Greg L. Stewart

Implementation of TeamSTEPPS for improving patient safety is examined via descriptive qualitative analysis of semistructured interviews with 21 informants at 12 hospitals. Implementation approaches fit 3 strategies: top-down, bottom-up, and combination. The top-down approach failed to develop enough commitment to spread implementation. The bottom-up approach was unable to marshal the resources necessary to spread implementation. Combining top-down and bottom-up processes best facilitated the implementation and spread of the TeamSTEPPS safety initiative.

The authors use a multilevel framework to introduce peer-based control as a motivational state that emerges in self-managing teams. The authors specifically describe how peer-based rational control, which is defined as team members perceiving the distribution of economic rewards as dependent on input from teammates, extends and interacts with the more commonly studied normative control force of group cohesion to explain both individual and collective performance in teams. On the basis of data from 587 factory workers in 45 self-managing teams at 3 organizations, peer-based rational control corresponded with higher performance for both individuals and collective teams. Results further demonstrated that the rational and normative mechanism of peer-based control interacted to explain performance at both the individual and team levels. Increased peer-based rational control corresponded with higher individual and collective performance in teams with low cohesion, but the positive effects on performance were attenuated in cohesive teams.

Over the past 30 years substantial research has focused on the concept of self-leadership. The authors adopt a multilevel perspective to review this research at both individual and team levels of analysis. At the individual level, studies consistently show that increased self-leadership corresponds with better affective responses and improved work performance. Findings are not as consistent at the team level. Relationships between team-level self-leadership and both affective and performance outcomes appear to be moderated by contextual factors. The authors also identify internal and external forces that influence self-leadership. Among these forces, external leadership is particularly important, as self-leadership is not a complete substitute for external leadership. Specifically, external leadership in the forms of empowering leadership and shared leadership facilitate self-leadership of individuals and teams. The authors also identify a number of cross-level research questions that illustrate how future research can benefit from exploring ways that self-leadership at the individual level interacts with self-leadership at the team level.

The authors examined how an applicant's handshake influences hiring recommendations formed during the employment interview. A sample of 98 undergraduate students provided personality measures and participated in mock interviews during which the students received ratings of employment suitability. Five trained raters independently evaluated the quality of the handshake for each participant. Quality of handshake was related to interviewer hiring recommendations. Path analysis supported the handshake as mediating the effect of applicant extraversion on interviewer hiring recommendations, even after controlling for differences in candidate physical appearance and dress. Although women received lower ratings for the handshake, they did not on average receive lower assessments of employment suitability. Exploratory analysis suggested that the relationship between a firm handshake and interview ratings may be stronger for women than for men.

Objective performance indicators have low test-retest reliability, particularly in complex jobs. Yet, little is actually known about the reasons why objective performance indicators lack temporal stability. The authors address this issue by using data from a sample of 106 professional football players to explore how the actions of other people influence intraindividual variation in performance. Results suggest that weekly measures of performance outcome exhibit substantial variability within individuals. A significant portion of this within-person variance is explained by environmental fluctuation created by the constraining actions of other people. Individuals with highly fluctuating past performance exhibit stronger relationships between the actions of competitors and subsequent performance outcomes. The intraindividual relationship between fluctuating constraints and performance outcomes is also stronger for individuals in more complex jobs.