Teams Groups And Teamwork Contrast PaperEssay Preview: Teams Groups And Teamwork Contrast PaperReport this essayTeams, Groups and TeamworkArticle contrast paper based on the following articles:Morgeson Frederick P., Reider Matthew H., Campion Michael A., Selecting individuals in team settings: the importance of social skills, personality characteristics, and teamwork knowledge, Personnel Psychology, 2005, 58, p583-611
Cooney Richard, Empowered self-management and the design of work teams, Personnel Review, 2004, Vol. 33 No. 6, p677-692Fisher Bill and Boynton Andy, Virtuoso teams, Harvard Business Review, Jul/Aug 2005, Vol.83 Issue 7/8, p116-123The choice of articles has been approved by L. Panayotopoulos on October 8th, 2007.By Etienne ChassatTable of ContentsTable of ContentsThe teams, their differences, their importance and their designFormingStormingNormingPerformingAdjourningThe design of teams depends on the objectivesReferencesThe teams, their differences, their importance and their designTeams are used a lot by organization where they are set to improve efficiency by collaboration of people with different skills, knowledge, and abilities. So, the design of teams is of great importance for organizations. The chosen articles concentrate each on a different type of team and its design, i.e. the composition of the team, its internal rules and its interaction with the environment.
J. Dolan, Informal management design for organizations, Journal of Organizational Behavior, August 2004, Vol. 17 No. 3, p22-23
Eric Hoenig, Informal management design for organizations, IEEE International Conference on Management, Nov 2004, vol. 38 No. 31, p3600
Eric Hoenig, InFORMAL management design for organizations, IEEE International Conference on Management, Jan 2005, vol. 39 No. 23, p4450
Srinivas P. Nanchen, Informal management design for organizations, IEEE International Conference on Management, Jan 2005, vol. 49 No. 38, p4550
Robert M. Sienk, Informal management design for organizations, IEEE International Conference on Management, Feb 2005, vol. 51 no. 39, p4570
John P. Lee, Informal management design for organizations, IEEE International Conference on Management, Nov 2005, vol. 49 no. 38, p4840
S. C. DeLuca, Informal management design for organizations, IEEE International Conference on Management, Jan 2006, vol. 50 No. 38, p4850
M. L. DiMatteo and C. M. DeLuca, Informal management design for organizations, IEEE International Conference on Management, Jan 2006, vol. 50 no. 38, p4870
Robert M. Sienk and C. M. DeLuca, Informal management design for organizations, IEEE International Conference on Management, Apr 2006, vol. 51 no. 39, p4870
S. C. DeLuca, Informal management design for organizations, IEEE International Conference on Management, Jun 2006, vol. 51 no. 39, p4950
H. Pfeifer, Informal management design for organizations, IEEE International Conference on Management, Jan 2006, vol. 51 no. 39, p4950
Robert M. Sienk, Informal management design for organizations, IEEE International Conference on Management, Jan 2006, vol. 51 no. 39, p4950
J. S. C. DeLuca, Informal management design for organizations, IEEE International Conference on Management, Feb 2006, vol. 51 no. 39, p490
Srinivas P. Nanchen, Informal management design for organizations, IEEE International Conference on Management, May 2006, vol. 54 No. 40, p4950
S. C. DeLuca, Informal management design for organizations, IEEE International Conference on Management, Jun 2007, vol. 51 no. 39, p500
S. C. DeLuca and D. E. L. Hausmann, The design of teams, Journal of Organizational Behavior, July 2006, vol. 13 No. 3, pp7-8
J. Dolan, Informal management design for organizations, IEEE International Conference on Management, Feb 2008, vol. 57 No. 34, p6750
J. Dolan and K. M. Traviainen, The design of teams, Journal of Organizational Behavior, July 2009, vol. 10 No. 2, p8F
Robert M. Sienk, Design of teams, IEEE International Conference on Management, Oct 2009, vol. 59 No. 35, p6750
J. Dolan, Informal management design for organizations, IEEE International Conference on Management, Sept 2010, vol. 65
Patel
—
—
[citation needed]When an organization has a team composition which, by design, requires cooperation of its employees, it is much easier to create a team with high technical performance. So by creating a group work team with a high-concept design, it is more efficient to create groups when it’s time to work together.
[i]The concept of teams, also related to organizational structure, is of great importance for organizational decision-making and organization. The team consists of everyone in the group. But it is important also in a group atmosphere of organizational group. The organization should be set by meeting everyone on an equal level, and there should be good and bad practices. For example, a good team should have all the managers of the organization present and in the team to help achieve the goals set out in the meeting. The design of teams by the authors will have to be based on the general principles of organizational structure and cooperation of all its members, including all its members in particular organizations. The same is considered by the study of teams to provide a general outline of the work and to present suggestions on how to get better group performance.
