Chapter 10
partnering process
- closely related to TQM and organizational development - focus on developing trust, improving communication, and team building - identifies positive and resisting forces and then sets in motion the development of action plans to turn these resisting forces into positive forces - uses both value clarification and strategic planning to develop a common set of goals along with a partnering agreement that all parties sign
examples of formal groups
- command groups - committees - task forces - self managing work teams
friendship group
- common interests - more social in nature - poker, sports, bands, coffee
virtuoso team
- compose of only top performers - attempt to put together just people who excel in respective specialties
synergy
- concept that in organizations the whole may be greater than its parts - members possess different perspectives, experiences, and job skills - combination means team is able to solve increasingly complex problems - collective responsibility often leads to higher motivation and commitment
four types or styles of followers
- contributors - collaborators - communicators - challengers
B.W. Tuckman
- developed model of small group development that encompasses four stages of growth (5th stage added) - classic model examines stages in terms of task functions and interpersonal relations which are essential concerns of any group
challenges of virtual team
- different time zones - less frequent verbal communications - lack of a physical presence - lack of informal interactions that lead to social ties among colocated groups
virtual group or team
- dislocated - mostly meets online
diffuse responsibility
- each person only does a part, so no one feels totally responsible - more pronounce the larger the group - may result in groups' assuming positions that individual members would not take if held individually accountable - more liberal risk taking - more mundane, routine, and undesirable group tasks may be neglected by individual members in hope that someone else will complete them
general limitations of groups
- encourage social loafing - diffuse responsibility - less effective than individuals - have difficulty in truly forming
developmental leadership
- especially effective in managing groups - helps groups evolve effectively to achieve highly supportive, open, creative, committed, high performing membership
sharing a common vision
- first step in manager's movement toward developmental leadership - overarching goal - supportive of mission and overall goals of organization - when done right can help make group members excited about where they are going
two broad types of organizational groups
- formal - informal
stages of group development
- forming - storming - norming - performing - adjourning *overlap - groupwill usually remain in stage until key issues are resolved before moving to next stage
social loafing
- free riding - team member who does not pull their weight - behavior reinforced when those who contribute less than their share still receive the same recognition or rewards
major factors contributing to group cohesiveness
- frequency of communication ( as long as it is issue oriented) - agreement on overall goals with the processes and plans to achieve those goals
norms
- general rules of behavior developed by group member to provide some guidance for group activities - may be formal or informal
collaborators
- goal directed, big picture team members - see the ultimate goal as overriding - flexible and open to new ideas - pitch in when and where necessary - share the limelight with other team members - main role is to keep members focused on the team's actual purpose
intervening variables
- group size - member composition and roles - group norms - group interdependence - group cohesiveness - time
other variables affecting group effectiveness
- group size - member composition and roles - norms - group interdependence - group cohesiveness - time
initial conditions of groupthink (model)
- high cohesiveness - insulation of the group from outsiders - lack of methodical procedures for search and appraisal - directive leadership - high stress with a low degree of home for finding a better solution than the one favored by the leader or other influential persons - complex/changing environment - conformity seeking tendency of group
workers with higher self management
- higher productivity gains - initiated the redesign of tasks independently of managerial control
group interdependence
- how much group members need to rely on one another - can range from low to high - reflects degree to which members' actions are contingent upon the actions of other team members - as it increases, so do requirements for coordination and healthy mutual accountability of actions among team members
member roles
- how team members view their area of responsibility - whether it is more like a position or an area of responsibility
Patrick Lencioni
- how to overcome team dysfunction - teams need to trust each other - need to break free of fear of conflict - discuss and commit to decisions - accountability - focus on team goals and objectives not individual ego driven needs
characteristics of groupthink
- illusion of invulnerability - collective rationalization - belief in inherent morality of the group - stereotypes of outgroups - direct pressure on dissenters - self censorship - illusion of unanimity - self appointed "mind guards"
empowerment and change strategies
- include partnering and self managing work teams - differ in form but share common characteristics
groupthink leads to defective decision making in terms of
