problem solving team types

35 problem-solving techniques and methods for solving complex problems

Design your next session with SessionLab

Join the 150,000+ facilitators  using SessionLab.

How do you identify problems?

How do you identify the right solution.

Tips for more effective problem-solving

Complete problem-solving methods

Problem-solving techniques to identify and analyze problems
Problem-solving techniques for developing solutions

Problem-solving warm-up activities

Closing activities for a problem-solving process.

Before you can move towards finding the right solution for a given problem, you first need to identify and define the problem you wish to solve.

Here, you want to clearly articulate what the problem is and allow your group to do the same. Remember that everyone in a group is likely to have differing perspectives and alignment is necessary in order to help the group move forward.

Identifying a problem accurately also requires that all members of a group are able to contribute their views in an open and safe manner. It can be scary for people to stand up and contribute, especially if the problems or challenges are emotive or personal in nature. Be sure to try and create a psychologically safe space for these kinds of discussions.

Remember that problem analysis and further discussion are also important. Not taking the time to fully analyze and discuss a challenge can result in the development of solutions that are not fit for purpose or do not address the underlying issue.

Successfully identifying and then analyzing a problem means facilitating a group through activities designed to help them clearly and honestly articulate their thoughts and produce usable insight.

With this data, you might then produce a problem statement that clearly describes the problem you wish to be addressed and also state the goal of any process you undertake to tackle this issue.

Finding solutions is the end goal of any process. Complex organizational challenges can only be solved with an appropriate solution but discovering them requires using the right problem-solving tool.

After you’ve explored a problem and discussed ideas, you need to help a team discuss and choose the right solution. Consensus tools and methods such as those below help a group explore possible solutions before then voting for the best. They’re a great way to tap into the collective intelligence of the group for great results!

Remember that the process is often iterative. Great problem solvers often roadtest a viable solution in a measured way to see what works too. While you might not get the right solution on your first try, the methods below help teams land on the most likely to succeed solution while also holding space for improvement.

Every effective problem solving process begins with an agenda . A well-structured workshop is one of the best methods for successfully guiding a group from exploring a problem to implementing a solution.

In SessionLab, it’s easy to go from an idea to a complete agenda . Start by dragging and dropping your core problem solving activities into place . Add timings, breaks and necessary materials before sharing your agenda with your colleagues.

The resulting agenda will be your guide to an effective and productive problem solving session that will also help you stay organized on the day!

Tips for more effective problem solving

Problem-solving activities are only one part of the puzzle. While a great method can help unlock your team’s ability to solve problems, without a thoughtful approach and strong facilitation the solutions may not be fit for purpose.

Let’s take a look at some problem-solving tips you can apply to any process to help it be a success!

Clearly define the problem

Jumping straight to solutions can be tempting, though without first clearly articulating a problem, the solution might not be the right one. Many of the problem-solving activities below include sections where the problem is explored and clearly defined before moving on.

This is a vital part of the problem-solving process and taking the time to fully define an issue can save time and effort later. A clear definition helps identify irrelevant information and it also ensures that your team sets off on the right track.

Don’t jump to conclusions

It’s easy for groups to exhibit cognitive bias or have preconceived ideas about both problems and potential solutions. Be sure to back up any problem statements or potential solutions with facts, research, and adequate forethought.

The best techniques ask participants to be methodical and challenge preconceived notions. Make sure you give the group enough time and space to collect relevant information and consider the problem in a new way. By approaching the process with a clear, rational mindset, you’ll often find that better solutions are more forthcoming.

Try different approaches

Problems come in all shapes and sizes and so too should the methods you use to solve them. If you find that one approach isn’t yielding results and your team isn’t finding different solutions, try mixing it up. You’ll be surprised at how using a new creative activity can unblock your team and generate great solutions.

Don’t take it personally

Depending on the nature of your team or organizational problems, it’s easy for conversations to get heated. While it’s good for participants to be engaged in the discussions, ensure that emotions don’t run too high and that blame isn’t thrown around while finding solutions.

You’re all in it together, and even if your team or area is seeing problems, that isn’t necessarily a disparagement of you personally. Using facilitation skills to manage group dynamics is one effective method of helping conversations be more constructive.

Get the right people in the room

Your problem-solving method is often only as effective as the group using it. Getting the right people on the job and managing the number of people present is important too!

If the group is too small, you may not get enough different perspectives to effectively solve a problem. If the group is too large, you can go round and round during the ideation stages.

Creating the right group makeup is also important in ensuring you have the necessary expertise and skillset to both identify and follow up on potential solutions. Carefully consider who to include at each stage to help ensure your problem-solving method is followed and positioned for success.

Document everything

The best solutions can take refinement, iteration, and reflection to come out. Get into a habit of documenting your process in order to keep all the learnings from the session and to allow ideas to mature and develop. Many of the methods below involve the creation of documents or shared resources. Be sure to keep and share these so everyone can benefit from the work done!

Bring a facilitator

Facilitation is all about making group processes easier. With a subject as potentially emotive and important as problem-solving, having an impartial third party in the form of a facilitator can make all the difference in finding great solutions and keeping the process moving. Consider bringing a facilitator to your problem-solving session to get better results and generate meaningful solutions!

Develop your problem-solving skills

It takes time and practice to be an effective problem solver. While some roles or participants might more naturally gravitate towards problem-solving, it can take development and planning to help everyone create better solutions.

You might develop a training program, run a problem-solving workshop or simply ask your team to practice using the techniques below. Check out our post on problem-solving skills to see how you and your group can develop the right mental process and be more resilient to issues too!

Design a great agenda

Workshops are a great format for solving problems. With the right approach, you can focus a group and help them find the solutions to their own problems. But designing a process can be time-consuming and finding the right activities can be difficult.

Check out our workshop planning guide to level-up your agenda design and start running more effective workshops. Need inspiration? Check out templates designed by expert facilitators to help you kickstart your process!

In this section, we’ll look at in-depth problem-solving methods that provide a complete end-to-end process for developing effective solutions. These will help guide your team from the discovery and definition of a problem through to delivering the right solution.

If you’re looking for an all-encompassing method or problem-solving model, these processes are a great place to start. They’ll ask your team to challenge preconceived ideas and adopt a mindset for solving problems more effectively.

Six Thinking Hats
Lightning Decision Jam
Problem Definition Process
Discovery & Action Dialogue

Design Sprint 2.0

Open Space Technology

1. Six Thinking Hats

Individual approaches to solving a problem can be very different based on what team or role an individual holds. It can be easy for existing biases or perspectives to find their way into the mix, or for internal politics to direct a conversation.

Six Thinking Hats is a classic method for identifying the problems that need to be solved and enables your team to consider them from different angles, whether that is by focusing on facts and data, creative solutions, or by considering why a particular solution might not work.

Like all problem-solving frameworks, Six Thinking Hats is effective at helping teams remove roadblocks from a conversation or discussion and come to terms with all the aspects necessary to solve complex problems.

2. Lightning Decision Jam

Featured courtesy of Jonathan Courtney of AJ&Smart Berlin, Lightning Decision Jam is one of those strategies that should be in every facilitation toolbox. Exploring problems and finding solutions is often creative in nature, though as with any creative process, there is the potential to lose focus and get lost.

Unstructured discussions might get you there in the end, but it’s much more effective to use a method that creates a clear process and team focus.

In Lightning Decision Jam, participants are invited to begin by writing challenges, concerns, or mistakes on post-its without discussing them before then being invited by the moderator to present them to the group.

From there, the team vote on which problems to solve and are guided through steps that will allow them to reframe those problems, create solutions and then decide what to execute on.

By deciding the problems that need to be solved as a team before moving on, this group process is great for ensuring the whole team is aligned and can take ownership over the next stages.

Lightning Decision Jam (LDJ) #action #decision making #problem solving #issue analysis #innovation #design #remote-friendly The problem with anything that requires creative thinking is that it’s easy to get lost—lose focus and fall into the trap of having useless, open-ended, unstructured discussions. Here’s the most effective solution I’ve found: Replace all open, unstructured discussion with a clear process. What to use this exercise for: Anything which requires a group of people to make decisions, solve problems or discuss challenges. It’s always good to frame an LDJ session with a broad topic, here are some examples: The conversion flow of our checkout Our internal design process How we organise events Keeping up with our competition Improving sales flow

3. Problem Definition Process

While problems can be complex, the problem-solving methods you use to identify and solve those problems can often be simple in design.

By taking the time to truly identify and define a problem before asking the group to reframe the challenge as an opportunity, this method is a great way to enable change.

Begin by identifying a focus question and exploring the ways in which it manifests before splitting into five teams who will each consider the problem using a different method: escape, reversal, exaggeration, distortion or wishful. Teams develop a problem objective and create ideas in line with their method before then feeding them back to the group.

This method is great for enabling in-depth discussions while also creating space for finding creative solutions too!

Problem Definition #problem solving #idea generation #creativity #online #remote-friendly A problem solving technique to define a problem, challenge or opportunity and to generate ideas.

4. The 5 Whys

Sometimes, a group needs to go further with their strategies and analyze the root cause at the heart of organizational issues. An RCA or root cause analysis is the process of identifying what is at the heart of business problems or recurring challenges.

The 5 Whys is a simple and effective method of helping a group go find the root cause of any problem or challenge and conduct analysis that will deliver results.

By beginning with the creation of a problem statement and going through five stages to refine it, The 5 Whys provides everything you need to truly discover the cause of an issue.

The 5 Whys #hyperisland #innovation This simple and powerful method is useful for getting to the core of a problem or challenge. As the title suggests, the group defines a problems, then asks the question “why” five times, often using the resulting explanation as a starting point for creative problem solving.

5. World Cafe

World Cafe is a simple but powerful facilitation technique to help bigger groups to focus their energy and attention on solving complex problems.

World Cafe enables this approach by creating a relaxed atmosphere where participants are able to self-organize and explore topics relevant and important to them which are themed around a central problem-solving purpose. Create the right atmosphere by modeling your space after a cafe and after guiding the group through the method, let them take the lead!

Making problem-solving a part of your organization’s culture in the long term can be a difficult undertaking. More approachable formats like World Cafe can be especially effective in bringing people unfamiliar with workshops into the fold.

World Cafe #hyperisland #innovation #issue analysis World Café is a simple yet powerful method, originated by Juanita Brown, for enabling meaningful conversations driven completely by participants and the topics that are relevant and important to them. Facilitators create a cafe-style space and provide simple guidelines. Participants then self-organize and explore a set of relevant topics or questions for conversation.

6. Discovery & Action Dialogue (DAD)

One of the best approaches is to create a safe space for a group to share and discover practices and behaviors that can help them find their own solutions.

With DAD, you can help a group choose which problems they wish to solve and which approaches they will take to do so. It’s great at helping remove resistance to change and can help get buy-in at every level too!

This process of enabling frontline ownership is great in ensuring follow-through and is one of the methods you will want in your toolbox as a facilitator.

Discovery & Action Dialogue (DAD) #idea generation #liberating structures #action #issue analysis #remote-friendly DADs make it easy for a group or community to discover practices and behaviors that enable some individuals (without access to special resources and facing the same constraints) to find better solutions than their peers to common problems. These are called positive deviant (PD) behaviors and practices. DADs make it possible for people in the group, unit, or community to discover by themselves these PD practices. DADs also create favorable conditions for stimulating participants’ creativity in spaces where they can feel safe to invent new and more effective practices. Resistance to change evaporates as participants are unleashed to choose freely which practices they will adopt or try and which problems they will tackle. DADs make it possible to achieve frontline ownership of solutions.

7. Design Sprint 2.0

Want to see how a team can solve big problems and move forward with prototyping and testing solutions in a few days? The Design Sprint 2.0 template from Jake Knapp, author of Sprint, is a complete agenda for a with proven results.

Developing the right agenda can involve difficult but necessary planning. Ensuring all the correct steps are followed can also be stressful or time-consuming depending on your level of experience.

Use this complete 4-day workshop template if you are finding there is no obvious solution to your challenge and want to focus your team around a specific problem that might require a shortcut to launching a minimum viable product or waiting for the organization-wide implementation of a solution.

8. Open space technology

Open space technology- developed by Harrison Owen – creates a space where large groups are invited to take ownership of their problem solving and lead individual sessions. Open space technology is a great format when you have a great deal of expertise and insight in the room and want to allow for different takes and approaches on a particular theme or problem you need to be solved.

Start by bringing your participants together to align around a central theme and focus their efforts. Explain the ground rules to help guide the problem-solving process and then invite members to identify any issue connecting to the central theme that they are interested in and are prepared to take responsibility for.

Once participants have decided on their approach to the core theme, they write their issue on a piece of paper, announce it to the group, pick a session time and place, and post the paper on the wall. As the wall fills up with sessions, the group is then invited to join the sessions that interest them the most and which they can contribute to, then you’re ready to begin!

Everyone joins the problem-solving group they’ve signed up to, record the discussion and if appropriate, findings can then be shared with the rest of the group afterward.

Open Space Technology #action plan #idea generation #problem solving #issue analysis #large group #online #remote-friendly Open Space is a methodology for large groups to create their agenda discerning important topics for discussion, suitable for conferences, community gatherings and whole system facilitation

Techniques to identify and analyze problems

Using a problem-solving method to help a team identify and analyze a problem can be a quick and effective addition to any workshop or meeting.

While further actions are always necessary, you can generate momentum and alignment easily, and these activities are a great place to get started.

We’ve put together this list of techniques to help you and your team with problem identification, analysis, and discussion that sets the foundation for developing effective solutions.

Let’s take a look!

The Creativity Dice
Fishbone Analysis
Problem Tree
SWOT Analysis
Agreement-Certainty Matrix
The Journalistic Six
LEGO Challenge
What, So What, Now What?
Journalists

Individual and group perspectives are incredibly important, but what happens if people are set in their minds and need a change of perspective in order to approach a problem more effectively?

Flip It is a method we love because it is both simple to understand and run, and allows groups to understand how their perspectives and biases are formed.

Participants in Flip It are first invited to consider concerns, issues, or problems from a perspective of fear and write them on a flip chart. Then, the group is asked to consider those same issues from a perspective of hope and flip their understanding.

No problem and solution is free from existing bias and by changing perspectives with Flip It, you can then develop a problem solving model quickly and effectively.

Flip It! #gamestorming #problem solving #action Often, a change in a problem or situation comes simply from a change in our perspectives. Flip It! is a quick game designed to show players that perspectives are made, not born.

10. The Creativity Dice

One of the most useful problem solving skills you can teach your team is of approaching challenges with creativity, flexibility, and openness. Games like The Creativity Dice allow teams to overcome the potential hurdle of too much linear thinking and approach the process with a sense of fun and speed.

In The Creativity Dice, participants are organized around a topic and roll a dice to determine what they will work on for a period of 3 minutes at a time. They might roll a 3 and work on investigating factual information on the chosen topic. They might roll a 1 and work on identifying the specific goals, standards, or criteria for the session.

Encouraging rapid work and iteration while asking participants to be flexible are great skills to cultivate. Having a stage for idea incubation in this game is also important. Moments of pause can help ensure the ideas that are put forward are the most suitable.

The Creativity Dice #creativity #problem solving #thiagi #issue analysis Too much linear thinking is hazardous to creative problem solving. To be creative, you should approach the problem (or the opportunity) from different points of view. You should leave a thought hanging in mid-air and move to another. This skipping around prevents premature closure and lets your brain incubate one line of thought while you consciously pursue another.

11. Fishbone Analysis

Organizational or team challenges are rarely simple, and it’s important to remember that one problem can be an indication of something that goes deeper and may require further consideration to be solved.

Fishbone Analysis helps groups to dig deeper and understand the origins of a problem. It’s a great example of a root cause analysis method that is simple for everyone on a team to get their head around.

Participants in this activity are asked to annotate a diagram of a fish, first adding the problem or issue to be worked on at the head of a fish before then brainstorming the root causes of the problem and adding them as bones on the fish.

Using abstractions such as a diagram of a fish can really help a team break out of their regular thinking and develop a creative approach.

Fishbone Analysis #problem solving ##root cause analysis #decision making #online facilitation A process to help identify and understand the origins of problems, issues or observations.

12. Problem Tree

Encouraging visual thinking can be an essential part of many strategies. By simply reframing and clarifying problems, a group can move towards developing a problem solving model that works for them.

In Problem Tree, groups are asked to first brainstorm a list of problems – these can be design problems, team problems or larger business problems – and then organize them into a hierarchy. The hierarchy could be from most important to least important or abstract to practical, though the key thing with problem solving games that involve this aspect is that your group has some way of managing and sorting all the issues that are raised.

Once you have a list of problems that need to be solved and have organized them accordingly, you’re then well-positioned for the next problem solving steps.

Problem tree #define intentions #create #design #issue analysis A problem tree is a tool to clarify the hierarchy of problems addressed by the team within a design project; it represents high level problems or related sublevel problems.

13. SWOT Analysis

Chances are you’ve heard of the SWOT Analysis before. This problem-solving method focuses on identifying strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats is a tried and tested method for both individuals and teams.

Start by creating a desired end state or outcome and bare this in mind – any process solving model is made more effective by knowing what you are moving towards. Create a quadrant made up of the four categories of a SWOT analysis and ask participants to generate ideas based on each of those quadrants.

Once you have those ideas assembled in their quadrants, cluster them together based on their affinity with other ideas. These clusters are then used to facilitate group conversations and move things forward.

SWOT analysis #gamestorming #problem solving #action #meeting facilitation The SWOT Analysis is a long-standing technique of looking at what we have, with respect to the desired end state, as well as what we could improve on. It gives us an opportunity to gauge approaching opportunities and dangers, and assess the seriousness of the conditions that affect our future. When we understand those conditions, we can influence what comes next.

14. Agreement-Certainty Matrix

Not every problem-solving approach is right for every challenge, and deciding on the right method for the challenge at hand is a key part of being an effective team.

The Agreement Certainty matrix helps teams align on the nature of the challenges facing them. By sorting problems from simple to chaotic, your team can understand what methods are suitable for each problem and what they can do to ensure effective results.

If you are already using Liberating Structures techniques as part of your problem-solving strategy, the Agreement-Certainty Matrix can be an invaluable addition to your process. We’ve found it particularly if you are having issues with recurring problems in your organization and want to go deeper in understanding the root cause.

Agreement-Certainty Matrix #issue analysis #liberating structures #problem solving You can help individuals or groups avoid the frequent mistake of trying to solve a problem with methods that are not adapted to the nature of their challenge. The combination of two questions makes it possible to easily sort challenges into four categories: simple, complicated, complex , and chaotic . A problem is simple when it can be solved reliably with practices that are easy to duplicate. It is complicated when experts are required to devise a sophisticated solution that will yield the desired results predictably. A problem is complex when there are several valid ways to proceed but outcomes are not predictable in detail. Chaotic is when the context is too turbulent to identify a path forward. A loose analogy may be used to describe these differences: simple is like following a recipe, complicated like sending a rocket to the moon, complex like raising a child, and chaotic is like the game “Pin the Tail on the Donkey.” The Liberating Structures Matching Matrix in Chapter 5 can be used as the first step to clarify the nature of a challenge and avoid the mismatches between problems and solutions that are frequently at the root of chronic, recurring problems.

Organizing and charting a team’s progress can be important in ensuring its success. SQUID (Sequential Question and Insight Diagram) is a great model that allows a team to effectively switch between giving questions and answers and develop the skills they need to stay on track throughout the process.

Begin with two different colored sticky notes – one for questions and one for answers – and with your central topic (the head of the squid) on the board. Ask the group to first come up with a series of questions connected to their best guess of how to approach the topic. Ask the group to come up with answers to those questions, fix them to the board and connect them with a line. After some discussion, go back to question mode by responding to the generated answers or other points on the board.

It’s rewarding to see a diagram grow throughout the exercise, and a completed SQUID can provide a visual resource for future effort and as an example for other teams.

SQUID #gamestorming #project planning #issue analysis #problem solving When exploring an information space, it’s important for a group to know where they are at any given time. By using SQUID, a group charts out the territory as they go and can navigate accordingly. SQUID stands for Sequential Question and Insight Diagram.

16. Speed Boat

To continue with our nautical theme, Speed Boat is a short and sweet activity that can help a team quickly identify what employees, clients or service users might have a problem with and analyze what might be standing in the way of achieving a solution.

Methods that allow for a group to make observations, have insights and obtain those eureka moments quickly are invaluable when trying to solve complex problems.

In Speed Boat, the approach is to first consider what anchors and challenges might be holding an organization (or boat) back. Bonus points if you are able to identify any sharks in the water and develop ideas that can also deal with competitors!

Speed Boat #gamestorming #problem solving #action Speedboat is a short and sweet way to identify what your employees or clients don’t like about your product/service or what’s standing in the way of a desired goal.

17. The Journalistic Six

Some of the most effective ways of solving problems is by encouraging teams to be more inclusive and diverse in their thinking.

Based on the six key questions journalism students are taught to answer in articles and news stories, The Journalistic Six helps create teams to see the whole picture. By using who, what, when, where, why, and how to facilitate the conversation and encourage creative thinking, your team can make sure that the problem identification and problem analysis stages of the are covered exhaustively and thoughtfully. Reporter’s notebook and dictaphone optional.

The Journalistic Six – Who What When Where Why How #idea generation #issue analysis #problem solving #online #creative thinking #remote-friendly A questioning method for generating, explaining, investigating ideas.

18. LEGO Challenge

Now for an activity that is a little out of the (toy) box. LEGO Serious Play is a facilitation methodology that can be used to improve creative thinking and problem-solving skills.

The LEGO Challenge includes giving each member of the team an assignment that is hidden from the rest of the group while they create a structure without speaking.

What the LEGO challenge brings to the table is a fun working example of working with stakeholders who might not be on the same page to solve problems. Also, it’s LEGO! Who doesn’t love LEGO!

LEGO Challenge #hyperisland #team A team-building activity in which groups must work together to build a structure out of LEGO, but each individual has a secret “assignment” which makes the collaborative process more challenging. It emphasizes group communication, leadership dynamics, conflict, cooperation, patience and problem solving strategy.

19. What, So What, Now What?

If not carefully managed, the problem identification and problem analysis stages of the problem-solving process can actually create more problems and misunderstandings.

The What, So What, Now What? problem-solving activity is designed to help collect insights and move forward while also eliminating the possibility of disagreement when it comes to identifying, clarifying, and analyzing organizational or work problems.

Facilitation is all about bringing groups together so that might work on a shared goal and the best problem-solving strategies ensure that teams are aligned in purpose, if not initially in opinion or insight.

Throughout the three steps of this game, you give everyone on a team to reflect on a problem by asking what happened, why it is important, and what actions should then be taken.

This can be a great activity for bringing our individual perceptions about a problem or challenge and contextualizing it in a larger group setting. This is one of the most important problem-solving skills you can bring to your organization.

W³ – What, So What, Now What? #issue analysis #innovation #liberating structures You can help groups reflect on a shared experience in a way that builds understanding and spurs coordinated action while avoiding unproductive conflict. It is possible for every voice to be heard while simultaneously sifting for insights and shaping new direction. Progressing in stages makes this practical—from collecting facts about What Happened to making sense of these facts with So What and finally to what actions logically follow with Now What . The shared progression eliminates most of the misunderstandings that otherwise fuel disagreements about what to do. Voila!

20. Journalists

Problem analysis can be one of the most important and decisive stages of all problem-solving tools. Sometimes, a team can become bogged down in the details and are unable to move forward.

Journalists is an activity that can avoid a group from getting stuck in the problem identification or problem analysis stages of the process.

In Journalists, the group is invited to draft the front page of a fictional newspaper and figure out what stories deserve to be on the cover and what headlines those stories will have. By reframing how your problems and challenges are approached, you can help a team move productively through the process and be better prepared for the steps to follow.

Journalists #vision #big picture #issue analysis #remote-friendly This is an exercise to use when the group gets stuck in details and struggles to see the big picture. Also good for defining a vision.

Problem-solving techniques for developing solutions

The success of any problem-solving process can be measured by the solutions it produces. After you’ve defined the issue, explored existing ideas, and ideated, it’s time to narrow down to the correct solution.

Use these problem-solving techniques when you want to help your team find consensus, compare possible solutions, and move towards taking action on a particular problem.

Improved Solutions
Four-Step Sketch
15% Solutions
How-Now-Wow matrix
Impact Effort Matrix

21. Mindspin

Brainstorming is part of the bread and butter of the problem-solving process and all problem-solving strategies benefit from getting ideas out and challenging a team to generate solutions quickly.

With Mindspin, participants are encouraged not only to generate ideas but to do so under time constraints and by slamming down cards and passing them on. By doing multiple rounds, your team can begin with a free generation of possible solutions before moving on to developing those solutions and encouraging further ideation.

This is one of our favorite problem-solving activities and can be great for keeping the energy up throughout the workshop. Remember the importance of helping people become engaged in the process – energizing problem-solving techniques like Mindspin can help ensure your team stays engaged and happy, even when the problems they’re coming together to solve are complex.

MindSpin #teampedia #idea generation #problem solving #action A fast and loud method to enhance brainstorming within a team. Since this activity has more than round ideas that are repetitive can be ruled out leaving more creative and innovative answers to the challenge.

22. Improved Solutions

After a team has successfully identified a problem and come up with a few solutions, it can be tempting to call the work of the problem-solving process complete. That said, the first solution is not necessarily the best, and by including a further review and reflection activity into your problem-solving model, you can ensure your group reaches the best possible result.

One of a number of problem-solving games from Thiagi Group, Improved Solutions helps you go the extra mile and develop suggested solutions with close consideration and peer review. By supporting the discussion of several problems at once and by shifting team roles throughout, this problem-solving technique is a dynamic way of finding the best solution.

Improved Solutions #creativity #thiagi #problem solving #action #team You can improve any solution by objectively reviewing its strengths and weaknesses and making suitable adjustments. In this creativity framegame, you improve the solutions to several problems. To maintain objective detachment, you deal with a different problem during each of six rounds and assume different roles (problem owner, consultant, basher, booster, enhancer, and evaluator) during each round. At the conclusion of the activity, each player ends up with two solutions to her problem.

23. Four Step Sketch

Creative thinking and visual ideation does not need to be confined to the opening stages of your problem-solving strategies. Exercises that include sketching and prototyping on paper can be effective at the solution finding and development stage of the process, and can be great for keeping a team engaged.

By going from simple notes to a crazy 8s round that involves rapidly sketching 8 variations on their ideas before then producing a final solution sketch, the group is able to iterate quickly and visually. Problem-solving techniques like Four-Step Sketch are great if you have a group of different thinkers and want to change things up from a more textual or discussion-based approach.

Four-Step Sketch #design sprint #innovation #idea generation #remote-friendly The four-step sketch is an exercise that helps people to create well-formed concepts through a structured process that includes: Review key information Start design work on paper, Consider multiple variations , Create a detailed solution . This exercise is preceded by a set of other activities allowing the group to clarify the challenge they want to solve. See how the Four Step Sketch exercise fits into a Design Sprint

24. 15% Solutions

Some problems are simpler than others and with the right problem-solving activities, you can empower people to take immediate actions that can help create organizational change.

Part of the liberating structures toolkit, 15% solutions is a problem-solving technique that focuses on finding and implementing solutions quickly. A process of iterating and making small changes quickly can help generate momentum and an appetite for solving complex problems.

Problem-solving strategies can live and die on whether people are onboard. Getting some quick wins is a great way of getting people behind the process.

It can be extremely empowering for a team to realize that problem-solving techniques can be deployed quickly and easily and delineate between things they can positively impact and those things they cannot change.

15% Solutions #action #liberating structures #remote-friendly You can reveal the actions, however small, that everyone can do immediately. At a minimum, these will create momentum, and that may make a BIG difference. 15% Solutions show that there is no reason to wait around, feel powerless, or fearful. They help people pick it up a level. They get individuals and the group to focus on what is within their discretion instead of what they cannot change. With a very simple question, you can flip the conversation to what can be done and find solutions to big problems that are often distributed widely in places not known in advance. Shifting a few grains of sand may trigger a landslide and change the whole landscape.

25. How-Now-Wow Matrix

The problem-solving process is often creative, as complex problems usually require a change of thinking and creative response in order to find the best solutions. While it’s common for the first stages to encourage creative thinking, groups can often gravitate to familiar solutions when it comes to the end of the process.

When selecting solutions, you don’t want to lose your creative energy! The How-Now-Wow Matrix from Gamestorming is a great problem-solving activity that enables a group to stay creative and think out of the box when it comes to selecting the right solution for a given problem.

Problem-solving techniques that encourage creative thinking and the ideation and selection of new solutions can be the most effective in organisational change. Give the How-Now-Wow Matrix a go, and not just for how pleasant it is to say out loud.

How-Now-Wow Matrix #gamestorming #idea generation #remote-friendly When people want to develop new ideas, they most often think out of the box in the brainstorming or divergent phase. However, when it comes to convergence, people often end up picking ideas that are most familiar to them. This is called a ‘creative paradox’ or a ‘creadox’. The How-Now-Wow matrix is an idea selection tool that breaks the creadox by forcing people to weigh each idea on 2 parameters.

26. Impact and Effort Matrix

All problem-solving techniques hope to not only find solutions to a given problem or challenge but to find the best solution. When it comes to finding a solution, groups are invited to put on their decision-making hats and really think about how a proposed idea would work in practice.

The Impact and Effort Matrix is one of the problem-solving techniques that fall into this camp, empowering participants to first generate ideas and then categorize them into a 2×2 matrix based on impact and effort.

Activities that invite critical thinking while remaining simple are invaluable. Use the Impact and Effort Matrix to move from ideation and towards evaluating potential solutions before then committing to them.

Impact and Effort Matrix #gamestorming #decision making #action #remote-friendly In this decision-making exercise, possible actions are mapped based on two factors: effort required to implement and potential impact. Categorizing ideas along these lines is a useful technique in decision making, as it obliges contributors to balance and evaluate suggested actions before committing to them.

27. Dotmocracy

If you’ve followed each of the problem-solving steps with your group successfully, you should move towards the end of your process with heaps of possible solutions developed with a specific problem in mind. But how do you help a group go from ideation to putting a solution into action?

Dotmocracy – or Dot Voting -is a tried and tested method of helping a team in the problem-solving process make decisions and put actions in place with a degree of oversight and consensus.

One of the problem-solving techniques that should be in every facilitator’s toolbox, Dot Voting is fast and effective and can help identify the most popular and best solutions and help bring a group to a decision effectively.

