Coordination leads to better team performance due to frequent communication and shared cognition within teams

by

Coordination leads to better team performance due to frequent communication and shared cognition within teams

Regression Analysis

The regression analysis was carried out to examine the relationship among the duration of cooperation between team members, shared cognition, communication, coordination and team performance. The duration of cooperation between team members (team tenure/history) were taken as dependent variable and shared cognition, communication, coordination and team performance as independents variable.

Model Summaryb

Model

R

R Square

Adjusted R Square

Std. Error of the Estimate

Durbin-Watson

1

.989a

.979

.976

32.15015

.383

a. Predictors: (Constant), shared cognition, communication, coordination, team performance

b. Dependent Variable: team tenure/history

From the above table it can be observed that the modulus value of Pearson correlation is 0.989 which indicates that a positive relationship exists among the predictors and dependent variable. The value of R square is 0.979 which is close to 1 it depicts that the change in any one of the variable may strongly affect the other variable.

ANOVAb

Model

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

1

Regression

1230925.696

4

410308.565

396.958

.000a

Residual

26874.437

96

1033.632

Total

1257800.133

100

a. Predictors: (Constant), shared cognition, communication, coordination, team performance

b. Dependent Variable: team tenure/history

The value of significance is 0.000 reported in the above table which indicates that the change in predictors may affect the dependent variable.

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized Coefficients

t

Sig.

Collinearity Statistics

B

Std. Error

Beta

Tolerance

VIF

1

(Constant)

1288.997

159.649

-8.074

.000

shared cognition

78.264

8.881

.640

8.813

.000

.156

6.423

communication

9.681

4.910

-.066

-1.972

.059

.729

1.371

team performance

4.856

3.589

.278

2.987

.000

.255

2.356

coordination

3.561

.691

.375

5.154

.000

.155

6.446

a. Dependent Variable: team tenure/history

Regression Equation

Team tenure/history = 1288.997 + 78.264* shared cognition + 9.681* communication + 4.856* team performance + 3.561* coordination

Collinearity Diagnosticsa

Model

Dimension

Eigenvalue

Condition Index

Variance Proportions

(Constant)

Organization Commitment

Organization Justice

Job performance

1

1

.953

1.000

.00

.00

.00

.00

2

.044

9.524

.00

.00

.02

.15

3

.003

36.705

.18

.01

.81

.05

4

.0214

85.650

.09

.02

.75

.06

5

.000

96.006

.82

.99

.17

.80

a. Dependent Variable: team tenure/history

Residuals Statisticsa

Minimum

Maximum

Mean

Std. Deviation

N

Predicted Value

597.3666

1.2519E3

9.1703E2

206.02358

100

Residual

-7.54062E1

58.61335

.00000

30.44183

100

Std. Predicted Value

-1.552

1.625

.000

1.000

100

Std. Residual

-2.345

1.823

.000

.947

100

a. Dependent Variable: team tenure/history

The eigen values are positive and around 1, condition indices are positive and the value of tolerance are around 1 which indicates that regression model is verified.

The shape of histogram is symmetric and the normal probability plot follows 45 degrees line so it can be said the assumption of normality isn't violated.

Correlation Analysis

Correlations

team tenure/history

shared cognition

Communication

Performance

team tenure/history

Pearson Correlation

1

.115

.966**

.889**

Sig. (2-tailed)

.544

.000

.000

N

100

100

100

100

shared cognition

Pearson Correlation

.115

1

.641

.730

Sig. (2-tailed)

.544

.003

.004

N

100

100

100

100

Communication

Pearson Correlation

.966**

.641

1

.953**

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.003

.000

N

100

100

100

100

Performance

Pearson Correlation

.889**

.730

.953**

1

Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.004

.000

N

100

100

100

100

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The above table presents the findings of correlation analysis. The correlation among team tenure/history and shared cognition (r = 0.115, p = .544>.05) reported in the table is positive, so it can be said the change in one variable may affect the other variable.

The correlation among team tenure/history and Communication (r = 0.966, p = .000<.05) reported in the table is positive and significantly different from 0 because the p-value of 0.000 is lower than 0.05. Communication and team tenure/history is directly proportional as the value of Pearson correlation is close to 1. So, strong relationship exists among the communication and team tenure/history.

The correlation among team tenure/history and Performance (r = 0.889, p = .000<.05) reported in the table is positive and significantly different from 0 because the p-value of 0.000 is lower than 0.05. Performance and team tenure/history is directly proportional as the value of Pearson correlation is close to 1. So, strong relationship exists among the Performance and team tenure/history.

The correlation among communication and shared cognition (r = 0.641, p = .000<.05) reported in the table is positive and significantly different from 0 because the ...