An examination of a child health project uncovers unexpected factors contributing to the success of teams in their early stages.
In large research projects, effective leadership and experience might be better indicators of team performance than collaborating across departments.
This insight could enhance the effectiveness of future large research teams and comes from a Rutgers Health study exploring team dynamics during the setup of a major child health research initiative.
“Leadership is crucial,” stated Ralph Gigliotti, one of the lead authors and an associate professor in the Department of Family Medicine and Community Health at Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School. “Leaders significantly affect the enthusiasm of team members and their willingness to stay engaged in such projects.”
The research, published in the Journal of Clinical and Translational Science, looked at 10 interdisciplinary working groups, comprising 105 members, as they developed protocols for the New Jersey Kids Study. Members were from 14 different Rutgers schools or units, and across 27 departments. Their backgrounds included a mix of senior professors (making up 35 percent) to trainees (accounting for 5 percent), each with differing skills in research, clinical practice, education, and administration.
Participants rated their team’s effectiveness using a modified TeamSTEPPS Team Assessment Questionnaire (TAQ), which covered elements like foundation, functioning, performance, skills, climate, and leadership. External reviewers assessed each group’s final reports with a standardized framework, giving scores between 18 and 24 out of 25.
In their analysis, the study authors looked into factors such as age distribution, diversity among schools, team size, and the ratio of members with research experience or advanced academic roles, correlating these aspects with TAQ scores and final report assessments to uncover potential indicators of team success.
Results indicated that teams comprising a higher percentage of senior faculty, research-centric members, and larger groups generally received better effectiveness ratings from peers. However, metrics of team diversity—like the range of academic disciplines and school affiliations—were associated with lower perceived team effectiveness during this initial planning phase.
“We found no link between the interdisciplinary diversity of teams and their effectiveness,” remarked Melissa Weidner, an assistant professor of pediatrics at the medical school and co-lead author. “These teams were just starting out, so it will be interesting to explore this further in future studies, especially as teams have more time to collaborate.”
Instead of solely relying on past performance indicators like publication output, researchers asked team members to share their views on effectiveness and had independent reviewers rate each group’s final outputs.
While no single element consistently indicated better report quality, a perception of strong leadership was linked to greater enthusiasm among team members for ongoing involvement.
The New Jersey Kids Study aspires to be a pioneering investigation into factors affecting children’s health and well-being. By tracking children from gestation to their teenage years, the goal is to shed light on health challenges such as increasing rates of asthma, autism, and childhood obesity within New Jersey’s diverse community.
The project leaders were clear on collecting data through questionnaires and biospecimen samples, but specifics were still under development, which is where the working groups proved crucial.
“What questions should we ask? What crucial information can patients provide about maternal and child health? What biospecimens are essential? How frequently should we gather them, and at what ages? These are the sorts of recommendations the working groups provided,” explained Weidner, who is also a physician at Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital in New Brunswick.
The qualitative analysis of the working group’s findings highlighted four key themes in team science practices: organization and processes, collaboration, task allocation, and decision-making trends. The researchers found significant differences in how various interdisciplinary teams handled these elements.
“There’s no universal approach to team science, and this study supports that notion,” noted Gigliotti, who is also Rutgers’ assistant vice president for organizational leadership in University Academic Affairs.
The authors of the study believe their insights could aid in shaping the design and management of future large-scale, interdisciplinary research projects at Rutgers and elsewhere. They stressed the importance of deliberate team creation and leadership development, even when combining experts from different academic areas.
“This serves as a prime example of how team science can be effectively conducted and the opportunities available to us at a place like Rutgers,” Gigliotti said. “Our infrastructure and cross-disciplinary collaborations enable us to gather a diverse range of expertise to tackle vital questions.”
As for the New Jersey Kids Study, a pilot stage involving 300 pregnant women is currently in the recruitment phase.