Dotmocracy #action #decision making #group prioritization #hyperisland #remote-friendly Dotmocracy is a simple method for group prioritization or decision-making. It is not an activity on its own, but a method to use in processes where prioritization or decision-making is the aim. The method supports a group to quickly see which options are most popular or relevant. The options or ideas are written on post-its and stuck up on a wall for the whole group to see. Each person votes for the options they think are the strongest, and that information is used to inform a decision.

All facilitators know that warm-ups and icebreakers are useful for any workshop or group process. Problem-solving workshops are no different.

Use these problem-solving techniques to warm up a group and prepare them for the rest of the process. Activating your group by tapping into some of the top problem-solving skills can be one of the best ways to see great outcomes from your session.

Check-in/Check-out
Doodling Together
Show and Tell
Constellations
Draw a Tree

28. Check-in / Check-out

Solid processes are planned from beginning to end, and the best facilitators know that setting the tone and establishing a safe, open environment can be integral to a successful problem-solving process.

Check-in / Check-out is a great way to begin and/or bookend a problem-solving workshop. Checking in to a session emphasizes that everyone will be seen, heard, and expected to contribute.

If you are running a series of meetings, setting a consistent pattern of checking in and checking out can really help your team get into a groove. We recommend this opening-closing activity for small to medium-sized groups though it can work with large groups if they’re disciplined!

Check-in / Check-out #team #opening #closing #hyperisland #remote-friendly Either checking-in or checking-out is a simple way for a team to open or close a process, symbolically and in a collaborative way. Checking-in/out invites each member in a group to be present, seen and heard, and to express a reflection or a feeling. Checking-in emphasizes presence, focus and group commitment; checking-out emphasizes reflection and symbolic closure.

29. Doodling Together

Thinking creatively and not being afraid to make suggestions are important problem-solving skills for any group or team, and warming up by encouraging these behaviors is a great way to start.

Doodling Together is one of our favorite creative ice breaker games – it’s quick, effective, and fun and can make all following problem-solving steps easier by encouraging a group to collaborate visually. By passing cards and adding additional items as they go, the workshop group gets into a groove of co-creation and idea development that is crucial to finding solutions to problems.

Doodling Together #collaboration #creativity #teamwork #fun #team #visual methods #energiser #icebreaker #remote-friendly Create wild, weird and often funny postcards together & establish a group’s creative confidence.

30. Show and Tell

You might remember some version of Show and Tell from being a kid in school and it’s a great problem-solving activity to kick off a session.

Asking participants to prepare a little something before a workshop by bringing an object for show and tell can help them warm up before the session has even begun! Games that include a physical object can also help encourage early engagement before moving onto more big-picture thinking.

By asking your participants to tell stories about why they chose to bring a particular item to the group, you can help teams see things from new perspectives and see both differences and similarities in the way they approach a topic. Great groundwork for approaching a problem-solving process as a team!

Show and Tell #gamestorming #action #opening #meeting facilitation Show and Tell taps into the power of metaphors to reveal players’ underlying assumptions and associations around a topic The aim of the game is to get a deeper understanding of stakeholders’ perspectives on anything—a new project, an organizational restructuring, a shift in the company’s vision or team dynamic.

31. Constellations

Who doesn’t love stars? Constellations is a great warm-up activity for any workshop as it gets people up off their feet, energized, and ready to engage in new ways with established topics. It’s also great for showing existing beliefs, biases, and patterns that can come into play as part of your session.

Using warm-up games that help build trust and connection while also allowing for non-verbal responses can be great for easing people into the problem-solving process and encouraging engagement from everyone in the group. Constellations is great in large spaces that allow for movement and is definitely a practical exercise to allow the group to see patterns that are otherwise invisible.

Constellations #trust #connection #opening #coaching #patterns #system Individuals express their response to a statement or idea by standing closer or further from a central object. Used with teams to reveal system, hidden patterns, perspectives.

32. Draw a Tree

Problem-solving games that help raise group awareness through a central, unifying metaphor can be effective ways to warm-up a group in any problem-solving model.

Draw a Tree is a simple warm-up activity you can use in any group and which can provide a quick jolt of energy. Start by asking your participants to draw a tree in just 45 seconds – they can choose whether it will be abstract or realistic.

Once the timer is up, ask the group how many people included the roots of the tree and use this as a means to discuss how we can ignore important parts of any system simply because they are not visible.

All problem-solving strategies are made more effective by thinking of problems critically and by exposing things that may not normally come to light. Warm-up games like Draw a Tree are great in that they quickly demonstrate some key problem-solving skills in an accessible and effective way.

Draw a Tree #thiagi #opening #perspectives #remote-friendly With this game you can raise awarness about being more mindful, and aware of the environment we live in.

Each step of the problem-solving workshop benefits from an intelligent deployment of activities, games, and techniques. Bringing your session to an effective close helps ensure that solutions are followed through on and that you also celebrate what has been achieved.

Here are some problem-solving activities you can use to effectively close a workshop or meeting and ensure the great work you’ve done can continue afterward.

One Breath Feedback
Who What When Matrix
Response Cards

How do I conclude a problem-solving process?

All good things must come to an end. With the bulk of the work done, it can be tempting to conclude your workshop swiftly and without a moment to debrief and align. This can be problematic in that it doesn’t allow your team to fully process the results or reflect on the process.

At the end of an effective session, your team will have gone through a process that, while productive, can be exhausting. It’s important to give your group a moment to take a breath, ensure that they are clear on future actions, and provide short feedback before leaving the space.

The primary purpose of any problem-solving method is to generate solutions and then implement them. Be sure to take the opportunity to ensure everyone is aligned and ready to effectively implement the solutions you produced in the workshop.

Remember that every process can be improved and by giving a short moment to collect feedback in the session, you can further refine your problem-solving methods and see further success in the future too.

33. One Breath Feedback

Maintaining attention and focus during the closing stages of a problem-solving workshop can be tricky and so being concise when giving feedback can be important. It’s easy to incur “death by feedback” should some team members go on for too long sharing their perspectives in a quick feedback round.

One Breath Feedback is a great closing activity for workshops. You give everyone an opportunity to provide feedback on what they’ve done but only in the space of a single breath. This keeps feedback short and to the point and means that everyone is encouraged to provide the most important piece of feedback to them.

One breath feedback #closing #feedback #action This is a feedback round in just one breath that excels in maintaining attention: each participants is able to speak during just one breath … for most people that’s around 20 to 25 seconds … unless of course you’ve been a deep sea diver in which case you’ll be able to do it for longer.

34. Who What When Matrix

Matrices feature as part of many effective problem-solving strategies and with good reason. They are easily recognizable, simple to use, and generate results.

The Who What When Matrix is a great tool to use when closing your problem-solving session by attributing a who, what and when to the actions and solutions you have decided upon. The resulting matrix is a simple, easy-to-follow way of ensuring your team can move forward.

Great solutions can’t be enacted without action and ownership. Your problem-solving process should include a stage for allocating tasks to individuals or teams and creating a realistic timeframe for those solutions to be implemented or checked out. Use this method to keep the solution implementation process clear and simple for all involved.

Who/What/When Matrix #gamestorming #action #project planning With Who/What/When matrix, you can connect people with clear actions they have defined and have committed to.

35. Response cards

Group discussion can comprise the bulk of most problem-solving activities and by the end of the process, you might find that your team is talked out!

Providing a means for your team to give feedback with short written notes can ensure everyone is head and can contribute without the need to stand up and talk. Depending on the needs of the group, giving an alternative can help ensure everyone can contribute to your problem-solving model in the way that makes the most sense for them.

Response Cards is a great way to close a workshop if you are looking for a gentle warm-down and want to get some swift discussion around some of the feedback that is raised.

Response Cards #debriefing #closing #structured sharing #questions and answers #thiagi #action It can be hard to involve everyone during a closing of a session. Some might stay in the background or get unheard because of louder participants. However, with the use of Response Cards, everyone will be involved in providing feedback or clarify questions at the end of a session.

Save time and effort discovering the right solutions

A structured problem solving process is a surefire way of solving tough problems, discovering creative solutions and driving organizational change. But how can you design for successful outcomes?

With SessionLab, it’s easy to design engaging workshops that deliver results. Drag, drop and reorder blocks to build your agenda. When you make changes or update your agenda, your session timing adjusts automatically , saving you time on manual adjustments.

Collaborating with stakeholders or clients? Share your agenda with a single click and collaborate in real-time. No more sending documents back and forth over email.

Explore how to use SessionLab to design effective problem solving workshops or watch this five minute video to see the planner in action!

Over to you

The problem-solving process can often be as complicated and multifaceted as the problems they are set-up to solve. With the right problem-solving techniques and a mix of creative exercises designed to guide discussion and generate purposeful ideas, we hope we’ve given you the tools to find the best solutions as simply and easily as possible.

Is there a problem-solving technique that you are missing here? Do you have a favorite activity or method you use when facilitating? Let us know in the comments below, we’d love to hear from you!

thank you very much for these excellent techniques

Certainly wonderful article, very detailed. Shared!

Design your next workshop with SessionLab

Join the 150,000 facilitators using SessionLab

How Managers Can Improve Team Problem-Solving

Teaching good problem-solving means learning from previous solutions..

Posted March 28, 2024 | Reviewed by Ray Parker

What Is a Career
Find a career counselor near me
We can access vast information online, but critical thinking skills are still essential.
The key to improving team problem-solving is providing reliable resources you trust.
Build a library of problem-solving resources, including creating step-by-step instructions and checklists.

By now, it is a hackneyed truth about today’s world that we all have endless amounts of information at our fingertips, available instantly, all the time. We have multiple competing answers to any question on any subject—more answers than an entire team, let alone an individual, could possibly master in a lifetime. The not quite as obvious punchline is this: There has been a radical change in how much information a person needs to keep inside their head versus accessible through their fingertips.

Nobody should be so short-sighted or so old-fashioned as to write off the power of being able to fill knowledge gaps on demand. Yet this phenomenon is often attributed to a growing critical thinking skills gap experienced in many organizations today.

Many people today are simply not in the habit of really thinking on their feet. Without a lot of experience puzzling through problems, it should be no surprise that so many people are often puzzled when they encounter unanticipated problems.

Here’s the thing: Nine out of ten times, you don’t need to make important decisions on the basis of your own judgment at the moment. You are much better off if you can rely on the accumulated experience of the organization in which you are working, much like we rely on the accumulated information available online.

The key is ensuring that your direct reports are pulling from sources of information and experience they and the organization can trust.

The first step to teaching anybody the basics of problem-solving is to anticipate the most common recurring problems and prepare with ready-made solutions. It may seem counterintuitive, but problem-solving skills aren’t built by reinventing the wheel: From learning and implementing ready-made solutions, employees will learn a lot about the anatomy of a good solution. This will put them in a much better position to improvise when they encounter a truly unanticipated problem.

The trick is to capture best practices, turn them into standard operating procedures, and deploy them to your team for use as job aids. This can be as simple as an “if, then” checklist:

If A happens, then do B.
If C happens, then do D.
If E happens, then do F.

Here are seven tips to help you build a library of problem-solving resources for your team:

1. Break things down and write them out. Start with what you know. Break down the task or project into a list of step-by-step instructions, incorporating any resources or job aids you currently use. Then, take each step further by breaking it down into a series of concrete actions. Get as granular as you possibly can—maybe even go overboard a little. It will always be easier to remove unnecessary steps from your checklist than to add in necessary steps later.

2. Follow your instructions as if you were a newbie. Once you have a detailed, step-by-step outline, try using it as though you were totally new to the task or project. Follow the instructions exactly as you have written them: Avoid subconsciously filling in any gaps with your own expertise. Don't assume that anything goes without saying, especially if the task or project is especially technical or complex. As you follow your instructions, make corrections and additions as you go. Don't make the mistake of assuming you will remember to make necessary corrections or additions later.

3. Make final edits. Follow your updated and improved instructions one final time. Make any further corrections or additions as necessary. Include as many details as possible for and between each step.

4. Turn it into a checklist. Now, it's time to translate your instructions into a checklist format. Checklists are primarily tools of mindfulness : They slow us down and focus us on the present actions under our control. Consider whether the checklist will be more helpful if it is phrased in past or present tense. Who will be using the checklist? What information do they need to know? How much of the checklist can be understood at a glance?

5. Get outside input. Ask someone to try and use your checklist to see if it works for them. Get their feedback about what was clear, what was unclear, and why it was clear or unclear. Ask about any questions they had that weren't answered by the checklist. Solicit other suggestions, thoughts, or improvements you may not have considered. Incorporate their input and then repeat the process with another tester.

6. Use your checklist. Don't simply create your checklist for others and then abandon it. Use it in your own work going forward, and treat it as a living document. Make clarifying notes, additions, and improvements as the work naturally changes over time. Remember, checklists are tools of mindfulness. Use them to tune in to the work you already do and identify opportunities for growth and improvement.

7. Establish a system for saving drafts, templates, and examples of work that can be shared with others . Of course, checklists are just one type of shareable job aid. Sharing examples of your previous work or another team member is another useful way to help someone jumpstart a new task or project. This can be anything from final products to drafts, sketches, templates, or even videos.

Bruce Tulgan, JD, is the founder and CEO of RainmakerThinking and the author of The Art of Being Indispensable at Work.

Find a Therapist
Find a Treatment Center
Find a Psychiatrist
Find a Support Group
Find Teletherapy
United States
Brooklyn, NY
Chicago, IL
Houston, TX
Los Angeles, CA
New York, NY
Portland, OR
San Diego, CA
San Francisco, CA
Seattle, WA
Washington, DC
Asperger's
Bipolar Disorder
Chronic Pain
Eating Disorders
Passive Aggression
Personality
Goal Setting
Positive Psychology
Stopping Smoking
Low Sexual Desire
Relationships
Child Development
Therapy Center NEW
Diagnosis Dictionary
Types of Therapy

Understanding what emotional intelligence looks like and the steps needed to improve it could light a path to a more emotionally adept world.

Coronavirus Disease 2019
Affective Forecasting
Neuroscience

Join 150k+ leaders reading our Monthly Newsletter.

Team Types: Why they matter, and how to harness their power

Ashley McCann

Every leader has their idea of the perfect team—a group with the skills, personalities, and competencies to achieve any goal. And while it’s easy to believe there’s a “right” way to assemble that Ocean’s Eleven team, that couldn’t be farther from the truth. Any team can be great —provided you understand their Team Type.

Learning about different Team Types in the workplace can help you put together the right group for the goal you’re pursuing. Whether you’re looking to drive innovation, improve efficiency, or encourage collaboration, there’s a Team Type that can help your organization address its needs.

What are Team Types?

A Team Type refers to the collective work style of a group of teammates. This work style is determined by the team’s unique makeup of employee behaviors .

According to PI’s science team, there are nine observable Team Types :

Cultivating
Pathfinding
Stabilizing

Each Type Team differs in its natural behavioral strengths. For example, an Exploring Team tends to consist of big-picture thinkers and risk takers; this type of team often lends itself well to innovation and agility. By contrast, a Stabilizing Team typically consists of more detail-oriented, risk-adverse employees. For that reason, a Stabilizing Team can be relied on to improve efficiencies and build new processes.

Just as these Team Types have strengths, they also have caution areas to beware of. You likely wouldn’t ask a Stabilizing Team to brainstorm a new product, just as much as you wouldn’t ask an Exploring Team to actually build that product.

The key, then, is to understand the team you have, and the goals you’re pursuing. So long as your Team Type is aligned with your strategy, you set yourself—and your people—up for success.

Why are teams important in organizations?

Teams are formed for a variety of business functions , often with unique responsibilities, objectives, or skill levels. For instance, a leadership team comprised of managers can serve a wildly different purpose than a project team in terms of its scope of work, level of responsibility, and duration.

A project team may consist of groups of employees tasked with the specific project of bringing a new product to market and may be disbanded once that project has been completed.

A leadership team , by contrast, refers to a group of individuals in management positions from different departments. This team is often responsible for decision making and sharing information about the employees and projects they oversee with other managers and executives, and has no set “end date.”

By understanding your Team Type, as well as your team function, you can strategically structure work teams in a way that makes it easier to define and achieve shared goals.

Learn more about effective team building:

Crush your team goals with PI Design’s Team Discovery.

5 ways PI Design can help you build winning teams

Different types of teams in the workplace

Most organizations have a wide range of team structures and functions. Teams may be grouped by role, department, work location, employment status, or project; you can even have teams within teams. In short, there’s no limit to the possible configurations when it comes to bringing employees together for a common purpose.

Here is a brief overview of the most commonly created teams:

Project teams

Project teams are made up of a group of individuals who often have different roles, tasks, and deadlines but who are all working together toward the same outcome. A project team is usually temporary.

Functional teams

The team members of a functional team typically share the same skills, are from the same department, or report to the same manager. Functional teams are usually permanent.

Cross-functional teams

Cross-functional teams consist of individuals who come from a variety of different departments and have a range of skills and expertise. These types of teams typically serve as a task force to solve problems or make decisions that require different types of input or experience.

Operational teams

Members of an operational team have roles and responsibilities that serve the purpose of supporting employees and/or teams so that they can work more efficiently and effectively. Tasks assigned to an operational team often relate to organizing and optimizing the workflow and processes of an organization in an effort to maximize productivity.

Virtual teams

With the rise of remote work, virtual teams have become more common. Virtual teams rarely work together in the same physical space, and their commonality lies in their offsite location. Online collaboration tools are especially important to keep these teams organized, informed, and communicating.

Self-managed teams

As indicated by the name, self-managing teams (also known as autonomous teams ) don’t rely on a team leader or project manager for guidance. The team members are fully responsible for every aspect of the decision-making process, from deadlines and tasks to expectations and outcomes. The flexibility available to self-managed teams often results in creative problem-solving and an increase in overall productivity.

Problem-solving teams

A problem-solving team is usually similar to a project team—it’s a group of individuals with different skills or experience who are brought together from various departments to find a solution to a specific challenge or crisis. This team is usually (and hopefully) temporary in nature.

Leadership teams

As referenced above, leadership teams usually consist of managers, team leaders, or executives and exist to identify strategies to improve the organization, as well as provide a greater sense of company-wide cohesion by communicating about the different roles, projects, and updates from their respective departments.

Benefits of clearly defined team functions

Putting together a successful team involves more than assigning a common interest or activity to a group of employees. To create a fully optimized team, you should consider the scope of work, the competencies of employees, the soft skills, and the personality types of your group members, as well as the management style, tools, and processes that will support the team and its initiatives.

You may need a functional team, like a marketing team, to define your product’s messaging, but a cross-functional team might be necessary if that messaging includes product features or limitations that only a developer would fully understand or if the goal is to have feedback from customers inspire future developments.

Understanding the proposed team’s objectives and the skills, expertise, management style, and work environment necessary to achieve those goals are the first steps of team development.

How PI helps you leverage Team Types

Distrust, incompatibility, and miscommunication are all obstacles to having a cohesive and collaborative team. PI Design uses data to identify what motivates your team, as individuals and as a group, and provides you with a custom action plan to achieve success.

Here’s how it works:

You: Take PI’s six-minute behavioral assessment, and learn how you work and manage best.
Team: Discover your team’s collective strengths and caution areas, and reveal your specific Team Type.
Strategy: Visualize the work to be done side-by-side with the capabilities of your team. Identify potential misalignment, and get instant insights to close the gap and crush your goals.

Even the smallest changes you make with PI Design can create a monumental impact on your team’s morale and productivity.

Ashley McCann is a content writer who specializes in the things that matter most to people. She loves travel, the Oxford comma, and those tiny kitchen cooking videos.

A group of people collaborating to discover their business team type.

What are the most common business team types?

Crush your team goals with Team Discovery

Create your free PI Learn account.

I would like to receive marketing emails from The Predictive Index. View our Privacy Policy.

By creating a Learn account, you’re agreeing to accept The Predictive Index Terms of Service .

We’re committed to your privacy. The Predictive Index uses the information you provide to contact you about relevant content, products, and services. You may unsubscribe from these communications at any time. For more information, check out our privacy policy .

Thank you for registering for PI Learn!

Please check your email for your account information.

Sign up for our monthly newsletter.

Join 150K+ business and HR leaders and stay up to date with our top resources.

I would like to receive marketing emails from The Predictive Index. By submitting my information, I agree to be subject to PI's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy .

By submitting your information, you agree to be subject to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy .

SUGGESTED TOPICS
The Magazine
Newsletters
Managing Yourself
Managing Teams
Work-life Balance
The Big Idea
Data & Visuals
Reading Lists
Case Selections
HBR Learning
Topic Feeds
Account Settings
Email Preferences

How to Solve Problems

Laura Amico

To bring the best ideas forward, teams must build psychological safety.

Teams today aren’t just asked to execute tasks: They’re called upon to solve problems. You’d think that many brains working together would mean better solutions, but the reality is that too often problem-solving teams fall victim to inefficiency, conflict, and cautious conclusions. The two charts below will help your team think about how to collaborate better and come up with the best solutions for the thorniest challenges.

Laura Amico is a former senior editor at Harvard Business Review.

Partner Center

Exploring 9 Distinct Type Of Team | Roles, Functions, and Purposes | 2024 Reveals

Jane Ng • 29 Jan 2024 • 6 min read

In today’s business world, teams are like characters in an exciting story, each playing a unique role and adding depth to the storyline of organizational growth. Similar to how various instruments combine to make beautiful music. Explore 9 different type of team in an organization and their undeniable impact on a company’s culture, productivity, and innovation.

9 different type of team: their purpose and functions.

#1 Cross-Functional Teams
#2 Project Teams
#3 Problem-Solving Teams
#4 Virtual Teams
#5 Self-Managed Teams
#6 Functional Teams
#7 Crisis Response Teams

Final Thoughts

More Tips On How To Build A High-Performing Team

Tips For Better Engagement

Cross functional teams management
Self managed team
Work challenge examples

Get your Employee Engaged

Start meaningful discussion, get useful feedback and educate your employee. Sign up to take free AhaSlides template

In the dynamic landscape of organizational behavior and management, various types of teams play crucial roles in fostering collaboration, achieving goals, and driving innovation. Let’s delve into the different types of teams in the workplace and understand the unique purposes they serve.

1/ Cross-Functional Teams

Type of Team: Cross-Functional Team

Types of Teamwork: Collaborative Expertise

Purpose: To bring together individuals with diverse skills from different departments, promoting innovation and comprehensive problem-solving for complex projects.

Cross-functional teams are groups of people from different departments or areas of expertise who work together to achieve a common goal. With different skill sets, backgrounds, and perspectives, this collaborative approach aims to tackle complex challenges, drive innovation, and create well-rounded solutions that might not have been achievable within a single department.

2/ Project Teams

Type of Team: Project Team

Types of Teamwork: Task-specific Collaboration

Purpose: To focus on a particular project or initiative, combining skills to achieve a specific goal within a defined timeframe.

Project teams are temporary groups of individuals who come together with a shared mission: to complete a specific project or initiative within the allotted time frame. Unlike ongoing departmental teams, project teams are formed to address a particular need and are led by a project manager.

3/ Problem-Solving Teams

Type of Team: Problem-Solving Team

Types of Teamwork: Collaborative Analysis

Purpose: To address organizational challenges and find innovative solutions through collective brainstorming and critical thinking.

Problem-solving teams are groups of people with diverse skills and perspectives who come together to solve specific problems. They analyze complex problems, generate creative solutions, and implement effective strategies. Problem-solving teams play a vital role in identifying opportunities for improvement, resolving issues, and driving continuous innovation within the organization.

4/ Virtual Teams

Type of Team: Virtual Team

Types of Teamwork: Remote Collaboration

Purpose: To use technology to connect team members who are located in different parts of the world, allowing for flexible work arrangements and access to a wider pool of talent.

In the era of digital connectivity, virtual teams have emerged as a response to the need for cross-border collaboration and the harnessing of specialized skills from around the world. A virtual team consists of members who are not physically located in the same place but work together seamlessly through various online tools and communication platforms.

5/ Self-Managed Teams

Type of Team: Self-Managed Team

Types of Teamwork: Autonomous Cooperation

Purpose: To empower members to make decisions collectively, enhancing accountability and ownership over tasks and outcomes.

Self-managed teams, also known as self-directed teams or autonomous teams, are a unique and innovative approach to teamwork and collaboration. In a self-managed team, members have a high degree of autonomy and responsibility to make decisions about their work, tasks, and processes. These teams are designed to foster a sense of ownership, accountability, and shared leadership.

6/ Functional Teams

Type of Team: Functional Team

Types of Teamwork: Departmental Synergy

Purpose: To align individuals based on specific functions or roles within the organization, ensuring expertise in specialized areas.

Functional teams are a fundamental and common type of team in organizations, designed to capitalize on specialized expertise and skills within distinct functional areas. These teams are composed of people with similar roles, responsibilities, and skill sets. This ensures that they have a coordinated approach to tasks and projects within their specific area of expertise. Functional teams are a crucial component of organizational structure, contributing to the efficient execution of tasks, processes, and projects.

7/ Crisis Response Teams

Type of Team: Crisis Response Team

Types of Teamwork: Emergency Coordination

Purpose: To manage unexpected situations and emergencies with a structured and efficient approach.

Crisis response teams are responsible for handling unexpected and potentially disruptive events, ranging from natural disasters and accidents to cybersecurity breaches and public relations crises. The primary goal of a crisis response team is to swiftly and effectively manage the crisis, minimize damage, protect stakeholders, and restore normalcy as efficiently as possible.

8/ Leadership Teams

Type of Team: Leadership Team

Types of Teamwork: Strategic Planning

Purpose: To facilitate high-level decision-making, set organizational directions, and drive long-term success.

Leadership teams are the guiding force behind an organization’s vision, strategy, and long-term success. Comprised of top executives, senior managers, and department heads, these teams play a pivotal role in shaping the direction of the organization and ensuring alignment with its mission and goals. Leadership teams are responsible for strategic planning, decision-making, and fostering a culture of collaboration and innovation to drive the organization’s growth and prosperity.

9/ Committees

Type of Team: Committee

Types of Teamwork: Policy and Procedure Management

Purpose: To oversee ongoing functions, policies, or initiatives, ensuring adherence to established guidelines.

Committees are formal groups established within an organization to manage and oversee specific functions, policies, or initiatives. These teams are responsible for ensuring consistency, compliance, and effective execution of established guidelines. Committees play a crucial role in promoting alignment with organizational standards, driving continuous improvement, and upholding the integrity of processes and policies.

In the world of businesses today, teams come in all shapes and sizes, each adding its special touch to the success story. Whether it’s teams that mix different skills, teams for specific projects, or teams that manage themselves, they all have one thing in common: they bring together different people’s strengths and skills to make great things happen.

And don’t miss an interactive tool at your fingertips that can turn ordinary group activities into engaging and productive experiences. AhaSlides offers a wide range of interactive features and ready-made templates that can be used for a variety of purposes, making team meetings, training sessions, workshops, brainstorms, and ice-breaking activities productive. more dynamic and efficient than ever.

Cross-functional self-managed teams are used in organizations to…

Cross-functional team management helps members to work faster with better results, which supports the business to grow quickly.

What are the four types of teams?

Here are four main types of teams: Functional Teams, Cross-Functional Teams, Self-Managed Teams, and Virtual Teams.

What are the 5 types of teams?

Here are five types of teams: Functional Teams, Cross-Functional Teams, Self-Managed Teams, Virtual Teams, and Project Teams.

What are the 4 types of teams and explain them?

Functional Teams: Individuals with similar roles in a department, focusing on specialized tasks. Cross-Functional Teams: Members from different departments collaborate, using diverse expertise to tackle challenges. Self-Managed Teams: Empowered to plan and execute work independently, promoting autonomy. Virtual Teams: Geographically dispersed members collaborate through technology, enabling flexible work and diverse communication.

Ref: Study Smarter | Ntask Manager

A writer who wants to create practical and valuable content for the audience

More from AhaSlides

7 Free Career Path Tests Worth Exploring To Shape Your Future

Members-only Content

Monthly Member Events
Event Session Videos
Experience Reports
Research Papers
Share a Community Event
Submit an Article to the Blog
Submit a Member Initiative
Promote a Training Event

Become an Agile Alliance member!

Your membership enables us to offer a wealth of resources, present renowned international events, support global community groups, and so much more! And, while you’re supporting our non-profit mission, you’ll also gain access to a range of valuable member benefits. Learn more

Join Us Today
Member Portal
Membership FAQs
Terms and Conditions
Corporate Members

Agile Conferences

Agile en Chile 2024
Agile Executive Forum
Agile2024 European Experience
All Agile Alliance Events
Past Conferences
Become an Event Sponsor

Virtual Events

Member Events Calendar
Agile MiniCon
BYOC Lean Coffee
Agile Tech Talks
Member Meet & Greet
Agile Coaching Network
Full Events Calendar
Community Events
Non-profit Events
Agile Training
Sponsored Meetup Groups
Submit a Non-profit Event
Submit a For-profit Training
Event Funding Request
Global Events Calendars

Agile en Chile – 2024

Events Calendar
BYOC – Lean Coffee
Member Meet & Greet
View All Events
Submit an Event
Meetup Groups
Past Conferences & Events

Agile Essentials is designed to bring you up to speed on the basic concepts and principles of Agile with articles, videos, glossary terms, and more.

Agile Essentials

Download the Agile Manifesto

To download a free PDF copy of the Agile Manifesto and 12 Principles of Agile, simply sign-up for our newsletter. Agile Alliance members can download it for free.

Agile Essentials Overview
Agile Manifesto
12 Principles Behind the Manifesto
A Short History of Agile
Subway Map to Agile Practices
Agile Glossary
Introductory Videos

Recent Blog Posts

Agile Alliance Call for Nominations for the Board of Directors

Agile Alliance Launches Young Professionals Committee

Agile Alliance New Zealand: Who we are and where we’re going

View all blog posts

Agile Resources

The agile resource library.

Find expert help with your Agile adoption within our vast library of online resources, including Agile glossary, event session videos, experience reports, research papers, blog posts, books, and more! Learn more

Remote Working Guide
Event Sessions
Content Library

Sustainability Manifesto

The Agile Sustainability Initiative has created the Agile Sustainability Manifesto in an effort to grow awareness about sustainability within the Agile community and inspire a more sustainable way of working. Read and sign now

MEMBER INITIATIVES

Agile Sustainability Initiative
Principle 12 Initiative
Agile in Color Initiative
Agile Coach Camp Worldwide
Agile Coaching Ethics

View all initiatives

Your Community

Global development.