- incomplete survey of alternatives - incomplete survey of goals - failure to examine risks of preferred choice - poor info search - selective bias in processing info at hand - failure to reappraise alternative - failure to work out contingency pans
empowerment strategies rely on
- individual behavior and performance - AND team behavior and performance - an understanding of group dynamics and team development
"pay for knowledge" plane
- job rotation - continued individual growth - increased expertise - avoid danger of increasing responsibilities and duties at lower levels without changing reward system
forms of partnerin
- joint venture in which new third company is formed by two - less formalized contractual arrangement that recognizes the interdependence of two companies and the need for a proactive approach to project management
contingency approach
- leader evaluates needs and situations for each team and adapts to what each needs
casual variables
- leadership - followership
other concepts that can support group and team development
- listening - supporting - differing
member composition
- makeup and background of each team member - more similar in areas, more alike their views
characteristics of heroic managers
- manager should know at all times what is going on in the department - should have enough technical expertise to supervise subordinates - solve any problem that comes up or at lease solve it before the subordinate - manager primary (or only) person responsible for how department is working
reasons for prominence of network
- many groups are formed and disbanded quickly which does not allow for normal group dynamics to emerge - teams are dislocated across cities and countries and composed of members who are working on multiple projects within many different teams - these teams frequently require collaboration and coordination across different projects and even from teams outside the organization
challenges of virtuoso teams
- may be expert but may not work well with others -
group cohesiveness
- mutual liking and team feeling in a group - size plays major part - larger group, harder to be cohesive
heroic managers
- need for control or influence and want to run things - if dynamic and capable, effective and produce good results in short run especially - critical that they do not over control and stymie the development of subordinates
self managed work team
- operate by member consensus rather than management direction - Europe at the forefront - may or may not be on the formal organization chart
Abilene paradox
- organizations frequently take actions in contradiction to the data they have for dealing with problems and compound their problems rather than solve them - inability to manage agreement caused group to miss preferred solution of remaining at home
communicator
- process oriented, positive people team members - effective listeners and facilitators of any conflict among team members - build consensus, provide feedback, and keep the group relaxed through informal relations - roles fill the social and emotional needs of group or team
major advantages of groups, especially when the become teams, are that they
- provide members with opportunities for need satisfaction - may function more effectively than individuals - are practical in that most people are already familiar with the concept
group membership
- provides opportunity for members to satisfy security needs - promotes opportunity for personal growth and relationship needs - can provide these opportunities for the higher level esteem and self actualization needs
challengers
- questioning, open, and candid team members who are willing to disagree, banter, contest assumptions, and encourage the team to take calculated risks when appropriate - devil's advocate when necessary - push team to move out of its comfort zone
end result variables
- satisfaction - goal accomplishment - productivity
building shared responsibility team
- shared leadership - deal with real issues and actual problem solving
team characteristics
- shared leadership roles - individual and mutual accountability - specific team purpose that the team itself delivers - collective work products - encourages open-ended discussion and active problem solving meetings - measures performance directly by assessing collective workproducts - discusses, decides, and does real work together
team
- small number of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose, performance goals, and approach for which they hold themselves as mutually accountable
groupthink
- sometimes observed in especially cohesive and conforming groups - coined by Yale University professor Irving Janis - refers to tendency of high cohesive groups to lose their critical thinking skills and, out of desire for unanimity, often overlook realistic, meaningful alternatives - result from group pressures for conformity - self censure to maintain good will - suppress new ideas or suggestions that might introduce conflict
Norming
- stage 3 - group cohesion and open lines of communication with info sharing are created - members fell good about one another - give positive feedback - level of trust and cooperation quite high - result of establishing agreed upon goals and finalizing the processes, standards, and rules by which the group will operate - if issues of earlier stages not resolved, group can regress
Adjourning
- stage 5 - stage in which the group breaks up (most likely having accomplished objectives) - members should take notice of who in the group they would like to work with in the future and who they wouldnt - assessment is made of how well group worked together and whether would be able to in future
