Team Science

* Pages marked with an asterisk are under development and coming soon.

IMO / IMOI

The IMO and the IMOI models replaced the original I-P-O model of teams. These models replaced the P (process) with M (mediators). Some of the processes identified in the research for the I-P-O model have been identified as not being processes. Mathieu, Maynard, Rapp, and Gilson (2008) identified that “IPO models have been criticized for failing to distinguish multiple types of ‘processes’ and outcomes” (p. 413). Ilgen, Hollenbeck, Johnson, and Jundt (2005) documented that “many constructs presented by researchers trying to invoke the I-P-O model as process are not really process at all, but emergent cognitive or affective states” (p. 520).

The IMO model stands for Input, Mediator, and Output, with process being replaced with mediator. The IMOI model incorporates an additional I (Input) at the end to indicate that the IMOI process is continuous with feedback mechanisms. One additional improvement to the model is that the IMOI model is not necessarily linear or additive — the IMOI process could be cyclical in nature and nonlinear.

IMOI cyclical model diagram Input-Mediator-Output (IMO) model diagram

The outline provided below comes from current research. This outline for the IMOI model primarily comes from Mathieu et al. (2008). Mathieu et al. (2008) defined Inputs as “antecedent factors that enable and constrain members’ interaction” (p. 412). Team member interactions aimed at task achievement are referred to as processes, and outputs are those end products that are desirable by one or more customers (internal or external).

Overview

INPUTS

MEDIATORS

OUTPUTS

Inputs

Mathieu et al. (2008) defined inputs as “antecedent factors that enable and constrain members’ interactions” (p. 412). In the IMOI model, inputs are categorized into three categories: team composition inputs, team-level inputs, and organizational/contextual inputs.

Mediators

Outputs

See Also

References

Chen, J. & Wang, L. (2007). Locus of control and the three components of commitment to change. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(3), 503–512.

Cohen, S. G. & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23, 239–290.

Ilgen, D. R., Hollenbeck, J. R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D. (2005). Teams in organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 517–543. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070250

Mathieu, J., Maynard, M. T., Rapp, T., & Gilson, L. (2008). Team effectiveness 1997–2007: A review of recent advancements and a glimpse into the future. Journal of Management, 34, 410–476. doi: 10.1177/0149206308316061

Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80(1, Whole No. 609).

© 2026 science-teams.com — A comprehensive resource for team research in organizational settings