LATAM Community
India Community

Global Affiliates

Community Groups
Community Services
Member Initiatives
LATAM Community Development
India Community Development
Volunteer Signup

OUR POLICIES

Become a sponsor.

Being an Agile Alliance sponsor is a great way to introduce your company to our members to build awareness around your products and services. The Call for Agile2024 Sponsorships is now open, and there are great options and opportunities still available! Learn more >

About Agile Alliance
Code of Conduct
Board of Directors
Agile Alliance Brazil
Agile Alliance New Zealand
Policies, Reports & Bylaws
Logo and Media Files
Become a Sponsor

Agile Event Session

Problem solving teams: creating resilient organisations through managing complexity, this video content is for agile alliance members only.

If you’re already an active member, please log in now .

To view this content, and gain access to many more valuable resources, conference discounts, and invitations to exclusive networking and learning events, please consider becoming an Agile Alliance member .

Abstract/Description

One reason many of us came to the field of software engineering or software development is because we enjoy solving problems. It exercises out mental muscles, and gives us a feeling of satisfaction to know we can add value to our organizations and customers by solving tough problems. However, as the organizations we work for get bigger, and the scope of work gets bigger, so too do the problems we need to solve. There comes a point where we can’t solve them alone, or even with the immediate team we work with. Some problems require a cross-organization, multi-function approach. When our goal is to be a more agile, lean-thinking organization, we need to develop approaches to solving these types of problems.

This is where Problem Solving Teams come into play. Problem Solving Teams are temporary structures that bring together leaders and team members from across the organization to focus on solving a specific problem. The benefits are many, including not just a solved problem, but also a more resilient organization, a stronger social network and a growing cohort of problem solvers with increased skills and abilities.

This approach draws from many influences, including complexity science, social network theory, military doctrine, flight crews, and emergency responders. We have been experimenting with this approach across several areas that involve multiple geographies and multiple functions.

Additional Resources

Speaker(s) may be willing to present this session at local group meetings and other events.

Conference or Event
Session Type
Audience Levels

Agile – 5 key points for managers

Hacking Culture for Change Management

Have a comment join the conversation, discover the many benefits of membership.

Your membership enables Agile Alliance to offer a wealth of first-rate resources, present renowned international events, support global community groups, and more — all geared toward helping Agile practitioners reach their full potential and deliver innovative, Agile solutions.

Thank you to our valued Agile Alliance Annual Partners

Our new Annual Partner Program offers a new and exciting level of engagement beyond event sponsorship.

Lucid – An Agile Alliance Official Partner

Our Cornerstone Corporate Supporting Members

Our Corporate Supporting Members are vital to the mission of Agile Alliance. Click here to view all corporate members.

Welcome back!

Not yet a member? Sign up now

Renew Membership
Agile Alliance Events
Agile en Español
Agile en Chile
Resources Overview
Agile Books
Content Library by Category
Content Standards
Privacy Policy
Cookie Policy

Privacy Overview

7.3 Using Teams to Enhance Motivation and Performance

Why are companies using team-based organizational structures?

One of the most apparent trends in business today is the use of teams to accomplish organizational goals. Using a team-based structure can increase individual and group motivation and performance. This section gives a brief overview of group behavior, defines work teams as specific types of groups, and provides suggestions for creating high-performing teams.

Understanding Group Behavior

Teams are a specific type of organizational group. Every organization contains groups, social units of two or more people who share the same goals and cooperate to achieve those goals. Understanding some fundamental concepts related to group behavior and group processes provides a good foundation for understanding concepts about work teams. Groups can be formal or informal in nature. Formal groups are designated and sanctioned by the organization; their behavior is directed toward accomplishing organizational goals. Informal groups are based on social relationships and are not determined or sanctioned by the organization.

Formal organizational groups, like the sales department at Apple , must operate within the larger Apple organizational system. To some degree, elements of the larger Apple system, such as organizational strategy, company policies and procedures, available resources, and the highly motivated employee corporate culture, determine the behavior of smaller groups, such as the sales department, within the company. Other factors that affect the behavior of organizational groups are individual member characteristics (e.g., ability, training, personality), the roles and norms of group members, and the size and cohesiveness of the group. Norms are the implicit behavioral guidelines of the group, or the standards for acceptable and unacceptable behavior. For example, an Apple sales manager may be expected to work at least two Saturdays per month without extra pay. Although this isn’t written anywhere, it is the expected norm.

Group cohesiveness refers to the degree to which group members want to stay in the group and tend to resist outside influences (such as a change in company policies). When group performance norms are high, group cohesiveness will have a positive impact on productivity. Cohesiveness tends to increase when the size of the group is small, individual and group goals are similar, the group has high status in the organization, rewards are group-based rather than individual-based, and the group competes with other groups within the organization. Work group cohesiveness can benefit the organization in several ways, including increased productivity, enhanced worker self-image because of group success, increased company loyalty, reduced employee turnover, and reduced absenteeism. Southwest Airlines is known for its work group cohesiveness. On the other hand, cohesiveness can also lead to restricted output, resistance to change, and conflict with other work groups in the organization.

The opportunity to turn the decision-making process over to a group with diverse skills and abilities is one of the arguments for using work groups (and teams) in organizational settings. For group decision-making to be most effective, however, both managers and group members must understand its strengths and weaknesses (see Table 7.1 ).

Work Groups versus Work Teams

We have already noted that teams are a special type of organizational group, but we also need to differentiate between work groups and work teams. Work groups share resources and coordinate efforts to help members better perform their individual duties and responsibilities. The performance of the group can be evaluated by adding up the contributions of the individual group members. Work teams require not only coordination but also collaboration, the pooling of knowledge, skills, abilities, and resources in a collective effort to attain a common goal. A work team creates synergy, causing the performance of the team as a whole to be greater than the sum of team members’ individual contributions. Simply assigning employees to groups and labeling them a team does not guarantee a positive outcome. Managers and team members must be committed to creating, developing, and maintaining high-performance work teams. Factors that contribute to their success are discussed later in this section.

Types of Teams

The evolution of the team concept in organizations can be seen in three basic types of work teams: problem-solving, self-managed, and cross-functional. Problem-solving teams are typically made up of employees from the same department or area of expertise and from the same level of the organizational hierarchy. They meet on a regular basis to share information and discuss ways to improve processes and procedures in specific functional areas. Problem-solving teams generate ideas and alternatives and may recommend a specific course of action, but they typically do not make final decisions, allocate resources, or implement change.

Many organizations that experienced success using problem-solving teams were willing to expand the team concept to allow team members greater responsibility in making decisions, implementing solutions, and monitoring outcomes. These highly autonomous groups are called self-managed work teams . They manage themselves without any formal supervision, taking responsibility for setting goals, planning and scheduling work activities, selecting team members, and evaluating team performance.

Today, approximately 80 percent of Fortune 1000 companies use some sort of self-managed teams. 9 One example is Zappos ’s shift to self-managed work teams in 2013, where the traditional organizational structure and bosses were eliminated, according to a system called holacracy. 10 Another version of self-managing teams can be found at W. L. Gore , the company that invented Gore-Tex fabric and Glide dental floss. The three employees who invented Elixir guitar strings contributed their spare time to the effort and persuaded a handful of colleagues to help them improve the design. After working three years entirely on their own—without asking for any supervisory or top management permission or being subjected to any kind of oversight—the team finally sought the support of the larger company, which they needed to take the strings to market. Today, W. L. Gore ’s Elixir is the number one selling string brand for acoustic guitar players. 11

An adaptation of the team concept is called a cross-functional team . These teams are made up of employees from about the same hierarchical level but different functional areas of the organization. Many task forces, organizational committees, and project teams are cross-functional. Often the team members work together only until they solve a given problem or complete a specific project. Cross-functional teams allow people with various levels and areas of expertise to pool their resources, develop new ideas, solve problems, and coordinate complex projects. Both problem-solving teams and self-managed teams may also be cross-functional teams.

Customer Satisfaction and Quality

Team approach flies high at ge aviation.

“Teaming” is the term used at GE Aviation manufacturing plants to describe how self-managed groups of employees are working together to make decisions to help them do their work efficiently, maintain quality, and meet critical deadlines in the global aviation supply chain.

This management concept is not new to GE Aviation; its manufacturing plants in Durham, North Carolina, and Bromont, Quebec, Canada, have been using self-managed teams for more than 30 years. This approach to business operations continues to be successful and is now used at most of its 77 manufacturing facilities worldwide.

The goal of teaming is to move decision-making and authority as close to the end-product as possible, which means front-line employees are accountable for meeting performance goals on a daily basis. For example, if there is some sort of delay in the manufacturing process, it is up to the team to figure out how to keep things moving—even if that means skipping breaks or changing their work schedules to overcome obstacles.

At the Bromont plant, workers do not have supervisors who give them direction. Rather, they have coaches who give them specific goals. The typical functions performed by supervisors, such as planning, developing manufacturing processes, and monitoring vacation and overtime, are managed by the teams themselves. In addition, members from each team sit on a joint council with management and HR representatives to make decisions that will affect overall plant operations, such as when to eliminate overtime and who gets promoted or fired.

This hands-on approach helps workers gain confidence and motivation to fix problems directly rather than sending a question up the chain of command and waiting for a directive. In addition, teaming allows the people who do the work on a daily basis to come up with the best ideas to resolve issues and perform various jobs tasks in the most efficient way possible.

For GE Aviation, implementing the teaming approach has been a successful venture, and the company finds the strategy easiest to implement when starting up a new manufacturing facility. The company recently opened several new plants, and the teaming concept has had an interesting effect on the hiring process. A new plant in Welland, Ontario, Canada, opens soon, and the hiring process, which may seem more rigorous than most job hiring experiences, is well under way. With the team concept in mind, job candidates need to demonstrate not only required technical skills but also soft skills—for example, the ability to communicate clearly, accept feedback, and participate in discussions in a respectful manner.

What challenges do you think HR recruiters face when hiring job candidates who need to have both technical and soft skills?
How can experienced team members help new employees be successful in the teaming structure? Provide some examples.

Sources: GE Reports Canada, “The Meaning of Teaming: Empowering New Hires at GE’s Welland Brilliant Factory,” https://gereports.ca, July 17, 2017; Sarah Kessler, “GE Has a Version of Self-Management That Is Much Like Zappos’ Holacracy—and It Works,” Quartz, https://qz.com, June 6, 2017; Gareth Phillips, “Look No Managers! Self-Managed Teams,” LinkedIn, https://www.linkedin.com, June 9, 2016; Amy Alexander, “Step by Step: Train Employees to Take Charge,” Investor’s Business Daily, http://www.investors.com, June 18, 2014; Rasheedah Jones, “Teaming at GE Aviation,” Management Innovation eXchange, http://www.managementexchange.com, July 14, 2013.

Building High-Performance Teams

A great team must possess certain characteristics, so selecting the appropriate employees for the team is vital. Employees who are more willing to work together to accomplish a common goal should be selected, rather than employees who are more interested in their own personal achievement. Team members should also possess a variety of skills. Diverse skills strengthen the overall effectiveness of the team, so teams should consciously recruit members to fill gaps in the collective skill set. To be effective, teams must also have clearly defined goals. Vague or unclear goals will not provide the necessary direction or allow employees to measure their performance against expectations.

Next, high-performing teams need to practice good communication. Team members need to communicate messages and give appropriate feedback that seeks to correct any misunderstandings. Feedback should also be detached; that is, team members should be careful to critique ideas rather than criticize the person who suggests them. Nothing can degrade the effectiveness of a team like personal attacks. Lastly, great teams have great leaders. Skilled team leaders divide work so that tasks are not repeated, help members set and track goals, monitor their team’s performance, communicate openly, and remain flexible to adapt to changing goals or management demands.

Concept Check

What is the difference between a work team and a work group?
Identify and describe three types of work teams.
What are some ways to build a high-performance team?

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/introduction-business/pages/1-introduction

Authors: Lawrence J. Gitman, Carl McDaniel, Amit Shah, Monique Reece, Linda Koffel, Bethann Talsma, James C. Hyatt
Publisher/website: OpenStax
Book title: Introduction to Business
Publication date: Sep 19, 2018
Location: Houston, Texas
Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-business/pages/1-introduction
Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-business/pages/7-3-using-teams-to-enhance-motivation-and-performance

© Apr 5, 2023 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.

.css-s5s6ko{margin-right:42px;color:#F5F4F3;}@media (max-width: 1120px){.css-s5s6ko{margin-right:12px;}} Join us: Learn how to build a trusted AI strategy to support your company's intelligent transformation, featuring Forrester .css-1ixh9fn{display:inline-block;}@media (max-width: 480px){.css-1ixh9fn{display:block;margin-top:12px;}} .css-1uaoevr-heading-6{font-size:14px;line-height:24px;font-weight:500;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;color:#F5F4F3;}.css-1uaoevr-heading-6:hover{color:#F5F4F3;} .css-ora5nu-heading-6{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-box-pack:start;-ms-flex-pack:start;-webkit-justify-content:flex-start;justify-content:flex-start;color:#0D0E10;-webkit-transition:all 0.3s;transition:all 0.3s;position:relative;font-size:16px;line-height:28px;padding:0;font-size:14px;line-height:24px;font-weight:500;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;color:#F5F4F3;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:hover{border-bottom:0;color:#CD4848;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:hover path{fill:#CD4848;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:hover div{border-color:#CD4848;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:hover div:before{border-left-color:#CD4848;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:active{border-bottom:0;background-color:#EBE8E8;color:#0D0E10;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:active path{fill:#0D0E10;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:active div{border-color:#0D0E10;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:active div:before{border-left-color:#0D0E10;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:hover{color:#F5F4F3;} Register now .css-1k6cidy{width:11px;height:11px;margin-left:8px;}.css-1k6cidy path{fill:currentColor;}

Leadership |
Team roles: 9 types to create a balance ...

Team roles: 9 types to create a balanced team

Dr. Meredith Belbin developed the team role theory based on common behavioral attributes. The Belbin model divides the roles into action-oriented, thought-oriented, and people-oriented categories to balance teams and increase productivity.

Working in a team takes organization and collaboration. For teams to be most productive, everyone should have a specific role that aligns with their strengths.

Dr. Meredith Belbin developed the team role theory based on behavioral attributes. Belbin’s nine team roles fall into three categories: action-oriented, thought-oriented, and people-oriented.

Action-oriented team members are ready to put things in action and they do well with strict deadlines. Thought-oriented team members are critical thinkers who may bring new ideas to the table. People-oriented team members have strong communication skills, which can help them support the entire team.

Shapers are team members who drive the team forward. They are action-oriented, motivating themselves and others despite any issues that arise. Shapers are natural leaders , so they do well in management roles. When a crisis occurs, these individuals are quick to find a solution.

Example of the shaper team role: Using a product marketing team as an example, the shaper would be the head of product, who oversees the team vision and the roadmap to get there.

No more silos: Optimizing your organizational structure for stronger cross-team collaboration

In this ebook, learn how to structure your organization to prevent silos, move faster, and stay aligned in the face of change.

Optimizing your organizational structure for stronger cross-team collaboration ebook banner image

2. Implementer

Implementers are also action-oriented team members, and they maintain order in their environments. They’re practical and thrive at bringing ideas to fruition. Although implementers like to take action, they’re also highly disciplined. These individuals may be the backbone of a team because they can confidently support other team members.

Example of the implementer team role: The implementer would be a data-driven business analyst on the product marketing team, assessing ways to make the organization’s processes more efficient.

3. Completer finisher

The last of the action-oriented team roles are the completer finishers. True to their name, completer finishers are heads-down individuals who notice fine details and strive for perfection. These team members may be more introverted, but they’re valuable in work environments because they push team members to produce high-quality work.

Example of the completer finisher team role: Completer finishers would do well in tech support. They know how to identify and fix problems both quickly and efficiently.

The plant is a thought-oriented team member who’s an innovative and creative thinker. Although plants help balance out the team, they prefer to brainstorm and solidify their own ideas before sharing to the greater team. Plants may prefer to work alone , but they bring valuable input even if they aren’t as outspoken as other team members.

Example of the plant team role: Plants are highly creative, which is why they would make great product designers.

5. Monitor evaluator

Another thought-oriented team role is the monitor evaluator. This type is a rational thinker and can put their emotions aside for problem solving. Monitor evaluators work best when their projects require advanced knowledge and strategic planning . They assess ideas to determine if they are valuable and viable, then take the steps to push those ideas forward.

Example of the monitor evaluator team role: Monitor evaluators are your hyper-organized project managers , strategically scoping projects and connecting the dots across teams.

6. Specialist

The last thought-oriented team role is the specialist. Specialists have in-depth knowledge in their field and they like to contribute to one area of expertise. Specialists follow the pattern of all the thought-oriented team roles in that they work better alone than in a group. Although this individual is more independent, they provide a lot of value to the team with their specific skill set.

Example of the specialist team role: Specialists may be your coders, your SEO analysts, or your technical crew on the team—their job is specialized on a skill the rest of the team may not know much about, and thankfully they have it covered.

7. Coordinator

Moving on to the people-oriented team roles, the coordinator is a team member with great communication skills. Coordinators are often in leadership positions because they promote collaboration and motivate the team to accomplish their goals. Other team members look up to coordinators and trust them to make a decision.

Example of the coordinator team role: Coordinators enjoy collaborating and motivating others, so they’d thrive as the lead of a team of product developers.

8. Teamworker

Teamworkers are also people-oriented. Their extroverted personalities help them function well with others and listen to their teammates. These team members can adapt easily to changes in their environment and they know how to create harmony if conflict arises . If one team member has too much on their plate or another has a family emergency, teamworkers are the first to step in and offer support.

Example of the teamworker team role: Because teamworkers are natural collaborators, they’d excel as a product marketer within a larger team.

9. Resource investigator

The last of the nine team roles is the resource investigator. These people-oriented individuals enjoy exploring new opportunities like finding potential marketing opportunities for the company or chatting up stakeholders for a new product launch. Their positive attitude makes them a natural networker or facilitator of new business.

Example of the resource investigator: Because resource investigators like to network with others, they’d thrive in product sales.

How to create a balanced team

Creating balanced teams at work can be more of a challenge when you have a variety of personalities and strengths at play. It’s unlikely that most teams will have the people to fill all nine team roles, which is why it’s critical to know how to work with the team you have and utilize each team member’s strengths.

Build on your team’s strengths

Every team role has its strengths and weaknesses. Being aware of these can help you create a more balanced team. For example, a plant may be less comfortable communicating, but they know how to solve complex problems. A completer finisher may not have a lot of experience with teamwork, but they always deliver on time.

When assigning responsibilities to team members, focus on each team member’s strengths. You can do this using practice tasks or employee assessments. When team members can use their strengths at work each day, your team will function at its best.

Assess gaps in your team

If you have too many individuals with the same strengths on one team, clashes and gaps can occur. For example, having too many thought-oriented people and not enough action-oriented people can lead to too many ideas with no execution.

You can become aware of gaps on your team with regular assessments. Not only should you assess team member performance, but you should observe the way team members work together. You can shift responsibilities and work duties based on natural behavior and personality types. Team building games are a great way to connect with your team and learn how you work well together.

Review team roles regularly

It’s essential to review team roles and responsibilities regularly so you can build high-performing teams. Using quarterly assessments, you can evaluate team member progress and assess whether individuals have improved their skills with time, would fit better in a different role, or could benefit from additional training.

For example, someone who is generally an introverted, thought-oriented person may gain confidence and develop their communication skills. After further evaluation, you might find that they’re a people-oriented person and would thrive in a leadership role. Without regular review and open communication, team members cannot grow into new roles.

Team management tools

Team management tools can provide clarity when assigning tasks and completing projects as a group. After all, collaboration is easier when everyone has visibility into who's doing what and by when. With clarity and insight into each team member's priorities, the entire team can function better together.

Workload management

An important part of team management is being proactive in managing workloads. Workload management involves visualizing schedules, understanding project life cycles, and using tools to gain insight on both people and projects. This is key to keep projects running smoothly without putting too much pressure on one person.

Resource allocation

Successfully allocating resources is essential to project and team success. Resource allocation helps you determine the availability of resources, how many resources you need for each project, and what team members are best suited to accomplish each project. Creating a resource management plan is a great way to keep projects on track from start to finish.

A roles and responsibilities matrix, also known as a RACI chart , helps teams clarify project roles and figure out who is responsible for a given task. The acronym stands for responsible, accountable, consulted, and informed. To create a RACI chart, outline every task in a project. Then, assign one of these four labels to each member of your team for each task at hand.

Kanban boards

Kanban boards are a great way for team members to visualize what stage a project is in so you know what’s left to bring it to completion. Using cards to represent work items, Kanban boards allow team members to visually plot out projects and workflows. This system makes projects easier to visualize by providing a clear view of the stage and priority of each initiative.

Team collaboration tools

Team collaboration is much easier when you have the right tools. Who wouldn’t want to eliminate the busywork? You can not only streamline tasks, but team members can align their goals, manage changes, share files, and more.

Having one team collaboration tool can prevent project risks from occurring and improve management of tasks across the board. To help all employees thrive in their roles, making the tool accessible to all will make everyone’s job easier.

Balanced teams increase team productivity

Using Belbin’s nine team roles can help create a balanced work environment so your team can be more productive. When you know how to play to your team’s strengths, they’ll be happier in their roles and you’ll be able to collaborate to complete tasks more efficiently.

Related resources

100+ teamwork quotes to motivate and inspire collaboration

Beat thrash for good: 4 organizational planning challenges and solutions

Work schedule types: How to find the right approach for your team

When to use collaboration vs. coordination

Problem Solving in Teams and Groups - 2

(5 reviews)

Cameron W. Piercy

Publisher: University of Kansas Libraries

Language: English

Formats Available

Conditions of use.

Learn more about reviews.

Reviewed by Eric Kaufman, Professor, Virginia Tech on 5/19/21

Comprehensiveness rating: 4 see less

The book is written in accessible language, with practical learning activities and related resources interspersed. It was helpful to see the sample course syllabus and schedule, because it allowed me to consider similarities and differences with existing courses that may benefit from adopting this textbook. Although the conceptual frameworks provided in the textbook are relevant for graduate students, they are sometimes presented in a way that seems more appropriate for undergraduate students. If the book was used for a graduate-level course, I believe it may need to be supplemented with scholarly publications that highlight the related research.

Content Accuracy rating: 4

The content is generally accurate and unbiased. Some of the hyperlinked embedded within the text are broken.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 4

The concepts are relevant for present-day application, including descriptions of many classical psychological experiments. However, in several chapters, I was somewhat disappointed the references were not more current and reflective of recent research.

Clarity rating: 4

The text is written in accessible prose, and many of the chapters contain appropriate attention to terminology. While many images and textboxes are visually appealing, some of the figures are not as crisp as I would like them to be.

Consistency rating: 1

There is much more variance between chapters than I had anticipated, making the book seem a little more like a coursepack (i.e., collection of resources) than a textbook. The difference in structure and approach are extreme enough that I believe students would find it frustrating. The variation may also be difficult for instructors to manage, as they consider different approaches to learning objectives, vocabulary, discussion questions, application activities, concept checks, outside resources, etc.

Modularity rating: 4

The text is composed of many smaller reading sections, including Wikipedia entries. Accordingly, it could be reorganized and realigned without losses from the shifts. However, because most chapters are freely available elsewhere, I would be inclined to go back to those original sources (e.g., OpenStax, NOBA, and other Pressbooks), rather than relying upon this book, which may not reflect the most current version.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 3

I appreciate the organization in three macro sections. However, I remain unclear why some chapters/sections are included and/or positioned where they are. For example, the chapter on “Intercultural and Plane Crashes” seems random. It would be helpful if each of the macro sections began with an overview of the contents, describing the mental model that explains the organization.

Interface rating: 3

The interface is generally sufficient, but it varies from one chapter to another, which can leave readers confused about what to expect with different hyperlinks or font effects. Also, while many of the font effects are carried into the PDF version, some functionality is lost, which may cause some confusion for readers using the PDF version.

Grammatical Errors rating: 4

The text contains few grammatical errors.

Cultural Relevance rating: 4

The book contains cultural variety and sensitivity to the same level I would expect in similar textbooks. Like most textbooks, though, there are opportunities for underrepresented populations to be better reflected in the examples and images provided. While this varies from one chapter to another, I was pleased to see some demographic diversity in photographs included in the book.

Because the book comes across more as a coursepack than a textbook, I may be inclined to create my own course rather than adopt this book. However, it did highlight related resources that could be used for such a coursepack or adopted as an alternate option for an open textbook.

Reviewed by Renee Owen, Assistant Professor, Southern Oregon University on 1/12/21

Comprehensiveness rating: 5 see less

I would be using the book for a graduate-level course in Adult Learning/Education, with a focus on leadership, particularly leading nonprofit organizations. The content is appropriate for the workplace. The content has a good broad overview of different approaches to group dynamics and could be useful at the graduate level, although probably more appropriate for undergraduate. That is to say it is comprehensive and broad, more so than drilling more in-depth into particular areas. There is no glossary or index.

Content Accuracy rating: 5

The book seemed accurate and up to date.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 5

The content is definitely up to date, with many theories that have longevity. Workplace topics are, of course, changing rapidly in today's world, so there will be a need for updates, something the author cannot control.

Clarity rating: 5

I liked the writing style. This text is easy to understand. It has a nice flow.

Consistency rating: 5

The book is organized with consistency that is followed throughout the book, making it easy to navigate.

Modularity rating: 5

I would not personally use the whole text, so the modularity of the book is important. It is organized and presented in a manner where chapters can be single, or even sections within chapters.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 5

The organization is presented in a clear fashion, making it easy to navigate and to read.

Interface rating: 4

The book is mostly in APA style, but there seemed to be a mixture of citation styles in some places. The images were important. I would prefer more images (but that is personal preference). Graphics, such as charts, are clear.

Grammatical Errors rating: 5

I am not a good proofing editor. I did not notice errors.

There was some attention paid to cultural responsiveness but did not extend the issue as much as today's world demands. More research on racial bias and the neuroscience of racial bias could be helpful. I appreciate the multi-racial photos, but there could be more.

Reviewed by Karishma Chatterjee, Assistant Professor of Instruction, University of Texas at Arlington on 3/6/20

The content covers a range of topics that are useful for a junior/upper level class about working in groups and teams. The content can be used for potentially two different courses- one a class about working in groups and the other one about... read more

The book starts out by drawing a distinction between groups and teams, which is a useful way to start a class about problem solving in teams and groups. Certain chapters such as Chapter 18 had descriptions and images of empirical studies on conformity and obedience that would enhance student understanding of the content.

However, there were some chapters that needed additional content. For example, chapter 2 focuses on cooperation and chapter 3 is about social comparison. A section on competition, particularly the role of communication, and its effect on teams and groups is needed. If this book is being used in Communication courses, it would be beneficial to include how group processes such as competition and cooperation are communicative in nature. Gibbs (1961) communication patterns would be helpful in identifying how communication can create defensive or supportive communication climates in teams and groups. Similarly, the role of culture is alluded without mentioning Hofstede’s cultural dimensions.

Most of the claims seemed accurate. The content was error-free and unbiased. On page 308, a claim needs a citation.

As a whole, there was literature presented that covered the history of how we study groups and what group dynamics look like in existing businesses. The text is arranged in a way that updates will be straightforward to implement.

The chapters were easy to read. However, the title of chapter Chapter 21 “Intercultural and Plane Crashes” is incomplete.

The text seems to be internally consistent in terms of terminology and framework.

The text is readily divisible into smaller reading sections that can be assigned at different points within a course.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 4

It is useful to start the book differentiating teams from groups given that people often use the two terms interchangeably. Students will appreciate the examples of different types of teams the author provides along with the organizational charts. References were provided at the end of each chapter, which is easier to look up as compared to textbooks that have all references listed at the end.

It would be helpful for the readers if there is a justification for the layout of the book. For example, chapter 5 Shared Information Bias would fit well with Chapter 15 Judgment and Decision Making. There is no rationale for why Chapter 5 is part of section 1 (An overview section ) and not section 3 (Group and team theory).

The book chapters have different citation styles. Some of the chapters seemed to be written in American Psychological Association’s (APA) style that uses in-text author citations and others are written in a different style with end notes . In section 1 most of the chapters are written in APA, while in section 2 and 3, there seems to be a mix of citations for the different chapters. The reader would have to adjust given that one can become used to reading in APA because of the first section.

The book seems to be largely error free. There are two floating “I” on page 293

Cultural Relevance rating: 5

The book is not culturally insensitive. There was some variation in pictorial representations. Study results also included women and people of different countries.

Reviewed by Melvina Goodman, Adjunct Faculty, J. Sargeant Reynolds Community College on 1/7/20

Thank you for developing this textbook. I teach a group dynamics course at a community college, and was looking for a new text for my course, as well as I want to help students reduce the cost of purchasing textbooks. With that said, I would like to offer some constructive feedback about the textbook. Overall, the book is comprehensive as evidence that it provides good information about group work, stages of group and other things about the pros and cons of group. It would have been helpful if the author had included more information in the introduction section including the purpose, how the book is organized, and maybe a personal note as to the reason he decided to write the book. That would be beneficial, because readers could decide whether or not they want to click the links of the table of contents to determine the content.

The text appears to be accurate, error-free, and unbiased.

The content is relevant and it addresses current trends as it relates to working with teams and groups. The information was somewhat generic, meaning, the information seemed tailored to the workplace, not necessarily for group counseling, although some of the activities are useful for teaching group counseling and group dynamics.

The text is written simply and clearly. The language and terms are user-friendly.

The psychology of groups section provided relevant information in terms of gaining an understanding of the rationale for groups and the overall role groups play in personal and professional development. It also provided good information on management and leadership styles.

The sections can be easily divided for class assignments. This text provides ample activities to promote student learning and engagement. Group dynamics is a skills-based course. Since the classroom has various types of learners, it is significant to utilize various teaching methods to convey information. In addition to lecture and PowerPoint presentation, including icebreakers and other fun activities in the syllabus enhances the learning experience for students.

The text is organized well. I appreciate that the author included references within each chapter, instead of at the end of the text. Some of the chapters have a list vocabulary words, however for the sake of having information at your fingertips, it would be helpful if the author included a glossary, a name index, and a subject index.

Interface rating: 5

There were no navigation issues, and all images and charts were clear.

There weren't any noticeable grammatical errors.

