The Effect of Complexity of Ambulance Missions on Shared Mental Models in Virtual Teams

Authors

  • Bjørn H. Johnsen Department of Psychosocial Science, University of Bergen, Christiesgt, 12, Bergen 5015, Norway
  • Guttorm Brattebø Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Haukeland University Hospital, Haukelandsveien 22, Bergen 5021, Norway; Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Haukeland University Hospital, Jonas Lies vei 87, Bergen 5021, Norway
  • Roar Espevik Swedish Defense University, Drottning Kristinas väg 37, Stockholm 114 28, Sweden; Centre for Crisis Psychology, University of Bergen, Møllendalsbakken 9, Bergen 5009, Norway
  • Sigurd W. Hystad Department of Psychosocial Science, University of Bergen, Christiesgt, 12, Bergen 5015, Norway
  • Øyvind Østerås Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Haukeland University Hospital, Haukelandsveien 22, Bergen 5021, Norway
  • Live Vatsøy Department of Psychosocial Science, University of Bergen, Christiesgt, 12, Bergen 5015, Norway
  • Jarle Eid Centre for Crisis Psychology, University of Bergen, Møllendalsbakken 9, Bergen 5009, Norway

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17140/EMOJ-8-164

Keywords:

Virtual medical first responder teams, Complexity, Shared mental models, Team processes, Coordinating mechanisms

Abstract

Background
Empirical research on shared mental models (SMM) in virtual environments are almost non-existent. Pre-hospital emergencies presents an opportunity to examine team processes in virtual teams because the dispatcher is geographically separated from the ambulance and at the same time plays a significant role in coordinating, organizing, obtaining, evaluating, and conveying relevant information to the deployed ambulance. The present study aimed at mapping team behavior and cognition in critical real-life emergency medical missions based on the concept of SMM.
Methods
By investigating the frequencies of coordinating mechanisms and team competencies based on voice recordings from real-life missions, differences in team behavior between low and high-complexity missions were investigated.
Results
Lower frequencies of team competencies and coordinating mechanisms were found in high compared to low-complexity missions. The results showed a different profile in communication between high and low-complexity missions with more frequent use of both coordinating mechanisms and team competencies in low-complexity missions. Furthermore, the profiles revealed that SMM and closed loop communication were the only coordinating mechanism used, and leadership and team orientation were the only competencies exercised.

Conclusion
It was concluded that the lack of visual input of a team member during team interaction could lead to team process loss due to a breakdown of the team into sub-units. Potential improvement of team behavior is discussed within the SMM framework.

References

Oksavik WS, Heen C, Heggdal, K. Factors affecting communi-cation and interaction in surgical teams in relation to patient safety – operating nurses’ perspective. Klinisk Sygepleje. 2021; 35: 3-22. doi: 10.18261/ISSN.1903-2285-2021-01-02

Schmidke JM, Cummings A. The effects of virtualness on team-work behavioral components: The role of shared mental mod-els. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2017; 27: 660-677. doi: 10.1016/j. hrmr.2016.12.011

Schmutz J, Manser T. Do team processes really have an effect on clinical performance? A systematic literature review. Br J Anaesth. 2013; 110: 529-544. doi: 10.1093/bja/aes513

Meynard MT, Gilson LL. The role of shared mental model de-velopment in understanding virtual team effectiveness. Group Or-gan Manag. 2014; 39: 3-32. doi: 10.1177/1059601113475361

Algesheimer R. Dholakia UM, Gurau C. Virtual team perfor-mance in a highly competitive environment. Group Organ Manag. 2011; 36: 161-190. doi: 10.1177/1059601110391251

Curseu P.L. Schalk R. Wessel I. How do virtual teams process in-formation? A literature review and implications for management. J. Manag. Psychol. 2008; 23: 628-652. doi: 10.1108/02683940810894729

Leasure EL. Jones RR, Meade LB, et al. There is no “I” in team-work in the patient-centered medical home. Acad Med. 2013; 88 (5): 585-592. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31828b0289

Salas E, Sims DE, Burke CS. Is there a “Big Five” in teamwork? Small Group Res. 2005; 36: 555-599. doi: 10.1177/1046496405277134

Espevik R, Johnsen BH, Saus ER, Sanden S, Olsen OK. Team-work on patrol: Investigating teamwork processes and underlaying coordinating mechanisms in a police training program. Front Psy-chol. 2021; 12: 702347. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.702347

DeChurch LA, Mesmer-Magnus JR. The cognitive underpin-nings of effective teamwork: A meta-analysis. J Appl Psychol. 2010; 95: 32-53 . doi: 10.1037/a0017328

Uitdewilligen S, Waller MJ, Roe RA, Bollen P. The effects of team mental model complexity on team information search and performance trajectories. Group Organ Manag. 2021; 0(0): 1-35. doi: 10.1177/10596011211023219

Kalisch BJ, Weaver SJ, Salas E. What does nursing teamwork look like? A qualitative study. J Nurs Care Qual. 2009; 24: 298-307. doi: 10.1097/NCQ.0b013e3181a001c0

Westli HK, Johnsen BH, Eid J, Rasten I, Brattebø G. Team-Original Research | Volume 8 | Number 1 | work skills shared mental models, and performance in simulated trauma teams. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2010; 18: 47. doi: 10.1186/1757-7241-18-47

