case study interpersonal leadership skills assignment

Interpersonal Leadership Skills are Essential to Successful Leaders

The acceleration of technology in the Fourth Industrial Revolution has dramatically shifted the skills necessary to be a successful leader. According to projections in  The Future of Jobs Report 2020  from the World Economic Forum, by 2025, 85 million jobs may be displaced due to technological innovations, while 97 million new, more adapted roles may emerge. 

The skill sets that make us human are still in demand as machines and automated systems take on many traditional job functions. They are often referred to as interpersonal skills. They are the kind of skill we use to communicate and interact with people every day effectively. They are sometimes called soft skills or emotional intelligence (EQ).

According to many experts who study organizational leadership and management, these interpersonal skills are essential in developing positive personal and professional relationships. Most managers look for these capabilities in their current and prospective employees. In fact, in a  LinkedIn research  report, 92% of hiring managers said soft skills are more important than technical skills, and 89% said that bad hires typically lack interpersonal skills.

The ability to connect with and influence others is especially impactful for those in leadership and management positions. According to  research  from the Corporate Executive Board (CEB), 50-70% of executives fail within 18 months of taking on a role. In many cases, their failure isn’t due to a lack of education or expertise in managing finances and resources. A lack of effective interpersonal communication causes it. 

On the other hand, professionals with strong interpersonal communication skills have a more positive attitude, more productive leadership styles, and more positive interactions with team members and employees. These executives and managers with strong influence skills, which are also called people skills, are well respected and trusted and often more successful. There are many powerful interpersonal skills to cultivate, and among those are a few standouts that are critical in leadership and management. 

Vital Interpersonal Leadership Skills 

Interpersonal communication .

Effective communication has three prongs – verbal communication, nonverbal communication, and active listening. Verbal communication skills allow leaders to articulate clear directions and expectations, provide constructive feedback and share their experience and perspective. This skill category also includes intangibles such as tone of voice and word choice. 

Nonverbal communication or body language includes eye contact, gestures, facial expressions, posture, and physical space. These physical cues will often determine how your verbal communication is perceived and received. For example, Betty is having an issue with one of her colleagues. She goes to talk to her boss, Cheryl, about it. Cheryl says all the right things, but she doesn’t look Betty in the eye, she’s distracted by her phone, and she keeps her arms folded across her chest. Betty perceives these physical cues as Cheryl not being sincere, and she feels even worse. If Cheryl had the competency to use nonverbal communication skills, she could have improved the situation for Betty and developed her trust, a key element in successful interpersonal leadership. 

Another important aspect of communication is active listening. Regardless of leadership style, executives and managers must be able to listen and hear what people communicate to them. This helps them learn from others, gain an understanding of their business and their team, foster interpersonal relationships, and promote trust and respect. To develop this trait, avoid distractions during conversations, meet face-to-face, and ask questions to foster dialogue. 

Empathy is the ability to understand and share in other people’s feelings. It's one of the most underrated managerial skills. In recent years it has been recognized as an invaluable interpersonal skill in business and has become a hallmark of a great leader in any sector.  Studies  have shown that empathetic leaders have happier, more productive and more collaborative teams than leaders who do not possess this important affiliative skill.

Empathy in the workplace is key to connecting with employees and earning trust and respect. For example, Frank, an otherwise good employee starts to have issues at work – his performance is tanking, he’s not engaged and he’s been showing up late or leaving early almost every day. A typical leader may look at these events and take a disciplinary course of action. 

Gary isn’t a typical leader. Gary sits down with Frank and asks him what’s causing this behavior. He uses his communication skills and listens thoughtfully to what’s going on. He finds out that Frank is struggling with some personal issues. Instead of punishing Frank and adding to his grief, Gary chose to connect with Frank and develop trust. Now that this trust is in place, the two can come up with coping strategies together. Frank feels seen, heard and cared for, and because of this he feels more motivated at work and develops a sense of loyalty. It’s a win-win. 

Resilience and Adaptability 

Resiliency is the ability to meet challenges and adversity, work through them and come out stronger. Adaptability is the capacity to learn new skills and behaviors in response to changing circumstances. Resiliency and adaptability complement and support each other as two crucial leadership skills in an unpredictable and ever-changing world. 

Leaders who thrive in dynamic environments, adapt quickly to change, and learn and grow from adversity are more successful and tend to achieve more for their organization. The most potent recent example of why resiliency and adaptability are so important is the COVID-19 pandemic. Organizations worldwide had to adapt frequently and with quickness to the changes brought on by the pandemic. Those that succeeded in adapting proved more resilient. They didn’t just survive the historic disruption; they thrived. Businesses that couldn’t adapt were forced to close their doors. 

Regardless of the industry, no leadership or management role is exempt from challenges and disruption. Things don’t always work out how they’re supposed to and circumstances change, often dramatically and repeatedly. Effective leaders adjust, tackle the challenges head-on, encourage their teams, learn from the experience and become stronger.  

Conflict Resolution 

Another important leadership and management skill is conflict resolution – the ability to reach a solution or compromise to a disagreement. Disagreements in the workplace are inevitable, but dysfunction is not. People have different beliefs, attitudes, political views, work ethics, education levels, social skills, and communication styles. 

Effective leaders understand that managing conflicting personnel is a critical competency for teamwork, negotiations, interpersonal relationships and overall organizational success. For example, Robert is in a leadership role at a new company. When he arrives, the workplace is toxic and the business isn’t performing the way it should. 

Robert uses his interpersonal skills to find out what is causing so many problems. He discovers that several members of the staff have opposing views on just about everything and their struggles have influenced the entire team. Robert understands that the only way to improve the company’s performance issues is to resolve interpersonal conflicts first. He utilizes his interpersonal skills and helps his team do the following: 

• Listen carefully and impartially. Hear all sides of the story. 
• Create a safe space to facilitate a conversation between co-workers.
• Set ground rules for verbal and nonverbal communication. 
• Discuss the conflict and work to understand the other person’s perspective. 
• Find areas of agreement. 
• Identify solutions. 
• Come up with an action plan – with specific actions for each party – to implement the solution. This plan also includes what to do if another decision-making disagreement arises.

Once the main issues are resolved, Robert brings in a professional to hold an interpersonal skills workshop with the entire team. With Robert's positive influence and encouragement and monthly interpersonal skills seminars, the workplace has transformed within a couple of months. Interpersonal relationships have drastically improved, company performance is up and conflict is managed quickly and calmly. 

Work environments like the one Robert stepped into are not uncommon. Many leaders and professionals lack the interpersonal skills needed to resolve issues at work. Developing these four interpersonal skills empowers professionals in leadership and management roles to create strong, effective and successful teams. 

Related insights

Ethical dilemmas in business: Balancing profitability, corporate social responsibility

How to foster a culture of psychological safety in the workplace

Resources for women in business: Empowering success

Interpersonal Effectiveness: 9 Worksheets & Examples (+ PDF)

There is a myriad of skills that can be added to our repertoire, enhanced, and improved.

There are thousands of courses, millions of books and articles, and countless tips and suggestions to improve our lives by cultivating a certain skill or set of skills.

But which one is most important?

There may not be a definitive answer to that question, but I think one of the most common answers would be: communication (or interpersonal) skills.

It is simply a fact of life that we will encounter thousands, even tens of thousands, of people in our lifetime. While we don’t need to make a good impression on each individual we meet (which would be an impossible task anyway), we do need to at least get along with others well enough to get by.

This is especially true for those of us struggling with a mental disorder like depression, anxiety, or Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD). It can be doubly difficult for people with these obstacles to effectively interact with others.

Fortunately, there are ways to enhance your interpersonal effectiveness. Whether you are a successful public speaker or an introverted loner, there are resources and activities that can help you improve your communication skills and enhance your quality of life.

Before you continue, we thought you might like to download our three Positive Relationships Exercises for free . These detailed, science-based exercises will help you or your clients build healthy, life-enriching relationships.

This Article Contains:

What is the definition of interpersonal effectiveness, interpersonal effectiveness & dialectical behavioral therapy, the importance of developing your interpersonal effectiveness skills, 6 games & activities (for groups) to develop effective interpersonal skills, 3 ways to improve your interpersonal effectiveness in the workplace, a take-home message.

Interpersonal effectiveness, at its most basic, refers to the ability to interact with others. It includes skills we use to (Vivyan, 2015):

• Attend to relationships
• Balance priorities versus demands
• Balance the “wants” and the “shoulds”
• Build a sense of mastery and self-respect

Our ability to interact with others can be broken by the goal we have in mind for our interactions. There are three main goals to interaction:

• Gaining our objective
• Maintaining our relationships
• Keeping our self-respect

Each goal requires interpersonal skills; while some interpersonal skills will be applied in many situations, some skills will be especially important for achieving one of these goals.

When we are working towards gaining our objective, we need skills that involve clarifying what we want from the interaction, and identifying what we need to do in order to get the results we want.

When maintaining our relationships is our first priority, we need to understand how important the particular relationship is to us, how we want the person to feel about us, and what we need to do in order to keep the relationship going.

Finally, when our goal is to keep our self-respect, we will use interpersonal skills to help us feel the way we would like to feel after the interaction is over and to stick to our values and to the truth (Vivyan, 2015).

In fact, it’s the second core skills module in classic DBT, with tons of materials and resources dedicated to improving the client’s interpersonal skills.

You might be wondering why interpersonal effectiveness is so important that it warrants an entire module in one of the most popular forms of therapy. Sure, communication is important, but does it really require this much time and effort? Why?

DBT’s take is that these skills are so important because the way we communicate with others has a huge impact on the quality of our relationships with others and the outcomes of our interactions with others (Linehan, 2015). In turn, the quality of our relationships and the outcomes of our interactions have a significant influence on our wellbeing , our sense of self-esteem and self-confidence , and our very understanding of who we are.

While there are many skills related to communication and interaction with others, DBT focuses on two main components:

• The ability to ask for things that you want or need
• The ability to say no to requests, when appropriate

Download 3 Free Positive Relationships Exercises (PDF)

These detailed, science-based exercises will equip you or your clients to build healthy, life-enriching relationships.

Download 3 Positive Relationships Pack (PDF)

By filling out your name and email address below.

• Email Address *
• Your Expertise * Your expertise Therapy Coaching Education Counseling Business Healthcare Other
• Comments This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

By now, you have surely recognized the importance of having good, or at least adequate, communication and interaction skills. However, you may be thinking that if you have the skills to communicate with others at a minimum level of effectiveness, you’re set! Why bother working on skills you already have?

Like any set of complex skills, there will never be a point at which you have completely mastered them. Even the best motivational speakers and public relations experts are not perfect communicators. There is always room for improvement!

Research has provided evidence that improving these interpersonal skills leads to positive outcomes, especially for clients with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD). For example, DBT skill utilization has been shown to improve BPD symptoms overall, reduce affective instability, and improve the client’s relationship capabilities (Stepp, Epler, Jahng, & Trull, 2008).

The ultimate guide to expert interpersonal skills – Science of People

While there are many worksheets and individual exercises you can engage in to build your interpersonal skills, they are not always the most effective way to do this.