It was good to see that the author included images of various ethnic and cultural groups. Our world is becoming increasingly diverse, and it is imperative that publications and media outlets reflect today's world regardless of personal opinions and biases. Of course, there could be more images included throughout the book, since an image speaks volumes.

Reviewed by Tammy Hall, Instructor, ULL on 11/5/19

Comprehensiveness rating: 3 see less

The textbook opened with a table of contents. The beginning chapter started with the difference between group (informal/formal) and team. A key distinction for students to know. The content included the five stages of group development. The book did not give enough detail group diversity, benefits of diversity in groups, and group decision making--missing some key decision making processes (Delphi and nominal group techniques). The book did not contain a glossary or index. I was unable to find information on contemporary organizations and new types of teams--virtual teams.

The information is accurate. I did find that some information could have been fleshed out more and additional information added for example the punctuated equilibrium model for group formation was not discussed.

The information is broad enough to allow for additions.

Excellent key terms. The terms were easy to understand.

Consistency rating: 3

Some inconsistencies were evident in the book. The reader activities in the book were not evident throughout the different chapters. Some chapters had activities, key takeaways, and/or discussions but not all chapters.

Modularity rating: 3

There were many areas of the text which were large areas of texts.

Perhaps the Groups Theory section should have proceeded the Groups & Teams in Action

The images were good.

The book did not have any grammatical errors.

Cultural Relevance rating: 3

No--I only noticed one set of children of color (picture depicting empathy) and African American male in the section discussing conformity. As an African American woman I could not relate to many of the images in the book.

Some of the paragraphs were long and perhaps should be broken up with graphics or other images.

I. Groups & Teams Overview

1. Defining Teams and Groups
2. Cooperation
3. Social Comparison
4. The Psychology of Groups
5. Shared Information Bias
6. Inattentional Blindness
7. Teams as Systems

II. Groups & Teams (In)Action

8. Professional Writing
9. Supplemental Writing Advice
10. Persuasive Presentations
11. Groups and meetings
12. Gantt Charts
13. Organizational culture
14. Performance Evaluation

III. Group & Team Theory

15. Power in Teams and Groups
16. Judgment and Decision Making
17. Cultivating a Supportive Group Climate
18. Structuration Theory
19. Teaming with Machines
20. Leadership
21. Conformity and Obedience
22. Working in Diverse Teams
23. Intercultural and Plane Crashes
24. Conflict and Negotiation

Ancillary Material

About the book.

This textbook covers content relevant to COMS342 Problem Solving in Teams and Groups at the University of Kansas.

About the Contributors

Cameron W. Piercy , Ph.D

Contribute to this Page

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
Front Psychol

Complex Problem Solving in Teams: The Impact of Collective Orientation on Team Process Demands

Associated data.

Complex problem solving is challenging and a high-level cognitive process for individuals. When analyzing complex problem solving in teams, an additional, new dimension has to be considered, as teamwork processes increase the requirements already put on individual team members. After introducing an idealized teamwork process model, that complex problem solving teams pass through, and integrating the relevant teamwork skills for interdependently working teams into the model and combining it with the four kinds of team processes (transition, action, interpersonal, and learning processes), the paper demonstrates the importance of fulfilling team process demands for successful complex problem solving within teams. Therefore, results from a controlled team study within complex situations are presented. The study focused on factors that influence action processes, like coordination, such as emergent states like collective orientation, cohesion, and trust and that dynamically enable effective teamwork in complex situations. Before conducting the experiments, participants were divided by median split into two-person teams with either high ( n = 58) or low ( n = 58) collective orientation values. The study was conducted with the microworld C3Fire, simulating dynamic decision making, and acting in complex situations within a teamwork context. The microworld includes interdependent tasks such as extinguishing forest fires or protecting houses. Two firefighting scenarios had been developed, which takes a maximum of 15 min each. All teams worked on these two scenarios. Coordination within the team and the resulting team performance were calculated based on a log-file analysis. The results show that no relationships between trust and action processes and team performance exist. Likewise, no relationships were found for cohesion. Only collective orientation of team members positively influences team performance in complex environments mediated by action processes such as coordination within the team. The results are discussed in relation to previous empirical findings and to learning processes within the team with a focus on feedback strategies.

Introduction

Complex problems in organizational contexts are seldom solved by individuals. Generally, interdependently working teams of experts deal with complex problems (Fiore et al., 2010 ), which are characterized by element interactivity/ interconnectedness, dynamic developments, non-transparency and multiple, and/or conflicting goals (Dörner et al., 1983 ; Brehmer, 1992 ; Funke, 1995 ). Complex problem solving “takes place for reducing the barrier between a given start state and an intended goal state with the help of cognitive activities and behavior. Start state, intended goal state, and barriers prove complexity, change dynamically over time, and can be partially intransparent” (Funke, 2012 , p. 682). Teams dealing with complex problems in interdependent work contexts, for example in disaster, crisis or accident management, are called High Responsibility Teams. They are named High Responsibility Teams (HRTs; Hagemann, 2011 ; Hagemann et al., 2011 ) due to their dynamic and often unpredictable working conditions and demanding work contexts, in which technical faults and slips have severe consequences for human beings and the environment if they are not identified and resolved within the team immediately (Kluge et al., 2009 ). HRTs bear responsibility regarding lives of third parties and their own lives based on their actions and consequences.

The context of interdependently working HRTs, dealing with complex problems, is described as follows (Zsambok, 1997 ): Members of interdependently working teams have to reach ill-defined or competing goals in common in poor structured, non-transparent and dynamically changing situations under the consideration of rules of engagement and based on several cycles of joint action. Some or all goals are critical in terms of time and the consequences of actions result in decision-based outcomes with high importance for the culture (e.g., human life). In HRT contexts, added to the features of the complexity of the problem, is the complexity of relationships, which is called social complexity (Dörner, 1989/2003 ) or crew coordination complexity (Kluge, 2014 ), which results from the interconnectedness between multiple agents through coordination requirements. The dynamic control aspect of the continuous process is coupled with the need to coordinate multiple highly interactive processes imposing high coordination demands (Roth and Woods, 1988 ; Waller et al., 2004 ; Hagemann et al., 2012 ).

Within this article, it is important to us to describe the theoretical background of complex problem solving in teams in depth and to combine different but compatible theoretical approaches, in order to demonstrate their theoretical and practical use in the context of the analysis of complex problem solving in teams. In Industrial and Organizational Psychology, a detailed description of tasks and work contexts that are in the focus of the analysis is essential. The individual or team task is the point of intersection between organization and individual as a “psychologically most relevant part” of the working conditions (Ulich, 1995 ). Thus, the tasks and the teamwork context of teams that deal with complex problems is of high relevance in the present paper. We will comprehensively describe the context of complex problem solving in teams by introducing a model of an idealized teamwork process that complex problem solving teams pass through and extensively integrate the relevant teamwork skills for these interdependently working teams into the idealized teamwork process model.

Furthermore, we will highlight the episodic aspect concerning complex problem solving in teams and combine the agreed on transition, action, interpersonal and learning processes of teamwork with the idealized teamwork process model. Because we are interested in investigating teamwork competencies and action processes of complex problem solving teams, we will analyze the indirect effect of collective orientation on team performance through the teams' coordination behavior. The focusing of the study will be owed to its validity. Even though that we know that more aspects of the theoretical framework might be of interest and could be analyzed, we will focus on a detail within the laboratory experiment for getting reliable and valid results.

Goal, task, and outcome interdependence in teamwork

Concerning interdependence, teamwork research focuses on three designated features, which are in accordance with general process models of human action (Hertel et al., 2004 ). One type is goal interdependence, which refers to the degree to which teams have distinct goals as well as a linkage between individual members and team goals (Campion et al., 1993 ; Wageman, 1995 ). A second type is task interdependence, which refers to the interaction between team members. The team members depend on each other for work accomplishment, and the actions of one member have strong implications for the work process of all members (Shea and Guzzo, 1987 ; Campion et al., 1993 ; Hertel et al., 2004 ). The third type is outcome interdependence, which is defined as the extent to which one team member's outcomes depend on the performance of other members (Wageman, 1995 ). Accordingly, the rewards for each member are based on the total team performance (Hertel et al., 2004 ). This can occur, for instance, if a team receives a reward based on specific performance criteria. Although interdependence is often the reason why teams are formed in the first place, and it is stated as a defining attribute of teams (Salas et al., 2008 ), different levels of task interdependence exist (Van de Ven et al., 1976 ; Arthur et al., 2005 ).

The workflow pattern of teams can be

Independent or pooled (activities are performed separately),
Sequential (activities flow from one member to another in a unidirectional manner),
Reciprocal (activities flow between team members in a back and forth manner) or
Intensive (team members must simultaneously diagnose, problem-solve, and coordinate as a team to accomplish a task).

Teams that deal with complex problems work within intensive interdependence, which requires greater coordination patterns compared to lower levels of interdependence (Van de Ven et al., 1976 ; Wageman, 1995 ) and necessitates mutual adjustments as well as frequent interaction and information integration within the team (Gibson, 1999 ; Stajkovic et al., 2009 ).

Thus, in addition to the cognitive requirements related to information processing (e.g., encoding, storage and retrieval processes (Hinsz et al., 1997 ), simultaneously representing and anticipating the dynamic elements and predicting future states of the problem, balancing contradictory objectives and decide on the right timing for actions to execute) of individual team members, the interconnectedness between the experts in the team imposes high team process demands on the team members. These team process demands follow from the required interdependent actions of all team members for effectively using all resources, such as equipment, money, time, and expertise, to reach high team performance (Marks et al., 2001 ). Examples for team process demands are the communication for building a shared situation awareness, negotiating conflicting perspectives on how to proceed or coordinating and orchestrating actions of all team members.

A comprehensive model of the idealized teamwork process

The cognitive requirements, that complex problem solving teams face, and the team process demands are consolidated within our model of an idealized teamwork process in Figure Figure1 1 (Hagemann, 2011 ; Kluge et al., 2014 ). Individual and team processes converge sequential and in parallel and influencing factors as well as process demands concerning complex problem solving in teams can be extracted. The core elements of the model are situation awareness, information transfer, individual and shared mental models, coordination and leadership, and decision making.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is fpsyg-08-01730-g0001.jpg

Relevant teamwork skills (orange color) for interdependently working teams (see Wilson et al., 2010 ) integrated into the model of an idealized teamwork process.

Complex problem solving teams are responsible for finding solutions and reaching specified goals. Based on the overall goals various sub goals will be identified at the beginning of the teamwork process in the course of mission analysis, strategy formulation and planning, all aspects of the transition phase (Marks et al., 2001 ). The transition phase processes occur during periods of time when teams focus predominantly on evaluation and/or planning activities. The identified and communicated goals within the team represent relevant input variables for each team member in order to build up a Situation Awareness (SA). SA contains three steps and is the foundation for an ideal and goal directed collaboration within a team (Endsley, 1999 ; Flin et al., 2008 ). The individual SA is the start and end within the idealized teamwork process model. SA means the assessment of a situation which is important for complex problem solving teams, as they work based on the division of labor as well as interdependently and each team member needs to achieve a correct SA and to share it within the team. Each single team member needs to utilize all technical and interpersonal resources in order to collect and interpret up-to-date goal directed information and to share this information with other team members via “closed-loop communication.”

This information transfer focuses on sending and receiving single SA between team members in order to build up a Shared Situation Awareness (SSA). Overlapping cuts of individual SA are synchronized within the team and a bigger picture of the situation is developed. Creating a SSA means sharing a common perspective of the members concerning current events within their environment, their meaning and their future development. This shared perspective enables problem-solving teams to attain high performance standards through corresponding and goal directed actions (Cannon-Bowers et al., 1993 ).

Expectations of each team member based on briefings, individual mental models and interpositional knowledge influence the SA, the information transfer and the consolidation process. Mental models are internal and cognitive representations of relations and processes (e.g., execution of tactics) between various aspects or elements of a situation. They help team members to describe, explain and predict circumstances (Mathieu et al., 2000 ). Mental models possess knowledge elements required by team members in order to assess a current situation in terms of SA. Interpositional knowledge refers to an individual understanding concerning the tasks and duties of all team members, in order to develop an understanding about the impact of own actions on the actions of other team members and vice versa. It supports the team in identifying the information needs and the amount of required help of other members and in avoiding team conflicts (Smith-Jentsch et al., 2001 ). This knowledge is the foundation for anticipating the team members' needs for information and it is important for matching information within the team.

Based on the information matching process within the team, a common understanding of the problem, the goals and the current situation is developed in terms of a Shared Mental Model (SMM), which is important for the subsequent decisions. SMM are commonly shared mental models within a team and refer to the organized knowledge structures of all team members, that are shared with each other and which enable the team to interact goal-oriented (Mathieu et al., 2000 ). SMM help complex problem solving teams during high workload to adapt fast and efficiently to changing situations (Waller et al., 2004 ). They also enhance the teams' performance and communication processes (Cannon-Bowers et al., 1993 ; Mathieu et al., 2000 ). Especially under time pressure and in crucial situations when overt verbal communication and explicit coordination is not applicable, SMM are fundamental in order to coordinate implicitly. This information matching process fosters the building of a shared understanding of the current situation and the required actions. In order to do so teamwork skills (see Wilson et al., 2010 ) such as communication, coordination , and cooperation within the team are vitally important. Figure Figure1 1 incorporates the teamwork skills into the model of an idealized teamwork process.

Depending on the shared knowledge and SA within the team, the coordination can be based either on well-known procedures or shared expectations within the team or on explicit communication based on task specific phraseology or closed-loop communication. Cooperation needs mutual performance monitoring within the team, for example, in order to apply task strategies to accurately monitor teammate performance and prevent errors (Salas et al., 2005 ). Cooperation also needs backup behavior of each team member, for example, and continuous actions in reference to the collective events. The anticipation of other team members' needs under high workload maintains the teams' performance and the well-being of each team member (Badke-Schaub, 2008 ). A successful pass through the teamwork process model also depends e.g., on the trust and the cohesion within the team and the collective orientation of each team member.

Collective orientation (CO) is defined “as the propensity to work in a collective manner in team settings” (Driskell et al., 2010 , p. 317). Highly collectively oriented people work with others on a task-activity and team-activity track (Morgan et al., 1993 ) in a goal-oriented manner, seek others' input, contribute to team outcomes, enjoy team membership, and value cooperativeness more than power (Driskell et al., 2010 ). Thus, teams with collectively oriented members perform better than teams with non-collectively oriented members (Driskell and Salas, 1992 ). CO, trust and cohesion as well as other coordination and cooperation skills are so called emergent sates that represent cognitive, affective, and motivational states, and not traits, of teams and team members, and which are influenced, for example, by team experience, so that emergent states can be considered as team inputs but also as team outcomes (Marks et al., 2001 ).

Based on the information matching process the complex problem solving team or the team leader needs to make decisions in order to execute actions. The task prioritization and distribution is an integrated part of this step (Waller et al., 2004 ). Depending on the progress of the dynamic, non-transparent and heavily foreseeable situation tasks have to be re-prioritized during episodes of teamwork. Episodes are “temporal cycles of goal-directed activity” in which teams perform (Marks et al., 2001 , p. 359). Thus, the team acts adaptive and is able to react flexible to situation changes. The team coordinates implicitly when each team member knows what he/she has to do in his/her job, what the others expect from him/her and how he/she interacts with the others. In contrast, when abnormal events occur and they are recognized during SA processes, the team starts coordinating explicitly via communication, for example. Via closed-loop communication and based on interpositional knowledge new strategies are communicated within the team and tasks are re-prioritized.

The result of the decision making and action taking flows back into the individual SA and the as-is state will be compared with the original goals. This model of an idealized teamwork process (Figure (Figure1) 1 ) is a regulator circuit with feedback loops, which enables a team to adapt flexible to changing environments and goals. The foundation of this model is the classic Input-Process-Outcome (IPO) framework (Hackman, 1987 ) with a strong focus on the process part. IPO models view processes as mechanisms linking variables such as member, team, or organizational features with outcomes such as performance quality and quantity or members' reactions. This mediating mechanism, the team process , can be defined as “members' interdependent acts that convert inputs to outcomes through cognitive, verbal, and behavioral activities directed toward organizing taskwork to achieve collective goals” (Marks et al., 2001 , p. 357). That means team members interact interdependently with other members as well as with their environment. These cognitive, verbal, and behavioral activities directed toward taskwork and goal attainment are represented as gathering situation awareness, communication, coordination, cooperation, the consolidation of information, and task prioritization within our model of an idealized teamwork process. Within the context of complex problem solving, teams have to face team process demands in addition to cognitive challenges related to individual information processing. That means teamwork processes and taskwork to solve complex problems co-occur, the processes guide the execution of taskwork.

The dynamic nature of teamwork and temporal influences on complex problem solving teams are considered within adapted versions (Marks et al., 2001 ; Ilgen et al., 2005 ) of the original IPO framework. These adaptations propose that teams experience cycles of joint action, so called episodes, in which teams perform and also receive feedback for further actions. The IPO cycles occur sequentially and simultaneously and are nested in transition and action phases within episodes in which outcomes from initial episodes serve as inputs for the next cycle (see Figure Figure2). 2 ). These repetitive IPO cycles are a vital element of our idealized teamwork process model, as it incorporates feedback loops in such a way, that the outcomes, e.g., changes within the as-is state, are continuously compared with the original goals. Detected discrepancies within the step of updating SA motivate the team members to consider further actions for goal accomplishment.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is fpsyg-08-01730-g0002.jpg

Teamwork episodes with repetitive IPO cycles (Marks et al., 2001 ).

When applying this episodic framework to complex problem solving teams it becomes obvious that teams handle different types of taskwork at different phases of task accomplishment (Marks et al., 2001 ). That means episodes consist of two phases, so-called action and transition phases , in which teams are engaged in activities related to goal attainment and in other time in reflecting on past performance and planning for further common actions. The addition of the social complexity to the complexity of the problem within collaborative complex problem solving comes to the fore here. During transition phases teams evaluate their performance, compare the as-is state against goals, reflect on their strategies and plan future activities to guide their goal accomplishment. For example, team members discuss alternative courses of action, if their activities for simulated firefighting, such as splitting team members in order to cover more space of the map, are not successful. During action phases, teams focus directly on the taskwork and are engaged in activities such as exchanging information about the development of the dynamic situation or supporting each other. For example, a team member recognizes high workload of another team member and supports him/her in collecting information or in taking over the required communication with other involved parties.

Transition and action phases

The idealized teamwork process model covers these transition and action phases as well as the processes occurring during these two phases of team functioning, which can be clustered into transition, action, and interpersonal processes. That means during complex problem solving the relevant or activated teamwork processes in the transition and action phases change as teams move back and forth between these phases. As this taxonomy of team processes from Marks et al. ( 2001 ) states that a team process is multidimensional and teams use different processes simultaneously, some processes can occur either during transition periods or during action periods or during both periods. Transition processes especially occur during transition phases and enable the team to understand their tasks, guide their attention, specify goals and develop courses of action for task accomplishment. Thus, transition processes include (see Marks et al., 2001 ) mission analysis, formulation and planning (Prince and Salas, 1993 ), e.g., fighting a forest fire, goal specification (Prussia and Kinicki, 1996 ), e.g., saving as much houses and vegetation as possible, and strategy formulation (Prince and Salas, 1993 ; Cannon-Bowers et al., 1995 ), e.g., spreading team members into different geographic directions. Action processes predominantly occur during action phases and support the team in conducting activities directly related to goal accomplishment. Thus, action processes are monitoring progress toward goals (Cannon-Bowers et al., 1995 ), e.g., collecting information how many cells in a firefighting simulation are still burning, systems monitoring (Fleishman and Zaccaro, 1992 ), e.g., tracking team resources such as water for firefighting, team monitoring and backup behavior (Stevens and Campion, 1994 ; Salas et al., 2005 ), e.g., helping a team member and completing a task for him/her, and coordination (Fleishman and Zaccaro, 1992 ; Serfaty et al., 1998 ), e.g., orchestrating the interdependent actions of the team members such as exchanging information during firefighting about positions of team members for meeting at the right time at the right place in order to refill the firefighters water tanks. Especially the coordination process is influenced by the amount of task interdependence as coordination becomes more and more important for effective team functioning when interdependence increases (Marks et al., 2001 ). Interpersonal processes occur during transition and action phases equally and lay the foundation for the effectiveness of other processes and govern interpersonal activities (Marks et al., 2001 ). Thus, interpersonal processes include conflict management (Cannon-Bowers et al., 1995 ), like the development of team rules, motivation and confidence building (Fleishman and Zaccaro, 1992 ), like encourage team members to perform better, and affect management (Cannon-Bowers et al., 1995 ), e.g., regulating member emotions during complex problem solving.

Summing up, process demands such as transition processes that complex problem solving teams pass through, are mission analysis, planning, briefing and goal specification, visualized on the left side of the idealized teamwork process model (see Figure Figure3). 3 ). The results of these IPO cycles lay the foundation for gathering a good SA and initiating activities directed toward taskwork and goal accomplishment and therefore initiating action processes. The effective execution of action processes depends on the communication, coordination, cooperation, matching of information, and task prioritization as well as emergent team cognition variables (SSA and SMM) within the team. The results, like decisions, of these IPO cycles flow back into the next episode and may initiate further transition processes. In addition, interpersonal processes play a crucial role for complex problem solving teams. That means, conflict management, motivating and confidence building, and affect management are permanently important, no matter whether a team runs through transition or action phases and these interpersonal processes frame the whole idealized teamwork process model. Therefore, interpersonal processes are also able to impede successful teamwork at any point as breakdowns in conflict or affect management can lead to coordination breakdowns (Wilson et al., 2010 ) or problems with monitoring or backing up teammates (Marks et al., 2001 ). Thus, complex problem solving teams have to face these multidimensional team process demands in addition to cognitive challenges, e.g., information storage or retrieval (Hinsz et al., 1997 ), related to individual information processing.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is fpsyg-08-01730-g0003.jpg

The integration of transition, action, interpersonal, and learning processes into the model of an idealized teamwork process.

Team learning opportunities for handling complex problems

In order to support teams in handling complex situations or problems, learning opportunities seem to be very important for successful task accomplishment and for reducing possible negative effects of team process demands. Learning means any kind of relative outlasted changes in potential of human behavior that cannot be traced back to age-related changes (Bower and Hilgard, 1981 ; Bredenkamp, 1998 ). Therefore, Schmutz et al. ( 2016 ) amended the taxonomy of team processes developed by Marks et al. ( 2001 ) and added learning processes as a fourth category of processes, which occur during transition and action phases and contribute to overall team effectiveness. Learning processes (see also Edmondson, 1999 ) include observation, e.g., observing own and other team members' actions such as the teammate's positioning of firewalls in order to protect houses in case of firefighting, feedback, like giving a teammate information about the wind direction for effective positioning of firewalls, and reflection, e.g., talking about procedures for firefighting or refilling water tanks, for example, within the team. Learning from success and failure and identifying future problems is crucial for the effectiveness of complex problem solving teams and therefore possibilities for learning based on repetitive cycles of joint action or episodes and reflection of team members' activities during action and transition phases should be used effectively (Edmondson, 1999 ; Marks et al., 2001 ). The processes of the idealized teamwork model are embedded into these learning processes (see Figure Figure3 3 ).

The fulfillment of transition, action, interpersonal and learning processes contribute significantly to successful team performance in complex problem solving. For clustering these processes, transition and action processes could be seen as operational processes and interpersonal and learning process as support processes. When dealing with complex and dynamic situations teams have to face these team process demands more strongly than in non-complex situations. For example, goal specification and prioritization or strategy formulation, both aspects of transition processes, are strongly influenced by multiple goals, interconnectedness or dynamically and constantly changing conditions. The same is true for action processes, such as monitoring progress toward goals, team monitoring and backup behavior or coordination of interdependent actions. Interpersonal processes, such as conflict and affect management or confidence building enhance the demands put on team members compared to individuals working on complex problems. Interpersonal processes are essential for effective teamwork and need to be cultivated during episodes of team working, because breakdowns in confidence building or affect management can lead to coordination breakdowns or problems with monitoring or backing up teammates (Marks et al., 2001 ). Especially within complex situations aspects such as interdependence, delayed feedback, multiple goals and dynamic changes put high demands on interpersonal processes within teams. Learning processes, supporting interpersonal processes and the result of effective teamwork are e.g., observation of others' as well as own actions and receiving feedback by others or the system and are strongly influenced by situational characteristics such as non-transparency or delayed feedback concerning actions. It is assumed that amongst others team learning happens through repetitive cycles of joint action within the action phases and reflection of team members within the transition phases (Edmondson, 1999 ; Gabelica et al., 2014 ; Schmutz et al., 2016 ). The repetitive cycles help to generate SMM (Cannon-Bowers et al., 1993 ; Mathieu et al., 2000 ), SSA (Endsley and Robertson, 2000 ) or transactive memory systems (Hollingshead et al., 2012 ) within the team.

Emergent states in complex team work and the role of collective orientation

IPO models propose that input variables and emergent states are able to influence team processes and therefore outcomes such as team performance positively. Emergent states represent team members' attitudes or motivations and are “properties of the team that are typically dynamic in nature and vary as a function of team context, inputs, processes, and outcomes” (Marks et al., 2001 , p. 357). Both emergent states and interaction processes are relevant for team effectiveness (Kozlowski and Ilgen, 2006 ).

Emergent states refer to conditions that underlie and dynamically enable effective teamwork (DeChurch and Mesmer-Magnus, 2010 ) and can be differentiated from team process, which refers to interdependent actions of team members that transform inputs into outcomes based on activities directed toward task accomplishment (Marks et al., 2001 ). Emergent states mainly support the execution of behavioral processes (e.g., planning, coordination, backup behavior) during the action phase, meaning during episodes when members are engaged in acts that focus on task work and goal accomplishment. Emergent states like trust, cohesion and CO are “products of team experiences (including team processes) and become new inputs to subsequent processes and outcomes” (Marks et al., 2001 , p. 358). Trust between team members and cohesion within the team are emergent states that develop over time and only while experiencing teamwork in a specific team. CO is an emergent state that a team member brings along with him/her into the teamwork, is assumed to be more persistent than trust and cohesion, and can, but does not have to, be positively and negatively influenced by experiencing teamwork in a specific team for a while or by means of training (Eby and Dobbins, 1997 ; Driskell et al., 2010 ). Thus, viewing emergent states on a continuum, trust and cohesion are assumed more fluctuating than CO, but CO is much more sensitive to change and direct experience than a stable trait such as a personality trait.

CO of team members is one of the teamwork-relevant competencies that facilitates team processes, such as collecting and sharing information between team members, and positively affects the success of teams, as people who are high in CO work with others in a goal-oriented manner, seek others' input and contribute to team outcomes (Driskell et al., 2010 ). CO is an emergent state, as it can be an input variable as well as a teamwork outcome. CO is context-dependent, becomes visible in reactions to situations and people, and can be influenced by experience (e.g., individual learning experiences with various types of teamwork) or knowledge or training (Eby and Dobbins, 1997 ; Bell, 2007 ). CO enhances team performance through activating transition and action processes such as coordination, evaluation and consideration of task inputs from other team members while performing a team task (Driskell and Salas, 1992 ; Salas et al., 2005 ). Collectively oriented people effectively use available resources in due consideration of the team's goals, participate actively and adapt teamwork processes adequately to the situation.

Driskell et al. ( 2010 ) and Hagemann ( 2017 ) provide a sound overview of the evidence of discriminant and convergent validity of CO compared to other teamwork-relevant constructs, such as cohesion, also an emergent state, or cooperative interdependence or preference for solitude. Studies analyzing collectively and non-collectively oriented persons' decision-making in an interdependent task demonstrated that teams with non-collectively oriented members performed poorly in problem solving and that members with CO judged inputs from teammates as more valuable and considered these inputs more frequently (Driskell and Salas, 1992 ). Eby and Dobbins ( 1997 ) also showed that CO results in increased coordination among team members, which may enhance team performance through information sharing, goal setting and strategizing (Salas et al., 2005 ). Driskell et al. ( 2010 ) and Hagemann ( 2017 ) analyzed CO in relation to team performance and showed that the effect of CO on team performance depends on the task type (see McGrath, 1984 ). Significant positive relationships between team members' CO and performance were found in relation to the task types choosing/decision making and negotiating (Driskell et al., 2010 ) respectively choosing/decision making (Hagemann, 2017 ). These kinds of tasks are characterized by much more interdependence than task types such as executing or generating tasks. As research shows that the positive influence of CO on team performance unfolds especially in interdependent teamwork contexts (Driskell et al., 2010 ), which require more team processes such as coordination patterns (Van de Ven et al., 1976 ; Wageman, 1995 ) and necessitate mutual adjustments as well as frequent information integration within the team (Gibson, 1999 ; Stajkovic et al., 2009 ), CO might be vitally important for complex problem solving teams. Thus, CO as an emergent state of single team members might be a valuable resource for enhancing the team's performance when exposed to solving complex problems. Therefore, it will be of interest to analyze the influence of CO on team process demands such as coordination processes and performance within complex problem solving teams. We predict that the positive effect of CO on team performance is an indirect effect through coordination processes within the team, which are vitally important for teams working in intensive interdependent work contexts.

Hypothesis 1: CO leads to a better coordination behavior, which in turn leads to a higher team performance.

As has been shown in team research that emergent states like trust and cohesion (see also Figure Figure1) 1 ) affect team performance, these two constructs are analyzed in conjunction with CO concerning action processes, such as coordination behavior and team performance. Trust between team members supports information sharing and the willingness to accept feedback, and therefore positively influences teamwork processes (McAllister, 1995 ; Salas et al., 2005 ). Cohesion within a team facilitates motivational factors and group processes like coordination and enhances team performance (Beal et al., 2003 ; Kozlowski and Ilgen, 2006 ).

Hypothesis 2: Trust shows a positive relationship with (a) action processes (team coordination) and with (b) team performance.
Hypothesis 3: Cohesion shows a positive relationship with (a) action processes (team coordination) and with (b) team performance.

Materials and methods

In order to demonstrate the importance of team process demands for complex problem solving in teams, we used a computer-based microworld in a laboratory study. We analyzed the effectiveness of complex problem solving teams while considering the influence of input variables, like collective orientation of team members and trust and cohesion within the team, on action processes within teams, like coordination.

