The Effectiveness of Self-Directed Work Teams - Coursework Example

The effectiveness of self-directed work teams Introduction Team structures at workplace are a phenomenon that has gained significance simultaneously with diversity in organizations. Self-directed work teams (SDWT) give an opportunity for organisations to reap the benefits of diversity through collaborative action. SDWT adopts several traditional management responsibilities, advance empowerment strategies through flexible and shared tasks, shard authority and management on the basis of participative decision making and information sharing (Hickman & Creighton-Zollar 1998 p.187-200). Thesis Self directed work teams can replace traditional managerial setting in most of the organizational settings due to its peculiarity to achieve goals effectively and efficiently through the self managerial techniques of the team members and it is also a work style which cannot be adapted in all settings due to specific reasons like collective accountability and self management. Self directed work team comprises of highly trained workers who are given the authority and responsibility to complete a defined project. SDWT represents innovative method of conducting business where the top management entrusts the total responsibility to the team to the extent that they achieve or exceed defined goals. The top management or executives of organisations that use SDWT maintain their authority regarding strategies and the teams take control over the tactics to achieve the targeted goal. The advantage of SDWT includes the capability to identify opportunities, execute actions quickly and to find solutions that leads to improved community satisfaction. The functioning of SDWT calls for a shift in organisational philosophy from authoritarian system to a self direction process. The senior management must train SDWT’s through proper planning and assessment of the team’s capability to understand and implement hands off system for the cultural shift of the organisation (Ramirez 1999 p.20-23). Research shows that individuals working in self directed work teams in the capacity of steering committees or board of directors are usually envisaged as high performance function groups. However, in highly transformational and innovative environment concerning a number of stakeholders and teams face more challenges to meet their goals and roles. These teams also find it difficult to manage feedback, solve problems, manage relationships and maintain a good work structure. The effectiveness of SDWT becomes difficulty because the performance expectation is always high (Alber & Fetzer 2005 p.144-156). While replacing the traditional bureaucratic organisation with SDWT, the increase in efficiency and performance is associated with demoralisation of the worker. Workers do not have freedom at workplace because they are responsible for their own performance and are strictly monitored by other members of the team. The actions of a worker are further controlled by the zero tolerance strategy of the team. The concertive control adopted in SDWT becomes rationalized and constrains the freedom of workers (Barker 1993 p.408-437). Self-direct work teams are usually the outcome of process innovation and reengineering efforts and organizational requirement to flatten or downsize. SDWT’s have registered performance improvements in blue collar settings though evidence suggests that it is not a suitable method for Information Systems industry. A research of 231 IS professionals across 13 organisations comprising 28 SDWT indicate that the intrinsic autonomy in SDWT paves way for improved levels of motivation, satisfaction and performance while the extent of cooperative learning that occurs within the team is more crucial to the achievement of better work outcomes (Janz 1999 p.171-192). Self directed work teams or self managing teams or semi-autonomous work groups register varying levels of success (Hartman 2002 p.101) Gains and benefits from SDWT can be obtained only after several months or years. For example, Dofasco Steel realised tangible results only two or three years after the implementation of the self directed work team. In the case of Boart Longyear, the company realised about ten to 15 percent productivity increase within a few months of installation. Willingness and patience is highly required to witness the success of SDWT (Hartman 2002 p.108) The sustenance of the initiative can be ensured by holding informal meetings with teams when it is in the beginning stage. The detractors of SDWT will always be on the look out for cracks in the commitment of the management. SDWT’s can encounter a sudden halt if the management is reluctant to allocate finance for the resources. In short, while implementing SDWT, the management should be ready to maintain the teams in the long term. Seasoned managements foresee the efforts of union to advance and defend the interest of employees while implementing SDWT. The management has to expect such circumstance and plan a suitable course of action. The best occurs when the union also shows enthusiasm and cooperation and the worst situation is extreme opposition and sabotage. A middle group is expected when the union does not public reveal its opposition to SDWT. If there is no denouncement of the initiative by the union, the management can infer a silent agreement. Passive acceptance assists the implementation of SDWT (Hartman 2002 p.109). While delegating responsibility to SDWT, the delegation should comprise three factors: responsibility, authority and accountability. The management must not delegate complete responsibility of the project to a team in the first instance. Authority should be delegated as and when the teams show the capability to handle more responsibility. When authority