Team performance
Also: Team risk
Isolation & ConfinementDistance from EarthBehavioral Health & SleepSelection & CertificationPreflight & TrainingIn-flightLEO long-durationMars transit & surfaceTerrestrial analogPublicClinicianResearcher
- Conflict and coordination problems are common in flight and in analogs. In one review, every team had at least one conflict by 40% of the mission or 90 days. ◆◆◆◇ Moderate · F A
- NASA rates team risk for a long Mars mission at the top of its scale (5×5) and requiring mitigation. ◆◆◆◆ High · E
Proposed certainty (◆ High → ◇ Very low) and evidence-type tags: F flight · A analog · M model/animal · C computational · E expert/operational/standards. AI-proposed, pending reviewer confirmation. How to read the grades.
NASA risk title (verbatim)
Risk of In-Mission Performance and Behavioral Health Decrements Due to Inadequate Cooperation, Coordination, Communication, and Psychosocial Adaptation within a Team
NASA short title: Team · HRP element: Human Factors and Behavioral Performance (HFBP) · Status: Active [current research ongoing] [1]
What it is
This risk is about whether a crew can cooperate, coordinate, communicate and adapt as a team well enough to stay healthy and get the job done [1]. NASA tracks it for in-mission performance only and does not rate long-term health under it [1].
Current evidence
- Occasional conflict has occurred within ISS crews before and during flight, including between partner-agency subgroups [1].
- In off-nominal events that required “exceptional” teamwork, crews have sometimes responded incorrectly [1].
- Communication delays and poor coordination between crew and Mission Control have had significant effects on performance, stress and cohesion [1].
- Crew selection assesses individual teamwork skills, but crew composition is not data-driven. Adding commercial and private astronauts adds risk that has not been quantified [1].
- A systematic review of 72 analog sources found that every team reported at least one conflict by 40% of the mission or 90 days [4].
- In Mars-500, crew members reported conflicts with mission control about five times more often than conflicts within the crew [5].
NASA’s risk posture
NASA scores each risk for each design reference mission (DRM) as likelihood × consequence (LxC). Both run from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest) on the HSRB’s 5×5 matrix [1][3]. Each score comes with a disposition, such as “Accepted”, “Requires Characterization” or “Requires Mitigation”. These ratings were last approved by NASA’s Human System Risk Board (HSRB) in 4/2024 [1].
| Mission | Duration | In-mission (operations) | Long-term health |
|---|---|---|---|
| LEO | Short (under 30 d) | 4x2 · Accepted with Monitoring | Not applicable |
| LEO | Long (30 d–1 yr) | 4x2 · Accepted with Monitoring | Not applicable |
| Lunar orbit | Short | 4x2 · Requires Mitigation | Not applicable |
| Lunar orbit | Long | 5x3 · Requires Mitigation | Not applicable |
| Lunar orbit + surface | Short | 5x3 · Accepted with Monitoring | Not applicable |
| Lunar orbit + surface | Long | 5x3 · Requires Mitigation | Not applicable |
| Mars preparatory | Under 1 yr | 5x4 · Requires Mitigation | Not applicable |
| Mars planetary | 730–1,224 d | 5x5 · Requires Mitigation | Not applicable |
NASA rates this risk for operations only. Long-term health is listed as “Not Applicable” [1].
Copied from the Human Research Roadmap on 2026-10-14. Ratings change. Check the live record before citing.
Open knowledge gaps
NASA lists 6 knowledge gaps for this risk, 6 of them open as of 2026-10-14 [1]. Each gap ID links to its page on the Human Research Roadmap (HRR).