The microworld for investigating teams process demands

We used the simulation-based team task C 3 Fire (Granlund et al., 2001 ; Granlund and Johansson, 2004 ), which is described as an intensive interdependence team task for complex problem solving (Arthur et al., 2005 ). C 3 Fire is a command, control and communications simulation environment that allows teams' coordination and communication in complex and dynamic environments to be analyzed. C 3 Fire is a microworld, as important characteristics of the real world are transferred to a small and well-controlled simulation system. The task environment in C 3 Fire is complex, dynamic and opaque (see Table Table1) 1 ) and therefore similar to the cognitive tasks people usually encounter in real-life settings, in and outside their work place (Brehmer and Dörner, 1993 ; Funke, 2001 ). Figure Figure4 4 demonstrates how the complexity characteristics mentioned in Table Table1 1 are realized in C 3 Fire. The screenshot represents the simulation manager's point of view, who is able to observe all units and actions and the scenario development. For more information about the units and scenarios, please (see the text below and the Supplementary Material). Complexity requires people to consider a number of facts. Because executed actions in C 3 Fire influence the ongoing process, the sequencing of actions is free and not stringent, such as a fixed (if X then Y) or parallel (if X then Y and Z) sequence (Ormerod et al., 1998 ). This can lead to stressful situations. Taking these characteristics of microworlds into consideration, team processes during complex problem solving can be analyzed within laboratories under controlled conditions. Simulated microworlds such as C 3 Fire allow the gap to be bridged between laboratory studies, which might show deficiencies regarding ecological validity, and field studies, which have been criticized due to their small amount of control (see Brehmer and Dörner, 1993 ).

Overview of complexity characteristics of microworlds in general and in C 3 Fire (cf. Funke, 2001 ).

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is fpsyg-08-01730-g0004.jpg

Examples for the complexity characteristics in Table Table1 1 represented within a simulation scenario in C 3 Fire.

In C 3 Fire, the teams' task is to coordinate their actions to extinguish a forest fire whilst protecting houses and saving lives. The team members' actions are interdependent. The simulation includes, e.g., forest fires, houses, tents, gas tanks, different kinds of vegetation and computer-simulated agents such as firefighting units (Granlund, 2003 ). It is possible, for example, that the direction of wind will change during firefighting and the time until different kinds of vegetation are burned down varies between those. In the present study, two simulation scenarios were developed for two-person teams and consisted of two firefighting units, one mobile water tank unit (responsible for re-filling the firefighting units' water tanks that contain a predefined amount of water) and one fire-break unit (a field defended with a fire-break cannot be ignited; the fire spreads around its ends). The two developed scenarios lasted for 15 min maximum. Each team member was responsible for two units in each scenario; person one for firefighting and water tank unit and person two for firefighting and fire-break unit. The user interface was a map system (40 × 40 square grid) with all relevant geographic information and positions of all symbols representing houses, water tank units and so on. All parts of the map with houses and vegetation were visible for the subjects, but not the fire itself or the other units; instead, the subjects were close to them with their own units (restricted visibility field; 3 × 3 square grid). The simulation was run on computers networked in a client-server configuration. The subjects used a chat system for communication that was logged. For each scenario, C 3 Fire creates a detailed log file containing all events that occurred over the course of the simulation. Examples of the C 3 Fire scenarios are provided in the Figures S1 – 3 and a short introduction into the microworld is given in the video. Detailed information regarding the scenario characteristics are given in Table S1 . From scenario one to two, the complexity and interdependence increased.

Participants

The study was conducted from Mai 2014 until March 2015. Undergraduate and graduate students ( N = 116) studying applied cognitive sciences participated in the study (68.1% female). Their mean age was 21.17 years ( SD = 3.11). Participants were assigned to 58 two-person teams, with team assignments being based on the pre-measured CO values (see procedure). They received 2 hourly credits as a trial subject and giveaways such as pencils and non-alcoholic canned drinks. The study was approved by the university's ethics committee in February 2014.

The study was conducted within a laboratory setting at a university department for business psychology. Prior to the experiment, the participants filled in the CO instrument online and gave written informed consent (see Figure Figure5). 5 ). The median was calculated subsequently ( Md = 3.12; range: 1.69–4.06; scale range: 1–5) relating to the variable CO and two individuals with either high ( n = 58) or low ( n = 58) CO values were randomly matched as teammates. The matching process was random in part, as those two subjects were matched to form a team, whose preferred indicated time for participation in a specific week during data collection were identical. The participants were invited to the experimental study by e-mail 1–2 weeks after filling in the CO instrument. The study began with an introduction to the experimental procedure and the teams' task. The individuals received time to familiarize themselves with the simulation, received 20 min of training and completed two practice trials. After the training, participants answered a questionnaire collecting demographic data. Following this, a simulation scenario started and the participants had a maximum of 15 min to coordinate their actions to extinguish a forest fire whilst protecting houses and saving lives. After that, at measuring time T1, participants answered questionnaires assessing trust and cohesion within the team. Again, the teams worked on the following scenario 2 followed by a last round of questionnaires assessing trust and cohesion at T2.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is fpsyg-08-01730-g0005.jpg

Overview about the procedure and measures.

Demographic data such as age, sex, and study course were assessed after the training at the beginning of the experiment.

Collective Orientation was measured at an individual level with 16 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree ) developed by the authors (Hagemann, 2017 ) based on the work of Driskell et al. ( 2010 ). The factorial structure concerning the German-language CO scale was proven prior to this study (χ 2 = 162.25, df = 92, p = 0.000, χ 2 /df = 1.76, CFI = 0.97, TLI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.040, CI = 0.030-0.051, SRMR = 0.043) and correlations for testing convergent and discriminant evidence of validity were satisfying. For example, CO correlated r = 0.09 ( p > 0.10) with cohesion, r = 0.34 ( p < 0.01) with cooperative interdependence and r = −0.28 ( p < 0.01) with preference for solitude (Hagemann, 2017 ). An example item is “ I find working on team projects to be very satisfying ”. Coefficient alpha for this scale was 0.81.

Trust in team members' integrity, trust in members' task abilities and trust in members' work-related attitudes (Geister et al., 2006 ) was measured with seven items rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree ). An example item is “ I can trust that I will have no additional demands due to lack of motivation of my team member .” Coefficient alpha for this scale was 0.83 (T1) and 0.87 (T2).

Cohesion was measured with a six-item scale from Riordan and Weatherly ( 1999 ) rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree ). An example item is “ In this team, there is a lot of team spirit among the members .” Coefficient alpha for this scale was 0.87 (T1) and 0.87 (T2).

Action process: coordination

Successful coordination requires mechanisms that serve to manage dependencies between the teams' activities and their resources. Coordination effectiveness was assessed based on the time the firefighting units spent without water in the field in relation to the total scenario time. This measure is an indicator of the effectiveness of resource-oriented coordination, as it reflects an efficient performance regarding the water refill process in C 3 Fire, which requires coordinated actions between the two firefighting units and one water tank unit (Lafond et al., 2011 ). The underlying assumption is that a more successful coordination process leads to fewer delays in conducting the refill process. Coordination was calculated by a formula and values ranged between 0 and 1, with lower values indicating better coordination in the team (see Jobidon et al., 2012 ).

Team performance

This measure related to the teams' goals (limiting the number of burned out cells and saving as many houses/buildings as possible) and was quantified as the number of protected houses and the number of protected fields and bushes/trees in relation to the number of houses, fields, and bushes/trees, respectively, which would burn in a worst case scenario. This formula takes into account that teams needing more time for firefighting also have more burning cells and show a less successful performance than teams that are quick in firefighting. To determine the worst case scenario, both 15-min scenarios were run with no firefighting action taken. Thus, the particularities (e.g., how many houses would burn down if no action was taken) of each scenario were considered. Furthermore, the houses, bushes/trees and fields were weighted according to their differing importance, mirroring the teams' goals. Houses should be protected and were most important. Bushes/trees (middle importance) burn faster than fields (lowest importance) and foster the expansion of the fire. Values regarding team performance ranged between 0 and 7.99, with higher values indicating a better overall performance. Team performance was calculated as follows (see Table Table2 2 ):

Explanation of formula for calculating team performance in both scenarios.

Means, standard deviations, internal consistencies, and correlations for all study variables are provided in Table Table3 3 .

Means, standard deviations, internal consistencies, and correlations for all study variables.

Performance range from 0 to 7.99; Time without Water range from 0 to 1 (lower values indicate a more effective handling of water); CO range from 1 to 5 .

Team complex problem solving in scenario 1 correlated significantly negative with time without water in scenario 1, indicating that a high team performance is attended by the coordination behavior (as a team process). The same was true for scenario 2. In addition, time without water as an indicator for team coordination correlated significantly negative with the team members' CO, indicating that team members with high CO values experience less time without water in the microworld than teams with members with low CO values.

In order to analyze the influence of CO on team process demands such as coordination processes and thereby performance within complex problem solving teams we tested whether CO would show an indirect effect on team performance through the teams' coordination processes. To analyze this assumption, indirect effects in simple mediation models were estimated for both scenarios (see Preacher and Hayes, 2004 ). The mean for CO was 3.44 ( SD = 0.32) for teams with high CO values and it was 2.79 ( SD = 0.35) for teams with low CO values. The mean concerning team performance in scenario 1 for teams with high CO values was 6.30 ( SD = 1.64) and with low CO values 5.35 ( SD = 2.30). The mean concerning time without water (coordination behavior) for teams with high CO values was 0.16 ( SD = 0.08) and with low CO values 0.20 ( SD = 0.09). In scenario 2 the mean for team performance was 6.26 ( SD = 2.51) for teams with high CO values and it was 4.36 ( SD = 2.24) for teams with low CO values. The mean concerning time without water for teams with high CO values was 0.18 ( SD = 0.08) and with low CO values 0.25 ( SD = 0.11).

For analyzing indirect effects, CO was the independent variable, time without water the mediator and team performance the dependent variable. The findings indicated that CO has an indirect effect on team performance mediated by time without water for scenario 1 (Table (Table4) 4 ) and scenario 2 (Table (Table5). 5 ). In scenario 1, CO had no direct effect on team performance ( b(YX) ), but CO significantly predicted time without water ( b(MX) ). A significant total effect ( b(YX) ) is not an assumption in the assessment of indirect effects, and therefore the non-significance of this relationship does not violate the analysis (see Preacher and Hayes, 2004 , p. 719). Furthermore, time without water significantly predicted team performance when controlling for CO ( b(YM.X) ), whereas the effect of CO on team performance was not significant when controlling for time without water ( b(YX.M) ). The indirect effect was 0.40 and significant when using normal distribution and estimated with the Sobel test ( z = 1.97, p < 0.05). The bootstrap procedure was applied to estimate the effect size not based on the assumption of normal distribution. As displayed in Table Table4, 4 , the bootstrapped estimate of the indirect effect was 0.41 and the true indirect effect was estimated to lie between 0.0084 and 0.9215 with a 95% confidence interval. As zero is not in the 95% confidence interval, it can be concluded that the indirect effect is indeed significantly different from zero at p < 0.05 (two-tailed).

Indirect Effect for Coordination and Team Performance in Scenario 1.

Y = Team Performance Scenario 1; X = Collective Orientation T0; M = Coordination (time without water in scenario 1); Number of Bootstrap Resamples 5000 .

Indirect Effect for Coordination and Team Performance in Scenario 2.

Y = Team Performance Scenario 2; X = Collective Orientation T0; M = Coordination (time without water in scenario 2); Number of Bootstrap Resamples 5000 .

Regarding scenario 2, CO had a direct effect on team performance ( b(YX) ) and on time without water ( b(MX) ). Again, time without water significantly predicted team performance when controlling for CO ( b(YM.X) ), whereas the effect of CO on team performance was not significant when controlling for time without water ( b(YX.M) ). This time, the indirect effect was 0.60 (Sobel test, z = 2.31, p < 0.05). As displayed in Table Table5, 5 , the bootstrapped estimate of the indirect effect was 0.61 and the true indirect effect was estimated to lie between 0.1876 and 1.1014 with a 95% confidence interval and between 0.0340 and 1.2578 with a 99% confidence interval. Because zero is not in the 99% confidence interval, it can be concluded that the indirect effect is indeed significantly different from zero at p < 0.01 (two-tailed).

The indirect effects for both scenarios are visualized in Figure Figure6. 6 . Summing up, the results support hypothesis 1 and indicate that CO has an indirect effect on team performance mediated by the teams' coordination behavior, an action process. That means, fulfilling team process demands affect the dynamic decision making quality of teams acting in complex situations and input variables such as CO influence the action processes within teams positively.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is fpsyg-08-01730-g0006.jpg

Indirect effect of collective orientation on team performance via coordination within the teams for scenario 1 and 2, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, numbers in italic represent results from scenario 2, non-italic numbers are from scenario 1.

Trust between team members assessed after scenario 1 (T1) and after scenario 2 (T2) did not show any significant correlation with the coordination behavior or with team complex problem solving in scenarios 1 and 2 (Table (Table3). 3 ). Thus, hypotheses 2a and 2b are not supported. Cohesion at T1 showed no significant relationship with team performance in both scenarios, one significant negative correlation ( r = −0.22, p < 0.05) with the coordination behavior in scenario 1 and no correlation with the coordination behavior in scenario 2. Cohesion at T2 did not show any significant correlation with the coordination behavior or with team performance in both scenarios. Thus, hypotheses 3a and 3b could also not be supported. Furthermore, the results showed no significant relations between CO and trust and cohesion. The correlations between trust and cohesion ranged between r = 0.39 and r = 0.51 ( p < 0.01).

The purpose of our paper was first to give a sound theoretical overview and to combine theoretical approaches about team competencies and team process demands in collaborative complex problem solving and second to demonstrate the importance of selected team competencies and processes on team performance in complex problem solving by means of results from a laboratory study. We introduced the model of an idealized teamwork process that complex problem solving team pass through and integrated the relevant teamwork skills for interdependently working teams into it. Moreover, we highlighted the episodic aspect concerning complex problem solving in teams and combined the well-known transition, action, interpersonal and learning processes of teamwork with the idealized teamwork process model. Finally, we investigated the influence of trust, cohesion, and CO on action processes, such as coordination behavior of complex problem solving teams and on team performance.

Regarding hypothesis 1, studies have indicated that teams whose members have high CO values are more successful in their coordination processes and task accomplishment (Eby and Dobbins, 1997 ; Driskell et al., 2010 ; Hagemann, 2017 ), which may enhance team performance through considering task inputs from other team members, information sharing and strategizing (Salas et al., 2005 ). Thus, we had a close look on CO as an emergent state in the present study, because emergent states support the execution of behavioral processes. In order to analyze this indirect effect of CO on team performance via coordination processes, we used the time, which firefighters spent without water in a scenario, as an indicator for high-quality coordination within the team. A small amount of time without water represents sharing information and resources between team members in a reciprocal manner, which are essential qualities of effective coordination (Ellington and Dierdorff, 2014 ). One of the two team members was in charge of the mobile water tank unit and therefore responsible for filling up the water tanks of his/her own firefighting unit and that of the other team member on time. In order to avoid running out of water for firefighting, the team members had to exchange information about, for example, their firefighting units' current and future positions in the field, their water levels, their strategies for extinguishing one or two fires, and the water tank unit's current and future position in the field. The simple mediation models showed that CO has an indirect effect on team performance mediated by time without water, supporting hypothesis 1. Thus, CO facilitates high-quality coordination within complex problem solving teams and this in turn influences decision-making and team performance positively (cf. Figure Figure1). 1 ). These results support previous findings concerning the relationships between emergent states, such as CO, and the team process, such as action processes like coordination (Cannon-Bowers et al., 1995 ; Driskell et al., 2010 ) and between the team process and the team performance (Stevens and Campion, 1994 ; Dierdorff et al., 2011 ).

Hypotheses 2 and 3 analyzed the relationships between trust and cohesion and coordination and team performance. Because no correlations between trust and cohesion and the coordination behavior and team complex problem solving existed, further analyses, like mediation analyses, were unnecessary. In contrast to other studies (McAllister, 1995 ; Beal et al., 2003 ; Salas et al., 2005 ; Kozlowski and Ilgen, 2006 ), the present study was not able to detect effects of trust and cohesion on team processes, like action processes, or on team performance. This can be attributed to the restricted sample composition or the rather small sample size. Nevertheless, effect sizes were small to medium, so that they would have become significant with an increased sample sizes. The prerequisite, mentioned by the authors, that interdependence of the teamwork is important for identifying those effects, was given in the present study. Therefore, this aspect could not have been the reason for finding no effects concerning trust and cohesion. Trust and cohesion within the teams developed during working on the simulation scenarios while fighting fires, showed significant correlations with each other, and were unrelated to CO, which showed an effect on the coordination behavior and the team performance indeed. The results seem to implicate, that the influence of CO on action processes and team performance might be much more stronger than those of trust and cohesion. If these results can be replicated should be analyzed in future studies.

As the interdependent complex problem-solving task was a computer-based simulation, the results might have been affected by the participants' attitudes to using a computer. For example, computer affinity seems to be able to minimize potential fear of working with a simulation environment and might therefore, be able to contribute to successful performance in a computer-based team task. Although computers and other electronic devices are pervasive in present-day life, computer aversion has to be considered in future studies within complex problem-solving research when applying computer-based simulation team tasks. As all of the participants were studying applied cognitive science, which is a mix of psychology and computer science, this problem might not have been influenced the present results. However, the specific composition of the sample reduces the external validity of the study and the generalizability of the results. A further limitation is the small sample size, so that moderate to small effects are difficult to detect.

Furthermore, laboratory research of teamwork might have certain limitations. Teamwork as demonstrated in this study fails to account for the fact that teams are not simple, static and isolated entities (McGrath et al., 2000 ). The validity of the results could be reduced insofar as the complex relationships in teams were not represented, the teamwork context was not considered, not all teammates and teams were comparable, and the characteristic as a dynamic system with a team history and future was not given in the present study. This could be a possible explanation why no effects of trust and cohesion were found in the present study. Maybe, the teams need more time working together on the simulation scenarios in order to show that trust and cohesion influence the coordination with the team and the team performance. Furthermore, Bell ( 2007 ) demonstrated in her meta-analysis that the relationship between team members' attitudes and the team's performance was proven more strongly in the field compared to the laboratory. In consideration of this fact, the findings of the present study concerning CO are remarkable and the simulation based microworld C3Fire (Granlund et al., 2001 ; Granlund, 2003 ) seems to be appropriate for analyzing complex problem solving in interdependently working teams.

An asset of the present study is, that the teams' action processes, the coordination performance, was assessed objectively based on logged data and was not a subjective measure, as is often the case in group and team research studies (cf. Van de Ven et al., 1976 ; Antoni and Hertel, 2009 ; Dierdorff et al., 2011 ; Ellington and Dierdorff, 2014 ). As coordination was the mediator in the analysis, this objective measurement supports the validity of the results.

As no transition processes such as mission analysis, formulation, and planning (Prince and Salas, 1993 ), goal specification (Prussia and Kinicki, 1996 ), and strategy formulation (Prince and Salas, 1993 ; Cannon-Bowers et al., 1995 ) as well as action processes such as monitoring progress toward goals (Cannon-Bowers et al., 1995 ) and systems monitoring (Fleishman and Zaccaro, 1992 ) were analyzed within the present study, future studies should collect data concerning these processes in order to show their importance on performance within complex problem solving teams. Because these processes are difficult to observe, subjective measurements are needed, for example asking the participants after each scenario how they have prioritized various tasks, if and when they have changed their strategy concerning protecting houses or fighting fires, and on which data within the scenarios they focused for collecting information for goal and systems monitoring. Another possibility could be using eye-tracking methods in order to collect data about collecting information for monitoring progress toward goals, e.g., collecting information how many cells are still burning, and systems monitoring, e.g., tracking team resources like water for firefighting.

CO is an emergent state and emergent states can be influenced by experience or learning, for example (Kozlowski and Ilgen, 2006 ). Learning processes (Edmondson, 1999 ), that Schmutz et al. ( 2016 ) added to the taxonomy of team processes developed by Marks et al. ( 2001 ) and which occur during transition and action phases and contribute to team effectiveness include e.g., feedback . Feedback can be useful for team learning when team learning is seen as a form of information processing (Hinsz et al., 1997 ). Because CO supports action processes, such as coordination and it can be influenced by learning, learning opportunities, such as feedback, seem to be important for successful task accomplishment and for supporting teams in handling complex situations or problems. If the team is temporarily and interpersonally unstable, as it is the case for most of the disaster or crisis management teams dealing with complex problems, there might be less opportunities for generating shared mental models by experiencing repetitive cycles of joint action (cf. Figure Figure2) 2 ) and strategies such as cross training (Salas et al., 2007 ) or feedback might become more and more important for successful complex problem solving in teams. Thus, for future research it would be of interest to analyze what kind of feedback is able to influence CO positively and therefore is able to enhance coordination and performance within complex problem-solving teams.

Depending on the type of feedback, different main points will be focused during the feedback (see Gabelica et al., 2012 ). Feedback can be differentiated into performance and process feedback. Process feedback can be further divided into task-related and interpersonal feedback. Besides these aspects, feedback can be given on a team-level or an individual-level. Combinations of the various kinds of feedback are possible and are analyzed in research concerning their influence on e.g., self- and team-regulatory processes and team performance (Prussia and Kinicki, 1996 ; Hinsz et al., 1997 ; Jung and Sosik, 2003 ; Gabelica et al., 2012 ). For future studies it would be relevant to analyze, whether it is possible to positively influence the CO of team members and therefore action processes such as coordination and team performance or not. A focus could be on the learning processes, especially on feedback, and its influence on CO in complex problem solving teams. So far, no studies exist that analyzed the relationship between feedback and a change in CO, even though researchers already discuss the possibility that team-level process feedback shifts attention processes on team actions and team learning (McLeod et al., 1992 ; Hinsz et al., 1997 ). These results would be very helpful for training programs for fire service or police or medical teams working in complex environments and solving problems collaboratively, in order to support their team working and their performance.

In summary, the idealized teamwork process model is in combination with the transition, action, interpersonal and learning processes a good framework for analyzing the impact of teamwork competencies and teamwork processes in detail on team performance in complex environments. Overall, the framework offers further possibilities for investigating the influence of teamwork competencies on diverse processes and teamwork outcomes in complex problem solving teams than demonstrated here. The results of our study provide evidence of how CO influences complex problem solving teams and their performance. Accordingly, future researchers and practitioners would be well advised to find interventions how to influence CO and support interdependently working teams.

Ethics statement

This study was carried out in accordance with the recommendations of Ethical guidelines of the German Association of Psychology, Ethics committee of the University of Duisburg-Essen, Department of Computer Science and Applied Cognitive Science with written informed consent from all subjects. All subjects gave written informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The protocol was approved by the Ethics committee of the University of Duisburg-Essen, Department of Computer Science and Applied Cognitive Science.

Author contributions

VH and AK were responsible for the conception of the work and the study design. VH analyzed and interpreted the collected data. VH and AK drafted the manuscript. They approved it for publication and act as guarantors for the overall content.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01730/full#supplementary-material

