Motivating Teams - Term Paper Example

?Motivating Teams Introduction Managers are important links in organizations. They are the forces that move for the organization’s as well as the workers’ best interests. With such a responsibility on their hands, managers are expected to be great leaders and excellent motivators, to keep the organization alive and running. However, teams are also important in making the goals of the organization possible. Thus, it is the responsibility of managers to lead and motivate them. The problem is that leading people is different from motivating them. Leadership entails directing people into a desired act or outcome (Ceridian Corporation, 2005) while motivating entails driving people to perform excellently (Anselmo, 2010). The objective of this paper is to present a background and a definition of motivating teams. Certain guidelines and goals for motivating a team will also be presented. The significance of this presentation is to provide a full understanding on the needs of teams and the importance of motivation. This is in order for managers and organizations to achieve the desired performance they need from their workers. With proper motivation, workers will be more satisfied with their work and will be pleased with what they are doing. In the end, the holistic environment and outcomes within the organization will result in positivity. The challenge, however, lies on the minimal number of studies regarding team motivations. The role of leadership skills has long been evaluated and studied whereas the importance of motivational skills is still gaining popularity in the labor world. A minimal number of researchers on this topic may be due to the fact that motivation is hardly measurable. Moreover, motivationcannot be observed directly(Swezey et al., 1994). The scope of this study remains on the essential information regarding motivation in teams and a brief description of motivation in individuals. The topic on motivating individuals will not be defined in this paper. Background of the Study In any organization, leadership and motivation of individuals are important in order to assure efficiency and quality work outcomes. Chen & Kanfer (2006) stated that there are many studies that have proven the effects of leadership on performance whereas little is still known regarding the effects of motivation on individuals or teams. For decades, proper leadership was deemed to be the most important role of a manager. However, managerial leadership skills havebeenfound to be inadequate or incomplete without the proper motivational skills (Ceridian Corporation, 2005). Thus, motivational skills are imperative in keeping workers at their best performance. According to Clark (2005), it is more challenging to motivate a team than to motivate an individual. Teams are defined as a set of “two or more people who interact, dynamically, interdependently, and adaptively toward a common and valued goal/objective/mission, who have each been assigned specific roles or functions to perform, and who have a limited life-span of membership” (Salas, Dickinson, Converse & Tannenbaum, 1992, p. 4). Since teams are composed of different individuals with different missions and values, it may be hard to keep them together. This is now the challenge that is associated with motivating teams.Yet, Chen & Kanfer (2006) state that about 80% of institutions around the world are now employing the use of teams. Teams, committees, and groups can increase productivity by achieving goals that are assigned them in a shorter length of time. Lawler (2003) also stated that employees behave in a line of sight. By this, he means that employees act in a certain way when they believe that these actions will result to appealing results. Furthermore, Lawler (2003, p. 124) indicated that, “employees are inherently neither motivated nor unmotivated to perform effectively; their motivationdepends on the situation, how they perceive it, and what rewards they need and value.” It is therefore imperative for managers to identifythe necessary modes of motivation that will be effective on the employees or the work teams. Method of Investigation In order to find studies regarding team motivations, the method of data collection involved a search on different databases such as Elsevier, Wiley, SAGE publications and JSTOR. The keywords used were “motivation”, “motivating” and “teams” used in combinations. The searches revealed a few articles, some of which had to be excluded due to non-relation to the topic. Thus, the keywords were again searched on the Internet to generate more articles. Books were also employed in the research. Motivation Clark (2006) stated that motivation is a social and psychological process that entails and sustains goal-directed performance. Motivation is the drive that people need in order to remove negativities in the surroundings, learn new things, solve problems and push themselves to continue amidst hardships that they experience (Clark, 2006). Certain authors insist that people are motivated to do something in order for them to gain something in return. Clark (2006) stated that people are motivated to do something if they believe that these activities will enable them to become more effective or successful. On the other hand, Lawler (2003) stated that people are motivated to act depending on the reward that they need or value. Anselmo (2010) and Beel (2007) revealed that people can be motivated by rewards such as money, or