Show NASA’s gap list (verbatim)
| Gap | NASA gap statement | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Team-101 | We need to understand the key threats, indicators, and evolution of the team throughout its life cycle for shifting autonomy and interface with automation in increasingly earth independent, long duration exploration missions. | Open |
| Team-102 | We need to identify a set of quantifiable and validated measures, based on 5-12 key indicators of mission-relevant and identified spaceflight acceptable thresholds (or ranges) of team function, to effectively monitor and measure team health and performance of integrated NASA and commercial/private crews, during shifting autonomy in increasingly earth independent, long duration exploration missions. | Open |
| Team-103 | We need to identify psychological and psychosocial factors, measures, and combinations thereof for use in selecting individuals and composing highly effective crews most likely to maintain team function during shifting autonomy in increasingly earth independent, long duration exploration missions. | Open |
| Team-104 | We need to identify validated ground-based and in-flight training methods for both preparatory and sustaining team function during shifting autonomy in increasingly earth independent, long duration exploration missions. | Open |
| Team-105 | We need to identify a set of countermeasures to support team function and enable multiple distributed teams to manage shifting levels of autonomy for all phases of increasingly earth independent, long duration exploration missions. | Open |
| Team-106 | We need to identify how multiple risks (e.g., BMed, EIHSO, Sleep) may increase or buffer Team risk, with potential for integrated, synergistic impact on Team performance and functioning during shifting levels of autonomy for all phases of increasingly earth independent, long duration exploration missions. | Open |
See also Open questions.
Active countermeasure research
- Threats and measures. NASA is identifying the most serious threats to teamwork and a short set of validated measures of team health [1].
- Selection and composition. Research covers psychological factors for choosing individuals and composing crews [1].
- Training and support. This includes ground and in-flight team training and countermeasures that help distributed teams handle increasing autonomy [1].
Project-level detail, including status, investigators and results, is in the NASA Task Book and on each HRR gap page.
Clinical articles
For practical, clinic-facing guidance, see:
Evidence profile
- Overall certainty
- ◆◆◇◇ Low (proposed)
- Evidence types
- F · Flight dataA · Terrestrial analogE · Expert / operational / standards
- Literature through
- 2026-10-14
- NASA source
- Human Research Roadmap risk page (last published 05/13/25; read 2026-10-14)
Requirements referenced 2
| Requirement | Title | Plain-language meaning |
|---|---|---|
| [V1 3001] | Selection and Recertification | Psychological as well as medical selection and annual recertification. |
| [V1 6004] | Behavioral Health and Performance Provisions | Psychological/behavioral health support programs for crew and families. |
IDs as published in NASA-STD-3001 Vol. 1 Rev C (2023-09-15) and NASA-STD-3001 Vol. 2 Rev F (2026-07-14). NASA-STD-3001 binds NASA programs; it is not a regulation for commercial flights. Paraphrased. Standards quick reference.
References 5
- NASA Human Research Roadmap. Risk record: “Risk of In-Mission Performance and Behavioral Health Decrements Due to Inadequate Cooperation, Coordination, Communication, and Psychosocial Adaptation within a Team”. Accessed 2026-10-14. humanresearchroadmap.nasa.gov/Risks/?i=101 NASA E
- NASA Human Research Program. Evidence report for the Team risk (approved June 10, 2022). humanresearchroadmap.nasa.gov/evidence/reports/Team%202022%2… NASA E
- Antonsen EL, et al. Updates to the NASA human system risk management process for space exploration. NPJ Microgravity. 2023;9:72. doi:10.1038/s41526-023-00305-z PMID:37679359 Peer-reviewed E
- Bell ST, Brown SG, Mitchell T. What we know about team dynamics for long-distance space missions: a systematic review of analog research. Front Psychol. 2019;10:811. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00811 PMID:31156490 Peer-reviewed A
- Basner M, et al. Psychological and behavioral changes during confinement in a 520-day simulated interplanetary mission to Mars. PLoS One. 2014;9(3):e93298. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0093298 PMID:24675720 Peer-reviewed A
Machine-checked on 2026-10-14: each URL resolved, each DOI's title/journal/year matched via Crossref, and claims were checked against the source text (abstract or full NASA page). Human verification against full text is still required before review. NASA documents are U.S. Government works (public domain) and are summarized with attribution; journal articles are summarized, not reproduced.
Article info
- Authors
- Pending (AI-assisted draft)
- Reviewer
- Pending review
- Last reviewed
- Pending review
- Literature through
- 2026-10-14
- AI-assisted
- Yes (disclosed)
- COI
- Pending
- License
- CC BY-SA 4.0
- Use
- Educational only · Disclaimer
- Cite this version
- Pending first edition