity, and the firm’s environment”. in A.S.
Blinder (Ed.), Paying for productivity. Washington, DC: Brookings, 1990, pp. 183-243.

[25] M.A. Campion, G.J. Medsker and C. Higgs. “Relations between work group characteristics and
effectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups”. Personnel Psychology, vol. 46, pp.
823-850, 1993.

[26] E. Chuang, J. Dill, J.C. Morgan and T.R. Konrad (2012). “A configurational approach to the
relationship between high-performance work practices and frontline health care worker outcomes”.
Health Services Research, vol. 47(4) 1460(22), Available: http://infotrac-college.cengage.com [Jun, 5
2016].

[27] A. Sherwood (1991). “Quality, creativity, hard team work, keys to job satisfaction”. Supervision:
National Research Bureau 1991, vol. 52(9), 13(1). Available: http://infotrac-college.cengage.com [Jun
5, 2016].

[28] K. Golonka, and J. Mojsa-Kaja. “Emotional intelligence and team roles – Analysis of
interdependencies with regard to teamwork effectiveness”. Contemporary Management Quarterly /
Wspólczesne Zarzadzanie, vol. 12(4), pp. 32-44, 2013.

[29] B. Metcalfe and A. Linstead. “Gendering Teamwork: Re–Writing the Feminine”. Gender, Work &
Organization, vol. 10(1), pp. 94-119, 2003.

[30] K. Lanaj and J.R. Hollenbeck. “Leadership Over-Emergence In Self-Managing Teams: The Role of
Gender and Countervailing Biases”. Academy of Management Journal, vol. 58(5), pp. 1476-1494,
2015. Available: doi:10.5465/amj.2013.0303

[31] D. Gallie, Y. Zhou, A. Felstead and F. Green (2012). “Teamwork, Skill Development and Employee
Welfare”. British Journal of Industrial Relations, vol. 50(1), pp. 23-46, 2012. Available:
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8543.2010.00787.

282
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

[32] M.A. Griffin, M.G. Patterson and M.A. West. “Job satisfaction and teamwork: the role of supervisor
support”. Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 22(5), pp. 537-550, 2001. Available: doi:10.
1002/job. 101

[33] A. Drach-Zachary and A. Freund. “Team effectiveness under stress: a structural contingency
approach”. Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 28(4), pp. 423-450, 2007.

[34] W. Mo, G. Burlacu, D. Truxillo, K. James and Y. Xiang. “Age differences in feedback reactions: the
roles of employee feedback orientation on social awareness and utility”. Journal of Applied
Psychology, vol. (4), pp. 1296, 2015.

[35] L.E. Atwater and F.J. Yammarino. “Does Self-Other Agreement on Leadership Perceptions Moderate
The Validity Of Leadership And Performance Predictions?” Personnel Psychology, vol. 45(1), pp. 141-
164, 1992. Available: doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1992.tb00848.x

[36] E. Van Velsor, S. Taylor, and J.B. Leslie. “An Examination of the Relationships among Self-
Perception Accuracy, Self-Awareness, Gender, and Leader Effectiveness”. Human Resource
Management, vol. 32(2/3), pp. 249-263, 1993.

[37] J.D. Shaw and M.K. Duffy (2000). “Interdependence and preference for group work: Main and
congruence effects on the satisfaction and performance of group members”. Journal of Management,
vol. 26(2), pp. 259-279, 2000. Available: doi:10.1016/s0149-2063(99)00045-8.

[38] W. Harms (2007). “America’s individualist culture influences the ability to view others’
Perspectives”. The University of Chicago Chronicle, vol. 26(19). Available:
http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/070712/perspectives.shtml [Jan. 1, 2017].

[39] M. Nowak. “Controllers, Non-Controllers and potential future controllers. Preferences on

individualism or collectivism in professional work”. Research Papers Of The Wroclaw University Of
Economics / Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego We Wroclawiu, vol. (290), pp. 72-86,
2013.

[40] InstitutionLinderbaum/Levy. “The Development and Validation of the Feedback Orientation Scale
(FOS)”. Journal of Management, vol. 36(6), pp. 1372-1405, 2010.

