Gap Team Gap 1: We need to understand the key threats, indicators, and evolution of the team throughout its life cycle for autonomous, long duration and/or distance exploration missions.
Last Published:  07/31/19 10:05:30 AM (Central)
Responsible Element: Human Factors and Behavioral Performance (HFBP)
Status: Open
Description

a) Initial state

Current research examines team function and performance from a static perspective (based on task outcomes, or results at a particular point in time); we know very little about what teams look like, how they function over time, and what key indicators explain and characterize most (greater than or equal to 30%) of the variation in team performance. To characterize the TEAM risk of performance decrements for exploration missions, a far more comprehensive understanding of high performing teams is needed. This gap aims to determine the major contributing factors to team function and performance over different durations that correspond to future autonomous exploration missions. An Earth baseline will be established utilizing ground analogs for various durations (e.g., <6; 6-12; >12 months).

b) Target for Closure

Identified set of key indicators of team function specific to ICE environments for three mission profiles, including missions over 12 months and greater distance. Feasibility of a Team Model will be determined based on key indicators and quantified variances:

(1) Identifying key contributors of team function specific to ICE environments based on the amount of variance for different duration missions (<6 months; 6-12 months; >12 months) [this serves as the Earth baseline]; and (2) Quantifying each contributor’s level of impact to the outcome for each mission duration.

c) Metrics for interim progress

(1) Review status of what is known regarding dynamics and key contributors (moderating or mediating factors) of team functioning over various duration ICE environments, then validate with BHPWG (30%); (2) Solicit and implement studies to benchmark team function variations in different long duration ground analog environments (50%); (3) Develop report on recommendations for research regarding team dynamics over autonomous long duration exploration missions, and for development of a team model (update as needed upon completion of research studies and as information about mission scenarios is further defined) (20%).


d) Approach

This gap will take ~ 8 years to close. We will begin with examining current tasks utilizing key metrics to understand team function in different duration missions (Stuster, Kozlowski) and solicit studies to systematically fill the gap by having between 5-12 key indicators of team function in ICE environments identified and categorized by mission durations and distance.  We will utilize SMEs and factor analyses (when feasible) to finalize the set of indicators, derive Earth baselines, assess feasibility of a TEAM model. 

 

Target for Closure
No Target for Closure available.
Mappings
Risk Risk of Performance and Behavioral Health Decrements Due to Inadequate Cooperation, Coordination, Communication, and Psychosocial Adaptation within a Team
You are here! Gap Team Gap 1: We need to understand the key threats, indicators, and evolution of the team throughout its life cycle for autonomous, long duration and/or distance exploration missions.
Active
Completed
Planned-Funded

Documentation:
No Documentation Available