The papers in this Special Issue show that virtual teamwork is a complex phenomenon that depends on a multiplicity of team, task, and environmental factors. In this editorial, we begin with a short review of the main perspectives through which virtual teams have been studied. From there, we move to an overview of the papers in this Special Issue. To conclude, we discuss potential avenues for future research based on the collection of papers in this issue.

Hybrid teamwork, which describes any combination of one's work time spent across organizational and other (typically domestic) work settings, has become a critical aspect of modern work environments. However, despite the rising prevalence and technological support for hybrid teamwork, there is limited understanding of its impact at the team level. Although we still lack research that addresses the dynamic geographic configurations inherent to hybrid teamwork, we believe that much of the extant literature on virtual teamwork can inform our understanding and guide future research. Accordingly, this paper aims to advance knowledge on hybrid teamwork by defining its unique characteristics and critically reviewing three broad classes of theory from the virtual teams literature and their implications for understanding hybrid teamwork. Based on both contributions and limitations of these three theory classes, we conclude this paper by mapping out pressing questions to guide future research.

This study focuses on of using videoconferencing for work-related meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using a text mining process and qualitative content analysis of 549 comments posted to a LinkedIn online discussion board, we identified six key themes; three were tied to camera and microphone issues, two involved eating and meeting management issues, and one dealt with work-from-home issues. These themes are discussed in relationship to media naturalness theory and meeting science. Because widespread use of videoconferencing will likely continue, we provide guidance for workplace policies/practices and suggest directions for future research.

The COVID-19 pandemic has greatly affected all of society, including teams in organizational settings. Collaborative teamwork is particularly susceptible to pandemic disruptions, as coordination across individuals becomes challenging in socially distanced and virtual contexts. Unfortunately, COVID-19 research thus far has primarily studied individual health and performance. Analysis of 90 open-ended survey responses gives voice to students working in project teams during the pandemic and provides future research directions regarding the multilevel impacts of the pandemic on teamwork. Results reflect three themes: (1) challenges experienced; (2) changes to team communication, tasks, and roles; and (3) consequences to team progress and outcomes.

Team learning behavior is found to be one of the most effective team processes, as learning behavior at the team level (e.g., sharing, discussing, and reflecting on knowledge and actions) enables teams to adapt existing or develop new knowledge. Team leadership behavior is considered a critical accelerant for creating conditions that are essential to engage in team learning behavior, such as a safe environment. Yet despite the growing amount of research in team learning, this relationship remains unclear. Meta-analytic techniques were used to examine when team leadership behaviors support team learning behavior and how the task type moderates that relationship. Forty-three empirical studies reporting 92 effect sizes were synthesized. Analyses show that team leadership behavior explains 18% of the variance in team learning behavior. Furthermore, results indicate that person-focused leaders foster team learning for both adaptive and developmental tasks, whereas task-focused leaders influence team learning for adaptive tasks only.

Research teams face complex leadership and coordination challenges. We propose shared authentic leadership (SAL) as a timely approach to addressing these challenges. Drawing from authentic and functional leadership theories, we posit a multiple mediation model that suggests three mechanisms whereby SAL influences team effectiveness: shared mental models (SMM), team trust, and team coordination. To test our hypotheses, we collected survey data on leadership and teamwork within 142 research teams that recently published an article in a peer-reviewed management journal. The results indicate team coordination represents the primary mediating mechanism accounting for the relationship between SAL and research team effectiveness. While teams with high trust and SMM felt more successful and were more satisfied, they were less successful in publishing in high-impact journals. We also found the four SAL dimensions (i.e., self-awareness, relational transparency, balanced processing, and internalized moral perspective) to associate differently with team effectiveness.

As part of the Lorentz workshop, "Interdisciplinary Insights into Group and Team Dynamics," held in Leiden, Netherlands, this article describes how Geeks and Groupies (computer and social scientists) may benefit from interdisciplinary collaboration toward the development of killer apps in team contexts that are meaningful and challenging for both. First, we discuss interaction processes during team meetings as a research topic for both Groupies and Geeks. Second, we highlight teamwork in health care settings as an interdisciplinary research challenge. Third, we discuss how an automated solution for optimal team design could benefit team effectiveness and feed into team-based interventions. Fourth, we discuss team collaboration in massive open online courses as a challenge for both Geeks and Groupies. We argue for the necessary integration of social and computational research insights and approaches. In the hope of inspiring future interdisciplinary collaborations, we develop criteria for evaluating killer apps-including the four proposed here-and discuss future research challenges and opportunities that potentially derive from these developments.

