TY - CHAP
T1 - Command Style and Team Performance in Dynamic Decision-Making Tasks
AU - Clancy, JM
AU - Elliot, GC
AU - Ley, T
AU - Omodei, MM
AU - Wearing, AJ
AU - McLennan, J
AU - Thorsteinsson, EB
PY - 2003
Y1 - 2003
N2 - Real-world tasks involving dynamic decision making are commonly distributed among a number of people, the organizational structure being typically hierarchical in nature. However, the optimal way to divide the responsibility for decision making among team members is not obvious. Should leaders make all decisions and communicate specific actions for subordinates to carry out? Or should decision-making responsibility be shared, with leaders communicating their intentions to subordinates, who then decide upon appropriate actions and carry these out? This is fundamentally an issue of the relative effectiveness of contrasting command styles. This chapter addresses this issue by reporting a study using teams of three persons (a leader and two subordinates) in a computer-simulated forestfirefighting task. The results indicate a marked performance advantage for teams in which the leader is required to command by the communication of intentions rather than by the communication of orders for specific actions. An intention-based command style, which creates a more even distribution of decision-making responsibility across ranks, was found to result in a more equal distribution of the cognitive workload, to take greater advantage of subordinates' local knowledge, and to allow for greater overall team productivity.
AB - Real-world tasks involving dynamic decision making are commonly distributed among a number of people, the organizational structure being typically hierarchical in nature. However, the optimal way to divide the responsibility for decision making among team members is not obvious. Should leaders make all decisions and communicate specific actions for subordinates to carry out? Or should decision-making responsibility be shared, with leaders communicating their intentions to subordinates, who then decide upon appropriate actions and carry these out? This is fundamentally an issue of the relative effectiveness of contrasting command styles. This chapter addresses this issue by reporting a study using teams of three persons (a leader and two subordinates) in a computer-simulated forestfirefighting task. The results indicate a marked performance advantage for teams in which the leader is required to command by the communication of intentions rather than by the communication of orders for specific actions. An intention-based command style, which creates a more even distribution of decision-making responsibility across ranks, was found to result in a more equal distribution of the cognitive workload, to take greater advantage of subordinates' local knowledge, and to allow for greater overall team productivity.
KW - Psychology
UR - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=rMwYEjh6-UsC
UR - http://www.cambridge.org/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521527187
M3 - Chapter
SN - 052152718X
T3 - Cambridge Series on Judgment and Decision Making
SP - 586
EP - 619
BT - Emerging Perspectives on Judgement and Decision Research
A2 - Schneider, null
A2 - SL, null
A2 - Shanteau, null
A2 - J, null
PB - Cambridge University Press
CY - Cambridge, United Kingdom
ER -