The Effects of Leader Role and Task Load on Team Performance and Process in an AWACS Environment

We manipulated two variables predicted by models of team performance to affect team processes and performance: team organization and task load. In one team organization the team leader served as a manager only, without responsibility for prosecuting hostile tracks. In the other organization the team leader served as a player-manager. Task load was established by varying the number of hostile tracks. As hypothesized, teams performed at a higher level, that is took less time to act, when task load was low than high. Counter to predictions no performance differences were found between the two team organization conditions, but as anticipated, performance differed among team members by task load. Additionally, teams in which the team leader was a manager only were more proactive and transferred more information to other teammates without requests to do so, a communication pattern that has been shown to be indicative of highperforming teams. Introduction A critical need exists for a solid understanding of team decision-making and the factors that influence it in order to identify interventions to improve team processes and performance (Salas, Bowers, & Cannon-Bowers, 1995). We conducted a research program to improve understanding of the functioning of high-performance military teams in the context of complex, distributed environments that require tightly coordinated performance to meet a range of shared goals. As part of this program we conducted an experiment in the AWACS domain to investigate some of these issues. Prior to the experiment we conducted a cognitive task analysis of the AWACS environment. This was performed to learn the current roles and responsibilities of the different AWACS team members and to learn enough about AWACS missions to create analog scenarios for a simulation application. In the last few years, the team research community has produced several models of team performance that provide a frame of reference for the research issues relevant to this effort. Our research was guided by two separate yet complementary models—the Integrated Team Model (ITM; Salas, Dickinson, Converse, and Tannenbaum; 1992) and the Adaptive Team Model (ATM; Serfaty, Entin, & Johnston; 1998). Both models relate key variables relevant to the context of dynamic team resource allocation and they are supported by empirical data. In AWACS command and control, there is little consensus about the best distribution of responsibility across the weapons directors (WDs) and 1 This research is sponsored by AFHRL/HEAB, Contract No. F41624-98-C-6010, under the direction of Dr. Sam Schiflett.