Explore the vast range of titles available.

Tips are included for clinical care team leaders and team members, as well as for members of management who support or oversee clinical teams (senior leaders, middle managers, crisis management teams). [...]research on team effectiveness has expanded and close to 50 meta-analyses have been published.4 Based on those meta-analytic findings, numerous studies on team effectiveness specifically in healthcare settings5 and our nearly 100 years of collective experience studying teams, we offer the following advice on how to counteract prevalent stressors and overcome risks that can adversely affect teamwork. While we recognise that time is limited, we encourage teams to conduct quick, periodic prebriefs, debriefs and huddles8 as well as thoughtful handoffs,9 using those touchpoints to share current priorities, clarify responsibilities and decision authority and confirm who has the most expertise/latest information related to key needs.10 Team members can help their team sustain a shared perspective by asking questions when they are unsure about a priority or a new process. Often when one team member is uncertain, others are as well, so all team members can benefit from hearing the answer.

Interprofessional teamwork is vital to effective patient care, and targeting healthcare learners earlier in their education can lead to greater improvement in confidence and competence in teamwork skills. Despite this, institutions have continued struggling to integrate competency-based interprofessional teamwork curriculum in undergraduate health care professions’ education. The current article provides guidance related to design, implementation, and assessment for institutions seeking to implement competency-based teamwork education and training strategies for healthcare students. Guiding principles and strategies for curricular design focus on conducting thorough interprofessional needs analyses and building transportable, evidence-based competencies that apply across professions. For implementation, key principles center on strategies to ensure adequate professional representation and faculty development. Assessment considerations focus on building infrastructure for evaluation that spans professional schools. These strategies aim to create a robust, effective, and sustainable IPE curriculum that enhances collaboration and teamwork among future healthcare professionals. By addressing the key areas of design, implementation, and assessment, this article offers comprehensive guidelines for advancing interprofessional education. We believe incorporating the key guiding principles and strategies from this paper will enable institutions to integrate teamwork education and training more effectively into undergraduate healthcare training, which will facilitate institutions’ ability to ensure learners are “team ready” as they transition into the workforce after graduation.

Organizations in the United States alone spend billions on training each year. These training and development activities allow organizations to adapt, compete, excel, innovate, produce, be safe, improve service, and reach goals. Training has successfully been used to reduce errors in such high-risk settings as emergency rooms, aviation, and the military. However, training is also important in more conventional organizations. These organizations understand that training helps them to remain competitive by continually educating their workforce. They understand that investing in their employees yields greater results. However, training is not as intuitive as it may seem. There is a science of training that shows that there is a right way and a wrong way to design, deliver, and implement a training program. The research on training clearly shows two things: (a) training works, and (b) the way training is designed, delivered, and implemented matters. This article aims to explain why training is important and how to use training appropriately. Using the training literature as a guide, we explain what training is, why it is important, and provide recommendations for implementing a training program in an organization. In particular, we argue that training is a systematic process, and we explain what matters before, during, and after training. Steps to take at each of these three time periods are listed and described and are summarized in a checklist for ease of use. We conclude with a discussion of implications for both leaders and policymakers and an exploration of issues that may come up when deciding to implement a training program. Furthermore, we include key questions that executives and policymakers should ask about the design, delivery, or implementation of a training program. Finally, we consider future research that is important in this area, including some still unanswered questions and room for development in this evolving field.

Purpose Over the past two decades, research has shown a growing consensus that 70% to 90% of organizational learning occurs not through formal training but informally, on-the-job, and in an ongoing manner. Despite this emerging consensus, primary data on the nature and correlates of informal learning remains sparse. The purpose of this study was to provide an integrative definition of informal learning behaviors (ILBs) and to synthesize existing primary data through meta-analysis to explore ILB correlates. Design/Methodology/Approach Given that there has been little systematic treatment of ILBs, we defined their construct domain and tested relationships suggested by our research questions with antecedents (personal factors, situational factors) and outcomes (attitudes, knowledge/skill acquisition, performance) using random effects meta-analyses ( k =  49, N  = 55,514). Findings Our results showed both personal and situational antecedent factors to be predictive of ILBs, as well as ILB–outcome relationships. Implications Findings indicate that engagement in ILBs for working adults is linked to valued criteria such as attitudes ( ρ  = .29), knowledge/skill acquisition ( ρ  = .41), and performance ( ρ  = .42). We provide suggestions for future research and actionable advice for organizations to support the development of ILBs. Originality/Value Although hundreds of studies and over a dozen meta-analyses have explored the nature and effectiveness of formal learning in the workplace, our work is the first attempt to conceptualize a unified definition of ILBs and to aggregate primary data on ILB correlates using meta-analysis.

