UNCLASSIFIED U S Army Research Institute for the

UNCLASSIFIED U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Unit Resilience Measure Development and Validation Cassie Berry, Ph. D. Emerging Research Unit Do. D HFE VTAG #74 November 2020 DISCLAIMER: The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army. The views expressed in this presentation are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, DOD, or the U. S. Government. UNCLASSIFIED Cassie A. Berry 1 (cassie. a. berry. civ@mail. mil), Colanda R. Cato 1, Bridget E. Boyle 1, Shala N. Blue 1, Scott D. Tannenbaum 2, John E. Mathieu 2, and Jamie Levy 2 1 U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 2 The Group for Organizational Effectiveness Controlled by: ARI Unclassified Distribution Statement A POC: Cassie Berry, 703 -545 -2386

UNCLASSIFIED The views expressed in this presentation are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Do. D, or the U. S. Government. UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 2

UNCLASSIFIED BLUF • Team resilience = Team members’ collective confidence and capacity (cognitive, affective, somatic) to withstand overcome stressors in a manner that enables sustained performance. • • Ensuring units are highly resilient is critical to Army readiness • • Important to identify unit resilience components and understand the factors that can enable or diminish it Initial validation of Battery of measures • • Team resilience is not a simple aggregation of individual Soldiers’ resilience Core unit resilience and other constructs (e. g. Stressors, Challenges) Technical Report and Administration Manual (under technical review) UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 3

UNCLASSIFIED Overview • Purpose of measuring team resilience • Two Studies – Study 1 – Army Installations – Study 2 – Army Recruiting Teams • Summary Findings • Applications • Limitations • Future research UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 4

UNCLASSIFIED Introduction • Resilience at the unit level has been studied far less frequently than resilience at the individual level. • Previously, no validated measure of unit resilience existed that is appropriate for research or practice in an Army context. • Current project • Items developed to measure three aspects of core unit resilience (Cognitive, Affective, Somatic) • Measure validation in two studies • • Army Installations Army Recruiting Teams (online survey, at 3 time points) UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 5

UNCLASSIFIED Resilience Framework and Measures Stressors (15 items) Environmental Challenges (6 items) Core Unit Resilience (Current and Future, 12 items) 5 -Item Short Form 2 -Item Short Form Mending (10 items) Minimizing (6 items) Manifestations (11 items) UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 6

UNCLASSIFIED Sample Items – Core Unit Resilience Team Resources Low ----------- Medium -------------- High Rest 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Energy 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Team Resources Low ----------- Medium -------------- High Mutual trust 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Morale 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Team Resources Low ----------- Medium -------------- High Task- or mission-related knowledge 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Shared situational awareness 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 7

UNCLASSIFIED Study 1 – Army Installations • Installation POCs at four locations identified squads • 705 surveys collected, 679 usable surveys • Represent 449 teams (factor structure and nomological net analyses) • Multiple respondents for 129 teams (agreement indices and ICCs) • Teams included a minimum of 2 members • Focus is on “team” (we analyzed for both team and squad) UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 8

UNCLASSIFIED Results UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 9

UNCLASSIFIED Core Unit Resilience – Both Studies • Agreement justifies aggregation at team and squad level (i. e. , rwgs >. 70) • Solid interrater agreement – Significant ICCs of moderate levels (>. 10, <. 25) – Except current physical fitness for Installations and future cognitions for Recruiting Teams • Scales show high internal consistency throughout (i. e. , Cronbach’s αs >. 90). • The Current and Future subscales and overall composites were highly and significantly correlated – Either Current capacity or Future confidence sub-scale can be used as appropriate to fit situation – interchangeable UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 10

UNCLASSIFIED Summary Findings • Ample evidence for construct validity of both 12 -item Core Unit Resilience scales • Confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) consistent across studies • Can use three resilience factors or combine to one composite factor UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 11

UNCLASSIFIED Summary Findings • Nomological network analyses encouraging • No major modifications needed to the content of the measures • Three versions of unit resilience • 2 -item; 5 -item; Core Unit Resilience Measure (12 items) • All three work similarly • Brevity vs. Diagnosticity UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 12

