Knowing where to focus change

It’s normally not possible to infer cause and effect on the basis of statistical correlations. However, a statistical technique called "structural equation modeling" allowed researchers to formulate and test hypotheses about the effect of the 17 KTEP team performance indicators on one another.

The result of this research clearly suggests a direction to the factor correlations, which leads to an understanding of higher-and lower-leverage factors to focus on for performance improvement. This is clearly an exciting and important finding for enhancing team effectiveness!

How did KTEP come to be?

Researchers created a list of over 100 team performance factors by conducting an extensive literature search and through interviews with government and private sector research leaders and managers. By combining like factors and eliminating those considered less significant, the researchers reduced the list to 21 factors. They further reduced the list through a pilot study with a sample of R&D managers to the 17 factors now part of KTEP.

A questionnaire, developed to obtain information about the importance of these 17 factors in research teams, was first administered to a sample of 250 research scientists working in government agencies and universities. That questionnaire was subsequently improved, normed, and validated against objective performance data (i.e., actual team results) with over 500 teams, and is now available to you via the Knowledge Team Effectiveness Profile.

Is KTEP valid?

Yes. And other research has been performed to test the validity, reliability, consistency, and statistical significance of the KTEP instrument and its results. All of the testing has shown KTEP to be a sound tool for assessing knowledge and R&D teams.

Want more background? Click below to read the research paper, authored by KTEP's developers, that was delivered at the International Conference on Work Teams: Teams in the Test Tube.

Next topic: What does KTEP really measure?