It’s no surprise that the best way to improve your interactions with others is to practice interacting with others!

Not only are group activities generally more effective in improving interpersonal skills, they are often more fun. Below, we’ve listed and described 5 fun games and activities that you can practice to improve your interpersonal effectiveness (as well as one handout you can use to assess your interpersonal skills).

Skills Assessment Handout

Before trying to improve your interpersonal communication skills, it is a good idea to find out where you currently are with each one. The assessment on page 3 of this handout can help.

On this page, you will find 29 skills, such as:

• Introducing yourself
• Listening – taking in what people say
• Listening – showing interest in people
• Responding to praise
• Responding to negative feedback
• Self-disclosure as appropriate

For each skill, you are instructed to rate yourself on a scale from 1 to 5, according to the following rubric:

• 1 – I am very poor at that skill
• 2 – I am poor
• 3 – I am sometimes good
• 4 – I am usually good
• 5 – I am always good

You can take the average of your ratings to give yourself an overall “interpersonal effectiveness” skill rating, but the individual ratings are valuable by themselves.

If you are looking to enhance your communication skills, make sure to establish a baseline first. If you have a baseline to compare back to, it is much easier to notice improvements!

Try Not To Listen Activity

In this fun and potentially eye-opening activity, group members will get a chance to put their acting chops to the test.

The group should be broken into pairs for this activity. In each pair, one individual should be designated to speak first while the other “listens,” before switching roles.

The first speaker (Partner A) is instructed to talk for two minutes straight, about any subject they’d like to talk about. While Partner A is speaking, Partner B’s job is to make it crystal clear that he or she is not listening to Partner A at all.

Partner B cannot say anything, instead relying on body language to communicate their message to Partner A.

Once Partner A’s two minutes of speaking time is up, Partner B gets two minutes to talk while Partner A “listens.”

The group will likely find that it is extremely hard to keep talking when their partner is so clearly not listening! This is an important lesson from the activity: that body language plays a vital role in communication, and listeners have a significant influence over how the interaction goes in addition to those speaking.

Once all group members have taken their turn both speaking and “listening,” each individual should write down their immediate reactions to having a speaking partner that is clearly not listening.

They will probably come up with feelings like:

• I felt frustrated.
• I was angry.
• I felt that I wasn’t important.
• I felt like what I was saying must be boring.
• I couldn’t keep talking.
• I felt insignificant and unimportant.

Next, group members should note the behaviors that their partner was exhibiting to show that they weren’t listening, behaviors like:

• Facing away, with head bent toward the floor or turned to the side
• Avoiding eye contact
• Looking at the floor/ceiling
• Folded arms/crossed legs
• Blank or bored expression
• Yawning, whistling, scratching or other activity incompatible with active listening
• Preoccupation (with looking at one’s surroundings, one’s phone, etc.)
• No interaction at all

While this exercise is clearly an exaggeration of what it is like to talk to someone who isn’t listening, this can help those who are not very observant or limited in their social skills to monitor their own behavior when interacting with others.

It’s easy to decide to practice active listening in your interactions, but it’s harder to keep all of the target behaviors (and all of the decidedly non-target behaviors) in mind. Practicing this exercise will help participants identify and remember the behaviors that make a person a good listener .

You can find this exercise on page 4 of the handout mentioned above ( Interpersonal Skills Exercises ).

Sabotage Exercise

This is another fun exercise that incorporates poor interpersonal behaviors in order to highlight what the good interpersonal behaviors are.

This exercise should be undertaken in a fairly large group, large enough to break into at least two or three groups of four to five individuals.

Instruct each group to take about 10 minutes to brainstorm, discuss, and list all the ways they can think of to sabotage a group assignment. Anything they can think of is fair game – it just needs to be something disruptive enough to drive a team task right off the rails!

Once each group has a good-sized list of ways to sabotage a group assignment, gather into the larger group again and compare responses. Write them all on the chalkboard, whiteboard, or a flip board in the front of the room.

Next, reform the groups and instruct them to produce a 5- to 10-point contract with agreed-upon guidelines for successful group work. Group members should draw from the sabotage ideas (i.e., what not to do for successful group work) to identify good ideas (i.e., what to do for successful group work).

For example, if a group listed “do not communicate with any of the other group members” as a way to sabotage the group assignment, they might come up with something like “communicate with other group members often” as a guideline for successful group work.

This exercise will help participants learn what makes for a positive group experience, while also giving them a chance to have a positive group experience along the way.

This exercise was described on page 14 of  this handout .

Group Strengths and Weaknesses

Groups have one very important advantage over individuals when it comes to accomplishing work – they can offset individuals’ weaknesses, complement their strengths, and bring balance to the group.

Group members will engage in some critical thinking and discussion about their own strengths and weaknesses in this exercise, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the other group members and the group as a whole.

To give this exercise a try, instruct the group to think about the strengths and weaknesses of each individual group member. Encourage them to be honest but kind to one another, especially when discussing weaknesses.

Once each team has come up with a good list of strengths and weaknesses for each group member, have each group think about how these will affect group dynamics. What strengths will positively influence group interactions? Which weaknesses have the potential to throw a monkey wrench into group interactions?

Finally, have each team discuss the composition of a “perfect” team. Is it better to have members with similar characteristics or with a wide range of personalities, abilities, and skills? What are the advantages and disadvantages of each type of team?

This discussion will help participants think critically about what makes a good team, how different personalities interact, and how to modify your behavior, group norms, or expectations to match the differing personalities and abilities of others.

This exercise is also described on page 14 of the handout on interpersonal skills ( Interpersonal Skills Exercises ).

World’s Largest Positive Psychology Resource

The Positive Psychology Toolkit© is a groundbreaking practitioner resource containing over 500 science-based exercises , activities, interventions, questionnaires, and assessments created by experts using the latest positive psychology research.

Updated monthly. 100% Science-based.

“The best positive psychology resource out there!” — Emiliya Zhivotovskaya , Flourishing Center CEO

Count the Squares

This game is a fun and engaging way to encourage group interaction and communication.

All you need is this image (or similar image of multiple squares), displayed on a PowerPoint presentation or on the wall or board at the front of the room.

In the first step, give the group a couple of minutes to individually count the number of squares in the figure and write down their answer. They should do this without speaking to others.

Next, have each group member call out the number of squares they counted. Write these down on the board.

Now instruct each participant to find someone to pair up with and count the squares again. They can talk to each other when determining how many squares there are, but no one else.

Have each pair share their number again once they are finished.

Finally, have the participants form groups of four to five members each and instruct them to count the squares one more time. When they have finished, once again take down the numbers each group counted.

At least one group will almost certainly have counted the correct number of squares, which is 40. Have this group walk the rest of the participants through how they got to 40.

Finally, lead the whole group through a discussion of group synergy, and why the counts (likely) kept getting closer and closer to 40 as more people got together to solve the problem.

Participants will learn about the importance of good group communication, practice working in pairs and in groups, and hopefully have fun completing this activity.

You can find more information about this activity here .

Non-Verbal Introduction Game

This game is a fun twist on an old classic – meeting a new person and introducing them to the group.

You should plan this game on the first day of a group therapy , training, or other activity to take advantage of the opportunity to introduce each group member.

Have the group members pair up with a person sitting next to them. Tell them to introduce themselves to each other and include something interesting or unusual about themselves.

Once every pair has been introduced and has found out something interesting about the other person, bring the focus back to the larger group.

Tell the group members that each person must introduce their partner to the group, but with a catch – they cannot use words or props! Each partner must introduce the other partner with actions only.

This game is not only a great icebreaker for introducing people to one another, it’s also a fun way for group members to see both the utility of verbal communication (something you might only recognize when cannot use it!) and the importance of nonverbal communication.

If you have time, you can lead the group in a discussion of nonverbal communication, the cues we pick up on in other peoples’ behavior, and how getting feedback from those you are communicating with is vital.

You can read more about this game here .

Luckily, most of these skills transfer nicely from therapy to family life, interactions with friends, and the workplace. Additionally, there are some exercises and resources developed to improve work-related interpersonal skills directly.

Below you will find a few different ways to improve your communication at work .

Interpersonal Effectiveness Skills Handout

This helpful handout can be reviewed and returned to while you or your client are working on enhancing interpersonal effectiveness.

It outlines the skills needed to communicate effectively with others, separated into three different skill sets:

• Objective Effectiveness
• Relationship Effectiveness
• Self-Respect Effectiveness

For each set, there is a handy acronym to help you remember which skills are included.

For objective effectiveness, the acronym is “DEAR MAN” and the skills are:

• D – Describe: use clear and concrete terms to describe what you want.
• E – Express: let others know how a situation makes you feel by clearly expressing your feelings; don’t expect others to read your mind.
• A – Assert: don’t beat around the bush – say what you need to say.
• R – Reinforce: reward people who respond well, and reinforce why your desired outcome is positive.
• M – Mindful : don’t forget the objective of the interaction; it can be easy to get sidetracked into harmful arguments and lose focus.
• A – Appear: appear confident; consider your posture, tone, eye contact, and body language.
• N – Negotiate: no one can have everything they want out of an interaction all the time; be open to negotiation.

These skills allow those who practice them to effectively and clearly express their needs and desires, and get what they want out of an interaction.

The acronym for relationship effectiveness is “GIVE”:

• G – Gentle: don’t attack, threaten, or express judgment during your interactions; accept the occasional “no” for your requests.
• I – Interested: show interest by listening to the other person without interrupting.
• V – Validate: be outwardly validating to the other person’s thoughts and feelings; acknowledge their feelings, recognize when your requests are demanding, and respect their opinions.
• E – Easy: have an easy attitude; try to smile and act lighthearted.

These skills help people to maintain relationships with others through fostering positive interactions.

Finally, the acronym for self-respect effectiveness is “FAST”:

• F – Fair: be fair; not only to others but also to yourself.
• A – Apologies: don’t apologize unless it’s warranted; don’t apologize for making a request, having an opinion, or disagreeing.
• S – Stick to Values: don’t compromise your values just to be liked or to get what you want; stand up for what you believe in.
• T – Truthful: avoid dishonesty such as exaggeration, acting helpless as a form of manipulation, or outright lying.

The self-respect skill set will help protect you from betraying your own values and beliefs to receive approval or to get what you want.

Knowing what these skills are and how they can be applied is the first step towards enhancing your ability to interact with others. You can find this handout online at this link .

Radical Acceptance Worksheet

This worksheet helps you to identify and understand a situation you are struggling to accept, whether it is at work, in your personal life, an issue with your family, or something else entirely. Whatever difficult thing you are working through, you can use this worksheet to help yourself accept the reality of your situation .

First, the worksheet instructs you to answer the question “What is the problem or situation?”

Next, you will describe the part of this situation that is difficult for you to accept.

Then, you describe the reality of that situation. Think critically here about the reality, don’t just write down what you want the situation to be or what your worst possible interpretation of the situation is.

After describing the reality, think about the causes that led up that reality (hint: you will probably notice that many of them are outside of your control!).