recognitions from their managers. Recognitions can range from a simple ‘thank you’ to a more public recognition such as awards given in front of fellow employees (Anselmo, 2010). As such, it is essential to understand the things that keep employees motivated. The following are the four motivated states of employees as suggested by Somerville & Stocks (1996): a) Motivated Behaviour – in this state, the employee has achieved the three desired motivators. These motivators are autonomy, responsibility, and achievement, leading to a satisfactory salary or job security. b) Supervised Behaviour – in this state, only two motivators are met. The employee achieves responsibility and achievement sans autonomy. At this rate, the employee’s situation is still deemed motivational because two out of the three motivators were met. c) Employee-centered Behaviour – an employee is provided with responsibility and autonomy. This state is deemed to be motivational because the employee is at some point, free and has control over his position and actions. The employee is also expected to be effective or efficient because the absence of dominance allows him to be creative and more operative. d) Organisation-centered Behaviour – in this state of motivation, the employee is awarded with achievement and autonomy. This level of motivation is best applied to persons who require a clarification of goals and objectives in order for them to complete a project. As such, managers should be able to identify the employees’ personality type in order to understand which level of motivation he should apply. Motivating Teams and Individuals Swezey et al., (1994) stated that only a few researches have addressed the topic of motivating teams. As a result, motivating teams are focused on the motivation of the individuals within the teams or groups (Swezey et al., 1994). Moreover, a study conducted by Chen, Kanfer & DeShon et al. (2009, p. 45) revealed that, “motivational constructs at the individual and team levels are functionally similar, in that they relate to each other and to performance similarly at the individual and team levels”. Perhaps the only difference is that, motivating teams aims to further enhance the team spirit, competence, interpersonal skills, leadership, communication skills, as well as work performance norms and values that help or hinder team performance (Swezey et al., 1994). A few researchers have suggested ways of motivating teams. Clark (2006) suggests five goals in order for teams to be motivated and therefore, be successful. First, teammates should promote mutual respect. Within a team, it is expected that members have differing values and attitudes. However, in order for the team to succeed, the members should be directed at a certain goal. Therefore, amidst their differences, members can direct their efforts into their goal if they choose to respect each other. For instance, highly competitive members could create friction or lapses with other members if they do not know how to regulate themselves. In these instances, the manager should acknowledge the attitudes of the other members. The manager should also bolster the confidence of each member through his or her own expertise and successes. The second goal according to Clark (2006, p. 492) is that, “the team must believe weaker members are working hard to improve”. It is commonplace that certain weak links are present in a team. A weak link may be due to an inexperienced member or a member that is caught in certain uncontrollable incidences. However, Clark (2006) states that team members are willing to give their support to the ‘weak link’ if he or she is seen to be exerting effort to improve. This way, teamwork and cooperation is boosted. The third goal involves enhancing collaboration within the team. A successful team needs to be composed of members who are able to collaborate and cooperate with each other. As stated earlier, a team may be composed of people with different values and attitudes. Arrogance, prima-donna styles and back stabbers are just some of the most negative mindsets that members could have. However, even with differences, members can still be able to get along if they are given the chance to interact, to discuss the mistakes they incurred and to address the measures on how they can improve as a team. If however, efforts are useless for certain members, Clark (2006) states that it is better to leave them as individual performers. The fourth goal involves holding individual team members accountable for their own efforts. Clark (2006) states that observations on team efforts show that, as people are added to the team, certain team members no longer work as hard as when they performed individually. This is also termed as social loafing or groupthink (Clark, 2006; Kayes, Kayes & Kolb, 2005). Thus, each team member should be assessed for their own work in order to monitor which ones are lagging and which ones are working hard. The final goal is to boost the team’s competitive spirit by making them compete with other teams. This way, teams will be able to build cooperation and members will be able to boost their competitive spirit. Team-building activities concerning challenging activities and locations were found to help boost cooperation and collaboration within teams. On the other hand, a different literature suggests the following guidelines in motivating teams(Swezey et al., 1994, p. 151): “(a) providing opportunities for each team member to take major