is given to spend, the management must mark the limit ensuring that there is a limit for different levels of management. In a SDWT setting, the decision making process should have a gradual shift from the managers to working teams. A gradual transition ensures that both the managers and work team are at ease with the change. The amount of authority to be delegated does not have a ready made answer. A reasonable approach of delegation is to monitor the quantum of authority essential to implement specific goals and the management can take decisive steps to transfer more authority when the situation demands. Teams must inform the facilitators through words and deeds that they can take more responsibilities. Though the authority is transferred to teams, frontline supervisors should always be ready to support the team in times of need. It is obvious that there is organisational reengineering in SDWT firms, but this does not mean that there is a complete change from traditional organisational setting. Too much authority can confuse team members who are not used to making decisions. Therefore, the management has to be vigilant to detect signs to either retract or extend decision making authority (Hartman 2002 p.113). Organisations turn to SDWT to meet the increased level of competitive pressures, increased quality expectations and worker empowerment. A number of analyses on SDWT suggest that managers usually struggle during the transition to self directed groups that requires shift in control. Managers are required to change their tactics to influence workers. Longitudinal analyses indicates that despite the implementation of work teams, managers focused to use influence tactics on individual basis. Managers use varying choice of tactics during the transition process to achieve the set objective. Exploratory analysis indicates that low self-monitoring managers tend to use more soft influence tactics and reduce the use of hard influence tactics during the transition process. Further, the behavioural influence of low self monitoring managers does not undergo change (Douglas & Gardner 2004 p.47-65). The various dimensions of SDWT that results in effectiveness does not ensure that they are related to one another in a particular industry setting. Instead, employee involvement, team characteristics and work design are the significant predictors of SDWT effectiveness. Moreover, team leadership is not of importance to the effectiveness of SDWT since in certain cases team leadership has a negative relation to the effectiveness (Spreitzer, Cohen & Leford, Jr. 1999 p.340-366). SDWT are not work groups since there is no much interdependence in the team and the accountability lies on every individual instead of the team as a whole. SDWT is a team of workers responsible for performing and managing tasks that gives out a service or a product which is delivered to an external or internal customer. Usually there are five to fifteen employees in a team hold the responsibility of scheduling, planning, staffing and monitoring. The team members rotate the technical and management responsibilities within the team periodically (Yeatts & Hytten). There are many characteristics that typically differentiate SDWT from other kinds of teams. SDWT is an intact team of individuals who work together on a day to day basis. The team is not formed for a special purpose and is designed to take up team ownership for a process, service or product and the team is responsible for the complete product. At any point of time, a team member should be able to perform all the tasks of the team. Proactive management is required in an SDWT due to its dynamic nature and requires the use of effective approach in the work. SDWT is geared to meet existing needs and there are no past records to refer if any problem arise. Since the competitiveness of SDWT is very high the facilitator of a team has to undertake many roles as a manager, mediator and resolve conflicts even though the person does not have the status of a team leader (Irani et al 2002 p.596-609). SDWT tools become effective when innovative approach is used to discuss problems and then find a solution. Methods like TPM (Total productive maintenance) and TOC (Theory of Constraints) can be used for operational improvements (Rose et al 1995). The first line managers in SDWT undergo a coach to coach development program to carry out boundary issues like interface problems with other SDWT on behalf of the customer and mediate supplier interactions and develop training opportunities for the team. The role of these managers are different from traditional supervisors because individuals manage themselves in a SDWT(What are self-directed work teams ? 2007). A SDWT is formed by combining people with diverse attributes like different skills, attitudes and personalities to effectively work towards a common goal. In a SDWT all team member are equally empowered (Irani, Sharp, Kagioglou 1997 p.199-205) During the team formation process certain members may complain about their participation. Such negative indications should be carefully considered and these members must be included or excluded based on the potential loss of the person or by considering the risk of disruption that person can cause to the SDWT (Recardo 1996 p.20). In an SDWT team members determine themselves how they will carry out the work and how the work various works associated with the project will be rotated within the team. New members are added to the team only with the approval of other members. There is reduction of turnover and improvement in productivity in an SDWT organisation (Palmer 2006 p.31-32) Peer pressure is not given importance in SDWT setting. Peer pressure can lead stress and health problems because SDWT includes group decision making which