Next, you practice acceptance with the whole self (mind, body, and spirit) and describe how you did this. The worksheet encourages you to try the following:

“Breathe deeply, put your body into an open, accepting posture, and notice and let go of thoughts and feelings that fight the reality. Practice skills for acceptance such as half-smile, awareness exercises, or prayer. Focus on a statement of acceptance, such as “it is what it is” or “everything is as it should be.”

Finally, you rate your distress tolerance about this difficult situation both before and after practicing radical acceptance, on a scale from 0 (you just can’t take it) to 100 (total acceptance of reality).

This worksheet will be available for download soon.

Compass Points Emotional Intelligence Activity

This exercise from the National School Reform Faculty is a fantastic way for a team to improve their emotional intelligence together (Allen, 2015).

To prepare for this exercise, create four signs – North, South, East, and West – and post them on the room walls. Under each point, write out the traits associated with each sign:

• North: Acting o Likes to act, try things, dive in; “Let’s do it!”
• East: Speculating o Likes to look at the big picture and all the possibilities before acting.
• South: Caring o Likes to know that everyone’s feelings have been taken into consideration and that their voices have been heard before acting.
• West: Paying Attention to Detail o Likes to know the who, what, when, where, and why before acting.

To begin the activity, point out the four points to the participants and ask them to read each one and select the one that most accurately captures how they work with others on teams. Have them walk over to that point and remain there for the activity.

Once each participant has chosen a compass point, ask them to recall a personal past team experience that was either very positive or very negative. They shouldn’t share this experience yet, but they should keep it in mind to discuss later.

Next, have the natural groups (formed by compass point selection) designate three positions amongst themselves:

• Recorder – to record the responses of the group
• Timekeeper – to keep the group members on task
• Spokesperson – to share out on behalf of the group when time is up

Once the roles have been assigned, provide 5 to 8 minutes for the teams to respond to the following questions:

• What are the strengths of your style?
• What are the limitations of your style?
• What style do you find most difficult to work with and why?
• What do people from other “directions” or styles need to know about you so you can work together effectively?
• What’s one thing you value about each of the other three styles?

Once each team has discussed these five questions and come up with something to share with the larger group, have them share their responses out. You may hear things like:

• North gets impatient with West’s need for details.
• West gets frustrated by North’s tendency to act before planning.
• South group members crave personal connections and get uncomfortable when team members’ emotional needs aren’t met.
• East group members get bored when West gets mired in details; East gets frustrated when North dives in before agreeing on big goals.

Once participants have shared their responses to the five questions, ask them to recall their very positive or very negative team experience. Tell them to take a moment or two to reflect on whether there was anything they learned from this exercise that helps them to better understand why their positive team experience was positive, or why their negative team experience was negative. This can be a great way to provoke some “a-ha!” moments (Allen, 2015).

Finally, shift to the conclusion of the exercise and give participants a few minutes to share their key takeaways from the exercise. Different groups will highlight different takeaways, but make sure to point these out if no one brings them up:

• This activity increases our awareness of our own and others’ preferences.
• Increased awareness opens the door to empathy.
• Our preferences have their strengths and limitations.
• A diversity of preferences is what makes for better teamwork and results.

You can find more information on this exercise here .

17 Exercises for Positive, Fulfilling Relationships

Empower others with the skills to cultivate fulfilling, rewarding relationships and enhance their social wellbeing with these 17 Positive Relationships Exercises [PDF].

Created by experts. 100% Science-based.

In this piece, we defined interpersonal effectiveness, described its importance in terms of Dialectical Behavioral Therapy , and provided several ways for you or your clients to work on improving interpersonal skills.

I hope I communicated my message clearly in this piece, and I hope you found a valuable takeaway from reading it. If you learned something particularly useful, what was it? Do you have other activities or exercises you use to keep your interpersonal skills sharp? Let us know in the comments!

Thanks for reading, and happy skill-building!

We hope you enjoyed reading this article. Don’t forget to download our three Positive Relationships Exercises for free .

• Allen, G. (2015). A simple exercise to strengthen emotional intelligence in teams. Mind Shift. Retrieved from https://ww2.kqed.org/mindshift/2015/06/22/a-simple-exercise-to-strengthen-emotional-intelligence-in-teams/
• Linehan, M. M. (2015).  DBT skills training manual (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
• Stepp, S. D., Epler, A. J., Jahng, S., & Trull, T. J. (2008). The effect of dialectical behavior therapy skills use on borderline personality disorder features.  Journal of Personality Disorders ,  22 (6), 549-563.
• Vivyan, C. (2015). Interpersonal effectiveness: Getting on with others using DBT. Get Self Help UK. Retrieved from https://www.getselfhelp.co.uk/interpersonal.htm

Share this article:

Article feedback

What our readers think.

Great resource and full of wonderful group activities.

I really enjoy reading and practicing the assignments presented here.

How do you join or sign up?

If you scroll down to the bottom of the page, you’ll see a sign-up form in the bottom right corner to register for our mailing list to receive free information and tools. For a fee, you can also sign up for the Positive Psychology Toolkit for access to over 400 assessments, exercises, and resources.

Hope this helps!

– Nicole | Community Manager

very helpful article

Great article!! Thanks!!

This is a wonderful share by the author. Thanks a ton Ms Ackerman for this great effort.

I am trying to run zoom classes and will attempt the ei interpersonal exercise virtually. Wish me luck!

I wanted to download a free book on Positive Psychology with 3 games/case studies. It would have really helped me during my teaching Management students. Despite filling all entries, it did not work. If you can help me that would be great ! Thanks in anticipation. my mail id is “[email protected]” Thanks, Professor Brijendra Dhup

Hi Prof. Brijendra, Could you please link to the download that is not working? That way we can get our team to take a look. Thank you. – Nicole | Community Manager

Let us know your thoughts Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Related articles

Anxious Attachment Style: What It Is (+ Its Hidden Strengths)

In the realm of human relationships, attachment styles shape our perceptions of intimacy and emotional fulfillment. Anxious attachment style, a type of insecure attachment characterized [...]

Secure Attachment Style: Why It Matters & How to Nurture It

Imagine a relationship where trust flows effortlessly, communication is a breeze, and both partners feel equally cherished, respected, and free. Welcome to the world of [...]

Managing Chronic Loneliness When Aging: 23 Strategies

Chronic loneliness can affect us all at any point in our lifetimes, but it can be a significant challenge for many older adults as they [...]

Read other articles by their category

• Body & Brain (52)
• Coaching & Application (39)
• Compassion (23)
• Counseling (40)
• Emotional Intelligence (21)
• Gratitude (18)
• Grief & Bereavement (18)
• Happiness & SWB (40)
• Meaning & Values (26)
• Meditation (16)
• Mindfulness (40)
• Motivation & Goals (41)
• Optimism & Mindset (29)
• Positive CBT (28)
• Positive Communication (23)
• Positive Education (36)
• Positive Emotions (32)
• Positive Leadership (16)
• Positive Parenting (14)
• Positive Psychology (21)
• Positive Workplace (35)
• Productivity (16)
• Relationships (46)
• Resilience & Coping (38)
• Self Awareness (20)
• Self Esteem (37)
• Strengths & Virtues (29)
• Stress & Burnout Prevention (33)
• Theory & Books (42)
• Therapy Exercises (37)
• Types of Therapy (54)

• Name This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

3 Positive Relationships Exercises Pack

Inspire and Lead With Interpersonal Communication

Winston Churchill. Abraham Lincoln. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Eleanor Roosevelt. What do these people have in common? They are all considered great leaders with extraordinary abilities to communicate on all levels. But, what is the secret to interpersonal communication that not only satisfies its primary purpose but also inspires and creates trust in your leadership abilities?

Interpersonal communication is not about being a great talker. The best leaders know their message must work on two levels. It needs to be understood and touch listeners emotionally.

One of the first steps in learning how to communicate well is learning how to actively listen . This skill enables leaders to assess the climate in the room and adjust their message accordingly. Remember, it is not about you. It’s about who is listening to what you have to say and how it impacts them. Stephen Covey said it best: “Seek first to understand, and then be understood.”

Forbes outlines 10 principles to follow to ensure great interpersonal communication for leaders:

• Build trust – You can’t demand trust. You have to earn it by exhibiting the right behaviors, thoughts, and making good decisions consistently.
• Relationship building –Talk to people and let them know you care about them and their jobs. Learn to understand their behavioral styles.
• Be specific – Be simple and concise when communicating. Respect your time and others.
• Focus on others  – Focus on your audience’s wants, needs, and desires to contribute more than you receive.
• Keep an open mind  – Make it a goal to understand what is on people’s minds using dialogue.
• Listen – Use conversations to understand that knowledge is gained by listening.
• Be empathetic  – Be authentic and exhibit true caring about your business and its workers.
• Read between the lines – Learn to understand what is not being said.
• Know your subject – Address both the “what” and the “how” when you speak.
• Speak to groups as individuals – Make people feel as if you are speaking to them alone.

Furthermore, don’t be afraid to change the message if it’s not working. Use humor, questions, stories, or data to connect with your audience, while building trust and confidence. Often people don’t understand where someone is coming from. Make sure to justify your message with knowledge, reason or empathy, so it is not ignored.

There’s another element to interpersonal communication: body language or nonverbal communication. If someone is nodding with arms tightly crossed, you will get a mixed message. Facial expressions, gestures, and body movements convey 70 to 93 percent of our message . Words constitute only about 7 percent of the communication.

How can you improve your interpersonal  skills ? Allison Kay , a career coach, has these tips:

• Practice active listening skills during all conversations. Always be mindful of what the other person is saying. Paraphrase what they say, and ask questions. When a person knows you are really listening, a better relationship results.
• Show appreciation for co-workers by sincere praise and recognition. Appreciation keeps people motivated and productive.
• Use positive body language by looking your best, practicing welcoming body language techniques , and smiling during interactions with others.
• Promote a positive work environment by keeping in touch with employees, offering assistance when appropriate, and using empathy to understand various situations.

Honing interpersonal skills is essential for any leader, or anyone who aspires to be in a leadership position. However, effective communication is just one facet of great leadership.

Besides interpersonal communication skills, leaders also need to have:

• Facilitating skills to inspire others to accomplish goals.
• Mentoring skills to provide guidance.
• Negotiating skills to know how to create win-win outcomes.
• Influence and motivation skills to understand how to inspire instead of command.
• Decision-making skills to steer the company in the right direction.
• Planning skills to promote goal attainment.
• Integrity skills to build trust at all levels through honesty, fairness and relationship building.
• Team work skills to foster cooperation, collaboration and delegation abilities.
• Stress management skills to develop patience, resilience and to keep a positive attitude.

Practicing these skills can give you a reputation not only as a leader, but as an inspirational leader who communicates and relates effectively to everyone in a positive, personal way. Start by listening, asking questions, and showing a sincere and genuine interest. It works every time!

• About the author
• Latest posts

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Join 80,000+ Fellow HR Professionals. Get expert recruiting and training tips straight to your inbox, and become a better HR manager.

