Web Designing Industry - Rainbow - Case Study Example

The success of Rainbow as a leader in web designing industry demands perfection in all aspects of web designing right from the content generation to the software related issues. The perfection in handling orders would highly depend on the cohesiveness and the coordination of different departments of the company. In the context of Rainbow, for it to be a perfectionist in the industry, its employees who handle different aspects of designing must work as a real good team. Katzenbach and Smith (1993) has opined that , a team is a small number of people with compatible skills who are dedicated to a common purpose, discharge goals, and approach for which they hold themselves mutually responsible. The relevance of team work is being confirmed as a vital factor in the all modes of modern business scenarios. The objective of this essay is to analyze the organizational structure of Rainbow designs and the staff performance as a cohesive team. The team pattern as observed in Rainbow designs is being compared with the theoretical knowledge on team work so as to evaluate the efficacy of Rainbow design’s work force. The essay also suggests the areas requiring improvement in Rainbow design’s organizational structure so as to work as a better team. How would you describe Rainbow Design’s work organization? The most promising factor in Rainbow Design’s organization is that each member of the working team holds cross-departmental skills, resultantly forming an ideal foundation for a good team. It is confirmed by the one simple example that though Teresa was an account manager she was an expert in content design as well. This understanding over cross-departmental matters is quite vital in forming a well structured team. Wheelan (1999) has pointed out that the most important characteristic of a high performance team is that all its members understand the team goals properly. Taking this theory into account, it can be confirmed that the work organization of Rainbow Design is ideal for team based jobs. However more important is the utilization of this ideal background in formulating a good team. However, the interaction interactive structure of the organization is quite formal. Tambe (1997, 83-124) has stressed the need of flexible work structure so as to build a complex, dynamic multi-functional team, with intended applications in differing arenas of the allied industry. In the context of the particular project dealt by, Rainbow Design it can be found that Laura, the content designer worked on the project by her own in a wrong direction without being corrected till the team meeting. A more flexible work structure would have negated this time and energy loss. The dynamics of the team and interpersonal relationship and mutual respect is another factor which requires amendment in the case of Rainbow Design. According to Wheelan (1999), team dynamics are the invisible forces that operate in a team between different people or groups and it can strongly influence how a team reacts, behaves or performs, and the effects of team dynamics are often very complex. The behavioral approach of John in the initial meeting and even in the meetings which followed indicates the lack of team dynamics and demands better quality in the interpersonal relationship. The leadership pattern as exhibited by Amber, also needs a more inclusive and motivating approach. From the factory floor to the corporate board room, teams are viewed as a means to motivate participants, increase productivity, and flatten the organizational hierarchy (LaFasto and Larson, 2001). This hierarchy flattening process will have to be deliberately induced by the leadership of Rainbow Design. In totality, the work organization of Rainbow Design with critical amendments can turn itself as a very good team. Is this a real team? Include appropriate theory in your discussion? As of the opinion of Katzenbach and Smith (1993), a team must include a group a people who must share the purpose, take responsibility in accordance to that and hold a feel of mutual responsibility. In the case of Rainbow design, the team has been observed to hold differential responsibilities in relation with the overall goal. Teresa was being responsible because she was the direct contact point for the customer and John’s interest in ensuring the proper management of work was that the client would enquire the technical directly to him. On the other side, Laura was left alone after the meeting to work on the draft. This clearly indicates that a sharing of responsibility is not happening as a team. The management theory confirms that sharing of capacity, responsibility and leadership should automatically happen in an ideal team environment (Nair N & Oommen P 1994,p.M.1). While taking into account the theoretical developmental stages of a team, including forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning, the functional team of Rainbow design has operationally went through these stages as a team. However they need more adherence as a team. Rather than limiting oneself to the individual responsibilities an inclusive approach in sharing of responsibilities must occur. As far as the leadership pattern of the team is concerned it can be found that Amber, the creative director of the team is highly assertive over the team. This is quite evident from the comments of the leader when Laura discussed the initial draft with her. West et al (2003) has confirmed that the team leader who dominates the team might be likely to dramatically reduce the positive influence of a supportive organisational culture upon the group processes and thereby levels of team innovation. When Amber took an unequivocal approach on the document made by Laura and as she discourages Laura by explaining the document presented by her as the messiest one she has ever seen, the motivational spirit