Forming
- stage one - members first come together and form initial impressions - trying to determine the task of the group and each person's roll expectations - members depend on a leader to provide considerable structure in establishing agenda and guidelines - unsure of what is expected - leader may or may not be assigned which could lengthen time in this stage
Storming
- stage two - conflict and organization - conflicts arise over goals, task behaviors, and leadership roles - relationship behaviors emerge and people who have strong feelings will express them - mistake to suppress conflic - key is to manage it - if successfully gets through this stage, emerges as more organized unit that begins developing norms, rules, and standards
working group characteristics
- strong, clearly focused leader - individual accountability - the groups purpose is the same as the broader organizational mission - individual work products - runs efficient meetings - measures its effectiveness indirectly by its influence on others (such as financial performance of the business) - discusses, decides, and delegates
contributors
- task oriented - dependable team members - provide good technical data, do their homework when requested - push the team to set a high bar for performance - use team resources wisely - help keep the group or team focused on the task
differences between groups and teams
- team places emphasis on the small number of people - teams should be composed of near the minimum number of people required to accomplish the task - emphasis on group is on fact that there are at least two many but could be more - emphasis on team is a limit to number of people who can belong to one functioning team - team members will hold each other mutually accountable - team should be working at a higher level than a group - team is an evolution of a group to a more trusting and functioning level and able to get more done with less people
time
- teams need time together to move through the first few stages of group formation and emerge at a point where the team is functioning at a level higher than the output of individual performers - often avoid meeting in order to get "real work" done
the leader and followers can focus on
- the task - the relationship - whether team members need to rely on one another
common characteristics of partnering and self managing work teams
- there is a need for support from higher management - there is a decentralization of authority - there is empowerment of lower levels in decision making, problem solving, and effective teamwork such that teams closest to the problem come up with the solution to it also emerging work teams that share some of these characteristics
group
- two or more people who communicate and work together regularly in pursuit of one or more common objectives - at least two individuals needed - must work together in order for group to exist - can either be supportive of or work in opposition to the overall organizational goals
partnering
- variation of team building and strategic planning, initially designed to improve efficiency and effectiveness in large construction projects - development of long term relationships between an organization and its buyers and/or suppliers in order to achieve a competitive advantage for both companies
one study found that fact finding group ideal size is
14 members
think of partnering as
a boundary spanning activity between two businesses that share some common objective
groups, whether formal or informal, are
a fact of organizational life
partnering is
a formalized teamwork across at least two companies
teams are sometimes considered as
a major source of competitive advantage in business
what is not always understood is whether cohesion is
a result of the performance or helps to improve team productivity or whether teams that perform well then become cohesive
teams need
all four roles to be successful
group cohesion and team performance
are linked tightly together
ultimately, goal of developmental leadership is to
build a team that can function without the heroic leader being involved in all decisions and actions
needed orientation is one that focuses on
building heroes rather than being a hero
major factors preventing group cohesiveness
can range from dysfunctional conflicts to internal power struggles or even failure to achieve goals
the word team implies
collegiality, collectiveness, and common purpose
decision making, problem solving, or advisory groups affected by Abilene paradox and/or groupthink can benefit from
concepts on decision making
formal groups are
deliberately formed by management and often shown on the organizational chart
informal groups evolve from
employees' need for social interactions, friendship, communication, and status
american firms have improved productivity and quality as well as lowered costs (or at least held constant) through
empowerment and change strategies
informal groups
evolve from the formal organizational structure but are not formed by management or shown in the organization's structure ex: a friendship group that enjoys discussing sports over coffee
informal groups are not part of
formal organization
sometimes an informal group is the same as a
formal work team
developing a team is harder work than
forming a team but can result in a greater payoff
leaders and leadership matter to
group effectiveness
when groups are viewed as a network