Johnsen BH, Westli HK, Espevik R, Wisborg T, Brattebø G. High performance trauma teams: Frequency of behavioral mark-ers of shared mental model displayed by team leaders and quality of performance. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2017; 25: 109. doi: 10.1186/s13049-017-0452-3

Moyers PA, Metzler CA. Interprofessional collaborative prac-tice in care coordination. Am J Occup Ther. 2014; 68: 500-505. doi: 10.5014/ajot.2014.685002

Shojania KG, Ranji SR. McDonald KM, et al. Effects of quality improvement strategies for type 2 diabetes on glycemic control: A metaregression analysis. JAMA. 2006; 296: 427-440. doi: 10.1001/ jama.296.4.427

Trinchero E, Kominis G, Dudau A, Corduneanu R. With a little help from my friends: The positive contribution of teamwork to safety behaviour in public hospitals. Public Manag Rev. 2020; 22: 141-160. doi: 10.1080/14719037.2019.1638443

Weld LR, Stringer MT, Ebertowski JS, et al. Team STEPPS improves operating room efficiency and patient safety. Am J Med Qual. 2016; 31: 408-414. doi: 10.1177/1062860615583671

Johnsen BH, Espevik R, Eid J, Østerås Ø, Jacobsen JK, Brattebø G. Coordinating mechanisms are more important than team pro-cesses for geographically dispersed emergency dispatch and para-medic teams. Front Psychol. 2022. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.754855

Wood RE. Task complexity: Definition of the construct. Or-gan Behav Hum Decis Process. 1986; 37: 60-82. doi: 10.1016/0749- 5978(86)90044-0

Sæthrevik B. Psychophysiology, task complexity, and team fac-tors determine emergency response teams’ shared beliefs. Saf Sci. 2015; 78: 117-123. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2015.04.0170

LaDonna KA, Field E, Watling C, Lingard L, Haddara W, Cris-tancho SM. Navigating complexity in team-based clinical settings. Med Educ. 2018; 52: 1125-1137. doi: 10.1111/medu.13671

Mohammed S, Ferzandi L, Hamilton K. Metaphor no more: A 15-year review of the team mental model construct. J Manage. Submit your article to this journal | https://openventio.org/submit-manuscript/ Original Research | Volume 8 | Number 1 | Johnsen BH, et al 2010; 36: 876-910. doi: 10.1177/0149206309356804

Curseu PL, Rus D. The cognitive complexity of groups. A criti-cal look at team cognition research. Cogn Brain Behav Interdiscip J. 2005; 9: 681-710.

Hannah ST, Lord RG. Pearce CL. Leadership and collective requisite complexity. Organ Psychol Rev. 2011; 1: 215-238. doi: 10.1177/2041386611402116

Uhl-Bien M, Marion R, McKelvey B. Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowl-edge era. The Leadership Quarterly. 2007; 18: 298-318. doi: 10.1016/j. leaqua.2007.04.002

Curseu PL, Schruijer S, Boros S. The effects of groups’ variety and disparity on groups’ cognitive complexity. Group Dyn Theory Res Pract. 2007; 11: 187-206. doi: 10.1037/1089-2699.11.3.187

Burke CS, Stagl KC, Salas E, Pierce L, Kendall D. Understand-ing team adaptation: A conceptual analysis and model. J Appl Psy-chol. 2006; 91: 1189-1207. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1189

Entin EE, Serfaty D. Adaptive team coordination. Hum Factors. 1999; 41(2): 312-325. doi: 10.1518/001872099779591196

Espevik R, Johnsen BH, Eid J. Outcomes of shared men-tal models of team members in cross training and high inten-sity situations. J Cogn Eng Decis Mak. 2011; 5: 352-377. doi: 10.1177/1555343411424695

Schmidtke JM, Cummings A. The effects of virtualness on teamwork behavioral components: The role of shared mental models. Human Resource Management Review. 2017; 27(4): 660-677. doi: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.12.011

Blickensderfer E, Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E. Cross-training and team performance. In: Cannon-Bowers J, Salas E, eds. Mak-ing Decisions Under Stress: Implications for Individual and Team Train-ing. Washington, D.C, USA: American Psychological Association; 1998: 299-311.

Smith-Jentsch KA, Campbell GE, Milanovich DM, Reynolds AM. Measuring teamwork mental models to support training needs assessment, development, and evaluation: Two empirical studies. J Organ Behav. 2001; 22: 179-194. doi: 10.1002/job.88

Downloads

Published

2022-02-17

How to Cite

Bjørn H. Johnsen, Guttorm Brattebø, Roar Espevik, Sigurd W. Hystad, Øyvind Østerås, Live Vatsøy, & Jarle Eid. (2022). The Effect of Complexity of Ambulance Missions on Shared Mental Models in Virtual Teams. Emergency Medicine, 8(1), 7–13. https://doi.org/10.17140/EMOJ-8-164

Issue

Vol. 8 No. 1 (2022): Volume 8 Issue 1 2022

Section

Articles

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

All content published in Emergency Medicine (EM) is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows anyone to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt the work — including for commercial purposes — provided appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and source.