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Interpersonal skills

• Managing yourself
• Authenticity
• Business communication
• Continuous learning

When Should You Take a Problem to HR?

• Octavia Goredema
• August 09, 2023

Manny Ramirez and the Dilemma of the Badly Behaved Superstar

• John Baldoni
• August 04, 2008

Managing a Team with Conflicting Political Views

• Rebecca Knight
• October 22, 2020

How to Avoid Becoming a Person You Hate

• Peter Bregman
• November 15, 2011

How to Stop Good Ideas from Getting Shot Down

• John P. Kotter
• October 27, 2010

How to Deliver Bad News to Your Boss

• Christopher Fenning
• June 27, 2022

Three Pitfalls Startup Founders Must Avoid

• Noam Wasserman
• May 31, 2012

“If Something Feels Off, You Need to Speak Up”

• Daniel McGinn
• From the May–June 2020 Issue

Don't Ask for a Raise - Negotiate It

• December 02, 2021

Managing an Employee Who Wants to Impress You All the Time

• September 13, 2019

Negotiating with Third World Governments

• Louis T. Wells, Jr.
• From the January 1977 Issue

How to Repair a Damaged Professional Relationship

• Dorie Clark
• June 05, 2014

The Problem with Saying "It's No Big Deal"

• James R. Detert
• August 20, 2021

Quality of Work Life—Learning from Tarrytown

• Robert H. Guest
• From the July 1979 Issue

Racial Remarks in the Workplace: Humor or Harassment?

• Terry L. Leap
• Larry R. Smeltzer
• From the November 1984 Issue

Navigating Mental Health at Work: A Reading List

• HBR Editors
• July 29, 2021

How to Hold Your Company Accountable to Its Promise of Racial Justice

• December 11, 2020

Avoid These Traps When Negotiating in a Crisis

• March 24, 2020

The Case of the Machinists’ Mutiny

• W. Bruce Chew
• From the November–December 1990 Issue

Don't Hide When Your Boss Is Mad at You

• Karen Dillon
• June 11, 2014

Teamwork at the Top

• Gregory LeStage
• Sara Nilsson DeHanas
• Pete Gerend
• From the September–October 2024 Issue

Where Data-Driven Decision-Making Can Go Wrong

• Michael Luca
• Amy C. Edmondson

Build Better Teams

• Angus Dawson
• Katy George
• Thomas Keil
• Marianna Zangrillo
• Nitin Nohria
• September 01, 2024

5 Tips for Writing Meaningful Thank-You Notes

• Sally Susman
• August 08, 2024

When Your Boss Suddenly Reduces Your Scope

• Dina Denham Smith
• August 05, 2024

How to Ask for Help Without Making Yourself Look Bad

• Melody Wilding
• August 01, 2024

Overcome Your Fear of Giving Feedback

• Deborah Grayson Riegel
• July 26, 2024

How to Gracefully Decline a Networking Request

• Loren Margolis
• July 19, 2024

Bringing Down the Temperature During Polarizing Times

• Karthik Ramanna

When a Team Member Speaks Up — and It Doesn’t Go Well

• Megan Reitz
• July 12, 2024

When a Coworker Keeps Giving You Unsolicited Advice

• July 11, 2024

What Sets Genius Teams Apart

• Merete Wedell-Wedellsborg
• July 08, 2024

How to Structure Customer Service Calls to Boost Satisfaction and Sales

• Jonah Berger
• Grant Packard
• July 01, 2024

Stop Playing Favorites

• Ginka Toegel
• Jean-Louis Barsoux
• From the July–August 2024 Issue

When Your Employee Feels Angry, Sad, or Dejected

• Christina Bradley
• Lindy Greer
• Jeffrey Sanchez-Burks

When Your New Boss Is a Micromanager

• June 18, 2024

Why Cofounder Partnerships Fail — and How to Make Them Last

• Travis Howell
• Steven Gray
• Esther Sackett
• June 13, 2024

How to Get Your Colleagues On Board with Your Idea

• Jeff Wetzler

5 Traps to Avoid as You Gain Power as a Leader

• Julie Diamond
• Lisa Zigarmi
• Lesli Mones

When Your Team Offloads Their Stress onto You

• June 11, 2024

• H. Irving Grousbeck
• Sara Rosenthal
• October 09, 2013

HBR Guide to Dealing with Conflict

• April 04, 2017

InterSoft of Argentina (B)

• Linda A. Hill
• Stacy Palestrant
• September 10, 1996

HBR's 10 Must Reads on Managing People (with featured article "Leadership That Gets Results," by Daniel Goleman)

• Harvard Business Review
• Daniel Goleman
• Jon R. Katzenbach
• W. Chan Kim
• Renee Mauborgne
• February 07, 2011

The Jenner Situation

• Richard G. Hamermesh
• Andy Whittemore
• Eliot Sherman
• May 27, 2009

Tommy Koh: Background and Major Accomplishments of the Great Negotiator, 2014

• James K. Sebenius
• Laurence A. Green
• February 24, 2014

Tim Keller at Katzenbach Partners LLC (A) (Abridged)

• Boris Groysberg
• Christopher Marquis
• Ayesha Kanji
• James Weber
• March 18, 2015

Next-Level Negotiating (HBR Women at Work Series)

• Deborah M. Kolb
• Suzanne de Janasz
• Deepa Purushothaman
• December 13, 2022

Michael Lester at Lachlan Consulting

• Anthony J. Mayo
• Joshua D. Margolis
• August 03, 2011

3-D Negotiation: Powerful Tools to Change the Game in Your Most Important Deals

• David A. Lax
• September 26, 2006

Harvard Business Review Family Business Handbook Toolkit

• Rob Lachenauer
• October 07, 2021

Navigating Organizational Politics: The Case of Kristen Peters (A)

• Eric Abrahamson
• Todd D. Jick
• James A. Kitts
• October 10, 2013

Errors in Social Judgment: Implications for Negotiation and Conflict Resolution, Part 1

• Robert J. Robinson
• February 06, 1997

Tomorrow.io Goes to Space

• Joshua Lev Krieger
• Abhishek Nagaraj
• James Barnett
• January 19, 2022

Sustaining Customer Centricity at Chateauform'

• Benoit Leleux
• Kurt Verweire
• Marion Debruyne
• August 25, 2014

Martha Rinaldi: Should She Stay or Should She Go?

• Mark Rennella
• August 24, 2011

Ponce de Leon: Confidential Instructions for Elaine Bennett

• Ian I. Larkin
• March 21, 2012

Dealing with Difficult People (HBR Emotional Intelligence Series)

• Tony Schwartz
• Mark Gerzon
• Holly Weeks
• May 08, 2018

BoldFlash: Cross-Functional Challenges in the Mobile Division

• Michael Beer
• Rachel Shelton

Negotiating from the Margins: The Santa Clara Pueblo Seeks Key Ancestral Lands

• Patricia Garcia-Rios
• Pamela Varley
• Kessely Hong
• May 22, 2014

Popular Topics

Partner center.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 06 May 2021

Interpersonal relationships drive successful team science: an exemplary case-based study

• Hannah B. Love   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0011-1328 1 ,
• Jennifer E. Cross   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5582-4192 2 ,
• Bailey Fosdick   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3736-2219 2 ,
• Kevin R. Crooks 2 ,
• Susan VandeWoude 2 &
• Ellen R. Fisher 3  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  8 , Article number:  106 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

10k Accesses

17 Citations

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Complex networks
• Science, technology and society

Scientists are increasingly charged with solving complex societal, health, and environmental problems. These systemic problems require teams of expert scientists to tackle research questions through collaboration, coordination, creation of shared terminology, and complex social and intellectual processes. Despite the essential need for such interdisciplinary interactions, little research has examined the impact of scientific team support measures like training, facilitation, team building, and expertise. The literature is clear that solving complex problems requires more than contributory expertise, expertise required to contribute to a field or discipline. It also requires interactional expertise, socialised knowledge that includes socialisation into the practices of an expert group. These forms of expertise are often tacit and therefore difficult to access, and studies about how they are intertwined are nearly non-existent. Most of the published work in this area utilises archival data analysis, not individual team behaviour and assessment. This study addresses the call of numerous studies to use mixed-methods and social network analysis to investigate scientific team formation and success. This longitudinal case-based study evaluates the following question: How are scientific productivity, advice, and mentoring networks intertwined on a successful interdisciplinary scientific team? This study used applied social network surveys, participant observation, focus groups, interviews, and historical social network data to assess this specific team and assessed processes and practices to train new scientists over a 15-year period. Four major implications arose from our analysis: (1) interactional expertise and contributory expertise are intertwined in the process of scientific discovery; (2) team size and interdisciplinary knowledge effectively and efficiently train early career scientists; (3) integration of teaching/training, research/discovery, and extension/engagement enhances outcomes; and, (4) interdisciplinary scientific progress benefits significantly when interpersonal relationships among scientists from diverse disciplines are formed. This case-based study increases understanding of the development and processes of an exemplary team and provides valuable insights about interactions that enhance scientific expertise to train interdisciplinary scientists.

Similar content being viewed by others

Towards understanding the characteristics of successful and unsuccessful collaborations: a case-based team science study

Science facilitation: navigating the intersection of intellectual and interpersonal expertise in scientific collaboration

A framework for developing team science expertise using a reflective-reflexive design method (R2DM)

Introduction.

Scientists are increasingly charged with solving complex and large-scale societal, health, and environmental challenges (Read et al., 2016 ; Stokols et al., 2008 ). These systemic problems require interdisciplinary teams to tackle research questions through collaboration, coordination, creation of shared terminology, and complex social and intellectual processes (Barge and Shockley-Zalabak, 2008 ; De Montjoye et al., 2014 ; Fiore, 2008 ). Thus, to successfully approach complex research questions, scientific teams must synthesise knowledge from different disciplines, create a shared terminology, and engage members of a diverse research community (Matthews et al., 2019 ; Read et al., 2016 ). Despite significant time, energy, and money spent on collaboration and interdisciplinary projects, little research has examined the impact of scientific team support measures like training, facilitation, team building, and team performance metrics (Falk-Krzesinski et al., 2011 ; Klein et al., 2009 ).

Studies examining the development of scientific teaming skills that result in successful outcomes are sparse (Fiore, 2008 ; Hall et al., 2018 ; Wooten et al., 2014 ). The earliest studies of collaboration in science used bibliometric data to search for predictors of team success such as team diversity, size, geographical proximity, inter-university collaboration, and repeat collaborations (Borner et al., 2010 ; Cummings and Kiesler, 2008 ; Wuchty et al., 2007 ). Building from these studies, current research focuses on team processes. Literature suggests that to successfully frame a scientific problem, a team must also engage emotionally and interact effectively (Boix Mansilla et al., 2016 ) and that scientific collaboration involve consideration of the process, collaborator, human capital, and other factors that define an scientific collaboration (Bozeman et al., 2013 ; Hall et al., 2019 ; Lee and Bozeman, 2005 ). Similarly, Zhang et al. ( 2020 ) used social network analysis to examine how emotional intelligence is transmitted to team outcomes through team processes. Still more research is needed, and Hall et al. ( 2018 ) called for team science studies that use longitudinal designs and mixed-methods to examine project teams as they develop in order to move beyond bibliometric measures of success and to explore the complex, interacting features in real-world teams.