groups change from traditional models to one in which many of the roles and responsibilities of group members are based upon connections, collaboration, and a targeted expertise - leader and follower roles and responsibilities shift away from hierarchical structure to one in which natural leaders may emerge, decision making is decentralized, and relationships are cultivated
leaders who focus on task and leaders who focus on the relational aspects of subordinates
had higher perceived team effectiveness and higher productivity
the word group
has a more ambiguous meaning that is open to interpretation
top leadership of an organization
has significant influence on ethical normative values of groups as well as individuals
for tasks that are relatively simple and require maximum cooperation
homogenous groups are superior
network teams
idea that groups need to be viewed as part of a network working within an organization
when a company, organization, or team is young or small
impact of leader on the team can be quite large
as team grows and accomplishes more
influence will naturally become less pronounced
sometimes informal group members give allegiance to
informal leader than formal manager
the concept of partnering
is used in maintaining cooperative relationships and achieving win-win outcomes for the partners
if a group becomes too large
it is difficult to interact with all members which leads to the evolution of smaller groups
informal interest group
may come together to seek increased fringe benefits or attempt to unionize a nonunion operation
informal groups provide valuable service by helping members
meet affiliation and social needs
both managers and subordinates can be
members of several different formal groups within the same organization
for complex tasks, groups composed of
members with widely differing backgrounds would be superior because more ideas that are different would be generated and increase probability of creativity
trend in self managed work teams
paying employees as they add to their knowledge and learn multiple skills
business ethics
similar to norms in that they provide guides to individual behavior
most important ingredient for creating a climate for effective teamwork and achieving successful empowerment strategies
support and philosophy of top management
leaders mattered more when
team members were more interdependent and needed each other
the more cohesive the group
the better the team performance
there is a cause and effect relationship between
the causal variables (leadership and followership, the intervening variables (group characteristics), and the end result variables
empowerment strategies often achieve more because
the groups that are formed become teams
when team members practice self management strategies
the teams they are assigned to attain higher productivity and are more cohesive
what makes groups informal
they do not show up on any organization chart or document
most partnership end
within 5 years in either success or failure
examples of empowerment strategies
- TQM - partnering - self managing work teams
advantages of virtual team
- ability to tap into more diverse and talented group - better cost advantages
five dysfunctions of a team
- absence of trust: invulnerability - fear of conflict: artificial harmony - lack of commitment: ambiguity - avoidance of accountability: low standards - inattention to results: status and ego
group size
- actual number of people involved - has impact on group's work effectiveness - social loafing problems increase with group size - larger group has the possibility of greater diversity
3 interrelated components of Bradford and Cohen's model of the manager as a developer
- building a shared responsibility team - continuously developing individual skills - determining and building common department vision
Bradford and Cohen
- heroic management
Performing
- stage 4 - group shows how efficiently and effectively it can operate to achieve goals - info exchange has developed to point of joint problem solving - may be shared leadership - group development is a continuing process
problem solving teams usually have an ideal size of
5 to 7 members
partnering is a means of
accelerating group and team development
norms, standards, and action plans in an effective team
are highly interrelated and can be supportive of the organization's goals
command groups
formal groups composed of subordinates who report to a designated manager
no one leadership approach
is effective in all situations
if a group is not well led
negative norms will result, working against goals
important factor in determining groups ideal size
purpose
in some cases informal groups combine to help meet
security needs that are not being met by the formal organization
when companies move to a team approach, particularly one with self managed work teams
they need to ensure that their reward system reinforces the team approach
formal groups
those prescribed and/or established by the organization
sometimes groups must be larger, but can use
- ad hoc task force of 5 to 7 members to study an issue and report back - action plan is usually accepted with only minor mods
developing individual skill
- best opportunity for development is an effective team that deals with real issues - encourage and seek out opportunities for followers to attend various developmental courses
virtuoso teams differ from traditional teams among most dimensions
- bring in members only for top skills - celebrate individual egos of team members - force members into close proximity - focus on creativity over efficiency
Cianbro
- cares for and respects employees - construction company - successfully practices empowerment strategies - climate of ethics and teamwork
