Handbook of Organization Measurement
Team Performance
construct.team_performance
§3The math on what we know
Synthesized priors from the live registry: pooled r, studies (k), total N, top study grade, and heterogeneity. Rows flagged for heterogeneity or single-study evidence are directional, not settled — read them as a central tendency.
What drives team performance
| Predictor | r | k | N | Grade | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Demographic Diversity | −0.01 | 3 | 8,857 | A | coherent |
| Task Related Diversity | +0.10 | 1 | 50 | B | single study |
| Team Diversity | +0.03 | 1 | 50 | A | single study |
What team performance predicts
| Outcome | r | k | N | Grade | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Demographic Diversity | −0.05 | 1 | 50 | B | single study |
| Job Related Diversity | +0.04 | 1 | 50 | B | single study |
| Task Oriented Diversity | +0.04 | 1 | 50 | B | single study |
| Relations Oriented Diversity | −0.03 | 1 | 50 | B | single study |
§4As a model node
Where team performance sits when you drop it into a model — what feeds it, what it moves. Read left to right as a small, actionable causal claim.
Inputs (drivers)
- Demographic Diversity−0.01
- Task Related Diversity+0.10
- Team Diversity+0.03
→
Team Performance
→
Outputs (outcomes)
- Demographic Diversity−0.05
- Job Related Diversity+0.04
- Task Oriented Diversity+0.04
- Relations Oriented Diversity−0.03