Fiore ( 2008 ) explained that much of what we know about the science of team science (SciTS), training scientists and team learning in productive team interactions, is anecdotal and not the result of systematic investigation (Fiore, 2008 ). Over a decade later there is still a paucity of research on how scientific teams develop the type of expertise they need to create new knowledge and further scientific discovery (Bammer et al., 2020 ). Bammer et al. ( 2020 ) has identified and defined two types of expertise: (1) contributory expertise, expertise required to make a contribution to a field or discipline (Collins and Evans, 2007 ); and (2) interactional expertise, socialised knowledge that includes socialisation into the practices of an expert group (Bammer et al., 2020 ). These forms of expertise are often tacit, codified by “learning-by-doing,” and augmented from project to project; therefore, they are difficult to measure and rarely documented in literature (Bammer et al., 2020 ).

Wooten et al. ( 2014 ) outlined three types of evaluations—developmental, process, and outcome—needed to understand how teams develop and to provide information about their future success (Wooten et al., 2014 ). A developmental evaluation focuses on the continuous process of team development, and a process evaluation focuses on team interactions, meetings, and engagement (Patton, 2011 ). Both development and process evaluations have the common goal of understanding the team’s future success or failures, also known as the team’s outcomes (e.g., grants, publications, and awards) (Patton, 2011 ). The majority of published work on outcome metrics is evaluated by archival data analysis, not individual team behaviour and assessment (Hall et al., 2018 ). Albeit informative, these studies are based upon limited outcome metrics such as publications and represent only a selective sampling of teams that have achieved success. To collect these three types of evaluation data, it is recommended to engage mixed-methods research such as a combination of social network analysis (SNA), participant observation, surveys, and interviews, although these approaches have not been widely employed (Bennett, 2011 ; Borner et al., 2010 ; Fiore, 2008 ; Hall et al., 2018 ; Wooten et al., 2014 ).

A few key studies have provided insight into successful collaboration strategies. Duhigg ( 2016 ) found that successful teams provided psychological safety, had dependable team members, and relied upon clear roles and structures. In addition, successful teams had meaningful goals, and team members felt like they could make an impact through their work on the team (Duhigg, 2016 ). Similarly, Collins ( 2001 ) explained that in business teams, moving from “Good to Great” required more than selecting the right people; the team needed development and training to achieve their goals (Collins, 2001 ). Woolley et al. ( 2010 ) found that it is not collective intelligence that builds the most effective teams, but rather, how teams interact that predicts their success (Woolley et al., 2010 ). The three traits they identified as most associated with team success included even turn-taking, social sensitivity, and proportion female (when women’s representation nears parity with men) (Woolley et al., 2010 ). Finally, Bammer et al. ( 2020 ) recommended creating a knowledge bank to strengthen knowledge about contributary and interactional expertise in scientific literature to solve complex problems. Collectively, these studies argue that the key to collective intelligence is highly reliant on interpersonal relationships to drive team success.

This article reports on a longitudinal case-based study of an exemplary interdisciplinary scientific team that has been successful in typical scientific outputs, including competing for research awards, publishing academic articles, and training and developing scientists. This analysis examines how scientific productivity, advice, and mentoring networks intertwined to promote team success. The study highlights how the team’s processes to train scientists (e.g., developing mentoring and advice networks) have propelled their scientific productivity, fulfilled the University’s land grant mission (i.e., emphasises research/discovery; education/training; and outreach/engagement) and created contributory and interactional expertise on the team. Team dynamics were evaluated by social network surveys, participant observation, focus groups, interviews, and historical social network data over 15 years to develop theory and evaluate complex relationships contributing to team success (Dozier et al., 2014 ; Greenwood, 1993 ).

Case study selection

The [BLIND] Science of team science (SciTS) team consisted of scientists trained in four different disciplines and research administrators. The SciTS team monitored twenty-five interdisciplinary teams at [BLIND] for 5 years from initiation of team formation to identify team dynamics that related to team success. This case is thus presented as part of an ongoing study of the 25 teams, supported by efforts through the [BLINDED] to encourage and enhance collaborative, interdisciplinary research and scholarship. Team outcomes were recorded annually and included extramural awards, publications, presentations, students trained, and training outcomes. An exemplary case-based study is appropriate when the case is unusual, the issues are theoretically important, and there are practical implications (Yin, 2017 ). Further, cases can illustrate examples of expertise and provide guidance to future teams (Bammer et al., 2020 ). An “exemplary team designation” was given to this team by the SciTS evaluators. Metrics used to designate an exemplary team included: team outcomes; highly interdisciplinary research; longevity of the team; fulfilment of all aspects of the land grant mission (research/discovery; education/training; and outreach/engagement); integration of team members; and use of external reviewers.

Social network survey

The exemplary team included Principle Investigators (PIs), postdoctoral researchers (postdocs), graduate students, undergraduate students, and active collaborators external to the University. The entire team was surveyed annually 2015–2019 about the extent and type of collaboration with other team members. In 2015, the team was asked about prior collaborations, and in subsequent years they were asked about additional interactions since joining the team. Possible collaborative activities included research publications, scientific presentations, grant proposals, and serving on student committees. Team members were also asked the types of relationships they had with each team member, including learning, leadership, mentoring, advice, friendship, and having fun (Supplementary 2 ). Data were collected using a voluntary online survey tool (Organisational Network Analysis Surveys). All subjects were identified by name on the social network survey but are not identified in any network diagrams or analyses. SNA software programmes R Studio (R Studio Team, 2020 ) and UCINET (Borgatti et al., 2014 ) were used to analyse data and Visone (Brandes and Wagner, 2011 ) was used to create visualisations. The response rate for the survey was 94% in 2015, 83% in 2016, 95% in 2017, and 81% in 2018. All data collection methods were performed with the informed consent of the participants and followed Institutional Review Board protocol #19-8622H.

Data from the social network survey were combined to create three different network measures: scientific productivity, mentoring, and advice. The scientific productivity network was a combination of four survey measures: research/consulting, grants, publications, and serving on student committees. Scientific productivity represents a form of cognitive or contributory expertise: expertise required to contribute to a field or discipline (Bammer et al., 2020 ; Boix Mansilla et al., 2016 ). The mentoring and advice networks were created from social network survey questions: “who is your mentor?” and “who do you go to for advice?”, respectively. Mentor and advice are tacit forms of interactional expertise: socialised knowledge that includes socialisation into the practices of an expert group (Collins and Evans, 2007 ). Other studies have also found a connection between social characteristics of interdisciplinary work and other factors like productivity, career paths, and a group’s ability to exchange information, interact, and explore together (Boix Mansilla et al., 2016 ).

Social network data were summarised using average degree, sometimes split into indegree and outdegree. Outdegree is a measure of how many team members a given individual reported getting advice, or mentorship, from. Similarly, the indegree of an individual is a measure of how many other team members reported receiving advice, or mentorship, from that person. Average degree is the average number of immediate connections (i.e., indegree plus outdegree) for a person in a network (Giuffre, 2013 ; R. Hanneman and Riddle, 2005 a, 2005 b). To further explore the mentoring and advice networks, we calculated the average degree/outdegree/indegree of postdocs, graduate students, and faculty separately to directly compare demographic groups.

The advice, mentoring, and scientific productivity networks were directly compared using the Pearson correlation between the corresponding network adjacency matrices. We predicted a positive correlation between the advice, mentoring, and scientific productivity matrices. Statistical significance ( p  < 0.05) of correlations was assessed with the network permutation-based method Quadratic Assignment Procedure (QAP) (R. A. Hanneman and Riddle, 2005 a, 2005 b).

Historical social network data

A historical network survey was created to determine how the connections in the network formed, developed, and changed from project-to-project. The historical social network was constructed from three forms of data: interviews with the PIs, a historical narrative written by the PIs describing the team formation process, and team rosters that listed the 81 team members since the inception of the team.

Retrospective team survey

A retrospective team survey was administered at the end of the study to determine what skills team members developed and codified through participating on the team, how membership on the team supported members personally and professionally, and their favourite aspects of the team. The survey was sent to 22 members from the 2018 team roster using Qualtrics (Qualtrics Labs, 2005 ) with an 86% response rate.

Two semi-structured, one-hour interviews were conducted with two PIs in 2018 to learn about the history of the team. The interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed.

Participant observations

Participant observation was conducted from 2015–2019 at four annual three-day, off-campus retreats and 1–2 additional meetings each year. Students, PIs, external collaborators, and families were all invited to attend the retreats and meetings. Field notes about team interactions were recorded immediately after each interaction. The analytic field notes captured how team members interacted across disciplines, tackled scientific problems, and engaged with others at different career stages. Analysis occurred as field notes were written, during observations, and again during data analysis.

An exemplary team

The SciTS Team identified one team from the larger study and designated it as exemplary based on six (tacit and non-tacit) elements. First, the team had outstanding team outcomes. From 2004–2018, notable accomplishments include 33 extramural awards totalling over $5.6 million, including two large federal awards totalling over $4.5 million; 58 peer-reviewed publications with 39 different universities, 13 state agencies, and 11 other organisations; 141 presentations, 21 graduate students and 15 postdocs trained; and receipt of an [BLIND]institution-wide Interdisciplinary Scholarship Team Award. Participants received many individual honours, including one of the PIs being named to the National Academy of Sciences.

Second, this interdisciplinary team combined scientific expertise from many different backgrounds, including ecologists, wildlife biologists, evolutionary biologists, geneticists, veterinarians, and numerous collaborators. Principal Investigators were housed in five main universities: Colorado State University, University of Wyoming, University of Minnesota, University of California-Davis, and University of Tasmania. They also engaged collaborators from national and international universities, federal, state, and local governmental agencies, veterinary centres, and animal shelters. Collectively, team members represented 39 different universities, 11 federal agencies, 13 state agencies, and 11 other organisations listed on their peer-reviewed publications. The team has published globally with co-authors from every continent but Antarctica.

The third element identified was the team’s 15-year history and how they evolved project-to-project (Supplementary Video S1 ). In 2003, a graduate student proposed a collaborative research project between two faculty members who became two of the founding team PIs (Fig. 1 ). The team was formed in 2004 with four members—two faculty PIs, a postdoc, and a Ph.D. student (Fig. 1 ). Initial grant proposals submitted in 2005 and 2006 were not funded; however, in 2007, the team received a large federal research award from the US National Science Foundation (NSF). The team roster increased from four to nine, and a second large expansion occurred after receipt of another NSF award in 2012. By 2014, membership increased to 31 people, and at the end of analysis in 2018, the roster comprised 43 members. Over the course of observation, 81 different individuals, including students, faculty, and collaborators, had participated in research activities supported by the team.

Significant events occurring over 15 years during the development and formation of an exemplary team.