responsibility for designing and directing a major task-related activity that affects the entire team, (b) employing positive reinforcement techniques and developing a system of rewards for those who exhibit supportive behaviors toward teammates, and (c) establishing both homogenous and heterogenous groupings of team members for some teamwork activities (this provides team members with a chance to work with individuals of different capabilities and backgrounds)”. Summary of Findings Work teams are essential in organizations because they boost earnings by enhancing production. Therefore, work teams strengthen an organization (Swezey et al., 1994). Thus, it is essential to motivate teams to maintain good performanceand output. The problem however lies in that motivating teams is harder than motivating individuals alone. Managers should exert double the effort because motivating teams also entails motivating each team member. This is done to make sure that the members are exerting their best effort and that the team maintains its competitiveness and efficiency. Thus, motivating individuals and motivating teams are interrelated or interdependent (Chen, Kanfer & DeShon et al., 2009). Efforts should be placed in finding ways to promote collaboration among the team members. This can be achieved by promoting a healthy working environment. A healthy interaction between members will help improve weak links within the team. Team-building efforts were also found to be effective in enhancing relationships and competitive spirits within the team members. Furthermore, it is relevant to provide opportunities for team members to take responsibility for their own actions and take credit for their successes. It is also possible to provide monetary rewards when goals are reached. As such, members will be motivated to work harder and cooperate in order to achieve goals. Managers should also take time to know his employees in order to identify the measures he can do to motivate them. Recommendations Finding ways to motivate people in the workplace may be difficult due to the complexities of human behavior. An effective way of motivating an individual may not be as effective to another individual. Thus, managers should consider each team member’s attributes. Managers should find a way to address the strengths and weaknesses of each team member so that they will function in the most efficient way in the team. There are only a few studies in relation to motivation in individuals, as well as motivation in teams. This author recommends that a more empirical study be performed regarding motivations in individuals and in teams. Further studies should focus on the effects of and the proper guidelines that can be adopted to motivate teams. Measuring motivation is difficult; however, a wide range of data will allow for better observations and debateregarding this matter. Conclusions Managers and teams are important participants of an organization. As managers, it is imperative for them to maintain the motivation of the team and its members in exerting their best efforts for the organization. This paper presented the importance of teams and the need for motivation. Certain guidelines and goals for proper motivation of teams were presented and the main points summarized. Certain recommendations for readers and researchers were also presented. References: Anselmo, D., 2010. Marketing Demystified, USA: McGraw-Hill Professional. Beel, J., 2007. Project Team Rewards: Rewarding and Motivating your Project Team, Joran Beel. Available at: http://books.google.com/books?id=uH88SVfEbNQC&pgis=1 [Accessed April 30, 2011]. Ceridian Corporation, 2005. Leading and Motivating as a Manager, Boston. Chen, G. & Kanfer, R., 2006. Towards a Systems Theory of Motivated Behavior in Work Teams. In B. M. Straw, ed. Research in Organizational Behavior. UK: Elsevier, p. 410. Available at: http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=5ncYTZrpYR8C&pgis=1 [Accessed April 30, 2011]. Chen, G. et al., 2009. The motivating potential of teams: Test and extension of Chen and Kanfer’s (2006) cross-level model of motivation in teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110(1), pp.45-55. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S074959780900051X [Accessed August 7, 2010]. Clark, R., 2006. Motivating Individuals, Teams, and Organizations. In J. Pershing, ed. Handbook of Human Performance Technology Third Edition. California: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., pp. 478-497. Clark, R.E., 2005. Research-tested team motivation strategies. Performance Improvement, 44(1), pp.13-16. Available at: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/pfi.4140440107. Kayes, A., Kayes, C. & Kolb, D., 2005. Experiential learning in teams. Stimulation & Gaming, 36(3), pp.330-354. Lawler, E.I., 2003. Pay Systems for Virtual Teams. In C. B. Gibson & S. G. Cohen, eds. Virtual Teams That Work. California: Jossey-Bass. Salas, E., Dickinson, T. L., Converse, S. A., & Tannenbaum, S. I. (1992). Toward anunderstanding of team performance and training. In R. Swezey & E. Salas (Eds.), Teams: Their Training and Performance (pp. 3-29). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Somerville, J. & Stocks, B., 1996. Realising the client’s strategic requirements: motivating teams, UK. Swezey, R., Meltzer, A. & Salas, E., 1994. Some Issues Involved in Motivating Teams. In H. O?Neil & M. Drillings, eds. Motivation: Theory and Research. Routledge, p. 332. Read More