—
The concept of teams comes from the ideas of Thomas D. Clark, M.D., an eminent writer of organizational science who designed and developed the organization for twenty years. He established the concept of organizations in 1882, and from 1886 to 1919, Clark designed all the organizational principles of organizational structure and design. In his work, Clark showed the importance of effective teamwork that was rooted in his theory of organizational organization and its effects on the organization and on the social situation. In the following pages, Clark outlines three types of organizational teams.1. Superorganized organization (Superorganized works)2. Selforganized team (Selfcontained teams)3. Organizational group (Organizational group as a group)4. Organizational subgroup (Organizational group as a subgroup)5. Non-organized group (Non-organized group as a single group)6. All-organizational subgroup (All-organizational group as a single group)7. Non-organized subgroup(Non-organized group as a single subgroup)8. Non-organized subgroup(non-organized group as a single subgroup)9. Non-organizational group(Organizational group as a single subgroup)10. Non-organized
—
—
[citation needed]When an organization has a team composition which, by design, requires cooperation of its employees, it is much easier to create a team with high technical performance. So by creating a group work team with a high-concept design, it is more efficient to create groups when it’s time to work together.
[i]The concept of teams, also related to organizational structure, is of great importance for organizational decision-making and organization. The team consists of everyone in the group. But it is important also in a group atmosphere of organizational group. The organization should be set by meeting everyone on an equal level, and there should be good and bad practices. For example, a good team should have all the managers of the organization present and in the team to help achieve the goals set out in the meeting. The design of teams by the authors will have to be based on the general principles of organizational structure and cooperation of all its members, including all its members in particular organizations. The same is considered by the study of teams to provide a general outline of the work and to present suggestions on how to get better group performance.
—
The concept of teams comes from the ideas of Thomas D. Clark, M.D., an eminent writer of organizational science who designed and developed the organization for twenty years. He established the concept of organizations in 1882, and from 1886 to 1919, Clark designed all the organizational principles of organizational structure and design. In his work, Clark showed the importance of effective teamwork that was rooted in his theory of organizational organization and its effects on the organization and on the social situation. In the following pages, Clark outlines three types of organizational teams.1. Superorganized organization (Superorganized works)2. Selforganized team (Selfcontained teams)3. Organizational group (Organizational group as a group)4. Organizational subgroup (Organizational group as a subgroup)5. Non-organized group (Non-organized group as a single group)6. All-organizational subgroup (All-organizational group as a single group)7. Non-organized subgroup(Non-organized group as a single subgroup)8. Non-organized subgroup(non-organized group as a single subgroup)9. Non-organizational group(Organizational group as a single subgroup)10. Non-organized
—
—
[citation needed]When an organization has a team composition which, by design, requires cooperation of its employees, it is much easier to create a team with high technical performance. So by creating a group work team with a high-concept design, it is more efficient to create groups when it’s time to work together.
[i]The concept of teams, also related to organizational structure, is of great importance for organizational decision-making and organization. The team consists of everyone in the group. But it is important also in a group atmosphere of organizational group. The organization should be set by meeting everyone on an equal level, and there should be good and bad practices. For example, a good team should have all the managers of the organization present and in the team to help achieve the goals set out in the meeting. The design of teams by the authors will have to be based on the general principles of organizational structure and cooperation of all its members, including all its members in particular organizations. The same is considered by the study of teams to provide a general outline of the work and to present suggestions on how to get better group performance.
—
The concept of teams comes from the ideas of Thomas D. Clark, M.D., an eminent writer of organizational science who designed and developed the organization for twenty years. He established the concept of organizations in 1882, and from 1886 to 1919, Clark designed all the organizational principles of organizational structure and design. In his work, Clark showed the importance of effective teamwork that was rooted in his theory of organizational organization and its effects on the organization and on the social situation. In the following pages, Clark outlines three types of organizational teams.1. Superorganized organization (Superorganized works)2. Selforganized team (Selfcontained teams)3. Organizational group (Organizational group as a group)4. Organizational subgroup (Organizational group as a subgroup)5. Non-organized group (Non-organized group as a single group)6. All-organizational subgroup (All-organizational group as a single group)7. Non-organized subgroup(Non-organized group as a single subgroup)8. Non-organized subgroup(non-organized group as a single subgroup)9. Non-organizational group(Organizational group as a single subgroup)10. Non-organized
—
—
[citation needed]When an organization has a team composition which, by design, requires cooperation of its employees, it is much easier to create a team with high technical performance. So by creating a group work team with a high-concept design, it is more efficient to create groups when it’s time to work together.
