Multiteam Systems

by

Margaret Luciano, Samantha Dubrow

• LAST MODIFIED: 23 September 2024
• DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199846740-0227

Introduction

Operating environments are increasingly dynamic and complex, leading to many projects and problems that necessitate the coordinated efforts of multiple teams. Consequently, multiteam systems (MTSs) have gained prominence and have been enthusiastically embraced as solutions to real-world challenges. These challenges include the coordination of teams from multiple agencies in emergency response, military teams orchestrating international efforts, and scientific teams collaborating on groundbreaking discoveries. MTSs, also known as teams-of-teams and interconnected networks of teams, are characterized as multiple teams that must work interdependently toward one or more shared overarching goals, in addition to their separate team objectives. These systems represent a distinct organizational structure that spans traditional team and organizational boundaries. Although MTSs share some similarities with traditional teams and organizations, they require unique theorizing and investigation, as they confront the paradox of building strong teams that must function effectively independently and interdependently.

Key Theories and Frameworks

The MTS organization form was introduced in Mathieu, et al. 2001. This chapter presents the core definitional elements of MTSs and distinguishes them from other forms such as teams and organizations. DeChurch and Zaccaro 2013 further illuminates why MTSs are not simply large teams and warrant their own theorizing as some forces (e.g., processes, emergent states) operate differently across team and MTS levels. Zaccaro, et al. 2012 reiterates and expands the arguments in Mathieu, et al. 2001 about separating MTSs from other forms, and also seeks to distinguish between different types of MTSs, as well as advancing a typology of MTS characteristics. Also highlighting the variance that exists among MTSs, Luciano, et al. 2018 offers a theoretical framework of MTS structure and also advances one of the first meso-theories on MTSs, which describes the nature of relationships across levels. Additionally, Torres, et al. 2021 advances a taxonomy of MTS action phases that may have wide applicability across many types of MTSs.

• DeChurch, L. A., and S. J. Zaccaro. Innovation in Scientific Multiteam Systems: Confluent and Countervailing Forces. National Academy of Sciences Workshop on Science Team Dynamics and Effectiveness. Washington, DC, July 2013.

  This technical report for the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Team Science focuses on innovation in scientific MTSs (e.g., teams of scientists from multiple laboratories). It introduces the notion of confluent and countervailing forces to explain the tensions created by multiple competing pressures. Confluent forces operate similarly and additively across the team and MTS levels, whereas countervailing forces operate differently at the team and MTS levels.

• Luciano, M. M., L. A. DeChurch, and J. E. Mathieu. “Multiteam Systems: A Structural Framework and Meso-Theory of System Functioning.” Journal of Management 44.3 (2018): 1065–1096.

  DOI: 10.1177/0149206315601184

  Advances a multidimensional scaling framework of MTS structure and one of the few meso-theories that links MTS-level features with phenomena at the component team and individual levels (i.e., team emergent states and individuals’ needs and motives). The structural framework contains two overarching dimensions—differentiation and dynamism—both of which have five subdimensions. Higher levels of these dimensions generate boundary-enhancing forces and disruptive forces, respectively.

• Mathieu, J. E., Marks, M. A., and Zaccaro, S. J. Multiteam systems. In Handbook of Industrial, Work and Organizational Psychology. Vol. 2, Organizational Psychology. Edited by N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil, and C. Viswesvaran, 289–313. Los Angeles: SAGE, 2001.

  Defines the characteristics of MTSs in terms of their size (composed of two or more component teams, yet smaller than their embedding organization); level of interdependence between teams; and goals (goal hierarchy with a shared superordinate goal). Also discusses connections with the environment and performance episodes, as well as factors influencing MTS effectiveness including shared mental models, leadership, information technology, and reward systems.

• Torres, E. M., D. M. Wallace, S. J. Zaccaro, and S. Dubrow. “Deconstructing Multiteam System Action: Development and Content Validation of a Multilevel Multiteam System Action Taxonomy.” Human Performance 34.3 (2021): 189–216.

  DOI: 10.1080/08959285.2021.1922909

  Advances an MTS action taxonomy, including an action behavior inventory comprising within-team alignment behaviors and between-team behaviors that occur across the multilevel phases of acting, monitoring, and recalibrating. The taxonomy was validated using data from the US Navy and is designed to help identify specific performance breakdown points.

• Zaccaro, S. J., M. A. Marks, and L. A. DeChurch. “Multiteam Systems: An Introduction.” In Multiteam Systems: An Organization Form for Dynamic and Complex Environments. Edited by S. J. Zaccaro, M. A. Marks, and L. A. DeChurch, 3–32. London: Routledge, 2012.

  The introduction to the MTS handbook edited by the same authors. Revisits the core features that distinguish MTSs from other collective forms of organizing, such as teams and organizations. Additionally, it advances a typology of MTS characteristics including compositional attributes (e.g., size and boundary status); linkage attributes (e.g., interdependence and communication structure); and developmental attributes (e.g., genesis and tenure).