The fourth reason this team was deemed exemplary was because it intertwined the components in the Land Grand mission, including research/discovery, teaching/training, and extension/engagement (Fig. 2 ). The team included undergraduates conducting research and presenting at conferences, graduate students working in multiple labs, and postdocs mentoring all the researchers in the lab. An external advisor said at the end of a retreat, “It’s really cool that students are part of the conversations that are both good/bad/ugly etc. It is not just good. It is not just one-on-one conversations. They hear it all.” A Ph.D. student wrote in the Retrospective Survey about the skills he developed: “I have developed the ability to talk about my research to people outside my field. I have also worked on broadening my understanding of disease ecology as a whole. I have been given the opportunity [to] begin placing my work in the larger framework of ecosystem health.” Faculty also wrote about what they learned, “[I] Learned from leadership of team (especially [blinded], and other PIs) how to develop and conduct research team work well - am using what I am learning to develop new research teams…. how to develop and nurture and respect interpersonal relationships and diversity of opinions. This has been an amazing experience, to be part of a well-functioning team, and to examine why and how that is maintained”

The team grew from 4 members in 2004 to 42 members in 2018. Much of the growth occurred by the addition of students and external collaborators.

Fifth, the team was effective at onboarding and integrating new members. To do so, they used two key strategies (Fig. 3 ). First, 15 of the students held co-advised graduate research positions. This shared model of mentorship provided students with opportunities to work in multiple labs, collaborate with additional team members, and gain a broader academic experience. A Ph.D. student wrote in the Retrospective Survey about the skills she learned from being a member of the team: “Leadership skills, communicating science to those in other fields, scientific writing skills, technical laboratory skills, interpersonal communication skills, data sharing experience, and many others.” The shared model supported the team’s interdisciplinary mission by providing opportunities to train future scientists to communicate, network, and conduct research across disciplines. Second, as team members developed through participation on the team, they assumed more mature scientific roles. Fourteen members of the team changed positions within the team. Many of these transitions were from undergraduate student to Ph.D. student or Ph.D. student to postdoctoral researcher. In 2012, one postdoc became a PI on the grant.

Social network diagrams of team growth and development from 2004–2018. This network reports onboarding and integration of all members, including their primary position when they joined the team. The nodes are sized by average degree (see text). Colours denote different roles on the team.

Finally, the 2018 team retreat included external reviewers. At the end of 2018 team retreat, they were asked if they had any feedback for the team. An external reviewer said: “You can check all of the boxes of a good team.”; “This is a dream team.”; “I am really impressed.”. Another external reviewer said:

The ambitiousness to execute the scope of the project, to have this many PIs, to be able to communicate; the opportunities for new insights; and the opportunities it presents for trainees are rare. There are a lot of people exposed in this. This is a unique experience for someone in training. And it extends to elementary school. I don’t think there are many projects that have this type of scope. I was impressed with just the idea that scientists are taking this across such a great scope and taking on such great questions.

Scientific productivity network

Prior to 2016, the average degree of the scientific productivity network was 8.8 (Fig. 4 ). In 2016, four faculty nodes were in the core of the network, and the periphery nodes included graduate students, postdocs, and external collaborators (Fig. 5 ). The average degree dropped slightly to 6.2 when the team integrated new members and re-formed around new roles and responsibilities on a new grant (Fig. 4 ). In 2017, the average degree peaked at 9.7 (Fig. 4 ) and faculty were still core, but graduate students and postdocs were more central than before (Fig. 5 ). During this time, productivity was at its highest as team members were working together to meet the objectives of a 5-year interdisciplinary NSF award. The network evolved further in 2018; two of the postdoc nodes overlapped with the faculty nodes in the core of the network (Fig. 5 ).

Average degree of social networks diagrams (mentoring, advice, scientific productivity) indicated strong social ties among team members.

Social network measures of productivity (research/consulting, grants, publications, and serving on student committees) were recorded over time. Each node represents a person on the team, and nodes are sized by average degree (see text). Colours denote different roles on the team. The node label indicates the number of years a person has been part of the team.

Mentoring is integral in the collaborative network

Team members reported between an average of 2.4–3.1 mentors (average outdegree) each year on the team (Fig. 6 ). More specifically, graduate students reported 6.0–7.7 mentors, whereas postdocs reported 2.4–3.5 mentors (Table 1 ). Faculty team members reported having an average of 2.2 to 4.3 mentors on the team (Table 1 ), with the highest average outdegree in 2018.

This diagram was created by using participant answers to the social network question, “who is your mentor?” Each circle or node represents a person on the team. The nodes are sized by outdegree to show who reported receiving mentorship. Node size indicates how many mentors an individual reported, and arrows indicate nodes that served as mentors. Colours denote different roles on the team.

The highest indegree for an individual was the lead PI, with an indegree ranging from 13 to 14 each year (i.e., each year, 13–14 team members reported this individual provided mentorship). In response to an interview question about this PIs favourite part of the team, this individual said, “…and of course, I really like the mentorship of the students…They are initially naive, and some people are initially underconfident, but eventually they become fluent in their subject area.” Many students wrote about the mentoring they received from the team. An undergraduate student wrote:

I have improved my communication skills after needing to collaborate with several mentors across different time zones. I’ve also improved willingness to ask questions when I don’t understand a concept. I’ve also learned what concepts I find basic in my field that others outside my discipline are less familiar with.

Faculty also wrote about the mentoring they received, such as, “I continually learn from members in the team and mentorship by the more experienced members has supported my own career progression.”

Advice is integral in the collaborative network

In the 2015–2017 advice network diagrams, the faculty were tightly clustered (Fig. 7 ). In 2018, the cluster separated as postdocs and graduate students joined the centre of the network. On average, team members reported 5.1 to 6.4 people they could go to for advice (Fig. 4 ).

This diagram was created by using participant answers to the social network question, “who do you go to for advice?” Each circle or node represents a person on the team. The nodes are sized by outdegree to show who reported receiving mentorship. Node size indicates how many mentors an individual reported, and arrows indicate nodes that served as mentors. Colours denote different roles on the team.

In a survey, faculty responded to the question, “How has the team supported you personally and professionally?” One faculty member wrote: “Just today I asked three members of the team for professional advice! And got a thoughtful and prompt response from all.” Another team member wrote: “Being a member of the…team has allowed me to develop skills in statistical analysis, scientific writing, and critical thinking. This team has opened my eyes to what is possible to achieve with science and has provided me with opportunities to network and expand my horizons both within the field of study and outside of it.” These quotes further suggest that the mentoring and advice from a large interdisciplinary team were important to train future scientists.

Interpersonal relationships as driver for scientific productivity

The mentoring and advice networks supported and built on the scientific productivity network and vice versa. The correlation between the collaboration, mentoring, and advice networks would not be possible if the networks were not intertwined. In the retrospective survey, a faculty member described how tacit interpersonal relationships were correlated with their scientific productivity:

Being a part of this grant has helped me both personally and professionally by teaching me new skills (disease ecology, team dynamics), developing friendships/mentors from the team, and strengthening my CV and dossier for promotion to early full professorship.

A Ph.D. student also described how the relationships on the large team propelled their research.

Membership on this team has provided me with a lot of mentorship that I would not otherwise receive were I not working on a large multi-disciplinary for my doctoral research. It has also allowed me to network more effectively.

Between 2015 and 2018, the mentor and advice networks were significantly correlated with the scientific productivity network, demonstrating that personal relationships are associated with scientific collaboration (Table 2 ).

To date, the literature examining successful interdisciplinary scientific team skills that result in successful outcomes is sparse (Fiore, 2008 ; Hall et al., 2018 ; Wooten et al., 2014 ). The majority of published work in this area is evaluated by archival data analysis, not individual team behaviour and assessment (Hall et al., 2018 ). This study answers the call of numerous researchers to use mixed-methods and SNA to investigate scientific teams (Bennett, 2011 ; Borner et al., 2010 ; Hall et al., 2018 ; Woolley et al., 2010 ; Wooten et al., 2015 ). Our case-based study also increases understanding of the development and processes of an exemplary team by providing valuable insights about how the interactions that enhance scientific productivity are synergistic with the interactions that train future scientists. There are four major implications of our findings: (1) interactional and contributory expertise are intertwined; (2) team size, tacit knowledge gained from previous project, and interdisciplinary knowledge were used to effectively and efficiently train scientists; (3) the team increased scientific productivity through interpersonal relationships; and (4) the team fulfilled the land grant mission of the University by integrating teaching/training, research/discovery, and extension/engagement into the team’s activities.

Interactive and contributory expertise are intertwined

Previous literature on scientific teams has found that great teams are not built on scientific expertise alone, but on the processes and interactions that build psychological safety, create a shared language, engage members emotionally, and promote effective interactions (Boix Mansilla et al., 2016 ; Hall et al., 2019 ; Senge, 1991 ; Woolley et al., 2010 ; Zhang et al., 2020 ). The team highlighted in this report created a shared language and vision through the mentoring and advice networks that helped fuel the team’s scientific productivity (Hall et al., 2012 ). To solve complex problems requires more than contributory expertise, it also requires interactional expertise (Bammer et al., 2020 ). These forms of expertise are often tacit and internalised through the process of becoming an expert in a field of study (Collins and Evans, 2007 ). Learning-by-doing is augmented from project-to-project, with expertise codified over time (Bammer et al., 2020 ). Further, cognitive, emotional, and interactions are key components of successful collaborations (Boix Mansilla et al., 2016 ; Bozeman et al., 2013 ; Zhang et al., 2020 ). Using social network analysis, our case-based analysis found that the mentoring and advice ties were intertwined with the scientific productivity network.

Training scientists to be experts

The Retrospective Survey asked what personal and professional skills respondents learned from being a member of a team. We hypothesised that many respondents would report tangible skills. Surprisingly, 82% of the open-ended responses were about tacit skills. Students frequently had co-advised graduate research positions, worked in multiple labs, and communicated regularly with practitioners. Moreover, the team translated research to different disciplines within the team, mentored others, and managed interpersonal conflicts. These interactions built expertise because training was not limited to research in a single lab or only in an academic setting. Simple, discrete, and codified knowledge is relatively easy to transfer; however, teams need stronger relationships to gain complex and tacit knowledge, (Attewell, 1992 ; Simonin, 1999 ). On this team, interactions and the ability to practice communication were especially influential for students, junior scientists, and new members. These individuals provided survey responses reporting they learned a wide variety of skills ranging from leadership, scientific and interpersonal communication, networking across disciplines, scientific writing, laboratory techniques, and data sharing standards. Further, respondents noted they had gained experience in developing, nurturing, and respecting interpersonal relationships and diversity of opinions. This was reinforced with participant observation data. In other interdisciplinary groups studied in conjunction with this exemplary team, students were not typically exposed to the inner workings of the team such as leadership meetings. On this team, students were exposed to all conversations, which became an important component of the mentoring and advice structure, serving to train future scientists in all aspects of team integration and leadership development. Belonging to this large interdisciplinary team was effectively training, building, and structuring the team.