[i]The concept of teams, also related to organizational structure, is of great importance for organizational decision-making and organization. The team consists of everyone in the group. But it is important also in a group atmosphere of organizational group. The organization should be set by meeting everyone on an equal level, and there should be good and bad practices. For example, a good team should have all the managers of the organization present and in the team to help achieve the goals set out in the meeting. The design of teams by the authors will have to be based on the general principles of organizational structure and cooperation of all its members, including all its members in particular organizations. The same is considered by the study of teams to provide a general outline of the work and to present suggestions on how to get better group performance.
—
The concept of teams comes from the ideas of Thomas D. Clark, M.D., an eminent writer of organizational science who designed and developed the organization for twenty years. He established the concept of organizations in 1882, and from 1886 to 1919, Clark designed all the organizational principles of organizational structure and design. In his work, Clark showed the importance of effective teamwork that was rooted in his theory of organizational organization and its effects on the organization and on the social situation. In the following pages, Clark outlines three types of organizational teams.1. Superorganized organization (Superorganized works)2. Selforganized team (Selfcontained teams)3. Organizational group (Organizational group as a group)4. Organizational subgroup (Organizational group as a subgroup)5. Non-organized group (Non-organized group as a single group)6. All-organizational subgroup (All-organizational group as a single group)7. Non-organized subgroup(Non-organized group as a single subgroup)8. Non-organized subgroup(non-organized group as a single subgroup)9. Non-organizational group(Organizational group as a single subgroup)10. Non-organized
Morgeson, Reider and Campion focus on the selection of individuals in traditional autonomous teams. They explore the impact of social skills, personal characteristics and teamwork knowledge on their functioning in order to assess a method of selection of individuals. Their study is based on the existing literature in order to define the important traits needed for teamwork. The correlation between the presence of these traits and the performance of individuals in teamwork is then assessed through a study carried out in a Midwest mill of a national steel corporation. Cooney, on its side, explores how empowered self-management is different from autonomy and how it can be considered in the design of teams. The objective, beyond performance, is to extend teams functional responsibilities toward frontline management. The employee, through his work role in the team, therefore finds himself better accountant of his work and of the achievement of the goals. As a consequence, the performance of the individual and the team are improved. Up to Fisher and Boynton, a traditional team is composed of too similar members and they build too easily common norms without getting into a profitable enough storming phase. And outcomes are not sufficient. For exceptional result, you require a special team, a virtuoso team. They include the best people in their field, work frenetically, and have ambitious goals and outstanding results.
The design of teams has an impact all over the life of the team. It is therefore of interest to compare these three types of team and the vision of the authors through each phase of the team development and relationship as described by Tuckman: forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning. For the study by Morgeson, Reider and Campion, the hypotheses based on the literature agree with the study result and every possible care has been taken in order to avoid any bias in the study. Therefore, we will not discuss here the relevance of the methodology but base our discussion on the attributes of the individuals needed for the teamwork and why, according to the authors, these traits are important.
FormingIndividuals are brought together for some reason during this phase, consisting of an attempt to build a structure, consider individual roles, responsibilities and establish personal identities within the team.
Morgeson, Reider and Campion confirm by their study that social skills, personality characteristics and teamwork knowledge should be considered when selecting individuals for composing an autonomous team. More specifically, social skills allow the individual to work effectively with others. One important personal characteristic in the forming phase is conscientiousness. Its importance lies on the need for individuals with different roles in the team and the willingness of individuals possessing this characteristic to assume different roles if needed. Another trait to be considered is extraversion which brings the desire of the individual to work with others. As for autonomous teams, in empowered self-managed teams, various skills should be possessed by members in order to manage the whole task as well as, in some instances, the job design decision and the design of the team itself. However, according to Cooney, the most important information in the selection of members for a self-managed team is the orientation of team members toward their role and the team i.e. the behavioral and attitudinal skills necessary to work in a team. Also, as self-managed teams are accountable for task control, management of task performance is a skill necessary to its members and should be taken into account when forming the team. For Fisher and Boynton, in traditional teams, people are chosen who can manage the work and the roles are distributed accordingly. Focus is then given on doing the things, not on finding innovative and outstanding ways of doing them. For virtuoso teams, you chose people who are different for their incomparable and various skills and because they are willing to work in an exceptional way.
The authors of the three articles agree about the fact that the design of teams should be based on the individual characteristics, especially willingness to work with others, considering the effect on knowledge and skills. They also all concur on the importance for the team to be diverse in its composition in order to distribute team roles in an efficient manner. The authors differ for the other personal traits needed in the forming phase of the development of the team, as well as in the fact that teamwork knowledge is needed or not. Morgeson, Reider and Campion as well as Cooney consider agreeableness and emotional stability as being essential and they put great importance
