Team attempts have ever been important to the completion of major undertakings. Take for illustration the building of a edifice. A squad of workers would of course be able to make the undertaking much faster and with better consequences than a individual individual. In a similar manner, an organisation is built up with teamwork and cooperation amongst employees and their directors.
A squad has been defined by Katzenbach and Smith ( 1993, p. 45, cited in Moorhead & A ; Griffin, 2004, p. 314 ) as “ a little figure of people with complementary accomplishments who are committed to a common intent, common public presentation ends and an attack for which they hold themselves reciprocally accountable. ” Therefore a figure of squads working within an organisation, by virtuousness of their holding ends that are similar to the organisations ‘ , can assist it to make the pinnacle of success. Naturally so, direction these yearss is looking more and more towards squads to acquire work done in the administration as this is believed to present more than the single attempt. ( Fincham & A ; Rhodes, 2005 ) .
Since squads consist of a little figure of individuals, the inquiry that comes to mind is ‘what truly causes these persons to come together? ‘
This essay attempts to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of working in squads by first briefly depicting squads, the grounds for their formation, their constructions and norms. Since squad attempts can besides be damaging to the success of the administration, the essay will besides seek to analyze ways in which the disadvantages may be mitigated or avoided.
Teams are formed for Functional intents, in order to acquire a certain organizational undertaking finished. Some squads are formed by administrations merely for bettering on facets such as quality or productiveness. ( Moorhead & A ; Griffin, 2004 ) . They may besides be formed for Psychological intents which involve the employee fulfilling certain demands. ( Moorhead & A ; Griffin, 2004 ) . The psychological facet has a peculiarly profound impact on the person as it helps the individual happen out how he or she relates to others ( Hogg & A ; Abrams, 1988 ) .
Administrations rely to a great extent on squads in order to work out different jobs. Hence, different types of squads can be said to be in the administration ( Moorhead & A ; Griffin, 2004 ) . The first type is Quality Circles, which are little groups and run into on a regular basis in order to discourse certain workplace jobs such as quality issues. The 2nd type is Work Teams, which really perform the day-to-day work unlike the Quality Circles, which are simply consultative in nature. The 3rd type is Problem Solving Teams, which exist on a impermanent footing in order to assail certain jobs within the administration. The 4th type of squad is known as the Management Team which is comparatively lasting and consists of directors. Its chief undertaking is to train other squads into going self-managing and organizing work amongst mutualist work squads. Finally, there are the Product Development Teams, which are a combination of work and job work outing squads. These are in order to plan new merchandises and/or services for clients. They are besides impermanent in nature, since one time the undertaking is completed, they are disbanded.
The squad has a construction amongst its members which reflects the squad individuality. ( Fincham & A ; Rhodes, 2005 ) . This includes, foremost and first, a squad leader, frequently seen as the most competent member with respect to the undertaking to be accomplished and as person who is able to take bid of the group. At the following degree are the squad members themselves who have agreed to come together in order to accomplish group ends. Deviates comprise the 3rd degree of the squad construction and are members who have personal ends that do non co-occur with the overall squad ends. The last degree is that of isolates who are perverts, isolated from the squad ( possibly psychologically and even physically ) because of their failure to adhere towards the common group ends ( Fincham & A ; Rhodes, 2005 ) .
Since squads are a instead close knit group, certain norms dictate the member ‘s behavior whilst he or she works within a group. A norm can be defined as “ a criterion against which the rightness of behavior is judged. ” ( Moorhead & A ; Griffin, 2004, p. 294 ) . Norms indicate the expected behavior from the different component members and serve to modulate the behavior amongst group members and do their behavior more predictable.
Despite their complexness vis-a-vis their construction and behavior, it is possible for us to name out some of the advantages of utilizing squads ( Moorhead & A ; Griffin, 2004 ) . The first of these advantages is enhanced public presentation which can be displayed in a assortment of signifiers runing from productiveness and quality ( Scholtes, 1988 ) to client service. This merely means that working in squads will assist to cut down wastage of attempt, mistakes and will besides assist to increase end product as a ratio of employee input. For illustration, General Electric ‘s North Carolina works was able to accomplish a 20 per centum addition in productiveness after a squad system was implemented at that place ( Orsburn, Moran, Musselwhite & A ; Zenger, [ n.d ] , cited in Moorhead & A ; Griffin, 2004, p. 318 ) .
The 2nd advantage of teamwork relates to employee benefits ( Moorhead & A ; Griffin, 2004 ) . Employees frequently look for ways to develop on the occupation, manage and do their ain determinations and get a feeling of ego worth and self fulfilment in an administration. Teams are particularly good at assisting employees to accomplish these since it does off with the trust on the traditional hierarchal system and provides the employees with the freedom needed for self growing. For illustration Milwaukee Mutual was able to cut down the figure of employees who required aid by 40 % owing to the application of a squad system ( Manz & A ; Sims, 1993, cited in Moorhead & A ; Griffin, 2004, p. 319 ) .
Third, houses may profit ( by utilizing squads ) from reduced costs owing to decrease in mistakes, absenteeism and even employee turnover. This is because squad members are actively engaged in their squads and are willing to do their parts shown. For illustration, Wilson Sporting Company reported salvaging ten million dollars by exchanging to a squad based system ( Moorhead & A ; Griffin, 2004 ) .
A 4th advantage ( and one of the features ) of a squad is Group Cohesiveness which is defined as “ the end point of all forces moving on the members to stay in the group ” ( Festinger, 1950, p 274, cited in Social Identifications, 1988, p. 95 ) . Cohesiveness has a positive impact on groups. For illustration it has been known to heighten productiveness ( Schacter, Ellertson, Mcbride & A ; Gregory, 1951, cited in Social Identifications, 1988, pg ) .