An augmented framework for training criteria based on Kirkpatrick's (1959a, 1959b, 1960a, 1960b) model divides training reactions into affective and utility reactions, and learning into post‐training measures of learning, retention, and behavior/skill demonstration. A total of 34 studies yielding 115 correlations were analyzed meta‐analytically. Results included substantial reliabilities across training criteria and reasonable convergence among subdivisions of criteria within a larger level. Utility‐type reaction measures were more strongly related to learning or on‐the‐job performance (transfer) than affective‐type reaction measures. Moreover, utility‐type reaction measures were stronger correlates of transfer than were measures of immediate or retained learning. These latter findings support recent concurrent thinking regarding use of reactions in training (e.g., Warr & Bunce, 1995). Implications for choosing and developing training criteria are discussed.

Researchers from a variety of disciplines are currently working with NASA to prepare for human exploration of Mars in the next decades. Such exploration will take scientific discovery to new heights, providing unprecedented information about the geology, atmosphere, and potential for life on Mars, including previous life, current life, and perhaps even our own lives in the future. To make these unparalleled discoveries, however, astronauts will need to undertake a novel and unprecedented journey. Moreover, the mission to Mars will require a team of crew members who will have to endure and sustain team performance requirements never seen before. Multidisciplinary teams of scientists have begun to provide the needed steps to address this challenge. The purpose of this article is (a) to illustrate the kinds of new conceptual frameworks and paradigms needed for teams in space exploration, (b) to delineate promising research paths to ensure that a robust team science can emerge for long-duration space exploration (LDSE), (c) to showcase initial findings and insights from studying astronauts now, and (d) to outline a plan of action for team-effectiveness research in LDSE.

This article describes, both conceptually and empirically, how salient aspects of an organization's work environment can influence whether continuous learning will occur. Survey results from over 500 people in seven organizations, coupled with data from diagnostic interviews, revealed that each organization has a unique learning profile and relies on different sources of learning to develop individual competencies. Those organizations with stronger learning environments appeared to demonstrate greater organizational effectiveness. Several common learning environment factors were empirically identified. These factors were found to be related to perceived competence and satisfaction with development across organizations. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

[...]in highly effective teams, team members possess shared mental models about roles, priorities and the situation; communicate information that others need and confirm their understanding; engage in mutual performance monitoring and backup behaviours and make it safe for others to speak up and ask questions.1 The research is also clear about the efficacy of team debriefs. Table 1 Team debriefing in education and in clinical practice: related but different Education/Training Clinical Typical use Conducted after an exercise such as a simulated patient encounter involving more than one healthcare provider May occur during formal education or work-placed training Involves students/trainees from one or more discipline Conducted after a clinical experience such as a patient interaction (eg, surgery or treatment) or after a period of performance (eg, end of a shift) May involve an ongoing, intact team or one formed to complete a specific task (eg, trauma team) Sometimes examines a mistake or error Learning objectives Learning objectives are typically established in advance Specific learning objectives cannot be established in advance, as learning opportunities are contingent on the nature of the experience Timing Time is allotted based on the learning objectives but the debrief is typically longer than a debrief in a clinical setting If conducted immediately in situ, then often very brief (5–15 min). If conducted retrospectively, more time may be allotted Roles Debrief leader (faculty member or occasionally peer-led) Student participants/trainees Debrief leader (team leader or a trained debrief facilitator) Team members Primary intent In an educational setting, build transportable competencies students can use throughout their career In a work-placed training setting, if trainees are participating as an intact team, help them build a shared mental model Reinforce positives and identify quick lessons learnt or adjustments to ensure teamwork is performed effectively/safely Build shared mental models about how the team expects to work together going forward Secondary intent Help prepare students to participate in clinical debriefs in the future Build transportable competencies; identify recommendations to improve processes/systems (to share with leadership) A few universal team debriefing guidelines Regardless of the setting, research supports some universally applicable guidelines for conducting an effective team debrief. Minimise the time between performance and feedback: given human memory constraints, it is advantageous to conduct a team debrief closer in time to the experience being discussed.6 Cover both teamwork and taskwork factors: teams in all professions gravitate towards discussing taskwork (eg, clinical) factors, so the debrief process should explicitly guide them to consider teamwork factors.7 Provide adequate structure: structured debriefs are more effective than free form debriefs, although the appropriate structure is contingent on the context of the debrief.8 Create psychological safety: ensure participants feel it is safe to ask questions, admit concerns, voice alternative perspectives and share constructive feedback.9 Reflect backward and look forward: explore and synthesise what happened (backward reflection) and then identify lessons learnt, agreements and/or action plans (look forward).10 Balance inquiry and advocacy: the debrief leader should solicit input from the group (inquiry) and where appropriate offer their own insights5 (advocacy), although the relative emphasis may need to vary for different debriefing purposes.