Chapter 13: Teams in Organizations
CHAPTER 13: Teams in Organizations
Module 13.1: Types of Teams
Groups and Teams: Definitions
Group vs Team Distinction
Historical distinction: Groups include members who may work together or share resources, while teams involve interdependent tasks among members.
Research on groups often conducted by social psychologists in lab settings, limiting generalizability to workplace teams.
Teams, studied by I-O psychologists and management researchers, operate in organizational settings with more complexity.
Current view: Groups and teams have similarities; the terms "group" and "team" are used interchangeably.
Definition of Team: An interdependent collection of individuals who work together toward a common goal and share responsibility for specific outcomes (Sundstrom, DeMeuse, & Futrell, 1990).
Examples: Sports teams, assembly teams, emergency response teams, etc.
Types of Teams
Introduction to Team Types
Various team types serve different functions. Understanding them helps in managing team size, structure, and support requirements (Mathieu et al., 2008).
Quality Circles
Definition: Groups of 6 to 12 employees meeting regularly to identify problems and generate solutions for productivity and quality (Guzzo & Dickson, 1996).
Origins: Based on participative management techniques from Japan.
Structure: Often initiated by management; voluntary participation encouraged but not mandatory.
Evidence: Mixed outcomes; some initial gains, but sustainability issues ("honeymoon effect"), leading to decline in adoption in U.S. organizations (Cannon-Bowers et al., 1992; Gibson & Tesone, 2001).
Current Use: While popularity has waned in the U.S., quality circles remain prevalent in Japan, exemplified by Honda's successful implementation.
Quality Circle at Honda: A unique blend of production and development roles, focusing on continuous improvement and team culture.
Project Teams
Definition: Teams assembled to solve specific problems or complete projects, disbanded upon completion (Guzzo & Dickson, 1996).
Can include cross-functional team members (e.g., sales, engineering).
Characteristics: Blend of autonomy and dependence on client feedback; tight deadlines; uncertainty in task accomplishment (Hackman, 1990).
Challenges: Member alignment between functional responsibilities and project roles, matrix organizational structures becoming common.
Production Teams
Definition: Teams comprised of frontline employees producing tangible outputs (e.g., manufacturing, assembly line).
Include maintenance and production crews.
Performance Measurement: Output is easily quantifiable, allowing straightforward evaluation of performance and feedback.
Autonomous Work Groups: Specific production teams with control over various tasks (e.g., scheduling, hiring) (Ivancevich & Matteson, 2002).
Developed in Europe for sociotechnical work designs, promoting self-management and skill development.
Virtual Teams
Definition: Teams functioning primarily via technology rather than in-person meetings (Cohen & Alonso, 2013).
Can be geographically dispersed; technology aids collaboration (videoconferencing, messaging).
Advantages: Cost-effective for travel, access to a broader talent pool.
Challenges: Communication barriers (language, cultural), generally lack face to face interaction can hinder trust building and coordination.
Example: Royal Dutch Shell's virtual team software enhances project management across borders.
Module 13.2: Input-Process-Output Model of Team Effectiveness
Overview
Input-process-output model aids in understanding team performance and how to enhance it (Cohen & Bailey, 1997; Guzzo & Shea, 1992).
Inputs: Organizational context, team task, and composition.
Processes: Include norms, communication, coordination, cohesiveness, decision-making. (LePine et al., 2008).
Outputs: Productivity, innovativeness, member well-being.
Note: Outputs provide feedback that can alter future inputs and processes (Mathieu et al., 2014).
Team Inputs
Organizational Context
Includes rewards, training systems, managerial support, and technological resources influencing team effectiveness.
Stronger contextual supports lead to more effective team interactions and performance (Gladstein, 1984).
Team Task
The nature of the task is critical to performance. Tasks requiring a variety of skills and meaning can motivate team members (Hackman & Oldham, 1980).
More complex tasks lead to increased team productivity and satisfaction (Campion et al., 1996).
Team Composition
Refers to the characteristics of team members including skills, abilities, experiences, and personalities. (Guzzo & Dickson, 1996).
Studies have linked cognitive and personality traits to improved team performance (Barrick et al., 1998; Neuman & Wright, 1999).
Team Processes
Crucial to effective teamwork, focusing on norms, communication, coordination, cohesiveness, and decision-making (LePine et al., 2008).
Norms: Team established rules influencing member behaviors (Feldman, 1984).
Communication: Information exchange critical for collective tasks. Communication barriers can lead to errors especially in high-dependence teams.
Coordination: Ensures team members align efforts and tasks effectively. Process losses can occur when coordination fails (social loafing).
Cohesion: Affects commitment to goals and performance, stronger among effective teams. Cohesive teams can experience inter-team conflict, e.g., during emergencies (Langewiesche, 2002).
Decision-Making: Ideal processes include problem definition, information gathering, and collaborative evaluation of alternatives. Groupthink can jeopardize decision quality, as seen in cases like the Challenger disaster (Janis, 1982).
Team Outputs
Output areas include performance, innovation, and member wellbeing (Brodbeck, 1996).
Team performance can be evaluated against quantifiable outcomes (sales, production).
Important note: Teams can underperform compared to strong individual contributors in some cognitive tasks. Innovation propensity is increased through member diversity and supportive organizational culture.
Module 13.3: Special Issues in Teams
Team Appraisal and Feedback
As teams play increasing roles in achieving organizational goals, evaluating team performance is vital (Hedge & Borman, 1995).
Different appraisal systems should assess team outcomes and help teams identify areas for improvement (Scott & Einstein, 2001).
Methods: Use direct measures, quality assessments, and 360-degree feedback to comprehensively evaluate team performance.
Challenges: Diverse team roles make consistent evaluation difficult.
Team Roles
Definition: Emphasizes the importance of balancing roles within a team for optimal performance (Belbin's team-role theory).
Research: Studies show that balanced teams perform better and can employ personality frameworks to categorize roles effectively.
Team Development
Refers to the evolution of teams through stages (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977), although processes may vary by context.
Developmental models describe phases leading to effective collaboration, but organizations may prioritize efficiency over traditional stages.
Team Training
Essential for effective teamwork and can take various forms (cross-training, leader training, coordinated training).
Each approach aims to improve collaboration and enhance team performance under specific conditions.
Cultural Issues in Teams
Cultural dimensions influence how teams operate (Hofstede's dimensions).
Understanding cultural complexity is pivotal for effective teamwork in diverse environments, as individualistic and collectivistic dynamics play significant roles in team performance.
Key Terms
Quality Circle, Project Team, Production Team, Virtual Team, Input-process-output model, Team Composition, Shared Mental Model, Demographic Diversity, Psychological Diversity, Groupthink, Social Loafing.
--
Each module expands on these key themes to prepare future leaders and teams for maintaining effectiveness in diverse organizational environments.