of Laura automatically dies off. However, as a leader of the team it is quite admirable that Amber was later on ready to take responsibility by herself as he got involved in the project herself. This is a very good indication for the ideal development of a team. This would motivate the team to behave in an empowered way. Erickson, Hamilton, Jones and Ditomassi (2006, 96-104) have stated that the process of empowerment happens when the team leaders engage their staff in ways that would promote personal and professional growth. During this cognitive process, the leaders help the employees to develop their skills and attitude. This resultantly make positive move towards the realization of the staff’s optimal potential. The basic concept of staff empowerment is to build a healthily functional, dedicated and motivated human resource team with an increased sense of productivity. (Copp, Agpaoa, Carvalho & Pfeiffer, 2004). Where do you think there are problems? What do you think they are due to? The problems pertaining in the team environment of Rainbow Designs related to the sharing of responsibility, leadership pattern and the interpersonal relationship among the team members. Though the team members had been sensibly handing their personal responsibilities there had been acute lack of sharing of responsibilities. May (1996) has argued that a gap in sharing responsibilities can hugely affect the attitude of the members of the team whereas on the other side, a team which shares responsibilities among themselves would perform in a motivated way. The interpersonal relationship is another matter of concern in the case of Rainbow Designs. The behavioral attribute of John towards Laura confirms this. Schein (2004) points out the participatory role of leaders in influencing the work culture of the team. Amber has proved to be an authoritative leader who dominates the team which can be very discouraging. Amber needs to move to another project. If you were to take her place what would you do to improve the team’s performance? My primary attention would be to improve the interpersonal relationship among the team members as this would be the foundation for the cohesiveness of the team. Christopher & Diana (1996, p75) have mentioned seven factors concerning to the human relationships including time, space, odors, frankness, intimacy of relationships, values and expression of emotions. These factors would be analyzed for each of the team members and they would be prepared to respect each other’s personal attributes. The measures to empower the team so as to be courageous to live up to the professional expectations would be the next measure undertaken. Klein and Napier (2003) opined that courage is a way of speaking and listening for the expression and enhancement of relationships. The indifference that John expressed while listening to the ideas of Laura would not be repeated. . Laura would turn courageous to convince and listen to John and so would John be ready to listen to Laura. Moreover, it has been confirmed that the empowerment of employees would create a nurturing environment in which staff can learn, grow, improve, and function effectively (Pfeiffer & Dunlap, 2005, 154-156). I would also deliberately include key leadership attributes into the working system. Lamperes (2004, 32-37) has suggested ten strategies pertaining to the betterment of the team environment which: ‘sharing information’, ,sharing decision making’, ‘practicing consensus decision making’, ‘developing consensus on budget’, ‘creating a common vision’, ‘developing shared beliefs’, ‘allowing employees to direct their professional growth’, ‘empowering stakeholders’, ‘understanding customer needs’ and ‘developing symbols of empowerment’. These strategies would be ideally fitted into the team environment of Rainbow Designs, which would help the company to fetch better results in the future endeavors. Better and fluent communication among the team members also will be facilitated to enhance team efficacy. The effect of communication on team efficiency was reiterated in one of my personal experience while being a member of Team Challenges module at Brookes. When a more inclusive policy on communication and planning was imparted, the performance of the team increased substantially. References Katzenbach, J R & Smith, D, K, 1993, The Wisdom of teams, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Wheelan, S ,1999, Creating Effective Teams: A guide for members and leaders, Sage Publication Ltd, London: LaFasto, F & Larson, E, 2001 When team work best: 6000 team members and leaders tell what it takes to succeed, Sage Publication Ltd, London. Nair N & Oommen P 1994, Business Management, Lions publications, Madras,p.M.1 West, M.; Tjosvold, D & Smith, K, 2003 International Handbook of organisational teamwork and cooperative working, John Wiley & Sons Ltd ,Sussex May Larry ,1996, Sharing Responsibility: University of Chicago Press ,Chicago. Schein, E H (2004) Organizational culture and leadership, John Wiley and Sons,San Farncisco, CA. Christopher E & Diana R 1996, International excellence: Seven Breakthrough Strategies for personal and professional success, Kodansha International, New York p.75 Klein, M & Napier, R, 2003 The courage to act. Davies-Black, Palo Alto, California Tambe M, 1997, ‘Towards Flexible Teamwork’, Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, Vol 7. pp. 83-124 Erickson, J I; Hamilton G A. Jones D E & Ditomassi, M, 2006, “The value of collaborative governance/staff empowerment”. Journal of Nursing Admin vol. 33, no. 2 pp. 96- 104 Copp, Cynthia R ; Agpaoa, Christine; Carvalho, Sandra & Pfeiffer, William, 2004, “Staff Empowerment” A Prescription For Success,” The Permanente Journal, vol.7 no.4 Pfeiffer, I L, & Dunlap, J B, 2005, ‘Empowered employees--a good personnel investment.’ Clin Lab Manage Rev, vol. 6, no.2.pp. 154-156 Read More