Interpersonal relationships increase scientific productivity

Longevity of relationships is an important factor in creating social cohesion, reducing uncertainty, and increasing reliability and reciprocity (Baum et al., 2007 ; Gulati and Gargiulo, 1999 ; Phelps et al., 2012 ). Previous literature has, however, rarely documented the importance of time in building the structure of the network (Phelps et al., 2012 ) and few longitudinal studies of scientific teams exist. Further, it has long been hypothesised that greater interaction among people increases the quality and innovativeness of ideas generated, which may in turn increase productivity (Cimenler et al., 2016 ). Our case-based study found that the mentoring and advice ties existed in a symbiotic relationship with the scientific productivity network where the practices of the team were simultaneously training scientists. This aligns with social network literature that interactions can structure the social network and the network structure influences interactions (Henry, 2009 ; Phelps et al., 2012 ). Second, intentional mentoring programmes have demonstrated a positive relationship between interdisciplinary mentoring and increased research productivity outcomes such as grant funding and publications (Spence et al., 2018 ). Finally, this finding also aligns with literature on the generation of new knowledge (Phelps et al., 2012 ). Knowledge creation has traditionally been framed in terms of individual creativity, but recent studies have placed more emphasis on how the contribution of social dynamics are influential in explaining this process (Boix Mansilla et al., 2016 ; Csikszentmihalyi, 1998 ; Phelps et al., 2012 ; Sawyer, 2003 ; Zhang et al., 2009 ). Thus, while we might think that science drives the team, in this case-based study, the team’s interpersonal relationships were the driver of the team’s scientific productivity.

Fulfilling the land grant mission

As noted above, this exemplary team fulfilled all three goals of the land grant mission. First, the team was training scientists at all levels, from undergraduate students, to graduate students, postdocs, new faculty, and external collaborators, including community partners. In many instances, the training and mentoring was structured in a vertically integrated manner. For example, postdocs were training graduate and undergraduate students, typical of many teams. In addition to the “top-down” scenarios, however, the team also encouraged training that went from the bottom up as well. Effectively, this is a hallmark of successful teams in other sectors such as emergency responders and elite military teams – whomever has the knowledge to drive the issue at hand is the effective “leader” in that mission (Kotler and Wheal, 2008 ). Second, the team excelled in research and discovery, partnering with a diversity of external collaborators to do so. This created a network structure wherein the team clearly utilised the collaborators for mentoring and advice. Organisations with a core-periphery network structure like this team have been reported to be more creative because ties on the periphery, such as external collaborators, can span boundaries and access diverse information (Perry-Smith, 2006 ; Phelps et al., 2012 ). Finally, because the team’s collaborators included community partners and practitioners, they were also influencing policy and practice. This resulted in an overall greater impact for the team’s science and allowed them to tailor their research to best meet the needs of society (Barge and Shockley-Zalabak, 2008 ).

Future research

This study provides a unique contribution to team science literature because it longitudinally studied the development and processes of a successful interdisciplinary team (Wooten et al., 2014 ). Future research on the elements of effective interdisciplinary teaming is required in five key areas. First, identification of best practices that inhibit or support teams is necessary (Fiore, 2008 ; Hall et al., 2018 ; Wooten et al., 2014 ). Second, previous research has found that small teams are best at disrupting science with new ideas and opportunities (Wu et al., 2019 ); however, practices large teams use to create new knowledge have been poorly documented. Third, successful training concepts for graduate students and postdoctoral researchers need additional consideration (Knowlton et al., 2014 ; Ryan et al., 2012 ; Sarraj et al., 2017 ). Fourth, we hypothesise that graduate students act as bridges in teams to connect scientific disciplines and prevent clustering the network. Future research should investigate the role of graduate students in creating knowledge through interdisciplinary teams. Finally, additional research is needed to better recognise and reward scientists who undertake integration and implementation (Bammer et al., 2020 ).

Data availability

The datasets generated during and analysed during the current study are available in the Mountain Scholar repository, https://doi.org/10.25675/10217/214187

Attewell P (1992) Technology diffusion and organizational learning: the case of business computing. Organ Sci 3(1):1–19. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.3.1.1

Article   Google Scholar  

Bammer G, O’Rourke M, O’Connell D, Neuhauser L, Midgley G, Klein JT, … Richardson GP (2020). Expertise in research integration and implementation for tackling complex problems: when is it needed, where can it be found and how can it be strengthened? Palgrave Commun, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0380-0

Barge JK, Shockley-Zalabak P (2008) Engaged scholarship and the creation of useful organizational knowledge. J Appl Commun Res 36(3):251–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909880802172277

Baum JAC, McEvily B, Rowley T (2007) Better with age? Tie longevity and the performance implications of bridging and closure. SSRN (vol. 23). INFORMS. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1032282

Bennett ML (2011) Collaboration and team science: a field guide-team science toolkit. Retrieved February 19, 2019, from https://www.teamsciencetoolkit.cancer.gov/Public/TSResourceTool.aspx?tid=1&rid=267

Boix Mansilla V, Lamont M, Sato K (2016) Shared cognitive–emotional–interactional platforms: markers and conditions for successful interdisciplinary collaborations. Sci Technol Human Value 41(4):571–612. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243915614103

Borgatti SP, Everett MG, Freeman LC (2014) UCINET. Encyclopedia of social network analysis and mining. Springer New York, New York, NY, 10.1007/978-1-4614-6170-8_316

Google Scholar  

Borner K, Contractor N, Falk-Krzesinski HJ, Fiore SM, Hall KL, Keyton J, Uzzi B (2010). A multi-level systems perspective for the science. Sci Transl Med 2: 49

Bozeman B, Fay D, Slade CP (2013, February 28). Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art. J Technol Transf https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-012-9281-8

Brandes U, Wagner D (2011) Analysis and visualization of social networks. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 321–340. 10.1007/978-3-642-18638-7_15

Cimenler O, Reeves KA, Skvoretz J, Oztekin A (2016) A causal analytic model to evaluate the impact of researchers’ individual innovativeness on their collaborative outputs. J Model Manag 11(2):585–611

Collins H, Evans R (2007) Rethinking expertise. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

Book   Google Scholar  

Collins JC (2001) Good to great. HarperBusiness, New York, NY

Csikszentmihalyi M (1998) Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In: Sternberg R (ed) Handbook of creativity (pp. 313–336. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807916.018

Cummings JN, Kiesler S (2008) Who collaborates successfully? prior experience reduces collaboration barriers in distributed interdisciplinary research. Cscw: 2008 Acm conference on computer supported cooperative work, Conference Proceedings, pp. 437–446. https://doi.org/10.1145/1460563.1460633

De Montjoye YA, Stopczynski A, Shmueli E, Pentland A, Lehmann S (2014) The strength of the strongest ties in collaborative problem solving. Sci Rep 4. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep05277

Dozier AM, Martina CA, O’Dell NL, Fogg TT, Lurie SJ, Rubinstein EP, Pearson TA (2014) Identifying emerging research collaborations and networks: method development. Eval Health Prof 37(1):19–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163278713501693

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Duhigg Ch (2016) What google learned from its quest to build the perfect team-The New York Times. Retrieved December 2, 2017, from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/magazine/what-google-learned-from-its-quest-to-build-the-perfect-team.html

Falk-Krzesinski HJ, Contractor N, Fiore SM, Hall KL, Kane C, Keyton J, Trochim W (2011) Mapping a research agenda for the science of team science. Res Eval 20(2):145–158. https://doi.org/10.3152/095820211X12941371876580

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Fiore SM (2008) Interdisciplinarity as teamwork. Small Group Res 39(3):251–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496408317797

Giuffre K (2013) Communities and networks: using social network analysis to rethink urban and community studies, 1st edn. Polity Press, Cambridge MA, 10.1177/0042098015621842

Greenwood RE (1993) The case study approach. Bus Commun Q 56(4):46–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/108056999305600409

Gulati R, Gargiulo M (1999) Where do interorganizational networks come from? Am J Sociol 104(5):1439–1493. https://doi.org/10.1086/210179

Hall KL, Vogel AL, Croyle RT (2019) Strategies for team science success: handbook of evidence-based principles for cross-disciplinary science and practical lessons learned from health researchers. Springer Nature, Switzerland

Hall KL, Vogel AL, Huang GC, Serrano KJ, Rice EL, Tsakraklides SP, Fiore SM (2018) The science of team science: a review of the empirical evidence and research gaps on collaboration in science. Am Psychol 73(4):532–548. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000319

Hall KL, Vogel AL, Stipelman BA, Stokols D, Morgan G, Gehlert S (2012) A four-phase model of transdisciplinary team-based research: goals, team processes, and strategies. Transl Behav Med 2(4):415–430. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13142-012-0167-y

Hanneman RA, Riddle M (2005a) Introduction to social network methods: table of contents. Riverside, CA. Retrieved from http://faculty.ucr.edu/~hanneman/nettext/

Hanneman R, Riddle M (2005b) Introduction to social network methods. Retrieved from http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Hanneman/publication/235737492_Introduction_to_social_network_methods/links/0deec52261e1577e6c000000.pdf

Henry AD (2009). Society for human ecology the challenge of learning for sustainability: a prolegomenon to. source: human ecology review (Vol. 16). Retrieved from https://www-jstor-org.ezproxy2.library.colostate.edu/stable/pdf/24707537.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3Ae9ffb98fef69c055ab05ead486b9ca7e

Klein C, DiazGranados D, Salas E, Le H, Burke CS, Lyons R, Goodwin GF (2009) Does team building work? Small Group Res 40(2):181–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496408328821

Knowlton JL, Halvorsen KE, Handler RM, O’Rourke M (2014) Teaching interdisciplinary sustainability science teamwork skills to graduate students using in-person and web-based interactions. Sustainability (Switzerland) 6(12):9428–9440. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6129428

Kotler S, Wheal J (2008) Stealing fire: how silicon valley, the navy seals, and maverick scientists are revolutionising the way we live and work. Visual Comput (vol. 24). Retrieved from https://qyybjydyd01.storage.googleapis.com/MDA2MjQyOTY1NQ==01.pdf

Lee S, Bozeman B (2005) The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Soc Stud Sci 35(5):673–702. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312705052359

Matthews NE, Cizauskas CA, Layton DS, Stamford L, Shapira P (2019) Collaborating constructively for sustainable biotechnology. Sci Rep 9(1):19033. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-54331-7

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Patton MQ (2011) Developmental evaluation: applying complexity concepts to enhance innovation and use. Guilford Press

Perry-Smith JE (2006) Social yet creative: the role of social relationships in facilitating individual creativity. Acad Manag J 49(1):85–101. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2006.20785503

Phelps C, Heidl R, Wadhwa A, Paris H (2012) Agenda knowledge, networks, and knowledge networks: a review and research. J Manag 38(4):1115–1166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311432640

Qualtrics Labs I (2005). Qualtrics Labs, Inc. Provo, Utah, USA

R Studio Team (2020) RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio, PBC, Boston, MA, http://www.rstudio.com/

Read EK, O’Rourke M, Hong GS, Hanson PC, Winslow LA, Crowley S, Weathers KC (2016) Building the team for team science. Ecosphere 7(3):e01291. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1291

