The importance of team processes for different team types
 

    In this article, they explain the difference between intellectual teams (e.g. executive team) and physical teams to value transition process as in planning and strategizing. When it came up to monitoring and coordinating, they showed less action with this process. With only two broad types of teams and two types of process competencies, studies provides evidence that these inconsistencies are due to the changing nature of teamwork. Theoretical supposition with different team types shows the level of importance they play.
In order to identify the necessary individual characteristics for a worker hired for a specific job. The job analysis requires identifying specific tasks that reflect the process that is necessary to do an effective performance. When the team can improve and identify performance appraisal systems, training and improve selections between characteristics (i.e.KSAs) and criterion outcomes (i.e. performance of tasks and achievement of goals/objectives: Marks et al, 2001, shows how successful the tasks are being used. If these concerns are not taken into consideration, they will suffer from fundamental differences. Studies shows that the number and diversity of work is relevant to both researchers and practitioners.  
When using a theoretical approach to the difference between intellectual and physical teams, it would be important for validation of different types of teams, depending on the task performed. Organizations often benefit from evaluating team processes for purposes of development and feedback (Brannick et al, 1997). For organizations to grow, it is important for them to focus on selecting, training, and managing team members based on knowledge and skills. The findings do support the difference in the value and the importance of team-based job analysis done. More research is needed to link specific team tasks to accomplish this process.

Honts, C., Prewett, M., Rahael, J., Grossen bacher, .(2012) The importance of team processes for different team types. Team Performance Management, 18(5), 312-327