This special issue on advancing interdisciplinary collaboration between computer scientists and social scientists documents the joint results of the international Lorentz workshop, "Interdisciplinary Insights into Group and Team Dynamics," which took place in Leiden, The Netherlands, July 2016. An equal number of scholars from social and computer science participated in the workshop and contributed to the papers included in this special issue. In this introduction, we first identify interaction dynamics as the core of group and team models and review how scholars in social and computer science have typically approached behavioral interactions in groups and teams. Next, we identify key challenges for interdisciplinary collaboration between social and computer scientists, and we provide an overview of the different articles in this special issue aimed at addressing these challenges.

Team learning is a complex social phenomenon that develops and changes over time. Hence, to promote understanding of the fine-grained dynamics of team learning, research should account for the temporal patterns of team learning behavior. Taking important steps in this direction, this special issue offers novel insights into the dynamics of team learning by advocating a temporal perspective. Based on a symposium presented at the 2016 Interdisciplinary Network for Group Research (INGRoup) Conference in Helsinki, the four empirical articles in this special issue showcase four different and innovative approaches to implementing a temporal perspective in team learning research. Specifically, the contributions highlight team learning dynamics in student teams, self-managing teams, teacher teams, and command and control teams. The articles cover a broad range of methods and designs, including both qualitative and quantitative methodologies, and longitudinal as well as micro-temporal approaches. The contributors represent four countries and five different disciplines in group research.

Extending past research showing that sequences of (low-level processing of information) and (high-level processing of information through questions and elaborations) influence the likelihoods of subsequent high and low cognitions, this study examines whether sequences of cognitions are related to group performance over time; 54 primary school students (18 triads) discussed and wrote an essay about living in another country (32,375 turns of talk). Content analysis and statistical discourse analysis showed that within each lesson, groups with more low cognitions or more sequences of low cognition followed by high cognition added more essay words. Groups with more high cognitions, sequences of low cognition followed by low cognition, or sequences of high cognition followed by an action followed by low cognition, showed different words and sequences, suggestive of new ideas. The links between cognition sequences and group performance over time can inform facilitation and assessment of student discussions.

Team learning is a recurrent topic in research on effective teamwork. However, research about the fact that team learning processes emerge from conversations and the different forms this emergence can take is limited. The aim of this study is to determine whether the extent to which team members act on each other's reasoning (transactivity) can be used to understand how team learning processes emerge. Research on teacher teams was used as the case study: Video recordings of three different teacher teams were used as primary data, and the data were analyzed using qualitative interaction analysis. The analysis shows that the content of team learning processes changes when team members act more closely on each other's reasoning. In particular, team learning processes related to the storage and retrieval of information took place only in sequences in which team members acted closely on each other's reasoning.

Due to their crucial and highly consequential task, it is of utmost importance to understand the levers leading to effectiveness of multidisciplinary emergency management command-and-control (EMCC) teams. We argue that the formal EMCC team leader needs to initiate structure in the team meetings to support organizing the work as well as facilitate team learning, especially the team learning process of constructive conflict. In a sample of 17 EMCC teams performing a realistic EMCC exercise, including one or two team meetings (28 in sum), we coded the team leader's verbal structuring behaviors (1,704 events), rated constructive conflict by external experts, and rated team effectiveness by field experts. Results show that leaders of effective teams use structuring behaviors more often (except asking procedural questions) but decreasingly over time. They support constructive conflict by clarifying and by making summaries that conclude in a command or decision in a decreasing frequency over time.

Although potentially beneficial, task conflict may threaten teams because it often leads to relationship conflict. Prior research has identified a set of interpersonal factors (e.g., team communication, team trust) that help attenuate this association. The purpose of this article is to provide an alternative perspective that focuses on the moderating role of performance-related factors (i.e., perceived team performance). Using social identity theory, we build a model that predicts how task conflict associates with growth in relationship conflict and how perceived team performance influences this association. We test a three-wave longitudinal model by means of random coefficient growth modeling, using data from 60 ongoing teams working in a health care organization. Results provide partial support for our hypotheses. Only when perceived team performance is low, do task conflicts relate with growth in relationship conflict. We conclude that perceived team performance seems to enable teams to uncouple task from relationship conflict.