Antoni C., Hertel G. (2009). Team processes, their antecedents and consequences: implications for different types of teamwork . Eur. J. Work Organ. Psychol. 18 , 253–266. 10.1080/13594320802095502 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Arthur W., Edwards B., Bell S., Villado A., Bennet W. (2005). Team task analysis: identifying tasks and jobs that are team based . Hum. Factors 47 , 654–669. 10.1518/001872005774860087 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Badke-Schaub P. (2008). Teamarbeit und Teamführung: Erfolgsfaktoren und sicheres Handeln. [Teamwork and Team leadership: Factors of success and reliable action] , in Führung und Teamarbeit in kritischen Situationen [Leadership and teamwork in critical situations] eds Buerschaper C., Starke S. (Frankfurt: Verlag für Polizeiwissenschaft; ), 3–19. [ Google Scholar ]
Beal D. J., Cohen R. R., Burke M. J., McLendon C. L. (2003). Cohesion and performance in groups: a meta-analytic clarification of construct relations . J. Appl. Psychol. 88 , 989–1004. 10.1037/0021-9010.88.6.989 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bell S. T. (2007). Deep-level composition variables as predictors of team performance: a meta-analysis . J. Appl. Psychol. 92 , 595–615. 10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.595 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bower G. H., Hilgard E. R. (1981). Theories of Learning . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. [ Google Scholar ]
Bredenkamp J. (1998). Lernen, Erinnern, Vergessen [Learning, Remembering, Forgetting]. München: C.H. Beck. [ Google Scholar ]
Brehmer B. (1992). Dynamic decision-making: human control of complex systems . Acta Psychol. 81 , 211–241. 10.1016/0001-6918(92)90019-A [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Brehmer B., Dörner D. (1993). Experiments with computer-simulated microworlds: escaping both the narrow straits of the laboratory and the deep blue sea of the field study . Comput. Hum. Behav. 9 , 171–184. 10.1016/0747-5632(93)90005-D [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Campion M. A., Medsker G. J., Higgs C. (1993). Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: implications for designing effective work groups . Pers. Psychol. 46 , 823–850. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1993.tb01571.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Cannon-Bowers J. A., Salas E., Converse S. (1993). Shared mental models in expert team decision making , in Individual and Group Decision Making , ed Castellan N. J. (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; ), 221–246. [ Google Scholar ]
Cannon-Bowers J. A., Tannenbaum S. I., Salas E., Volpe C. E. (1995). Defining competencies and establishing team training requirements , in Team Effectiveness and Decision Making in Organizations , eds Guzzo R. A., E. Salas and Associates (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; ), 333–380. [ Google Scholar ]
DeChurch L. A., Mesmer-Magnus J. R. (2010). The cognitive underpinnings of effective teamwork: a meta-analysis . J. Appl. Psychol. 95 , 32–53. 10.1037/a0017328 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Dierdorff E. C., Bell S. T., Belohlav J. A. (2011). The “power of we”: effects of psychological collectivism on team performance over time . J. Appl. Psychol. 96 , 247–262. 10.1037/a0020929 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Dörner D. (1989/2003). Die Logik des Misslingens. Strategisches Denken in komplexen Situationen [The logic of failure. Strategic thinking in complex situations] 11th Edn . Reinbeck: rororo. [ Google Scholar ]
Dörner D., Kreuzig H. W., Reither F., Stäudel T. (1983). Lohhausen. Vom Umgang mit Unbestimmtheit und Komplexität. Bern; Stuttgart; Wien: Verlag Hans Huber. [ Google Scholar ]
Driskell J. E., Salas E. (1992). Collective behavior and team performance . Hum. Factors 34 , 277–288. 10.1177/001872089203400303 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Driskell J., Salas E., Hughes S. (2010). Collective orientation and team performance: development of an individual differences measure . Hum. Factors 52 , 316–328. 10.1177/0018720809359522 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Eby L. T., Dobbins G. H. (1997). Collectivistic orientation in teams: an individual and group-level analysis . J. Organ. Behav. 18 , 275–295. 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199705)18:3<275::AID-JOB796>3.0.CO;2-C [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Edmondson A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams . Adm. Sci. Q. 44 , 350–383. 10.2307/2666999 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Ellington J. K., Dierdorff E. C. (2014). Individual learning in team training: self-regulation and team context effects . Small Group Res. 45 , 37–67. 10.1177/1046496413511670 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Endsley M. R. (1999). Situation Awareness in Aviation Systems , in Handbook of Aviation Human Factors , eds Garland D. J., Wise J. A., Hopkin V. D. (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers; ), 257–276. [ Google Scholar ]
Endsley M. R., Robertson M. M. (2000). Training for Situation Awareness in Individuals and Teams , in Situation awareness Analysis and Measurement , eds Endsley M. R., Garland D. J. (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers; ), 349–365. [ Google Scholar ]
Fiore S. M., Rosen M. A., Smith-Jentsch K. A., Salas E., Letsky M., Warner N. (2010). Toward an understanding of macrocognition in teams: predicting processes in complex collaborative contexts . Hum. Factors 52 , 203–224. 10.1177/0018720810369807 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Fleishman E. A., Zaccaro S. J. (1992). Toward a taxonomy of team performance funtions , in Teams: Their Training and Performance , eds Swezey R. W., Salas E. (Norwood, NJ: Ables; ), 31–56. [ Google Scholar ]
Flin R., O'Connor P., Crichton M. (2008). Safety at the Sharp End. Aldershot: Ashgate. [ Google Scholar ]
Funke J. (1995). Experimental research on complex problem solving , in Complex Problem Solving: The European Perspective eds Frensch P. A., Funke J. (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; ), 243–268. [ Google Scholar ]
Funke J. (2001). Daynamic systems as tools for analysing human judgement . Think. Reason. 7 , 69–89. 10.1080/13546780042000046 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Funke J. (2012). Complex Problem Solving , in Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning ed Seel N. M. (Heidelberg: Springer; ), 682–685. [ Google Scholar ]
Gabelica C., van den Bossche P., de Maeyer S., Segers M., Gijselaers W. (2014). The effect of team feedback and guided reflexivity on team performance change . Learn. Instruct. 34 , 86–96. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.09.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Gabelica C., Van den Bossche P., Segers M., Gijselaers W. (2012). Feedback, a powerful lever in teams: a review . Educ. Res. Rev. 7 , 123–144. 10.1016/j.edurev.2011.11.003 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Geister S., Konradt U., Hertel G. (2006). Effects of process feedback on motivation, satisfaction, and performance in virtual teams . Small Group Res. 37 , 459–489. 10.1177/1046496406292337 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Gibson C. B. (1999). Do they do what they believe they can? group efficacy and group effectiveness across tasks and cultures . Acad. Manag. J. 42 , 138–152. 10.2307/257089 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Granlund R. (2003). Monitoring experiences from command and control research with the C 3 Fire microworld . Cogn. Technol. Work 5 , 183–190. 10.1007/s10111-003-0129-8 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Granlund R., Johansson B. (2004). Monitoring distributed collaboration in the C 3 Fire Microworld , in Scaled Worlds: Development, Validation and Applications , eds Schiflett G., Elliot L. R., Salas E., Coovert M. D. (Aldershot: Ashgate; ), 37–48. [ Google Scholar ]
Granlund R., Johansson B., Persson M. (2001). C3Fire a micro-world for collaboration training and investigations in the ROLF environment , in Proceedings of 42nd Conference on Simulation and Modeling: Simulation in Theory and Practice (Porsgrunn: ). [ Google Scholar ]
Hackman J. R. (1987). The design of work teams , in Handbook of Organizational Behavior ed Lorsch J. W. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; ), 315–342. [ Google Scholar ]
Hagemann V. (2011). Trainingsentwicklung für High Responsibility Teams [Training development for High Responsibility Teams] . Lengerich: Pabst Verlag. [ Google Scholar ]
Hagemann V. (2017). Development of a German-language questionnaire to measure collective orientation as an individual attitude . Swiss J. Psychol. 76 , 91–105. 10.1024/1421-0185/a000198 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hagemann V., Kluge A., Ritzmann S. (2011). High responsibility teams - Eine systematische Analyse von Teamarbeitskontexten für einen effektiven Kompetenzerwerb [A systematic analysis of teamwork contexts for effective competence acquisition] . Psychologie des Alltagshandelns 4 , 22–42. Available online at: http://www.allgemeine-psychologie.info/cms/images/stories/allgpsy_journal/Vol%204%20No%201/hagemann_kluge_ritzmann.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
Hagemann V., Kluge A., Ritzmann S. (2012). Flexibility under complexity: work contexts, task profiles and team processes of high responsibility teams . Empl. Relat. 34 , 322–338. 10.1108/01425451211217734 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hertel G., Konradt U., Orlikowski B. (2004). Managing distance by interdependence: goal setting, task interdependence, and team-based rewards in virtual teams . Euro. J. Work Organ. Psychol. 13 , 1–28. 10.1080/13594320344000228 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hinsz V., Tindale R., Vollrath D. (1997). The emerging concept of groups as information processors . Psychol. Bull. 121 , 43–64. 10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.43 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hollingshead A. B., Gupta N., Yoon K., Brandon D. (2012). Transactive memory theory and teams: past, present, and future , in Theories of Team Cognition , eds Salas E., Fiore S. M., Letsky M. (New York, NY: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group; ), 421–455. [ Google Scholar ]
Ilgen D. R., Hollenbeck J. R., Johnson M., Jundt D. (2005). Teams in organizations: from input-process-output models to IMOI models . Annu. Rev. Psychol. 56 , 517–543. 10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070250 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Jobidon M.-E., Muller-Gass A., Duncan M., Blais A.-R. (2012). The enhance of mental models and its impact on teamwork . Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 56 , 1703–1707. 10.1177/1071181312561341 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Jung D. I., Sosik J. J. (2003). Group potency and collective efficacy . Group Organ. Manage. 28 , 366–391. 10.1177/1059601102250821 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Kluge A. (2014). The Acquisition of Knowledge and Skills for Taskwork and Teamwork to Control Complex Technical Systems: A Cognitive and Macroergonomics Perspective . Dordrecht: Springer. [ Google Scholar ]
Kluge A., Hagemann V., Ritzmann S. (2014). Military crew resource management – Das Streben nach der bestmöglichen Teamarbeit [Striving for the best of teamwork] , in Psychologie für Einsatz und Notfall [Psychology for mission and emergency] , eds Kreim G., Bruns S., Völker B. (Bonn: Bernard & Graefe in der Mönch Verlagsgesellschaft mbH; ), 141–152. [ Google Scholar ]
Kluge A., Sauer J., Schüler K., Burkolter D. (2009). Designing training for process control simulators: a review of empirical findings and current practices, theoretical issues in ergonomics Science 10 , 489–509. 10.1080/14639220902982192 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Kozlowski S. W. J., Ilgen D. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams . Psychol. Sci. Public Interest 7 , 77–124. 10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00030.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Lafond D., Jobidon M.-E., Aubé C., Tremblay S. (2011). Evidence of structure- specific teamwork requirements and implications for team design . Small Group Res. 42 , 507–535. 10.1177/1046496410397617 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Marks M. A., Mathieu J. E., Zaccaro S. J. (2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes . Acad. Manag. Rev. 26 , 356–376. 10.2307/259182 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Mathieu J. E., Heffner T. S., Goodwin G. F., Salas E., Cannon-Bowers J. A. (2000). The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance . J. Appl. Psychol. 85 , 273–283. 10.1037/0021-9010.85.2.273 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
McAllister D. J. (1995). Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations . Acad. Manag. J. 38 , 24–59. 10.2307/256727 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
McGrath J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and Performance . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. [ Google Scholar ]
McGrath J. E., Arrow H., Berdahl J. L. (2000). The study of groups: past, present, and future . Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 4 , 95–105. 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0401_8 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
McLeod P. L., Liker J. K., Lobel S. A. (1992). Process feedback in task groups: an application of goal setting . J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 28 , 15–41. 10.1177/0021886392281003 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Morgan B. B., Salas E., Glickman A. S. (1993). An analysis of team evolution and maturation . J. Gen. Psychol. 120 , 277–291. 10.1080/00221309.1993.9711148 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Ormerod T. C., Richardson J., Shepherd A. (1998). Enhancing the usability of a task analysis method: a notation and environment for requirements specification . Ergonomics 41 , 1642–1663. 10.1080/001401398186117 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Preacher K., Hayes A. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models . Behav. Res. Methods Instrum. Comput. 36 , 717–731. 10.3758/BF03206553 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Prince C., Salas E. (1993). Training and research for teamwork in the military aircrew , in Cockpit Resource Management , eds Wiener E. L., Kanki B. G., Helmreich R. L. (San Diego, CA: Academic Press; ), 337–366. [ Google Scholar ]
Prussia G. E., Kinicki A. J. (1996). A motivation investigation of group effectiveness using social-cognitive theory . J. Appl. Psychol. 81 , 187–198. 10.1037/0021-9010.81.2.187 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Riordan C. M., Weatherly E. W. (1999). Defining and measuring employees‘identification with their work groups . Educ. Psychol. Meas. 59 , 310–324. 10.1177/00131649921969866 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Roth E. M., Woods D. D. (1988). Aiding human performance i: cognitive analysis . Trav. Hum. 51 , 39–64. [ Google Scholar ]
Salas E., Cooke N. J., Rosen M. A. (2008). On teams, teamwork, and team performance: discoveries and developments . Hum. Factors 50 , 540–547. 10.1518/001872008X288457 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Salas E., Nichols D. R., Driskell J. E. (2007). Testing three team training strategies in intact teams . Small Group Res. 38 , 471–488. 10.1177/1046496407304332 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Salas E., Sims D., Burke S. (2005). Is there a “big five” in teamwork? Small Group Res. 36 , 555–599. 10.1177/1046496405277134 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Schmutz J., Welp A., Kolbe M. (2016). Teamwork in healtcare organizations , in Management Innovations for Health Care Organizations , eds Örtenblad A., Löfström C. A., Sheaff R. (New York, NY: Routledge Taylor & Francis; ), 359–377. [ Google Scholar ]
Serfaty D., Entin E. E., Johnston J. H. (1998). Team coordination training , in Making Decisions Under Stress , eds Cannon-Bowers J. A., Salas E. (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; ), 221–246. [ Google Scholar ]
Shea G. P., Guzzo R. A. (1987). Group effectiveness: what really matters? Sloan Manage. Rev. 28 , 25–31. [ Google Scholar ]
Smith-Jentsch K. A., Baker D. P., Salas E., Cannon-Bowers J. A. (2001). Uncovering differences in team competency requirements: The case of air traffic control teams , in Improving Teamwork in Organizations. Applications of Resource Management Training , eds Salas E., Bowers C. A., Edens E. (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers; ), 31–54. [ Google Scholar ]
Stajkovic A. D., Lee D., Nyberg A. J. (2009). Collective efficacy, group potency, and group performance: meta-analyses of their relationships, and test of a mediation model . J. Appl. Psychol. 94 , 814–828. 10.1037/a0015659 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Stevens M. J., Campion M. A. (1994). The knowledge, skill, and ability requirements for teamwork: implications for human resource management . J. Manage. 20 , 503–530. 10.1177/014920639402000210 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Ulich E. (1995). Gestaltung von Arbeitstätigkeiten [Designing job tasks] , in Lehrbuch Organisationspsychologie [Schoolbook Organizational Psychology] , ed Schuler H. (Bern: Huber; ), 189–208. [ Google Scholar ]
Van de Ven A. H., Delbecq A. L., Koenig R. (1976). Determinants of coordination modes with organizations . Am. Sociol. Rev. 41 , 322–338. 10.2307/2094477 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Wageman R. (1995). Interdependence and group effectiveness . Adm. Sci. Q. 40 , 145–180. 10.2307/2393703 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Waller M. J., Gupta N., Giambatista R. C. (2004). Effects of adaptive behaviors and shared mental models on control crew performance . Manage. Sci. 50 , 1534–1544. 10.1287/mnsc.1040.0210 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Wilson K. A., Salas E., Andrews D. H. (2010). Preventing errors in the heat of the battle: formal and informal learning strategies to prevent teamwork breakdowns , in Human Factors Issues in Combat Identification , eds Andrews D. H., Herz R. P., Wolf M. B. (Aldershot: Ashgate; ), 1–28. [ Google Scholar ]
Zsambok C. E. (1997). Naturalistic decision making: where are we now? , in Naturalistic Decision Making , eds Zsambok C. E., Klein G. (New York, NY: Routledge; ), 3–16. [ Google Scholar ]

1 Defining Teams and Groups

The content included in this chapter is adapted from two open university chapters: working in groups and teams and groups and teamwork, what is a group.

Our tendency to form groups is a pervasive aspect of organizational life. In addition to formal groups, committees, and teams, there are informal groups, cliques, and factions.

Formal groups are used to organize and distribute work, pool information, devise plans, coordinate activities, increase commitment, negotiate, resolve conflicts and conduct inquests. Group work allows the pooling of people’s individual skills and knowledge, and helps compensate for individual deficiencies. Estimates suggest most managers spend 50 percent of their working day in one sort of group or another, and for top management of large organizations this can rise to 80 percent. Thus, formal groups are clearly an integral part of the functioning of an organization.

No less important are informal groups. These are usually structured more around the social needs of people than around the performance of tasks. Informal groups usually serve to satisfy needs of affiliation, and act as a forum for exploring self-concept as a means of gaining support, and so on. However, these informal groups may also have an important effect on formal work tasks, for example by exerting subtle pressures on group members to conform to a particular work rate, or as ‘places’ where news, gossip, etc., is exchanged.

What is a team?

Exploration Activity

Write your own definition of a ‘team’ (in 20 words or less).

Provide an example of a team working toward an achievable goals

You probably described a team as a group of some kind. However, a team is more than just a group. When you think of all the groups that you belong to, you will probably find that very few of them are really teams. Some of them will be family or friendship groups that are formed to meet a wide range of needs such as affection, security, support, esteem, belonging, or identity. Some may be committees whose members represent different interest groups and who meet to discuss their differing perspectives on issues of interest.

In this reading the term ‘work group’ (or ‘group’) is often used interchangeably with the word ‘team,’ although a team may be thought of as a particularly cohesive and purposeful type of work group. We can distinguish work groups or teams from more casual groupings of people by using the following set of criteria (Adair, 1983). A collection of people can be defined as a work group or team if it shows most, if not all, of the following characteristics:

A definable membership: a collection of three or more people identifiable by name or type;
A group identity: the members think of themselves as a group;
A sense of shared purpose: the members share some common task or goals or interests;
Interdependence: the members need the help of one another to accomplish the purpose for which they joined the group;
Interaction: the members communicate with one another, influence one another, react to one another;
Sustainability: the team members periodically review the team’s effectiveness;
An ability to act together.

Usually, the tasks and goals set by teams cannot be achieved by individuals working alone because of constraints on time and resources, and because few individuals possess all the relevant competences and expertise. Sports teams or orchestras clearly fit these criteria.

List some examples of teams of which you are a member – both inside and outside work – in your learning file.

Now list some groups .

What strikes you as the main differences?

By contrast, many groups are much less explicitly focused on an external task. In some instances, the growth and development of the group itself is its primary purpose; process is more important than outcome. Many groups are reasonably fluid and less formally structured than teams. In the case of work groups, an agreed and defined outcome is often regarded as a sufficient basis for effective cooperation and the development of adequate relationships. Teamwork is usually connected with project work and this is a feature of much work. Teamwork is particularly useful when you have to address risky, uncertain, or unfamiliar problems where there is a lot of choice and discretion surrounding the decision to be made. In the area of voluntary and unpaid work, where pay is not an incentive, teamwork can help to motivate support and commitment because it can offer the opportunities to interact socially and learn from others (Piercy & Kramer, 2017). Furthermore, people are more willing to support and defend work they helped create (Stanton, 1992).

Importantly, groups and teams are not distinct entities. Both can be pertinent in personal development as well as organizational development and managing change. In such circumstances, when is it appropriate to embark on teambuilding rather than relying on ordinary group or solo working?

In general, the greater the task uncertainty the more important teamwork is, especially if it is necessary to represent the differing perspectives of concerned parties. In such situations, the facts themselves do not always point to an obvious policy or strategy for innovation, support, and development: decisions are partially based on the opinions and the personal visions of those involved.

There are risks associated with working in teams as well. Under some conditions, teams may produce more conventional, rather than more innovative, responses to problems. The reason for this is that team decisions may regress towards the average, with group pressures to conform cancelling out more innovative decision options (Makin, Cooper, & Cox, 1989). It depends on how innovative the team is, in terms of its membership, its norms, and its values.

Teamwork may also be inappropriate when you want a fast decision. Team decision making is usually slower than individual decision making because of the need for communication and consensus about the decision taken. Despite the business successes of Japanese companies, it is now recognized that promoting a collective organizational identity and responsibility for decisions can sometimes slow down operations significantly, in ways that are not always compensated for by better decision making.

Is a team or group really needed?

There may be times when group working – or simply working alone – is more appropriate and more effective. For example, decision-making in groups and teams is usually slower than individual decision-making because of the need for communication and consensus. In addition, groups and teams may produce conventional rather than innovative responses to problems, because decisions may regress towards the average, with the more innovative decision options being rejected (Makin et al., 1989).

In general, the greater the task uncertainty , that is to say the less obvious and more complex the task to be addressed, the more important it will be to work in a group or team rather than individually. This is because there will be a greater need for different skills and perspectives, especially if it is necessary to represent the different perspectives of the different stakeholders involved.

Table 2 lists some occasions when it will be appropriate to work in teams, in groups or alone.

When to work alone, in groups or in teams

Types of teams

Different organizations or organizational settings lead to different types of team. The type of team affects how that team is managed, what the communication needs of the team are and, where appropriate, what aspects of the project the project manager needs to emphasize. A work group or team may be permanent, forming part of the organization’s structure, such as a top management team, or temporary, such as a task force assembled to see through a particular project. Members may work as a group continuously or meet only intermittently. The more direct contact and communication team members have with each other, the more likely they are to function well as a team. Thus, getting a group to function well is a valuable management aim.

The following section defines common types of team. Many teams may not fall clearly into one type, but may combine elements of different types. Many organizations have traditionally been managed through a hierarchical structure. This general structure is illustrated in Figure 1 below.

The number of levels clearly depends upon the size and to some extent on the type of the organization. Typically, the span of control , the number of people each manager or supervisor is directly responsible for, averages about five people, but this can vary widely. As a general rule it is bad practice for any single manager to supervise more than 7-10 people.

While the hierarchy is designed to provide a stable ‘backbone’ to the organization, projects are primarily concerned with change, and so tend to be organized quite differently. Their structure needs to be more fluid than that of conventional management structures. There are four commonly used types of project team: the functional team, the project (single) team, the matrix team and the contract team.

Why is it problematic for a manager to supervise too many people? How does this relate to groups, is there an ideal group size or configuration?

The project (single) team

The hierarchical structure described above divides groups of people along largely functional lines: people working together carry out the same or similar functions. A functional team is a team in which work is carried out within a group organized around a similar function or task. This can be project work. In organizations in which the functional divisions are relatively rigid, project work can be handed from one functional team to another in order to complete the work. For example, work on a new product can pass from marketing, which has the idea, to research and development, which sees whether it is technically feasible, thence to design and finally manufacturing. This is sometimes known as ‘baton passing’ – or, less flatteringly, as ‘throwing it over the wall’!

The project, or single, team consists of a group of people who come together as a distinct organizational unit in order to work on a project or projects. The team is often led by a project manager, though self-managing and self-organizing arrangements are also found. Quite often, a team that has been successful on one project will stay together to work on subsequent projects. This is particularly common where an organization engages repeatedly in projects of a broadly similar nature – for example developing software, or in construction. Perhaps the most important issue in this instance is to develop the collective capability of the team, since this is the currency for continued success. People issues are often crucial in achieving this.

The closeness of the dedicated project team normally reduces communication problems within the team. However, care should be taken to ensure that communications with other stakeholders (senior management, line managers and other members of staff in the departments affected, and so on) are not neglected, as it is easy for ‘us and them’ distinctions to develop.

The matrix team

In a matrix team , staff report to different managers for different aspects of their work. Matrix structures are often, but not exclusively, found in projects. Matrix structures are more common in large and multi-national organizations. In this structure, staff are responsible to the project manager for their work on the project while their functional line manager may be responsible for other aspects of their work such as appraisal, training, and career development, and ‘routine’ tasks. This matrix project structure is represented in Figure 2. Notice how the traditional hierarchy is cross-cut by the ‘automated widget manufacturing configuration.’

In this form of organization, staff from various functional areas (such as design, software development, manufacturing or marketing) are loaned or seconded to work on a particular project. Such staff may work full- or part-time on the project. The project manager thus has a recognizable team and is responsible for controlling and monitoring its work on the project.

However, many of the project staff will still have other duties to perform in their normal functional departments. The functional line managers they report to will retain responsibility for this work and for the professional standards of their work on the project, as well as for their training and career development. It is important to overcome the problems staff might have with the dual reporting lines (the ‘two-boss’ problem). This requires building good interpersonal relationships with the team members and regular, effective communication.

The contract team

The contract team is brought in from outside in order to do the project work. Here, the responsibility to deliver the project rests very firmly with the project manager. The client will find such a team harder to control directly. On the other hand, it is the client who will judge the success of the project, so the project manager has to keep an eye constantly on the physical outcomes of the project. A variant of this is the so-called ‘outsourced supply team’, which simply means that the team is physically situated remotely from the project manager, who then encounters the additional problem of ‘managing at a distance’.

Mixed structures

Teams often have mixed structures:

Some members may be employed to work full time on the project and be fully responsible to the project manager. Project managers themselves are usually employed full time.
Others may work part time, and be responsible to the project manager only during their time on the project. For example, internal staff may well work on several projects at the same time. Alternatively, an external consultant working on a given project may also be involved in a wider portfolio of activities.
Some may be part of a matrix arrangement, whereby their work on the project is overseen by the project manager and they report to their line manager for other matters. Project administrators often function in this way, serving the project for its duration, but having a career path within a wider administrative service.
Still others may be part of a functional hierarchy, undertaking work on the project under their line manager’s supervision by negotiation with their project manager. For instance, someone who works in an organization’s legal department may provide the project team with access to legal advice when needed.

In relatively small projects the last two arrangements are a very common way of accessing specialist services that will only be needed from time to time.

Modern teams

In addition to the traditional types of teams or groups outlined above, recent years have seen the growth of interest in three other important types of team: ‘self-managed teams’, ‘self-organizing teams’, and ‘dispersed virtual teams.’

A typical self-managed team may be permanent or temporary. It operates in an informal and non-hierarchical manner, and has considerable responsibility for the way it carries out its tasks. It is often found in organizations that are developing total quality management and quality assurance approaches. The Industrial Society Survey observed that: “Better customer service, more motivated staff, and better quality of output are the three top motives for moving to [self-managed teams], managers report.”

In contrast, organizations that deliberately encourage the formation of self-organizing teams are comparatively rare. Teams of this type can be found in highly flexible, innovative organizations that thrive on creativity and informality. These are modern organizations that recognize the importance of learning and adaptability in ensuring their success and continued survival. However, self-organizing teams exist, unrecognized, in many organizations. For instance, in traditional, bureaucratic organizations, people who need to circumvent the red tape may get together in order to make something happen and, in so doing, spontaneously create a self-organizing team. The team will work together, operating outside the formal structures, until its task is done and then it will disband.

Table 2 shows some typical features of self-managed and self-organizing teams.

Table 2: Comparing Self-managed and Self-Organizing Teams

Many organizations set up self-managed or empowered teams as an important way of improving performance and they are often used as a way of introducing a continuous improvement approach. These teams tend to meet regularly to discuss and put forward ideas for improved methods of working or customer service in their areas. Some manufacturers have used multi-skilled self-managed teams to improve manufacturing processes, to enhance worker participation and improve morale. Self-managed teams give employees an opportunity to take a more active role in their working lives and to develop new skills and abilities. This may result in reduced staff turnover and less absenteeism.

Self-organizing teams are usually formed spontaneously in response to an issue, idea or challenge. This may be the challenge of creating a radically new product, or solving a tough production problem. In Japan, the encouragement of self-organizing teams has been used as a way of stimulating discussion and debate about strategic issues so that radical and innovative new strategies emerge. By using a self-organizing team approach companies were able to tap into the collective wisdom and energy of interested and motivated employees.

Following the COVID-19 pandemic, virtual teams are increasingly common. A virtual team is one whose primary means of communicating is electronic, with only occasional phone and face-to-face communication, if at all. Virtual teams use technologies like, Zoom, Skype, Teams, Basecamp, etc. to coordinate, meet, and share work (Kniffen et al., 2021). Table 3 contains a summary of benefits virtual groups provide to organizations and individuals, as well as the potential challenges and disadvantages virtual groups present.

Table 3. Teams have organizational and individual benefits, as well as possible challenges and disadvantages

Why do (only some) teams succeed?

Clearly, there are no hard-and-fast rules which lead to team effectiveness . The determinants of a successful team are complex and not equivalent to following a set of prescriptions. However, the results of poor teamwork can be expensive, so it is useful to draw on research, experience and case studies to explore some general guidelines. What do I mean by ‘team effectiveness’? – the achievement of goals alone? Where do the achievements of individual members fit in? and How does team member satisfaction contribute to team effectiveness?

Borrowing from Adair’s (1983) leadership model, the left-hand side of Figure 3 shows the main constituents of team effectiveness: the satisfaction of individual membership needs, successful team interaction and the achievement of team tasks. These elements are not discrete, so Figure 3 shows them as overlapping. For example, team member satisfaction will be derived not only from the achievement of tasks but also from the quality of team relationships and the more social aspects of teamworking: people who work almost entirely on their own, such as teleworkers and self-employed business owner-managers, often miss the opportunity to bounce ideas off colleagues in team situations. The experience of solitude in their work can, over time, create a sense of isolation, and impair their performance. The effectiveness of a team should also relate to the next step, to what happens after the achievement of team goals.

The three elements could be reconfigured as an iceberg, most of which is below the water’s surface (the right-hand side of Figure 3). Superficial observation of teams in organizations might suggest that most, if not all, energy is devoted to the explicit task (what is to be achieved, by when, with what budget and what resources). Naturally, this is important. But too often the concealed part of the iceberg (how the team will work together) is neglected. As with real icebergs, shipwrecks can ensue.

For instance, if working in a particular team leaves its members antagonistic towards each other and disenchanted with the organization to the point of looking for new jobs, then it can hardly be regarded as fully effective, even if it achieves its goals. The measure of team effectiveness could be how well the team has prepared its members for the transition to new projects, and whether the members would relish the thought of working with each other again.

In addition to what happens inside a team there are external influences that impact upon team operations. Restated, teams operate in complex systems composed on both internal and external stakeholders, resources, and outcomes. The factors shown in Figure 4 interact with each other in ways that affect the team and its development. We don’t fully understand the complexity of these interactions and combinations. The best that we can do is discuss each factor in turn and consider some of the interactions between them and how they relate to team effectiveness. For instance, discussions about whether the wider culture of an organization supports and rewards teamworking, whether a team’s internal and/or external customers clearly specify their requirements and whether the expectations of a team match those of its sponsor will all either help or hinder a team’s ongoing vitality.

Adair, J. (1983) Effective Leadership , Gower.
Industrial Society (1995) Managing Best Practice: Self Managed Teams . Publication no. 11, May 1995, London, Industrial Society.
Kniffin, K. M., Narayanan, J., Anseel, F., Antonakis, J., Ashford, S. P., Bakker, A. B., … & Vugt, M. V. (2021). COVID-19 and the workplace: Implications, issues, and insights for future research and action. American Psychologist , 76 (1), 63.
Makin, P., Cooper, C. and Cox, C. (1989) Managing People at Work , The British Psychological Society and Routledge.
Stanton, A. (1992). Learning from experience of collective teamwork. In Paton R., Cornforth C, and Batsleer, J. (Eds.) Issues in Voluntary and Non-profit Management , pp. 95–103, Addison-Wesley.
Piercy, C. W., & Kramer, M. W. (2017). Exploring dialectical tensions of leading volunteers in two community choirs. Communication Studies, 68 , 208-226.

Groups used to organize and distribute work, pool information, devise plans, coordinate activities, increase commitment, negotiate, resolve conflicts and conduct inquests.

Groups not formally sanctioned (by an organization) which serve to satisfy needs of affiliation, and act as a forum for exploring self-concept as a means of gaining support, and so on.

a particularly cohesive and purposeful type of work group

the less obvious and more complex the task to be addressed

the number of people each manager or supervisor is directly responsible for

a group of people who come together as a distinct organizational unit in order to work on a project or projects.

other parties involved or affected by decision a team makes (e.g., customers, co-workers, managers, etc.)

a team in which members report to different managers for different aspects of their work

A team brought in from outside in order to do the project work

A team which operates in an informal and non-hierarchical manner, and has considerable responsibility for the way it carries out its tasks

A team in which members self-select their membership, this type of team is typically marked by an informal work style and little input or direction from senior management. These teams are often formed spontaneously in response to an issue, idea or challenge.

A combination of task achievement, individual success, and positive team interactions across both the task and process dimensions of team work.

A system is a group of interacting or interrelated elements that interact to form a unified whole. A system is surrounded and influenced by its environment. Systems are described by its boundaries, structure and purpose and expressed in its functioning.

Defining Teams and Groups Copyright © 2021 by Cameron W. Piercy, Ph.D. is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Book a Demo

></center></p><h2>13 Problem-Solving Activities & Exercises for Your Team</h2><ul><li>December 4, 2023</li><li>Project Management</li><li>21 min read</li></ul><p><center><img style=

Are you looking to enhance your or your team’s problem-solving abilities? Engaging in activities specifically designed to stimulate your and your team’s critical thinking skills can be an excellent way to sharpen your problem-solving prowess. Whether you enjoy puzzles, brain teasers, or interactive challenges, these activities provide an opportunity to overcome obstacles and think creatively.

By immersing yourself in problem-solving activities, you can develop valuable strategies, improve your decision-making abilities, and boost your overall problem-solving IQ. Get ready to unlock your full potential and tackle any challenge that comes your way with these exciting activities for problem-solving.

In this article, we will explore activities for problem-solving that can help enhance your team’s problem-solving skills, allowing you to approach challenges with confidence and creativity.

What Are Problem Solving Activities?

Problem-solving activities or problem-solving exercises are interactive games requiring critical thinking to solve puzzles. They enhance teamwork & critical thinking. Examples include building towers, navigating simulated challenges, and fostering creativity and communication.

For instance, imagine a team working together to construct the tallest tower using limited materials. They strategize, communicate ideas, and problem-solve to create the best structure, promoting collaboration and inventive thinking among team members.

Some widely practiced problem-solving activities include:

A Shrinking Vessel: Teams must fit into a shrinking space, testing their cooperation and adaptability.
Marshmallow Spaghetti Tower: Participants build a tower using marshmallows and spaghetti, promoting creative engineering.
Egg Drop: Protecting an egg from a fall challenges problem-solving skills.
Desert Island Survival: Teams simulate survival scenarios, encouraging creative solutions.
Rolling Dice: A simple yet effective game involving chance and decision-making.
Build a Tower: Constructing a stable tower with limited resources fosters teamwork and innovation, etc.

13 Easy Activities For Problem-Solving Ideas to Enhance Team Collaboration

Team building activities offer a great opportunity to test problem-solving abilities and promote effective collaboration within a group to problem solving group activities. By engaging in these activities, teams can break the monotony of the workplace and create a more inclusive and welcoming environment.

Here are nine easy-to-implement activities that can bring substantial change to your team culture and overall workplace dynamics.

#1. Crossword Puzzles

Objective: To enhance problem-solving skills, vocabulary, and cognitive abilities through engaging crossword puzzles.

Estimated Time: 15-20 Minutes

Materials Needed:

Crossword puzzle sheets
Pens or pencils
Distribute crossword puzzle sheets and pens/pencils to each participant.
Explain the rules of crossword puzzles and the goal of completing as many clues as possible within the given time.
Participants individually or in pairs work on solving the crossword puzzle by filling in the correct words.
Encourage critical thinking, word association, and collaborative discussions for solving challenging clues.
At the end of the time limit, review the answers and discuss any interesting or challenging clues as a group.
Enhanced Problem-Solving: Participants engage in critical thinking while deciphering clues, promoting effective problem-solving skills.
Vocabulary Expansion: Exposure to new words and phrases within the crossword improves vocabulary and comprehension.
Cognitive Stimulation: The mental exercise of solving the puzzle stimulates the brain, enhancing cognitive abilities.
Team Collaboration: If done in pairs, participants practice collaboration and communication to solve clues together.
Achievement and Motivation: Successfully completing the crossword brings a sense of accomplishment and motivates individuals to explore more puzzles.

Tips for Facilitators:

Provide varying levels of crossword puzzles to accommodate different skill levels.
Encourage participants to share strategies for solving challenging clues.
Emphasize the fun and educational aspects of the activity to keep participants engaged.

#2. A Shrinking Vessel

Estimated Time: 10-15 Minutes

Materials Needed: A rope and a ball of yarn
Prepare the Setting: Lay a rope on the floor in a shape that allows all team members to stand comfortably inside it. For larger teams, multiple ropes can be used, dividing them into smaller groups.
Enter the Circle: Have all team members stand inside the rope, ensuring that nobody steps outside its boundaries.
Shrinking the Circle: Begin gradually shrinking the rope’s size, reducing the available space inside the circle.
Adapt and Maintain Balance: As the circle shrinks, team members must make subtle adjustments to maintain their positions and balance within the shrinking area.
The Challenge: The objective for the team is to collectively brainstorm and find innovative ways to keep every team member inside the circle without anyone stepping outside.
Collaboration and Communication: The activity promotes teamwork and open communication as participants strategize to stay within the shrinking circle.
Adaptability: Team members learn to adapt swiftly to changing circumstances, fostering agility and flexibility.
Creative Problem-Solving: The challenge encourages inventive thinking and brainstorming to find unique solutions.
Trust Building: By relying on each other’s actions, participants build trust and cohesion among team members.
Time-Efficient: The short duration makes it an ideal icebreaker or energizer during meetings or workshops.
Observe and Facilitate: Monitor the team’s dynamics and offer guidance to encourage equal participation and effective problem-solving.
Encourage Verbalization: Prompt participants to voice their ideas and collaborate vocally, aiding in real-time adjustments.
Debrief Thoughtfully: Engage the team in a discussion afterward, reflecting on strategies employed and lessons learned.
Emphasize Adaptability: Highlight the transferable skill of adaptability and its significance in both professional and personal contexts.