[41] C. Peterson and M.P. Seligman (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and
classification. Washington, DC, US; New York, NY, US: American Psychological Association, 2004.

[42] Sharma. “Measuring Personal Cultural Orientations: Scale Development and Validation”. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 38(6), pp. 787–806, 2010.

Appendix A

283
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

Informed Consent Form

You are being asked to participate in an anonymous survey about the Effectiveness of Teamwork in the
Workplace which is being conducted as a course project by graduate students at Carlos Albizu University
(CAU).

Our team members are:

Ashley Khawam [email protected] 813-957-3675

Brenda S. Hernandez [email protected] 682-227-9248

This survey is anonymous, you will not be asked to include your name or any other identifying information.
There are no known risks for participation in anonymous online surveys. If you feel uncomfortable with any part
of the survey, you may discontinue at any time without any penalty or consequence. In addition, there are no
specific benefits to you for your participation.

If you agree to participate you will be asked to complete a series of questions including basic demographic
information as well as questions related about the Effectiveness of Teamwork in the Workplace. The survey
should take approximately 10-15 minutes to complete. The results of this survey may be published. The data
from this project will be stored in a password protected file and only the researchers will have access to it. The
data may be combined with the data from other studies and published as part of other papers. No identifying
information will be included in any publications. Results will be available to you upon request by contacting any
member of our research team in approximately 6 months.

Questions regarding the purpose or procedures of the research should be directed to any member of our research
team. If you have a question or concern that cannot be addressed by the primary researcher, you may contact her
supervisor and professor for this course project, Toni DiDona, PhD at [email protected].

Your participation is completely voluntary and you may choose to withdraw at any time with no penalty. You
must be at least 18 years of age to participate in this study.

Your completion of the survey serves as your voluntary agreement to participate in this research project and
your certification that you are 18 or older.

Appendix B

Demographics

What is your gender?

[male, female]

284
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

What is your age in years?

[leave a fill in the blank] years old

Which best describes your racial/ethnic identity?

[White/Non Hispanic; Black/African American; Hispanic/Latino; Other]

What is your marital status?

[single, married, separated, divorced, widowed, other]

How many children, if any, do you have?

[0, 1, 2, 3, 4+]

How many years of formal education have you completed? (If you finished high school you would answer 12, if
you have a bachelor’s degree you would answer 16, a doctoral degree would be 20) [leave a fill in the blank]
years

Which best describes your current job?

[professional, administrative, technical, clerical, self-employed, retired, unemployed, other]

How many years of experience do you have in your current field?

[leave a fill in the blank] years of experience

How many years of experience do you have in your current job?

[leave a fill in the blank] years of experience

What is your annual income?

[0-30k, 30-50k, 50-70k, 70-90k, 90k or more]

Which best describes your household?

[single income household, dual income household, more than 2 income household]

Appendix C

Social Awareness [40]

285
 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2017) Volume 32, No 3, pp 267-286

• I try to be aware of what other people think of me.

• Using feedback, I am more aware of what people think of me.
• Feedback helps me manage the impression I make on others.
• Feedback lets me know how I am perceived by others.
• I rely on feedback to help me make a good impression.

Appendix D

Citizenship/Teamwork [41]

• Don't miss group meetings or team practices.

• Enjoy being part of a group.
• Support my teammates or fellow group members.
• Feel I must respect the decisions made by my group.
• Am not good at working with a group.
• Prefer to do everything alone.
• Work best when I am alone.
• Don’t think it’s important to socialize with others.
• Lose respect for leaders if I disagree with them.

Appendix E

Judgment/Open-mindedness [41]

• Don’t think about more possibilities than the one I like first

Appendix F

Accountability [40]

• It is my responsibility to apply feedback to improve my performance.

• If my supervisor gives me feedback, it is my responsibility to respond to it.
• I feel obligated to make changes based on feedback.

Appendix G

Independence [42]

• I would rather depend on myself than others.

• My personal identity, independent of others, is important to me.
• I rely on myself most of the time, rarely on others.
• It is important that I do my job better than others.

286