Team Workload in Action Teams

A key contribution of human factors engineering is the concept of workload: a construct that represents the relationship between an operator’s cognitive resources, the demands of their task, and performance. Understanding workload can lead to improvements in safety and performance for people working in critical environments, particularly within action teams. Recently, there has been interest in considering how the workload of a team as a whole may differ from that of an individual, prompting investigation into team workload as a distinct team-level construct. In empirical research, team-level workload is often considered as the sum or average of individual team members' workloads. However, the intrinsic characteristics of action teams—such as interdependence and heterogeneity—challenge this assumption, and traditional methods of measuring team workload might be unsuitable. This dissertation delves into this issue with a review of empirical work in action teams, pinpointing several gaps. Next, the development of a testbed is described and used to address two pressing gaps regarding the impact of interdependence and how team communications relate to team workload states and performance. An experiment was conducted with forty 3-person teams collaborating in an action team task. Results of this experiment suggest that the traditional way of measuring workload in action teams via subjective questionnaires averaged at the team level has some major shortcomings, particularly when demands are elevated, and action teams are highly interdependent. The results also suggested that several communication measures are associated with increases in demands, laying the groundwork for team-level communication-based measures of team workload. The results are synthesized with findings from the literature to provide a way forward for conceptualizing and measuring team workload in action teams.