#3. Human Knots

Objective: Improving Collaboration & enhancing Communication Skills

Estimated Time: 15-20 minutes

Materials: None required

Procedure:

Organize your team into a compact circle. For more sizable teams, subdivide them into smaller clusters, with each cluster forming its own circle.
Direct each individual to grasp the hands of two other people in the circle, with the exception of those positioned directly adjacent to them. This action will result in the formation of a complex “human knot” within the circle.
Present the challenge to the group: to unravel themselves from this entanglement while maintaining their hold on each other’s hands. If preferred, you can establish a specific time limit.
Observe the team members collaborating to unravel the knot, witnessing their collective effort to devise solutions and free themselves from the intricate puzzle.
Team Cohesion: The activity encourages team members to interact closely, promoting bonding and understanding among participants.
Effective Communication: Participants practice clear and concise communication as they coordinate movements to untangle the knot.
Problem-Solving: The challenge stimulates creative thinking and problem-solving skills as individuals work collectively to find the optimal path for untangling.
Adaptability: Participants learn to adapt their actions based on the evolving dynamics of the human knot, fostering adaptability.
Trust Building: As individuals rely on each other to navigate the intricate knot, trust and cooperation naturally develop.
Set a Positive Tone: Create an inclusive and supportive atmosphere, emphasizing that the focus is on collaboration rather than competition.
Encourage Verbalization: Urge participants to articulate their intentions and listen to others’ suggestions, promoting effective teamwork.
Observe Group Dynamics: Monitor interactions and step in if needed to ensure everyone is actively engaged and included.
Reflect and Share: Conclude the activity with a debriefing session, allowing participants to share their experiences, strategies, and key takeaways.
Vary Grouping: Change group compositions for subsequent rounds to enhance interactions among different team members.

#4. Egg Drop

Helps With: Decision Making, Collaboration

A carton of eggs
Construction materials (balloons, rubber bands, straws, tape, plastic wrap, etc.)
A suitable location for the activity
Assign each team a single egg and random construction materials.
Teams must create a carrier to protect the egg from breaking.
Drop the carriers one by one and increase the height if necessary to determine the most durable carrier.
The winning team is the one with the carrier that survives the highest drop.
Decision Making: Participants engage in critical decision-making processes as they select construction materials and determine carrier designs.
Collaboration: The activity necessitates collaboration and coordination among team members to construct an effective carrier.
Problem-Solving: Teams apply creative problem-solving skills to devise innovative methods for safeguarding the egg.
Risk Management: Participants learn to assess potential risks and consequences while making design choices to prevent egg breakage.
Celebrating Success: The victorious team experiences a sense of accomplishment, boosting morale and promoting a positive team spirit.
Provide Diverse Materials: Offer a wide range of construction materials to stimulate creativity and allow teams to explore various design options.
Set Safety Guidelines: Prioritize safety by specifying a safe drop height and ensuring participants follow safety protocols during construction.
Encourage Brainstorming: Prompt teams to brainstorm multiple carrier ideas before finalizing their designs, fostering diverse perspectives.
Facilitate Reflection: After the activity, lead a discussion where teams share their design strategies, challenges faced, and lessons learned.
Highlight Collaboration: Emphasize the significance of teamwork in achieving success, acknowledging effective communication and cooperation.

#5. Marshmallow Spaghetti Tower

Helps With: Collaboration

Estimated Time: 20-30 Minutes

Materials Needed (per team):

Raw spaghetti: 20 sticks
Marshmallow: 1
String: 1 yard
Masking tape: 1 roll
Tower Construction: Instruct teams to collaborate and utilize the provided materials to construct the tallest tower possible within a designated time frame.
Marshmallow Support: Emphasize that the tower must be capable of standing independently and supporting a marshmallow at its highest point.
Prototype and Iterate: Encourage teams to engage in prototyping and iteration, testing different design approaches and refining their tower structures.
T eamwork and Communication: Promote effective teamwork and communication as team members coordinate their efforts to build a stable and tall tower.
Evaluation Criteria: Evaluate each tower based on its height, stability, and the successful placement of the marshmallow at the top.
Collaboration: Participants collaborate closely, sharing ideas and working together to design and construct the tower.
Innovative Thinking: The activity encourages innovative thinking as teams experiment with different strategies to build a stable tower.
Time Management: Teams practice time management skills as they work within a specified time limit to complete the task.
Problem-Solving: Participants engage in creative problem-solving to address challenges such as balancing the marshmallow and constructing a sturdy tower.
Adaptability: Teams adapt their approaches based on trial and error, learning from each iteration to improve their tower designs.
Set Clear Guidelines: Clearly explain the materials, objectives, and evaluation criteria to ensure teams understand the task.
Foster Creativity: Encourage teams to think outside the box and explore unconventional methods for constructing their towers.
Emphasize Collaboration: Highlight the importance of effective communication and teamwork to accomplish the task successfully.
Time Management: Remind teams of the time limit and encourage them to allocate their time wisely between planning and construction.
Reflect and Share: Facilitate a discussion after the activity, allowing teams to share their design choices, challenges faced, and lessons learned.

Objective: To engage participants in the strategic and analytical world of Sudoku, enhancing logical thinking and problem-solving abilities.

Estimated Time: 20-25 Minutes

Sudoku puzzle sheets
Pencils with erasers
Distribute Sudoku puzzle sheets and pencils to each participant.
Familiarize participants with the rules and mechanics of Sudoku puzzles.
Explain the goal: to fill in the empty cells with numbers from 1 to 9 while adhering to the rules of no repetition in rows, columns, or subgrids.
Encourage participants to analyze the puzzle’s layout, identify potential numbers, and strategically fill in cells.
Emphasize the importance of logical deduction and step-by-step approach in solving the puzzle.
Provide hints or guidance if needed, ensuring participants remain engaged and challenged.
Logical Thinking: Sudoku challenges participants’ logical and deductive reasoning, fostering analytical skills.
Problem-Solving: The intricate interplay of numbers and constraints hones problem-solving abilities.
Focus and Patience: Participants practice patience and attention to detail while gradually unveiling the solution.
Pattern Recognition: Identifying number patterns and possibilities contributes to enhanced pattern recognition skills.
Personal Achievement: Successfully completing a Sudoku puzzle provides a sense of accomplishment and boosts confidence.
Offer varying levels of Sudoku puzzles to cater to different skill levels.
Encourage participants to share strategies and techniques for solving specific challenges.
Highlight the mental workout Sudoku provides and its transferable skills to real-life problem-solving.

Helps With: Communication, Problem-solving, & Management

A lockable room
5-10 puzzles or clues
Hide the key and a set of clues around the room.
Lock the room and provide team members with a specific time limit to find the key and escape.
Instruct the team to work together, solving the puzzles and deciphering the clues to locate the key.
Encourage efficient communication and effective problem-solving under time pressure.
Communication Skills: Participants enhance their communication abilities by sharing observations, ideas, and findings to collectively solve puzzles.
Problem-solving Proficiency: The activity challenges teams to think critically, apply logical reasoning, and collaboratively tackle intricate challenges.
Team Management: The experience promotes effective team management as members assign tasks, prioritize efforts, and coordinate actions.
Time Management: The imposed time limit sharpens time management skills as teams strategize and allocate time wisely.
Adaptability: Teams learn to adapt and adjust strategies based on progress, evolving clues, and time constraints.
Clear Introduction: Provide a concise overview of the activity, emphasizing the importance of communication, problem-solving, and time management.
Diverse Challenges: Offer a mix of puzzles and clues to engage various problem-solving skills, catering to different team strengths.
Supportive Role: Act as a facilitator, offering subtle guidance if needed while allowing teams to independently explore and solve challenges.
Debriefing Session: Organize a debriefing session afterward to discuss the experience, highlight successful strategies, and identify areas for improvement.
Encourage Reflection: Encourage participants to reflect on their teamwork, communication effectiveness, and problem-solving approach.

#8. Frostbite for Group Problem Solving Activities

Helps With: Decision Making, Trust, Leadership

An electric fan
Construction materials (toothpicks, cardstock, rubber bands, sticky notes, etc.)
Divide the team into groups of 4-5 people, each with a designated leader.
Blindfold team members and prohibit leaders from using their hands.
Provide teams with construction materials and challenge them to build a tent within 30 minutes.
Test the tents using the fan to see which can withstand high winds.
Decision-Making Proficiency: Participants are exposed to critical decision-making situations under constraints, allowing them to practice effective and efficient decision-making.
Trust Development: Blindfolding team members and relying on the designated leaders fosters trust and collaboration among team members.
Leadership Skills: Designated leaders navigate the challenge without hands-on involvement, enhancing their leadership and communication skills.
Creative Problem Solving: Teams employ creative thinking and resourcefulness to construct stable tents with limited sensory input.
Team Cohesion: The shared task and unique constraints promote team cohesion and mutual understanding.
Role of the Facilitator: Act as an observer, allowing teams to navigate the challenge with minimal intervention. Offer assistance only when necessary.
Clarity in Instructions: Provide clear instructions regarding blindfolding, leader restrictions, and time limits to ensure a consistent experience.
Debriefing Session: After the activity, conduct a debriefing session to discuss team dynamics, leadership approaches, and decision-making strategies.
Encourage Communication: Emphasize the importance of effective communication within teams to ensure smooth coordination and successful tent construction.
Acknowledge Creativity: Celebrate creative solutions and innovative approaches exhibited by teams during the tent-building process.

#9. Dumbest Idea First

Helps With: Critical Thinking & Creative Problem Solving Activity

Estimated Time: 15-20 Minutes

Materials Needed: A piece of paper, pen, and pencil

Problem Presentation: Introduce a specific problem to the team, either a real-world challenge or a hypothetical scenario that requires a solution.
Brainstorming Dumb Ideas: Instruct team members to quickly generate and jot down the most unconventional and seemingly “dumb” ideas they can think of to address the problem.
Idea Sharing: Encourage each participant to share their generated ideas with the group, fostering a relaxed and open atmosphere for creative expression.
Viability Assessment: As a team, review and evaluate each idea, considering potential benefits and drawbacks. Emphasize the goal of identifying unconventional approaches.
Selecting Promising Solutions: Identify which seemingly “dumb” ideas could hold hidden potential or innovative insights. Discuss how these ideas could be adapted into workable solutions.
Divergent Thinking: Participants engage in divergent thinking, pushing beyond conventional boundaries to explore unconventional solutions.
Creative Exploration: The activity sparks creative exploration by encouraging participants to let go of inhibitions and embrace imaginative thinking.
Critical Analysis: Through evaluating each idea, participants practice critical analysis and learn to identify unique angles and aspects of potential solutions.
Open Communication: The lighthearted approach of sharing “dumb” ideas fosters open communication, reducing fear of judgment and promoting active participation.
Solution Adaptation: Identifying elements of seemingly “dumb” ideas that have merit encourages participants to adapt and refine their approaches creatively.
Safe Environment: Foster a safe and non-judgmental environment where participants feel comfortable sharing unconventional ideas.
Time Management: Set clear time limits for idea generation and sharing to maintain the activity’s energetic pace.
Encourage Wild Ideas: Emphasize that the goal is to explore the unconventional, urging participants to push the boundaries of creativity.
Facilitator Participation: Participate in idea generation to demonstrate an open-minded approach and encourage involvement.
Debriefing Discussion: After the activity, facilitate a discussion on how seemingly “dumb” ideas can inspire innovative solutions and stimulate fresh thinking.

This activity encourages out-of-the-box thinking and creative problem-solving. It allows teams to explore unconventional ideas that may lead to unexpected, yet effective, solutions.

#10: Legoman

Helps With: Foster teamwork, communication, and creativity through a collaborative Lego-building activity.

Estimated Time: 20-30 minutes

Lego bricks
Lego instruction manuals

Procedure :

Divide participants into small teams of 3-5 members.
Provide each team with an equal set of Lego bricks and a Lego instruction manual.
Explain that the goal is for teams to work together to construct the Lego model shown in the manual.
Set a time limit for the building activity based on model complexity.
Allow teams to self-organize, build, and collaborate to complete the model within the time limit.
Evaluate each team’s final model compared to the manual’s original design.
Enhanced Communication: Participants must communicate clearly and listen actively to collaborate effectively.
Strengthened Teamwork: Combining efforts toward a shared goal promotes camaraderie and team cohesion.
Creative Problem-Solving: Teams must creatively problem-solve if pieces are missing or instructions unclear.
Planning and Resource Allocation: Following instructions fosters planning skills and efficient use of resources.
Sense of Achievement: Completing a challenging build provides a sense of collective accomplishment.
Encourage Participation: Urge quieter members to contribute ideas and take an active role.
Highlight Teamwork: Emphasize how cooperation and task coordination are key to success.
Ensure Equal Engagement: Monitor group dynamics to ensure all members are engaged.
Allow Creativity: Permit modifications if teams lack exact pieces or wish to get creative.
Focus on Enjoyment: Create a lively atmosphere so the activity remains energizing and fun.

#11: Minefield

Helps With: Trust, Communication, Patience

Materials Needed: Open space, blindfolds

Mark a “minefield” on the ground using ropes, cones, or tape. Add toy mines or paper cups.
Pair up participants and blindfold one partner.
Position blindfolded partners at the start of the minefield. Direct seeing partners to verbally guide them through to the other side without hitting “mines.”
Partners switch roles once finished and repeat.
Time partnerships and provide prizes for the fastest safe crossing.
Trust Building: Blindfolded partners must trust their partner’s instructions.
Effective Communication: Giving clear, specific directions is essential for navigating the minefield.
Active Listening: Partners must listen closely and follow directions precisely.
Patience & Support: The exercise requires patience and encouraging guidance between partners.
Team Coordination: Partners must work in sync, coordinating movements and communication.
Test Boundaries: Ensure the minefield’s size accommodates safe movement and communication.
Monitor Interactions: Watch for dominant guidance and ensure both partners participate fully.
Time Strategically: Adjust time limits based on the minefield size and difficulty.
Add Obstacles: Introduce additional non-mine objects to increase challenge and communication needs.
Foster Discussion: Debrief afterward to discuss communication approaches and trust-building takeaways.

#12: Reverse Pyramid

Helps With: Teamwork, Communication, Creativity

Materials Needed: 36 cups per group, tables

Form small groups of 5-7 participants.
Provide each group with a stack of 36 cups and a designated building area.
Explain the objective: Build the tallest pyramid starting with just one cup on top.
Place the first cup on the table, and anyone in the group can add two cups beneath it to form the second row.
From this point, only the bottom row can be lifted to add the next row underneath.
Cups in the pyramid can only be touched or supported by index fingers.
If the structure falls, start over from one cup.
Offer more cups if a group uses all provided.
Allow 15 minutes for building.

Teamwork: Collaborate to construct the pyramid.

Communication: Discuss and execute the building strategy.

Creativity: Find innovative ways to build a tall, stable pyramid.

Clarify Expectations: Emphasize the definition of a pyramid with each row having one less cup.

Encourage Perseverance: Motivate groups to continue despite challenges.

Promote Consensus: Encourage groups to work together and help each other.

Reflect on Failure: Use collapses as a metaphor for overcoming obstacles and improving.

Consider Competitions: Modify the activity for competitive teams and scoring.

#13: Stranded

Helps With: Decision-making, Prioritization, Teamwork

Materials Needed: List of salvaged items, paper, pens

Present a scenario where teams are stranded and must prioritize items salvaged from a plane crash.
Provide teams with the same list of ~15 salvaged items.
Instruct teams to agree on an item ranking with #1 being the most important for survival.
Teams share and compare their prioritized lists. Identify differences in approach.
Discuss what factors influenced decisions and how teams worked together to agree on priorities.
Critical Thinking: Weighing item importance requires analytical thinking and discussion.
Team Decision-Making: Coming to a consensus fosters team decision-making capabilities.
Prioritization Skills: Ranking items strengthen prioritization and justification abilities.
Perspective-Taking: Understanding different prioritizations builds perspective-taking skills.
Team Cohesion: Collaborating toward a shared goal brings teams closer together.
Encourage Discussion: Urge teams to discuss all ideas rather than allow single members to dominate.
Be Engaged: Circulate to listen in on team discussions and pose thought-provoking questions.
Add Complexity: Introduce scenarios with additional constraints to expand critical thinking.
Highlight Disagreements: When priorities differ, facilitate constructive discussions on influencing factors.
Recognize Collaboration: Acknowledge teams that demonstrate exceptional teamwork and communication.

Now let’s look at some common types of problem-solving activities.

Types of Problem-Solving Activities

The most common types of problem-solving activities/exercises are:

Creative problem-solving activities
Group problem-solving activities
Individual problem-solving activities
Fun problem-solving activities, etc.

In the next segments, we’ll be discussing these types of problem-solving activities in detail. So, keep reading!

Creative Problem-Solving Activities

Creative problem solving (CPS) means using creativity to find new solutions. It involves thinking creatively at first and then evaluating ideas later. For example, think of it like brainstorming fun game ideas, discussing them, and then picking the best one to play.

Some of the most common creative problem-solving activities include:

Legoman: Building creative structures with LEGO.
Escape: Solving puzzles to escape a room.
Frostbite: Finding solutions in challenging situations.
Minefield: Navigating a field of obstacles.

Group Problem-Solving Activities

Group problem-solving activities are challenges that make teams work together to solve puzzles or overcome obstacles. They enhance teamwork and critical thinking.

For instance, think of a puzzle-solving game where a group must find hidden clues to escape a locked room.

Here are the most common group problem-solving activities you can try in groups:

A Shrinking Vessel
Marshmallow Spaghetti Tower
Cardboard Boat Building Challenge
Clue Murder Mystery
Escape Room: Jewel Heist
Escape Room: Virtual Team Building
Scavenger Hunt
Dumbest Idea First

Individual Problem-Solving Activities

As the name suggests, individual problem-solving activities are the tasks that you need to play alone to boost your critical thinking ability. They help you solve problems and stay calm while facing challenges in real life. Like puzzles, they make your brain sharper. Imagine it’s like training your brain muscles to handle tricky situations.

Here are some of the most common individual problem-solving activities:

Puzzles (jigsaw, crossword, sudoku, etc.)
Brain teasers
Logic problems
Optical illusions
“Escape room” style games

Fun Problem-Solving Activities

Fun problem-solving activities are enjoyable games that sharpen your critical thinking skills while having a blast. Think of activities like the Legoman challenge, escape rooms, or rolling dice games – they make problem-solving exciting and engaging!

And to be frank, all of the mentioned problem-solving activities are fun if you know how to play and enjoy them as all of them are game-like activities.

Team Problems You Can Address Through Problem Solving Activities

Fun problem-solving activities serve as dynamic tools to address a range of challenges that teams often encounter. These engaging activities foster an environment of collaboration, creativity, and critical thinking, enabling teams to tackle various problems head-on. Here are some common team problems that can be effectively addressed through these activities:

Communication Breakdowns:

Activities like “Escape,” “A Shrinking Vessel,” and “Human Knots” emphasize the importance of clear and effective communication. They require teams to work together, exchange ideas, and devise strategies to accomplish a shared goal. By engaging in these activities, team members learn to communicate more efficiently, enhancing overall team communication in real-world situations.

Lack of Trust and Cohesion:

Problem-solving activities promote trust and cohesiveness within teams. For instance, “Frostbite” and “Marshmallow Spaghetti Tower” require teams to collaborate closely, trust each other’s ideas, and rely on each member’s strengths. These activities build a sense of unity and trust, which can translate into improved teamwork and collaboration.

Innovative Thinking:

“Dumbest Idea First” and “Egg Drop” encourage teams to think outside the box and explore unconventional solutions. These activities challenge teams to be creative and innovative in their problem-solving approaches, fostering a culture of thinking beyond traditional boundaries when faced with complex issues.

Decision-Making Challenges:

Activities like “Onethread” facilitate group decision-making by providing a platform for open discussions and collaborative choices. Problem-solving activities require teams to make decisions collectively, teaching them to weigh options, consider different viewpoints, and arrive at informed conclusions—a skill that is transferable to real-world decision-making scenarios.

Leadership and Role Clarification:

Activities such as “Frostbite” and “Egg Drop” designate team leaders and roles within groups. This provides an opportunity for team members to practice leadership, delegation, and role-specific tasks. By experiencing leadership dynamics in a controlled setting, teams can improve their leadership skills and better understand their roles in actual projects.

Problem-Solving Strategies:

All of the problem-solving activities involve the application of different strategies. Teams learn to analyze problems, break them down into manageable components, and develop systematic approaches for resolution. These strategies can be adapted to real-world challenges, enabling teams to approach complex issues with confidence.

Team Morale and Engagement:

Participating in engaging and enjoyable activities boosts team morale and engagement. These activities provide a break from routine tasks, energize team members, and create a positive and fun atmosphere. Elevated team morale can lead to increased motivation and productivity.

By incorporating these fun problem-solving activities, teams can address a variety of challenges, foster skill development, and build a more cohesive and effective working environment. As teams learn to collaborate, communicate, innovate, and make decisions collectively, they are better equipped to overcome obstacles and achieve shared goals.

The Benefits of Problem Solving Activities for Your Team

#1 Better Thinking

Problem-solving activities bring out the best in team members by encouraging them to contribute their unique ideas. This stimulates better thinking as team managers evaluate different solutions and choose the most suitable ones.

For example, a remote team struggling with communication benefited from quick thinking and the sharing of ideas, leading to the adoption of various communication modes for improved collaboration.

#2 Better Risk Handling

Team building problem solving activities condition individuals to handle risks more effectively. By engaging in challenging situations and finding solutions, team members develop the ability to respond better to stressful circumstances.

#3 Better Communication

Regular communication among team members is crucial for efficient problem-solving. Engaging in problem-solving activities fosters cooperation and communication within the team, resulting in better understanding and collaboration. Using tools like OneThread can further enhance team communication and accountability.

#4 Improved Productivity Output

When teams work cohesively, overall productivity improves, leading to enhanced profit margins for the company or organization. Involving managers and team members in problem-solving activities can positively impact the company’s growth and profitability.

How Onethread Enhances the Effect of Problem Solving Activities

Problem-solving activities within teams thrive on collaborative efforts and shared perspectives. Onethread emerges as a potent facilitator, enabling teams to collectively tackle challenges and harness diverse viewpoints with precision. Here’s a comprehensive view of how Onethread amplifies team collaboration in problem-solving initiatives:

Open Channels for Discussion:

Onethread’s real-time messaging feature serves as a dedicated hub for open and seamless discussions. Teams can engage in brainstorming sessions, share insightful observations, and propose innovative solutions within a flexible environment. Asynchronous communication empowers members to contribute their insights at their convenience, fostering comprehensive problem analysis with ample deliberation.

Centralized Sharing of Resources:

Effective problem-solving often hinges on access to pertinent resources. Onethread’s document sharing functionality ensures that critical information, references, and research findings are centralized and readily accessible. This eradicates the need for cumbersome email attachments and enables team members to collaborate with precise and up-to-date data.

Efficient Task Allocation and Monitoring:

Problem-solving journeys comprise a series of tasks and actions. Onethread’s task management capability streamlines the delegation of specific responsibilities to team members. Assign tasks related to research, data analysis, or solution implementation and monitor progress in real time. This cultivates a sense of accountability and guarantees comprehensive coverage of every facet of the problem-solving process.

Facilitated Collaborative Decision-Making: Navigating intricate problems often demands collective decision-making. Onethread’s collaborative ecosystem empowers teams to deliberate over potential solutions, assess pros and cons, and make well-informed choices. Transparent discussions ensure that decisions are comprehensively comprehended and supported by the entire team.

Seamless Documentation and Insights Sharing:

As the problem-solving journey unfolds, the accumulation of insights and conclusions becomes pivotal. Onethread’s collaborative document editing feature empowers teams to document their discoveries, chronicle the steps undertaken, and showcase successful solutions. This shared repository of documentation serves as a valuable resource for future reference and continuous learning.

With Onethread orchestrating the backdrop, team collaboration during problem-solving activities transforms into a harmonious fusion of insights, ideas, and actionable steps.

What are the 5 problem-solving skills?

The top 5 problem-solving skills in 2023 are critical thinking, creativity, emotional intelligence, adaptability, and data literacy. Most employers seek these skills in their workforce.

What are the steps of problem-solving?

Problem-solving steps are as follows: 1. Define the problem clearly. 2. Analyze the issue in detail. 3. Generate potential solutions. 4. Evaluate these options. 5. Choose the best solution. 6. Put the chosen solution into action. 7. Measure the outcomes to assess effectiveness and improvements made. These sequential steps assist in efficient and effective problem resolution.

How do you teach problem-solving skills?

Teaching problem-solving involves modelling effective methods within a context, helping students grasp the problem, dedicating ample time, asking guiding questions, and giving suggestions. Connect errors to misconceptions to enhance understanding, fostering a straightforward approach to building problem-solving skills.

So here is all about “activities for problem solving”.No matter which activity you choose, engaging in problem-solving activities not only provides entertainment but also helps enhance cognitive abilities such as critical thinking, decision making, and creativity. So why not make problem solving a regular part of your routine?

Take some time each day or week to engage in these activities and watch as your problem-solving skills grow stronger. Plus, it’s an enjoyable way to pass the time and challenge yourself mentally.

So go ahead, grab a puzzle or gather some friends for a game night – get ready to have fun while sharpening your problem-solving skills!

Let's Get Started with Onethread

Onethread empowers you to plan, organise, and track projects with ease, ensuring you meet deadlines, allocate resources efficiently, and keep progress transparent.

By subscribing you agree to our Privacy Policy .

Giving modern marketing teams superpowers with short links that stand out.

Live Product Demo

5 Types of Teams You Will Find in Organizations

Table of Contents

Types of Teams

Teams are groups of people who share a common objective and have complementary skills to achieve that objective. The following are the most common 5 types of teams found in the workplace settings:

Problem-Solving Team

As the name suggests, it is a specialized group assembled within an organization to identify, analyze, and resolve specific issues hindering operational efficiency, productivity, quality, or work environment. Typically, these teams consist of 5 to 12 members drawn from the same department or unit, focusing on solving identified problems.

Within a Problem-Solving Team, members collaborate to investigate the root causes of issues through data analysis, brainstorming sessions, and discussions. They aim to propose potential solutions or improvements, emphasizing actionable strategies to rectify the problem.

Forming an effective Problem-Solving Team involves several steps: accurately identifying the problem, selecting team members with diverse skills and expertise relevant to the issue, defining clear objectives and timelines, and fostering an environment conducive to open communication and idea-sharing.

Implementing such a team effectively requires establishing specific problem-solving protocols, encouraging active participation from all members, facilitating brainstorming sessions, providing necessary resources and support, and ensuring a structured approach toward implementing agreed-upon solutions.

By establishing Problem-Solving Teams with clear goals, diverse skill sets, and a conducive work environment, organizations can efficiently address challenges, enhance problem-solving capabilities, and drive continuous improvement in their operations.

Functional Team

A Functional Team is like a workforce in a company, where employees from the same department work together on specific jobs. It’s a permanent team, usually led by a manager who oversees everyone’s tasks. These teams could be in places like sales, HR, or accounting.

Normally, in a Functional Team, the boss manages everything, and everyone reports to them. It’s a bit like a top-down structure, where communication and trust are super important.

To form a good Functional Team, first, clearly define what the team should do and pick people who are great at those tasks. Then, make sure everyone knows their roles and what’s expected of them. Building trust and open communication is key here.

For an effective Functional Team, focus on improving how team members talk to each other. Encourage feedback that doesn’t hurt feelings, and set up ways for everyone to feel supported. Also, defining clear goals and ways of working helps everyone get on the same page and work smoothly together.

Self Managed Team

A Self-Managed Team is like a cool club where everyone’s in charge. It’s a group of people working together, around 5 to 15 people, who handle their jobs without a big boss telling them what to do. They’re a bit like a team of superheroes, each having their special powers and making decisions together.

Read More: 10 Characteristics of an Effective Team

To build this team, you pick people who are awesome at what they do and can work well in a team without someone watching over them all the time. They set their own goals, decide how to get things done, and even pick new members. Everyone shares the leadership and takes turns being in charge.

Now, to make this team rock, trust, and good communication are key. People need to listen to each other, solve problems together, and respect everyone’s ideas. It’s like a bunch of friends working together without a teacher – they help each other out and make amazing things happen.

Cross-Functional Team

Imagine a dream team with heroes from different worlds coming together to tackle big challenges – that’s a Cross-Functional Team! It’s like a squad of experts, usually around 5 to 15 members, where each person brings their superpowers from different departments.

Forming this team is like putting together an Avengers crew – you gather top players from various areas like marketing, design, and tech. They join forces for specific missions that need different skills to succeed.

To make this team rock, it’s all about teamwork and respect for everyone’s talents. They talk a lot, share their skills, and brainstorm ideas to solve tricky problems. Communication is key, making sure everyone understands each other’s lingo and works towards the same goal.

Virtual Team

Imagine a team that’s not in the same place but still manages to save the day—it’s a Virtual Team ! This team is like an online club, made up of people scattered around different locations, maybe 5 to 20 members, all using technology to work together.

Forming this team is like building a digital hangout. You gather cool folks with diverse skills, from coding wizards to creative minds. They come together virtually, using tools like video calls and chat apps.

What happens in this team? It’s a bit like an online adventure. They talk, share ideas, and work on projects using their gadgets. Communication is super important because they’re not in the same room. Trust and teamwork make everything smooth.

To make it work, you need good tech tools, like Zoom or Slack, and a leader who keeps everyone connected. When this team vibes well, they’re like an online superhero squad, taking on challenges no matter where they are!

Hence, these are the 5 types of teams in organizations.