Ryan MM, Yeung RS, Bass M, Kapil M, Slater S, Creedon K (2012) Developing research capacity among graduate students in an interdisciplinary environment. High Educ Res Dev 31(4):557–569. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2011.653956

Sarraj H, Hellmich M, Chao C, Aronson J, Cestone C, Wooten K, Allan, B (2017) Training future team scientists: reflections from translational course. In: Team science training for graduate students and postdocs. Clearwater, FL. Retrieved from www.scienceofteamscience.org

Sawyer RK (2003) Emergence in creativity and development. In: Sawyer RK, John-Steiner V, Moran S., Sternberg RJ, Nakamura J et al. (eds.) Creativity and development. Oxford University Press, Oxford, England, pp. 12–60

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Senge PM (1991) The fifth discipline, the art and practice of the learning organization. Perform Instruct 30(5):37–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.4170300510

Simonin BL (1999) Ambiguity and the process of knowledge transfer in strategic alliances. Strateg Manag J 20(7):595–623. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199907)20:7<595::AID-SMJ47>3.0.CO;2-5

Spence JP, Buddenbaum JL, Bice PJ, Welch JL, Carroll AE (2018) Independent investigator incubator (I3): a comprehensive mentorship program to jumpstart productive research careers for junior faculty. BMC Med Educ 18(1):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1290-3

Stokols D, Misra S, Moser RP, Hall KL, Taylor BK (2008). The ecology of team science. Understanding contextual influences on transdisciplinary collaboration. Am J Prevent Med https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.05.003

Woolley AW, Chabris CF, Pentland A, Hashmi N, Malone TW (2010) Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science 330(6004):686–688. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1193147

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Wooten KC, Calhoun WJ, Bhavnani S, Rose RM, Ameredes B, Brasier AR (2015) Evolution of multidisciplinary translational teams (MTTs): insights for accelerating translational innovations. Clin Transl Sci 8(5):542–552. https://doi.org/10.1111/cts.12266

Wooten KC, Rose RM, Ostir GV, Calhoun WJ, Ameredes BT, Brasier AR (2014) Assessing and evaluating multidisciplinary translational teams: a mixed methods approach. Eval Health Profession 37(1):33–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163278713504433

Wu L, Wang D, Evans JA (2019) Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology. Nature 1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-0941-9

Wuchty S, Jones BF, Uzzi B (2007) The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science 316(5827):1036–1039. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1136099

Yin RK (2017) Case study research and applications: design and methods (6th edn.). Sage Publications

Zhang HH, Ding C, Schutte NS, Li R (2020) How team emotional intelligence connects to task performance: a network approach. Small Group Res 51(4):492–516. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496419889660

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Zhang J, Scardamalia M, Reeve R, Messina R (2009) Designs for collective cognitive responsibility in knowledge-building communities. J Learn Sci 18(1):7–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400802581676

Download references

Acknowledgements

A special thank you to Elizabeth Scodfidio for helping with data, images and more!. The research reported in this publication was supported by Colorado State University’s Office of the Vice President for Research Catalyst for Innovative Partnerships Programme. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the Office of the Vice President for Research. Supported by NIH/NCATS Colorado CTSA Grant Number UL1 TR002535. Contents are the authors’ sole responsibility and do not necessarily represent official NIH views. Funding and support were provided by grants from the National Science Foundation’s Ecology of Infectious Diseases Programme (NSF EF-0723676 and NSF EF-1413925).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Divergent Science LLC, Fort Collins, CO, USA

Hannah B. Love

Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA

Jennifer E. Cross, Bailey Fosdick, Kevin R. Crooks & Susan VandeWoude

University of New Mexico and Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA

Ellen R. Fisher

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

HBL conceptualised the study, developed the methodology, curated the data, analysed the data, conducted the investigation, worked as the project manager, managed the software, validated the data, created visualisations, reviewed and edited the paper; BF conceptualised the study, developed the methodology, curated the data, analysed the data, managed the software, validated the data, supervised all aspects of the research, created visualisations, reviewed and edited the paper; JC conceptualised the study, developed the methodology, acquired funding, supervised data collection, and reviewed and edited the paper; KC and SV wrote the paper, secured funding, reviewed and edited the paper; and ERF conceptualised the study, developed the methodology, supervised all aspects of the research, acquired funding, created the visualisations, reviewed and edited the paper; All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hannah B. Love .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

HBL, BF, JC, and ERF declare no competing interests. KC and SV are members of the exemplary team

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information, supplementary data, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Love, H.B., Cross, J.E., Fosdick, B. et al. Interpersonal relationships drive successful team science: an exemplary case-based study. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 8 , 106 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00789-8

Download citation

Received : 02 January 2021

Accepted : 14 April 2021

Published : 06 May 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00789-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

• Social Sciences

Interpersonal Leadership: How to Lead with Effective Interpersonal Skills

12 Oct 2022

Format: APA

Academic level: Master’s

Paper type: Case Study

Downloads: 0

I agree with group 4 members' conclusions since they successfully presented the correct action plan that Russ Saffold should pursue as a manager and a leader in addressing the outsourcing crises in the study case. The action plan presented is applicable since it begins with culminate the anxiety of the IT team members and ensureing that their duties normally even under the threat of losing their positions (Kollenscher, Popper& Ronen, 2018). The move would afford Russ an enabling environment to negotiate upwards about the future of his IT department members at Tappan Refineries. 

Strengths and Weakness of Group 4 Conclusions 

The conclusions would allow Russ Saffold and the rest of his IT team members to play their roles in solving the crises posed by outsourcing IT employees. The action plan drawn by group 4 members defines the roles of the IT members at Tappan Refineries in addressing the situation quo (Sassenberg & Hamstra, 2017). The conclusions have included the various decisions that Russ Saffold should make as a leader of the IT department to address the outsourcing problem. 

Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.

The conclusions do not address the actual cause of the outsourcing problem. The conclusions are drawn only advise Russ and his department members on how to survive the threat of losing their positions due to outsourcing (Northouse, 2019). The action plan does not identify the cause of Axis Global to initiate an outsourcing program. 

Applicable Insights from My Category of Leadership That Are Relevant to The Case 

I would propose to group 4 the consideration of a more permanent solution in addressing the outsourcing problem in the case study 14.2. The group's conclusions could be better is they address the reason for Axis Global to initiate the outsourcing plan in the IT department (Northouse, 2019). Addressing the root cause of the problem would ensure that no future outsourcing crises would arise. 

Additional Recommendations for The Case 

I would draw my recommendations from a similar scenario depicted in the text provided. In the book "Leadership" on page 385, a similar scenario is depicted in case 14.1 of the book. The case involves an IT team working in a major International Corporation under the leadership of Jim Towne. The IT team majors on teamwork as a tool to secure job positions (Northouse, 2019). The team applies video conferencing in inspecting the performance department members. Such an initiative ensures all the members are properly performing their duties. When all members are effectively working, the risk of losing their positions through outsourcing is averted. I would, therefore, recommend the IT team at Tappan Refineries to devise a system of counter checking the performance of all team members to avoid job loss through outsourcing. 

Additional Insights 

Ideal interpersonal leadership should be characterized by prudence and sobriety in addressing critical changes. Interpersonal leadership should be anchored on providing an enabling working environment through sound decision making. The case study 14.1 provides a perfect platform for showcasing interpersonal leadership qualities (Northouse, 2019). The ability to make critical decisions in the face of turmoil defines the suitability of an interpersonal leader. The remaining questions is ways in which organizations can interpret interpersonal leadership in their operations. 

References 

Kollenscher, E., Popper, M., & Ronen, B. (2018). Value-creating organizational leadership. Journal of Management & Organization, 24(1), 19-39. 

Northouse, P. G. (2019).  Leadership: Theory and practice  (8th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. ISBN: 9781506362311. 

Sassenberg, K., & Hamstra, M. R. W. (2017). The intrapersonal and interpersonal dynamics of self-regulation in the leadership process. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 55, pp. 193-257). Academic Press 

• Leadership: Natural , Rational , and Open Viewpoints
• How to Plan and Execute a Successful Project

Select style:

StudyBounty. (2023, September 15). Interpersonal Leadership: How to Lead with Effective Interpersonal Skills . https://studybounty.com/interpersonal-leadership-how-to-lead-with-effective-interpersonal-skills-case-study

Hire an expert to write you a 100% unique paper aligned to your needs.

Related essays

We post free essay examples for college on a regular basis. Stay in the know!

Critique of Traditional Body of Leadership Literature

Commercial real estate negotiation.

Words: 1058

Katherine Johnson: The Woman Who Helped Put a Man on the Moon

Words: 1440

Stanley McChrystal: The Military Mind

Skills versus traits and the systems perspective, effects of military leadership on military sexual trauma (mst) survivors.

Words: 5358

Running out of time ?

Entrust your assignment to proficient writers and receive TOP-quality paper before the deadline is over.

CASE STUDY: INTERPERSONAL LEADERSHIP SKILLS ASSIGNMENT

Case Study: Interpersonal Leadership Skills Assignment Instructions

In this Case Study, student will apply the Statesmanship model discussed in to a real, specific public administration context. In other words, choose an organization that has a real-life issue or a situation they are currently dealing with. Describe what happened in as much detail as necessary. Next, apply the statesmanship model discussed Module 1: Week 1 to this situation. The overarching idea of statesmanship is the call for moral character. In the context of this assignment, how can this model be applied to the situation at hand?

The student will discuss what type of interpersonal skills are needed to effectively administer statesmanship in that context? Remember to also discuss the importance of the following:

·        Importance of Emotional Intelligence

·        Covenant

Instructions

·        Case Study scenarios must be taken from documented (published) public administration contexts; no hypotheticals are allowed. 

o    Students can focus on one public administration organization or may refer to a particular situation (well-documented by the research) that public administrators faced during an actual event(s).

·        All ideas shared by student should be supported with sound reason and citations from the required readings and presentations, and additional resources.

·        Paper should be 4-5 double-spaced pages of content in length (this does not include title page or reference pages).

o    Paper should be in current APA format.

o    Headings should be included and must conform to the content categories listed (i.e., Statesmanship Model, Interpersonal Skills, Emotional Intelligence, etc.).

·        3-5 additional scholarly sources must be used. They need to be scholarly and provide relevant public administration theory and practices.

·        All required reading and presentations from the assigned reading must be cited.

·        Integrate biblical principles within the analysis of the paper.

·        Unacceptable sources (Wikipedia, dictionaries, encyclopedias, and websites).

·        Acceptable sources (scholarly articles published within the last eight years).

Note: Your assignment will be checked for originality via the Turnitin plagiarism tool.

THIS QUESTION HAS BEEN ANSWERED. Contact us to get a copy or Place an Order to get an original answer

• ☑ Very quick delivery
• ☑ Plagiarism free papers
• ☑ 24/7 support
• ☑ Cost friendly prices
• ☑ Money-back guarantee
• ☑ Unique and original content
• ☑ Total adherence to deadlines
• ☑ Negotiable prices and coupons