UNCLASSIFIED Limitations • Only two samples – Will the findings generalize to other types of teams and settings? • Somewhat smaller sample size with recruiting teams • Same source data from Installation teams UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 13

UNCLASSIFIED Future Research and Example Applications • Apply the measures in other settings, including deployed teams or training settings • Sample teams’ resilience while under different forms and degrees of stressors • Delve more deeply into team’s responses and adaptations to stressors and how that may influence their subsequent resilience • Consider other levels of aggregation beyond team and squad • Test interventions designed to boost team resilience, perhaps using pre-post temporal designs • Assess value and feasibility of adding unit resilience measure data to dashboards UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 14

UNCLASSIFIED Project Contact Information Dr. Cassie Berry Research Psychologist, Unit Resilience Emerging Research Unit, U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) cassie. a. berry. civ@mail. mil Dr. Charles T. Keil Acting Chief Emerging Research Unit, U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) charles. t. keil 3. civ@mail. mil 703. 851. 7711 UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 15

UNCLASSIFIED Back-up Slides UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 16

UNCLASSIFIED Item Development • Generated a pool of items based on the framework focusing on three hypothesized team resilience dimensions (Somatic, Affective, and Cognitive (SAC); Anderson & Gerbing, 1991; Mathieu et al. , 2019) • 1) Affective includes team psychological states relating to feelings, attitudes, and emotion • 2) Cognitive consists of team states that concern members’ thoughts or beliefs regarding a specific factor • 3) Somatic states refer to members’ physical and mental conditions at any given time. UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 17

UNCLASSIFIED Content Validation • • Items piloted with Army SMEs (n = 9) for input/revisions Content validation with a second sample of SMEs (n = 36) were presented the 12 items in an online survey and mapped the items to the hypothesized dimensions Eleven of the 12 items were accurately categorized significantly more often than chance. • • Alertness was intended as an indicator of Cognitive (11%) but was actually classified more often as Somatic (23%). UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 18

UNCLASSIFIED Sample Items • From 2 -item Unit Resilience short form • From Manifestations scale NO NEED to demonstrate this behavior Never or Rarely Some of the Time Most of the Time Every Time 1. Alerted one another to potential problems 1 2 3 4 5 2. Communicated about situational changes (for example: mission, resources) 1 2 3 4 5 3. Responded to challenges when they occurred 1 2 3 4 5 4. Sought assistance 1 2 3 4 5 5. Ensured all team members were comfortable speaking up 1 2 3 4 5 6. Offered backup or support when team members needed help (for example: overloaded, competing demands) 1 2 3 4 5 During the last month, how often did your team exhibit this behavior when it was needed ? UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 19

UNCLASSIFIED Sample Items • From Stressors scale During the last month how often did your team experience: 1. information overload? 2. uncertainty or doubt? 3. lack of sleep? Never Rarely Occasionally Frequently Constantly 1 2 3 4 5 • From Environmental Challenges scale UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 20

UNCLASSIFIED Study 2 – Army Recruiting Teams • Longitudinal, multi-source design • Online survey; 275 recruiting stations; 49 companies; three time points (once a month for 3 months) • Recruiters assessed their team’s resilience • Core Unit Resilience (Current and Future scales), 2 -Item Unit Resilience Form (i. e. , Overall Resilience) • Station Commanders assessed all other factors • Including Stressors, Environmental Challenges, Minimizing, Mending, Manifestations, Team Performance • Team performance assembled from archival records (yields versus goals) • 385 instances with team performance and recruiter survey data • Of those, 210 also had station commander survey data UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 21

UNCLASSIFIED References • Anderson, J. C. , & Gerbing, D. W. (1991). Predicting the performance of measures in a confirmatory factor analysis with a pretest assessment of their substantive validities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 732 -740. https: //doi. org/10. 1037/00219010. 76. 5. 732 • Mathieu, J. E. , Luciano, M. M. , D’Innocenzo, L. D. , Klock, E. A. , & Le. Pine, J. A. (2019). The development and construct validity of a team processes survey measure. Organizational Research Methods. https: //doi. org/10. 1177/1094428119840801 UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution unlimited. The research described herein was sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of the Army (Contract No. W 911 NF-18 -C-0024). 22