Read Next: The 10 Reasons for Group Formation

14 Best Team Building Problem Solving Group Activities For 2024

The best teams see solutions where others see problems. A great company culture is built around a collaborative spirit and the type of unity it takes to find answers to the big business questions.

So how can you get team members working together?

How can you develop a mentality that will help them overcome obstacles they have yet to encounter?

One of the best ways to improve your teams’ problem solving skills is through team building problem solving activities .

“86% of employees and executives cite lack of collaboration or ineffective communication for workplace failures.” — Bit.AI

These activities can simulate true-to-life scenarios they’ll find themselves in, or the scenarios can call on your employees or coworkers to dig deep and get creative in a more general sense.

The truth is, on a day-to-day basis, you have to prepare for the unexpected. It just happens that team building activities help with that, but are so fun that they don’t have to feel like work ( consider how you don’t even feel like you’re working out when you’re playing your favorite sport or doing an exercise you actually enjoy! )

Team Building Problem Solving Group Activities

What are the benefits of group problem-solving activities?

The benefits of group problem-solving activities for team building include:

Better communication
Improved collaboration and teamwork
More flexible thinking
Faster problem-solving
Better proactivity and decision making

Without further ado, check out this list of the 14 best team-building problem-solving group activities for 2024!

Page Contents (Click To Jump)

2. Problem-Solving Templates

Problem-Solving Templates are popular problem-solving activities that involve a group of people working together to solve an issue. The challenge generally involves members of the team utilizing pre-made templates and creating solutions for a given problem with the help of visual aids.

This activity is great for teams that need assistance in getting started on their problem-solving journey.

Why this is a fun problem-solving activity: Problem-Solving Templates offer teams an easy and stress-free way to get the creative juices flowing. The visual aids that come with the templates help team members better understand the issue at hand and easily come up with solutions together.

This activity is great for teams that need assistance in getting started on their problem-solving journey, as it provides an easy and stress-free way to get the creative juices flowing.

Problem Solving Group Activities & Games For Team Building

3. coworker feud, “it’s all fun and games”.

Coworker Feud is a twist on the classic Family Feud game show! This multiple rapid round game keeps the action flowing and the questions going. You can choose from a variety of customizations, including picking the teams yourself, randomized teams, custom themes, and custom rounds.

Best for: Hybrid teams

Why this is an effective problem solving group activity: Coworker Feud comes with digital game materials, a digital buzzer, an expert host, and a zoom link to get the participants ready for action! Teams compete with each other to correctly answer the survey questions. At the end of the game, the team with the most competitive answers is declared the winner of the Feud.

How to get started:

Sign up for Coworker Feud
Break into teams of 4 to 10 people
Get the competitive juices flowing and let the games begin!

Learn more here: Coworker Feud

4. Crack The Case

“who’s a bad mamma jamma”.

Crack The Case is a classic WhoDoneIt game that forces employees to depend on their collective wit to stop a deadly murderer dead in his tracks! Remote employees and office commuters can join forces to end this crime spree.

Best for: Remote teams

Why this is an effective problem solving group activity: The Virtual Clue Murder Mystery is an online problem solving activity that uses a proprietary videoconferencing platform to offer the chance for employees and coworkers to study case files, analyze clues, and race to find the motive, the method, and the individual behind the murder of Neil Davidson.

Get a custom quote here
Download the app
Let the mystery-solving collaboration begin!

Learn more here: Crack The Case

5. Catch Meme If You Can

“can’t touch this”.

Purposefully created to enhance leadership skills and team bonding , Catch Meme If You Can is a hybrid between a scavenger hunt and an escape room . Teammates join together to search for clues, solve riddles, and get out — just in time!

Best for: Small teams

Why this is an effective problem solving group activity: Catch Meme If You Can is an adventure with a backstory. Each team has to submit their answer to the puzzle in order to continue to the next part of the sequence. May the best team escape!

The teams will be given instructions and the full storyline
Teams will be split into a handful of people each
The moderator will kick off the action!

Learn more here: Catch Meme If You Can

6. Puzzle Games

“just something to puzzle over”.

Puzzle Games is the fresh trivia game to test your employees and blow their minds with puzzles, jokes , and fun facts!

Best for: In-person teams

Why this is an effective problem solving group activity: Eight mini brain teaser and trivia style games include word puzzles, name that nonsense, name that tune, and much more. Plus, the points each team earns will go towards planting trees in the precious ecosystems and forests of Uganda

Get a free consultation for your team
Get a custom designed invitation for your members
Use the game link
Dedicated support will help your team enjoy Puzzle Games to the fullest!

Learn more here: Puzzle Games

7. Virtual Code Break

“for virtual teams”.

Virtual Code Break is a virtual team building activity designed for remote participants around the globe. Using a smart video conferencing solution, virtual teams compete against each other to complete challenges, answer trivia questions, and solve brain-busters!

Why this is an effective problem solving group activity: Virtual Code Break can be played by groups as small as 4 people all the way up to more than 1,000 people at once. However, every team will improve their communication and problem-solving skills as they race against the clock and depend on each other’s strengths to win!

Reach out for a free consultation to align the needs of your team
An event facilitator will be assigned to handle all of the set-up and logistics
They will also provide you with logins and a play-by-play of what to expect
Sign into the Outback video conferencing platform and join your pre-assigned team
Lastly, let the games begin!

Learn more here: Virtual Code Break

8. Stranded

“survivor: office edition”.

Stranded is the perfect scenario-based problem solving group activity. The doors of the office are locked and obviously your team can’t just knock them down or break the windows.

Why this is an effective problem solving group activity: Your team has less than half an hour to choose 10 items around the office that will help them survive. They then rank the items in order of importance. It’s a bit like the classic game of being lost at sea without a lifeboat.

Get everyone together in the office
Lock the doors
Let them start working together to plan their survival

Learn more here: Stranded

9. Letting Go Game

“for conscious healing”.

The Letting Go Game is a game of meditation and mindfulness training for helping teammates thrive under pressure and reduce stress in the process. The tasks of the Letting Go Game boost resiliency, attentiveness, and collaboration.

Why this is an effective problem solving group activity: Expert-guided activities and awareness exercises encourage team members to think altruistically and demonstrate acts of kindness. Between yoga, face painting, and fun photography, your employees or coworkers will have more than enough to keep them laughing and growing together with this mindfulness activity!

Reach out for a free consultation
A guide will then help lead the exercises
Let the funny videos, pictures, and playing begin!

Learn more here: Letting Go Game

10. Wild Goose Chase

“city time”.

Wild Goose Chase is the creative problem solving activity that will take teams all around your city and bring them together as a group! This scavenger hunt works for teams as small as 10 up to groups of over 5000 people.

Best for: Large teams

Why this is an effective group problem solving activity: As employees and group members are coming back to the office, there are going to be times that they’re itching to get outside. Wild Goose Chase is the perfect excuse to satisfy the desire to go out-of-office every now and then. Plus, having things to look at and see around the city will get employees talking in ways they never have before.

Download the Outback app to access the Wild Goose Chase
Take photos and videos from around the city
The most successful team at completing challenges on time is the champ!

Learn more here: Wild Goose Chase

11. Human Knot

“for a knotty good time”.

The Human Knot is one of the best icebreaker team building activities! In fact, there’s a decent chance you played it in grade school. It’s fun, silly, and best of all — free!

Why this is an effective group problem solving activity: Participants start in a circle and connect hands with two other people in the group to form a human knot. The team then has to work together and focus on clear communication to unravel the human knot by maneuvering their way out of this hands-on conundrum. But there’s a catch — they can’t let go of each other’s hands in this team building exercise.

Form a circle
Tell each person to grab a random hand until all hands are holding another
They can’t hold anyone’s hand who is directly next to them
Now they have to get to untangling
If the chain breaks before everyone is untangled, they have to start over again

Learn more here: Human Knot

12. What Would You Do?

“because it’s fun to imagine”.

What Would You Do? Is the hypothetical question game that gets your team talking and brainstorming about what they’d do in a variety of fun, intriguing, and sometimes, whacky scenarios.

Best for: Distributed teams

Why this is an effective group problem solving activity: After employees or coworkers start talking about their What Would You Do? responses, they won’t be able to stop. That’s what makes this such an incredible team building activity . For example, you could ask questions like “If you could live forever, what would you do with your time?” or “If you never had to sleep, what would you do?”

In addition to hypothetical questions, you could also give teammates some optional answers to get them started
After that, let them do the talking — then they’ll be laughing and thinking and dreaming, too!

13. Crossing The River

“quite the conundrum”.

Crossing The River is a river-crossing challenge with one correct answer. Your team gets five essential elements — a chicken, a fox, a rowboat, a woman, and a bag of corn. You see, the woman has a bit of a problem, you tell them. She has to get the fox, the bag of corn, and the chicken to the other side of the river as efficiently as possible.

Why this is an effective group problem solving activity: She has a rowboat, but it can only carry her and one other item at a time. She cannot leave the chicken and the fox alone — for obvious reasons. And she can’t leave the chicken with the corn because it will gobble it right up. So the question for your team is how does the woman get all five elements to the other side of the river safely in this fun activity?

Form teams of 2 to 5 people
Each team has to solve the imaginary riddle
Just make sure that each group understands that the rowboat can only carry one animal and one item at a time; the fox and chicken can’t be alone; and the bag of corn and the chicken cannot be left alone
Give the verbal instructions for getting everything over to the other side

14. End-Hunger Games

“philanthropic fun”.

Does anything bond people quite like acts of kindness and compassion? The End-Hunger Games will get your team to rally around solving the serious problem of hunger.

Best for: Medium-sized teams

Why this is an effective problem solving group activity: Teams join forces to complete challenges based around non-perishable food items in the End-Hunger Games. Groups can range in size from 25 to more than 2000 people, who will all work together to collect food for the local food bank.

Split into teams and compete to earn boxes and cans of non-perishable food
Each team attempts to build the most impressive food item construction
Donate all of the non-perishable foods to a local food bank

Learn more here: End-Hunger Games

Q: What kind of skills do group problem solving activities & games improve?

A: Group problem solving activities and games improve collaboration, leadership, and communication skills.

Q: What are problem solving based team building activities & games?

A: Problem solving based team building activities and games are activities that challenge teams to work together in order to complete them.

Q: What are some fun free problem solving games for groups?

A: Some fun free problem solving games for groups are kinesthetic puzzles like the human knot game, which you can read more about in this article. You can also use all sorts of random items like whiteboards, straws, building blocks, sticky notes, blindfolds, rubber bands, and legos to invent a game that will get the whole team involved.

Q: How do I choose the most effective problem solving exercise for my team?

A: The most effective problem solving exercise for your team is one that will challenge them to be their best selves and expand their creative thinking.

Q: How do I know if my group problem solving activity was successful?

A: In the short-term, you’ll know if your group problem solving activity was successful because your team will bond over it; however, that should also translate to more productivity in the mid to long-term.

Interested in a content partnership? Let’s chat!

Get Started

About SnackNation

SnackNation is a healthy office snack delivery service that makes healthy snacking fun, life more productive, and workplaces awesome. We provide a monthly, curated selection of healthy snacks from the hottest, most innovative natural food brands in the industry, giving our members a hassle-free experience and delivering joy to their offices.

Top 12 Best Gift Sending Services For Businesses To Use In 2024

Employee Reward Systems: 2024 Guide to Recognizing Success At Work 🎖️

See how the Key Bridge collapse will disrupt the supply of cars, coal and tofu

The port of baltimore is the top port in the nation for automobile shipments.

The collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore on Tuesday cut off access to much of the city’s port — causing a suspension of vessel traffic that will disrupt a key trade lane and threaten to further tangle already-stressed supply chains.

The Port of Baltimore was the 17th largest in the nation by total tons in 2021 and an important artery for the movement of autos, construction machinery and coal. It handled 52.3 million tons of foreign cargo worth nearly $81 billion in 2023, according to Maryland data, and creates more than 15,000 jobs.

Top 10 imports and exports to the Port

of Baltimore in 2023

2023 total: $59B

electronics

commodities

2023 total: $22B

Iron, steel

Seeds, grains,

fruits, plants

Air and space

craft, parts

Coal, oil and

natural gas

Note: not seasonally adjusted. Vehicles excluding railways

and tramways. Nickel, aluminium, paper and wood include

derivatives of those commodities

Source: Census Bureau

Top ten imports and exports to the Port of Baltimore in 2023

Electronic machinery

and electronics

farmwork and

construction

Iron and steel

spacecraft, parts

Note: not seasonally adjusted. Vehicles excluding railways and tramways. Nickel, aluminium,

paper and wood include derivatives of those commodities

spacecraft,

bedding, lights

Note: not seasonally adjusted. Vehicles excluding railways and tramways. Nickel, aluminium, paper and wood include

On Tuesday, the Port of Baltimore said that vessel traffic would be suspended in and out of the port until further notice, but trucks would still be processed in its terminals.

“Baltimore’s not one of the biggest ports in the United States, but it’s a good moderate-sized port,” said Campbell University maritime historian Sal Mercogliano. It has five public and 12 private terminals to handle port traffic.

North Locust

Point Marine

Ports and terminals

Baltimore Port

Truck Plaza

Seagirt Marine

Dundalk Marine

Shipping channels

CSX Coal Pier

Francis Scott

Hawkins Point

Marine Terminal

“It does cars, it does bulk carriers, it does containers, it does passengers.” said Mercogliano. “So this is going to be a big impact.”

Baltimore’s the top port in the nation for automobile shipments, having imported and exported more than 750,000 vehicles in 2022, according to the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, an industry group.

About three-quarters of the autos that travel through the port are imports, dominated by big-name brands, including Mazda and Mercedes-Benz. Most of the top companies have enough inventory sitting on U.S. dealer lots that any immediate impact on supply is unlikely, said Ambrose Conroy, chief executive of the consulting firm Seraph.

“It’s too early to say what impact this incident will have on the auto business, but there will certainly be a disruption,” said John Bozzella, president of the Alliance for Automotive Innovation.

The port ranked second in the country for exporting coal last year, according to the state of Maryland. But it’s not a huge global supplier of thermal coal, and the disruption can likely be made up by replacements from Australia or Indonesia if needed, said Alexis Ellender, lead analyst at global trade intelligence company Kpler.

Baltimore is also a niche port for the soybean trade, focusing mostly on high-value soy used in tofu, miso, tempeh and organic products, according to Mike Steenhoek, executive director of the Soy Transportation Coalition. Most of those exports are destined for Asia, but Steenhoek doesn’t expect a big spike in tofu prices because several other U.S. ports also ship this sort of soy, including Norfolk, Va., Savannah, Ga. and Charleston, S.C.

All East Coast ports have become more important in recent years as the United States attempts to boost its trade with friendly nations and reduce geopolitical risks related to trade with China, which generally happens via West Coast ports, said Tinglong Dai, a Johns Hopkins Carey Business School professor and expert on global supply chains.

Baltimore port’s suspension is “one more disruption in an already-stressed system” for the global supply chain, said Abe Eshkenazi, chief executive of the Association for Supply Chain Management. Cargo will now have to be rerouted to other ports, which means figuring out where there is enough capacity to move things.

East Coast ports and shipping density

Ship traffic

Philadelphia

of Baltimore

5th-largest port

on the East Coast

for foreign trade

Newport News

Morehead City

East Coast ports

and shipping density

PENNSYLVANIA

The Port of Baltimore

5th-largest port on the

East Coast for foreign trade

Coal shipments will need to be rerouted to other ports, Kpler’s Ellender said. And Ryan Petersen, chief executive of the logistics company Flexport, posted on X that the company currently has 800 containers on a slew of ships heading for the port that will need to be rerouted, likely to Philadelphia or Norfolk.

The biggest problem Steenhoek sees from Baltimore’s shuttering is the knock-on effect to other ports. Many ships stuck in the port were destined to make stops at other U.S. ports to load and unload goods before heading overseas, a complicated logistical dance now scrambled by the bridge collapse.

“It just shows how you throw a wrench in the supply chain and the impact is not just confined to that one port,” Steenhoek said.

Tim Meko, Justine McDaniel and David J. Lynch contributed to this report. Editing by Kate Rabinowitz and Karly Domb Sadof.

Baltimore bridge collapse

Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge collapsed after being hit by a cargo ship , sending at least eight people from a construction crew into the water. Follow live updates and see photos from the scene .

How it happened: The container ship lost power shortly before hitting the bridge, Maryland Gov. Wes Moore (D) said. Video shows the bridge collapse in under 40 seconds.

Victims: Divers recovered the bodies of two construction workers who died , while finding other vehicles trapped and probably containing the other victims, officials said. They were fathers, husbands and hard workers . The entire crew aboard the container ship Dali survived . First responders shut down most traffic on the four-lane bridge after the crew issued an urgent mayday call. It saved lives, Moore said.

Economic impact: The collapse of the bridge, which severed ocean links to the Port of Baltimore, adds a fresh headache to already struggling global supply chains . See how the collapse will disrupt the supply of cars, coal and other goods .

History: The Key Bridge was built in the 1970s and spanned the Patapsco River. Rebuilding the bridge will probably take years and cost hundreds of millions of dollars, experts said.

Six presumed dead in bridge collapse were immigrants, soccer fans, family men March 27, 2024 Six presumed dead in bridge collapse were immigrants, soccer fans, family men March 27, 2024
Why investigators are looking into ‘dirty fuel’ in Baltimore bridge collapse March 27, 2024 Why investigators are looking into ‘dirty fuel’ in Baltimore bridge collapse March 27, 2024
Rebuilding Baltimore’s Key Bridge will likely take years, experts say March 27, 2024 Rebuilding Baltimore’s Key Bridge will likely take years, experts say March 27, 2024

Baltimore bridge collapse wasn't first major accident for giant container ship Dali

Propulsion failed on the cargo ship that struck the Francis Key Bridge in Baltimore early Tuesday as it was leaving port, causing it to collapse into the frigid Patapsco River. Its crew warned Maryland officials of a possible collision because they had lost control.

“The vessel notified MD Department of Transportation (MDOT) that they had lost control of the vessel” and a collision with the bridge “was possible,” according to an unclassified Department of Homeland Security report. “The vessel struck the bridge causing a complete collapse.”

An official speaking on condition of anonymity confirmed to USA TODAY that the DHS’ Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency is working with federal, state, and local officials “to understand the potential impacts of this morning’s collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge.”

Clay Diamond, executive director, American Pilots’ Association, told USA TODAY power issues are not unusual on cargo ships, which are so large they cannot easily course correct.

“It’s likely that virtually every pilot in the country has experienced a power loss of some kind (but) it generally is momentary,” Diamond said. “This was a complete blackout of all the power on the ship, so that’s unusual. Of course this happened at the worst possible location.”

The ship in Tuesday's crash, Dali, was involved in at least one prior accident when it collided with a shipping pier in Belgium.

That 2016 incident occurred as the Dali was leaving port in Antwerp and struck a loading pier made of stone, causing damage to the ship’s stern, according to VesselFinder.com, a site that tracks ships across the world. An investigation determined a mistake made by the ship’s master and pilot was to blame.

No one was injured in that crash, although the ship required repair and a full inspection before being returned to service. The pier – or berth – was also seriously damaged and had to be closed.

VesselFinder reports that the Dali was chartered by Maersk, the same company chartering it during the Baltimore harbor incident.

The 9-year-old container ship had passed previous inspections during its time at sea, but during one such inspection in June at the Port of San Antonio in Chile, officials discovered a deficiency with its "propulsion and auxiliary machinery (gauges, thermometers, etc)," according to the Tokyo MOU, an intergovernmental maritime authority in the Asia-Pacific region.

The report provided no other information about the deficiency except to note that it was not serious enough to remove the ship from service.

Follow here for live updates: Baltimore's Key Bridge collapses after ship strike; construction crew missing: Live Updates

Why did Dali crash into the Baltimore bridge?

Officials said Tuesday they’re investigating the collision, including whether systems on board lost electricity early Tuesday morning, which could be related to mechanical failure, according to a U.S. official who was not authorized to speak publicly.

Accidents at sea, known as marine casualties, are not uncommon, the source told USA TODAY. However, “allisions,” in which a moving object strikes a stationary one with catastrophic results, are far less common. The investigation of the power loss aboard the Dali, a Singapore-flagged vessel, will be a high priority.

In a video posted to social media, lights on the Dali shut off, then turned back on, then shut off again before the ship struck a support pier on the bridge.

Numerous cargo and cruise ships have lost power over the years.

The International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea requires all international vessels to have two independent sources of electricity, both of which should be able to maintain the ship's seaworthiness on their own, according to a safety study about power failures on ships , citing the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea.

The Dali's emergency generator was likely responsible for the lights coming back on after the initial blackout, Diamond said.

“There was still some steerage left when they initially lost power,” he said. “We’ve been told the ship never recovered propulsion. The emergency generator is a diesel itself – so if you light off the generator, that’s also going to put off a puff of exhaust.”

Under maritime law, all foreign flagged vessels must be piloted into state ports by a state licensed pilot so the Dali's pilot is licensed by Association of Maryland Pilots .

Diamond described the incident based on information from the Maryland agency that licensed the pilot aboard the ship. His organization represents that group and all other state piloting agencies in the US.

“The pilot was directing navigation of the ship as it happened,” he said. “He asked the captain to get the engines back online. They weren’t able to do that, so the pilot took all the action he could. He tried to steer, to keep the ship in the channel. He also dropped the ship’s anchor to slow the ship and guide the direction.

“Neither one was enough. The ship never did regain its engine power.”

How big is the Dali ship?

The Dali is a 984-foot container vessel built in 2015 by Hyundai Heavy Industries in South Korea. With a cruising speed of about 22 knots – roughly 25 mph. It has traveled the world carrying goods from port to port.

The ship, constructed of high-strength steel, has one engine and one propeller, according to MarineTraffic.com.

The Dali arrived in Baltimore on Sunday from the Port of Norfolk in Virginia. Before that, it had been in New York and came through the Panama Canal.

It remains at the scene of the collapse as authorities investigate.

Who owns and operates the Dali?

It is owned by the Singapore-based Grace Ocean Pte Ltd but managed by Synergy Marine Group, also based in Singapore. It was carrying Maersk customers’ cargo, according to a statement from the shipping company.

“We are deeply concerned by this incident and are closely monitoring the situation,” Maersk said in the statement.

Synergy, which describes itself as a leading ship manager with more than 600 vessels under its guidance, issued a statement on its website acknowledging the incident and reporting no injuries among its crew and no pollution in the water. There were two pilots on board and 22 crew members in all, according to Synergy, all of them from India.

USA TODAY reached out to Synergy on Tuesday, but the company did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

Contributing: Josh Susong

IMAGES

Understanding workteams
Tips For Team Problem Solving
25 Problem-Solving and Decision-Making Activities for Your Team to Master
Problem solving. creative decision, difficult task concept. Man and
WorkClout
Workplace teams don't naturally know how to collaborate. Effective

VIDEO

How to Be a Great Team Member in Challenging Times: Module 9
SC AWARE Problem Solving Team Meeting (Sept. 27, 2021)
DI Global Finals 2010 Closing Ceremonies
Problem solving skills types l tech 394
How different project team types impact on the success of the project ?
Recording 2023 05 24 143405 lightburn

COMMENTS

The Two Traits of the Best Problem-Solving Teams
The team is midway through attempting to solve a new, uncertain, and complex problem. The facilitators look on as at first the exercise follows its usual path. But then activity grinds to a halt ...
35 problem-solving techniques and methods for solving complex problems
All teams and organizations encounter challenges as they grow. There are problems that might occur for teams when it comes to miscommunication or resolving business-critical issues.You may face challenges around growth, design, user engagement, and even team culture and happiness.In short, problem-solving techniques should be part of every team's skillset.
How Managers Can Improve Team Problem-Solving
The key to improving team problem-solving is providing reliable resources you trust. Build a library of problem-solving resources, including creating step-by-step instructions and checklists ...
PDF The Two Traits of the Best Problem-Solving Teams
The Two Traits of the Best Problem-Solving Teams. by Alison Reynolds and David Lewis. APRIL 02, 2018. hbr staff/the new york public library. Imagine you are a fly on the wall in a corporate training center where a management team of 12 is participating in a session on executing strategy. The team is midway through attempting to solve a new ...
Team Types: Why they matter, and how to harness their power
Problem-solving teams. A problem-solving team is usually similar to a project team—it's a group of individuals with different skills or experience who are brought together from various departments to find a solution to a specific challenge or crisis. This team is usually (and hopefully) temporary in nature. Leadership teams
What Is Group Problem-Solving? (With Benefits and Tips)
To solve problems in a group, consider following these six steps: 1. Identify the problem. First, explore the different facets of the problem your group is trying to solve. Many group problem-solving sessions begin with an interactive activity, where each group member describes the problem and its effects on their work.
How to Solve Problems
How to Solve Problems. To bring the best ideas forward, teams must build psychological safety. by. Laura Amico. October 29, 2021. HBR Staff/EschCollection/Getty Images. Teams today aren't just ...
Exploring 9 Distinct Type Of Team
Type of Team: Cross-Functional Team. Types of Teamwork: Collaborative Expertise. Purpose: To bring together individuals with diverse skills from different departments, promoting innovation and comprehensive problem-solving for complex projects. Cross-functional teams are groups of people from different departments or areas of expertise who work ...
Problem Solving Strategies for the Workplace [2024] • Asana
4 steps to better problem solving. While it might be tempting to dive into a problem head first, take the time to move step by step. Here's how you can effectively break down the problem-solving process with your team: 1. Identify the problem that needs to be solved. One of the easiest ways to identify a problem is to ask questions.
Problem Solving Teams: Creating resilient organisations through
Some problems require a cross-organization, multi-function approach. When our goal is to be a more agile, lean-thinking organization, we need to develop approaches to solving these types of problems. This is where Problem Solving Teams come into play. Problem Solving Teams are temporary structures that bring together leaders and team members ...
7.3 Using Teams to Enhance Motivation and Performance
Types of Teams. The evolution of the team concept in organizations can be seen in three basic types of work teams: problem-solving, self-managed, and cross-functional. Problem-solving teams are typically made up of employees from the same department or area of expertise and from the same level of the organizational hierarchy. They meet on a ...
What is Team? Features, Types, Importance, & Examples
Let's look at 4 most common team types in management: Problem-Solving Team. Comprised of individuals with diverse skills, a problem-solving team is formed to address specific issues within an organization. They collaboratively work to find solutions, improve quality, enhance productivity, or address workplace challenges. ...
5 Different Types of Teams & Their Role in the Organization
Besides the types of teams we've mentioned, there are several more - problem-solving teams (temporary teams built to solve a specific issue,) leadership teams (those consisting of leadership,) contract teams (teams hired to work on a part of a project,) operational teams (teams that don't work on any projects but support others, like Human ...
Team roles: 9 types to create a balanced team
Example of the plant team role: Plants are highly creative, which is why they would make great product designers. 5. Monitor evaluator. Another thought-oriented team role is the monitor evaluator. This type is a rational thinker and can put their emotions aside for problem solving.
Problem Solving in Teams and Groups
This textbook covers content relevant to COMS342 Problem Solving in Teams and Groups at the University of Kansas. ... Students will appreciate the examples of different types of teams the author provides along with the organizational charts. References were provided at the end of each chapter, which is easier to look up as compared to textbooks ...
What is Problem Solving? Steps, Process & Techniques
Finding a suitable solution for issues can be accomplished by following the basic four-step problem-solving process and methodology outlined below. Step. Characteristics. 1. Define the problem. Differentiate fact from opinion. Specify underlying causes. Consult each faction involved for information. State the problem specifically.
Complex Problem Solving in Teams: The Impact of Collective Orientation
Complex problem solving is challenging and a high-level cognitive process for individuals. When analyzing complex problem solving in teams, an additional, new dimension has to be considered, as teamwork processes increase the requirements already put on individual team members. After introducing an idealized teamwork process model, that complex ...
Defining Teams and Groups
The type of team affects how that team is managed, what the communication needs of the team are and, where appropriate, what aspects of the project the project manager needs to emphasize. ... This may be the challenge of creating a radically new product, or solving a tough production problem. In Japan, the encouragement of self-organizing teams ...
13 Problem-Solving Activities & Exercises for Your Team
Here are nine easy-to-implement activities that can bring substantial change to your team culture and overall workplace dynamics. #1. Crossword Puzzles. Objective: To enhance problem-solving skills, vocabulary, and cognitive abilities through engaging crossword puzzles.
12 Approaches To Problem-Solving for Every Situation
Here are the seven steps of the rational approach: Define the problem. Identify possible causes. Brainstorm options to solve the problem. Select an option. Create an implementation plan. Execute the plan and monitor the results. Evaluate the solution. Read more: Effective Problem Solving Steps in the Workplace.
The 4 Types of Problem Solvers Your Team Needs
Step 1 (Structure) involves achieving the right ratio of problem-solving styles. Step 2 (Model) involves demonstrating the importance of a problem-solving style top-down. Step 3 (Reward) involves creating incentives for problem-finding. Step 4 (Train) involves creating opportunities to learn about all styles. If you feel like your team is stuck ...
5 Types of Teams in Organizations
Problem-Solving Team. As the name suggests, it is a specialized group assembled within an organization to identify, analyze, and resolve specific issues hindering operational efficiency, productivity, quality, or work environment. Typically, these teams consist of 5 to 12 members drawn from the same department or unit, focusing on solving identified problems.
14 Brain-Boosting Problem Solving Group Activities For Teams
Jeopardy. Problem-solving activities such as Virtual Team Challenges offer a great way for teams to come together, collaborate, and develop creative solutions to complex problems. 2. Problem-Solving Templates. Problem-Solving Templates are popular problem-solving activities that involve a group of people working together to solve an issue.
Different Problem-Solving Styles: What Type of Problem Solver Are You
It is classic inconsistent-type behavior to lose time dithering between all three ideas, lost in indecision. Instead, write them down in a chart. Then, give each one a score out of 5 according to its strength in whatever categories are relevant to the problem. For example, expense, time, elegance, effort.
Math Message Boards FAQ & Community Help
Small live classes for advanced math and language arts learners in grades 2-12.
How the Baltimore bridge collapse will impact supply chains, economy
Baltimore's the top port in the nation for automobile shipments, having imported and exported more than 750,000 vehicles in 2022, according to the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, an industry ...
Dali ship that caused Baltimore bridge collapse was in prior accident
The ship in Tuesday's crash, Dali, was involved in at least one prior accident when it collided with a shipping pier in Belgium. That 2016 incident occurred as the Dali was leaving port in Antwerp ...