Organizational structures are designed to enhance productivity, provide a flow of information and are deliberately set to work in the most effective and efficient manner as suited to the industry the organization is in. As the world moves towards globalization and rapid information sharing, the need for collaboration, innovation and flexibility within the organizational structure is increasing (Mealiea & Baltazar, pg141, 2005). One of the ways top management is rising up to meet these challenges is to promote team building and team work within organizations so that the individual skills and abilities of the employees can be tapped into simultaneously and result in more creative and faster solutions. A cohesive team with a clear strategy is one of the most important assets for any organization towards achieving their goals and introduces the process of ‘synergy’ in the work environment.
Current literature all support the idea of flexible project based organizations as the most effective units in today’s world. These organizations can respond rapidly to changing external factors and crisis situations by forming semi autonomous problem solving teams which can combine the expertise and skills necessary to deal with the risk laden and uncertain environment (Lam, pg17-19, 2004). A team based structure can be configured to take the advantage of the employees’ unique abilities to generate new ideas and foster innovation- two very important things required for the survival of any organization. It also allows for a more adaptive work environment which is more effective under rapid changes.
Increasingly it can be seen that workers in the UK and the Eastern Europe don’t work in isolation any more, even in organization where formal teams are not constructed informal teams build up around a project or objective. These people share similar goals and working together it is possible to achieve better and faster results. But for most organizations teams are deliberately structured to facilitate collaboration and productivity; these teams can be cross functional teams, functional work teams, project teams, self managed teams or even management teams. Factors such as the degree of autonomy each individual member has, decision authority, shared or traditional leadership, structural support and responsibility are assigned according to the requirements and work nature of each team and can differ greatly. The important thing is to make sure that all members of a team recognize and accept these factors and together the characteristics of the team should contribute towards the end goal.
Often team building efforts are not as successful as the management would have hoped. Team clashes often occur because of mismatched personalities, uncertainty about assigned roles or a lock of clear direction. One of the main reasons for the failure of team building efforts is a lack of understanding about the correct team structure and requirements. Teams are sometimes designed with the help of outside expertise- in the UK itself, a number of firms offer organizations the chance to hire experts who would conduct team building exercises and determine the team structures – however, these outsiders are often unaware of the intricate networks which exist within offices and play out because of social interactions and may propose team solution which in the long run will not be productive within the organizational culture. The correct person to determine the nature of the teams should be the manager who is informed about the individual employees and can match up the right personalities for the right kind of goals. The manager will also be able to assess personal goals with regards to organizational goals and allow for team objectives which have increased job involvement and job satisfaction for those involved- leading to high motivation.
In designing the team the manager can follow some set guidelines in forming the most effective team. The first step has to be an assessment of the team characteristics which would lead to success. “Behavioral scientists argue that the success of team-building efforts is a function of the number of desirable team characteristics that can be built into a work environment”(Mealiea & Baltazar, pg142, 2005). An insightful manager can decide the interpersonal and technical skills required within the team, the amount of power distribution, teams’ level in organization and the tasks to be performed. Assigning the supporting characteristics of the team provides the necessary formal structure for the people involved and the increases chances of success. The second step is to identify the people who will be well suited to the decided team dynamics and recruit them for the team. The manager may use his own knowledge of employee personalities, attitudes and needs along with interviews or informal talks to decide whether a candidate will prove to be a productive team member. After the team profile has been made, what remains to be seen is what kind of deficiencies exists in the team characteristics and how they may be changed.
An effective management realizes that any initial team building effort will result in a team which is far from ideal. The next step after the team has been formed is to identify the strategies required for the team deficiencies to be removed. These problems may range from a lack of a clear direction, unavailability of required resources, communication and trust problems within the team or even rivalry between individual members. A good technique would be schedule periodic feedback sessions to review the performance of the team with regards to set objectives and allow open communication to air out concerns and take suggestions. Formal training sessions, coaching and strong leadership can overcome some of these problems and maintaining specific milestones with appropriate rewards will keep the team working in the right direction. The important thing to remember is that the team dynamics would differ with each task and each organization and the problems which arise have to be dealt on a case by case basis, though feedback and open communication will always help in identifying those and lead towards solutions.