Another advantage of squads is the synergism that characterises them i.e. the phenomenon wherein groups repeatedly discuss the undertaking at manus in order to come up with different, possibly even better options. Decision doing within a squad has been seen to hold overpowering advantage in footings of the experience of all the members and the different, fresh point of views squad members bring to the treatment tabular array. ( Fincham & A ; Rhodes, 2005 )
Last, squads benefit administrations by assisting to cut down excess beds of bureaucratism in the administration and leting the employees to be in closer contact with top direction. For illustration, a squad in Motorola was able to convert top direction to alter a policy sing supplier review and therefore helped to cut down rhythm times and better bringings ( Moorhead & A ; Griffin, 2004 ) .
The flipside of the coin nevertheless is that squads besides have disadvantages for the administrations ( Moorhead & A ; Griffin, 2004 ) . First and first, the cardinal job that an administration taking to follow a squad construction faces is in implementing it. Forming squads means that directors in the administration tend to go more similar ‘coaches or facilitators ‘ instead than directors ( or leaders of the employees ) in the true sense of the word ( Moorhead & A ; Griffin, 2004, p. 321 ) . Often, directors feel as though they are working themselves out of a occupation since more and more of their responsibilities are handed out to squads ( Manz & A ; Simz, 1993, cited in Moorhead and Griffin, 2004, p. 321 ) .
Second, it takes a batch of clip ( frequently two to five old ages ) for a squad to to the full develop and turn into an efficient and effectual organic structure. Thus impatient directors may non wait for this to go on and trash the full squad construction, which will ensue in important losingss in clip and money to the administration. Employees may besides stop up losing trust with top direction determination doing which can be black for the company.
Third, Groupthink is a state of affairs when determinations are taken nem con without sing their rightness. ( Janis, 1972 ) . It occurs in extremely cohesive groups on history of clique force per unit areas which blur group members ‘ judgements and forces them to do wrong determinations. Clearly so, taking a consentaneous base on an issue without argument on any other options is a disadvantage of squads. The Bay of Pigs debacle is a clear illustration of this, since, the determination taken by President Kennedy and his advisers was consentaneous without sing possibilities such as the fact that their ground forces was outnumbered 140 to 1 ( Janis, 1972, cited in Principles Of Organisational Behaviour, 2005, pg. 293 ) .
Last, due to the figure of squads present in an administration struggle between groups, is inevitable ( Fincham & A ; Rhodes, 2005 ) . This struggle could originate from functional grounds when, one squad within the administration considers another squad within the same administration as a menace to accomplishing its ends. The 2nd ground for struggle amongst squads in an administration is Social Identity Theory. This theory assumes that groups have a shared societal individuality ( Tajfel 1978, cited in Principles Of Organisational Behaviour, 2005, pg. 298 ) . In other words, a ‘need for ego regard ‘ ( Fincham and Rhodes, 2005, p. 299 ) is what drives certain cognitive procedures and allows us to measure and compare our ego regard in groups that we belong to, with those in other groups ( Fincham & A ; Rhodes, 2005 ) .
This struggle may take to teams seeing each other as hinderances to their accomplishing their ends taking to unhealthy competition between them. It may take to factionalism and obstructors by the creative activity of distinguishable group individualities ( Fincham & A ; Rhodes, 2005, pg. 305 ) .
Theorists have suggested ways for extenuating the disadvantages that characterize squad work within the administration. One of these is the displacement a squad based construction that can be accomplished through five basic stairss or stages ( Moorhead & A ; Griffin, 2004 ) . The Phase 1 is referred to as Start Up and is merely that phase at which squad members are chosen and trained to work with each other. Phase two is Reality and Unrest wherein the squad and their directors are frustrated sing possible ambiguities with their new duties. Phase three is Leader Centered Teams and is when squad members become more comfy with the thought of working in squads and refocus on squad ends. Phase four is known as Tightly Formed squads, when squads become close knit and focused on their ends. Intergroup competitions frequently begin at this phase. The fifth and last stage of execution is Self Managing Teams and is when the squad works as an effectual and efficient organic structure. These five stages besides provide an index of what phase a squad is at and therefore directors need non lose forbearance as they will be able to efficaciously estimate at what phase a squad is and hence how long it will take the squad to to the full develop.
Groupthink can be easy avoided excessively. It is suggested that group members actively search out information whether or non it ‘s contrary to the group ‘s sentiment. Besides, the group may delegate one member with the function of ‘devil ‘s advocator ‘ to guarantee that other options are discussed ( Janis, 1972, cited in Principles Of Organisational Behaviour, 2005, p. 293 ) . Therefore extenuating groupthink could give better solutions and therefore better consequences.
Intergroup Conflict may be mitigated by, foremost, underscoring ace ordinate ends, that is, seting organizational ends before group ends. Second, there must be increased communicating between different groups and possibly groups can besides dwell of members from different backgrounds such as gross revenues or finance. Third, the administration can implement a rotary motion system whereby members of each squad are rotated between different squads. Last, administrations should work every bit hard as possible to supply squads with equal resources so that they do n’t hold to vie for these ( Fincham & A ; Rhodes, 2005 ) .
In decision, we may province that squads are a complex system of interactions amongst its members. These interactions are governed by certain norms, constructions and squad procedures. Despite holding certain major disadvantages such as intergroup struggle or groupthink, squads continue to bask overpowering popularity amongst directors today for some of their positive facets, chiefly, enhanced public presentation, reduced costs and employee development. Therefore, the phrase, ‘the amount is greater than the parts ‘ , holds true for squads and teamwork.