When talking about the modern organization we have to give consideration to the technological aspects of the structure as well. Virtual teams are becoming ever more popular as the communication technology keeps advancing and employers see the advantages of allowing flexible work timings and schedules for their employees. In the UK as in the rest of the world, many workers are opting for the option of working from home and collaborating using intranets and internets to collaborate with their peers. Similarly the trend of outsourcing, offshoring and nearshoring is on the rise with 57% of UK organizations taking part in these practices in 2007 (up from 47% the year before). According to Phil Morris, managing director of EquaTerra for Europe, "this is all being driven by technology, the speed of processors and telecommunications, together with cleverer application interfaces and graphical user interfaces" (Heath, 2008). Web 3.0 allows virtual collaboration and team work through tools like IM, email, shared documents, video conferences and video calls- two employees on the far ends of the world can work on online project together while getting constant input from their supervisor.
The advantages of having virtual workers are many; they open up a global source of expertise for organizations, cuts down on overhead costs and allow greater job satisfaction for the employees- in UK telecommuters made up 8% of the workforce at the beginning of the millennium. However, productive virtual teams are much different in nature than physical teams and come with their own problems along than the traditional ones discussed before. The main problem is that there can be no direct supervision, without face to face communication it can be hard to gauge the motivation level of employees and whether they are working efficiently. The lack of a physical meeting space also means that interpersonal bonds may be difficult to form leading to lower trust and interdependence. From the employees side there may be problems like lack of recognition or unfair work load which cannot be easily delegated.
Managing virtual teams is a completely different area of expertise for managers, even with the technological advances taking place there is still some time before an effective and proven way of managing virtual teamwork emerges. While no one can deny the importance of these teams, trial and error along with intuition is still the best way to gauge their long term performance in an organization.
Organizations are better off when they adopt a team based structure. In an era of globalization and rapid change, organizations need to be flexible, innovative and should allow a culture of creativity and cooperation. Teams provide a formal structure and work space to merge the skills of the employees in a productive direction. While effective teamwork is not always easy to ensure due to the personalities of individual members or any other conflicting group dynamics, if they are carefully supervised and supported, teams can provide better solutions to organizational problems. Technology has ushered in a new era of work practices and introduced different formats of teams enabled by internet connectivity but existing without any physical support. These teams are the future of the modern workplace work and despite the concerns about effective management smart organizations will take advantage of these in order to ensure their survival.
Biliography
Mealiea, L. & Baltazar, R., 2005. A Strategic Guide for Building Effective Teams. Public Personnel Management Volume 34 No. 2 Summer 2005, pg141-156.
Lam, A., 2004. Organizational innovation. BRESE, School of Business and Management
Brunel University Uxbridge, West London, working paper 1, pg 4-20. Available at: < http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/11539/1/BRESE_org_innovation_Lam_WP1.pdf>
Heath, N., 2008. India top destination for UK outsourcing. ZDNet. Available from: < http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/it-strategy/2008/01/14/india-top-destination-for-uk-outsourcing-39292109/>
Pohlman, P., 2002. Team Building: Major Issues Facing Teams. Poynter. Available at: <http://www.poynter.org/uncategorized/1831/team-building-major-issues-facing-teams/>
Distefano, J. 2000. Creating Value with diverse teams. Organizational dynamics, vol. 29, no.1.
Seimens, press release. Siemens unveils Senior Management team for Building Technologies division in the UK. Available from :< http://www.siemens.co.uk/en/news_press/index/news_archive/building-technologies-management-team.htm>
Team Trainers, 2011. Scientists’ Review Raises Problems with Team Building. Available at:< http://suddenteams.com/teams-blog/scientists-review-raises-problems-team-building>
Kjerulf, A., 2007. The top 5 reasons why team building events are a waste of time. The chief happiness officer. Available at:< http://positivesharing.com/2007/10/the-top-5-problems-with-corporate-team-building/>
Robbins, P.S & Judge, T.A., 2011. Organizational Behaviour. 13th Ed.
Management library, 2012. Group Dynamics: Basic Nature of Groups and How They Develop. Available at: < http://managementhelp.org/groups/dynamics-theories.htm>
0 comments:
Post a Comment