is a complex task(Roy 2003 p.359-376). Skill development is crucial for the fulfilment of SDWT principle of redundancy of skill and task and to rotate leadership roles and tasks. Multi-skill training, group problem solving, team building and retraining are some of best practices significantly associated to better performance (Pasmore & Woodman 2007 p.381). The morale of SDWT can be increase by providing proper training. This will enable team members to work together as a true community and thereby lead to better productivity (Application of self directed work teams for lean production). It is found that SDWT’s can create large difference in workers and their work. But this concept is not applicable universally because any organisation considering the installation of SDWT has to check whether the method is viable for the organisation’s circumstances (Sprague 1992 p.22-26). The effectiveness of SDWT has a negative dimension because team members are required to work in consensus, resolve issues and set priorities and goals on their own. It is difficult to build a consensus because members continue to report to traditional supervisors, do not have control on schedules, budges and other significant factors and are frequently given multiple assignments. This leads team members to handle a variety of projects that conflict one another. This is because companies basically focus on outcomes and do not evaluate the process of SDWT (WEbne-Behrman 1998 p.110) Conclusion It may be concluded that SDWT is an adaptive method of working where team members, learn, grow and evolve through quality improvement, flexibility, value-added customer orientation, speed and the capability to redesign rapidly and radically in response to circumstantial changes. Though there are several advantages, SDWT is associated with negative factors like peer pressure, accountability while control remains with top management, the pressure to work within limits, health problems due to work pressure and the need to adapt to changing requirement while there is no set standard for operation and the non-viability of SDWT in all industrial settings (Rose & Buckley 1999). However, the positive implications of SDWT in the form of improved productivity and morale of workers outweigh the negative factors of SDWT. Therefore self directed work teams are a boon for the success of an organisation. Reference Albert, Sylvie, R. & Fetzer, Ronald, C. 2005 Smart community networks: self-directed team effectiveness in action Team Performance Management Vol.: 11 Iss. 5/6 p: 144 – 156 Available: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/viewContentItem.do;jsessionid=AB61A194 E0E520445EC17B259E77C2D4?contentType=Article&hdAction=lnkhtml&contentId=1515100. Retrieved on August 28 2009 Application of self directed work teams for lean production Availablehttp://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/dissertations/AAI1460213/. Retrieved on August 28 2009 Barker, James R. 1993 Tightening the Iron Cage: Concertive Control in Self-Managing Teams Administrative Science Quarterly Vol.38 p:408-437 Available: http://www.jstor.org/pss/2393374. Retrieved on August 28 2009 Douglas, Ceasar & Gardner, William. L. 2004 Transition to self-directed work teams: implications of transition time and self-monitoring for managers use of influence tactics Journal of Organizational Behavior Vol.25 Iss.1, p.47 – 65 Available: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/106592118/abstract?SRETRY=0. Retrieved on August 28 2009  Hartman, Melissa G. 2002 Fundamental concepts of quality improvement Milwaukee: American Society for Quality Hickman, Gill Robinson & Creighton-Zollar, Ann. 1998 Diverse self-directed work teams: developing strategic initiatives for 21st century organizations. Public Personnel Management, 27(2), 187-200. http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst;jsessionid=KWjGFzntLWBglnJ1lmm7yMKlTKWx1KykRTnQnm92HJMD1pcMJqzd!945283895!766828861?docId=5001360330. Retrieved on August 28 2009 Irani,Z., Sharp,J.M., & Kagioglou,M. 1997 Communicating through self-directed work teams (SDWTs) within an SME learning organization  Journal of Workplace Learning Vol: 9 Iss: 6 p: 199 – 205 Available: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/viewContentItem.do?contentId=882097&contentType=Article. Retrieved on August 28 2009 Irani, Zahir., Choudrie, Jyoti., Love, Peter E.D. & Gunasekaran, Angappa 2002 Sustaining TQM through self-directed work teams International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management Vol.19 No.5 pp: 596-609 Available : http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0400190507.html. Retrieved on August 28 2009 Janz, Brian D. 1999 Self-directed teams in IS: correlates for improved systems development work outcomes. Information & Management Vol. 35, Iss. 3 p: 171-192 Available: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VD0-3VP9WJ0-4&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=992261503&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=b91f607e40bfa2493bff1f41c876bb4d. Retrieved on August 28 2009 Palmes, Paul, C. 2006 The magic of self-directed work teams: a case study in courage and culture change  Milwaukee : American Society for Quality, 2006 Pasmore, William A. & Woodman, Richard W 2007 Research in Organizational Change and Development Volume 16 of Research in Organizational Change and Development Series Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Ramirez, Stephen, M. 1999 FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin  Vol:68  Iss:8  p.20 to 23 Available: http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=178333. Retrieved on August 28 2009 Recardo, Ronald J.1996 Teams: who needs them and why? Oxford: Gulf Professional Publishing Rose, E.   Odom, R.   Murphy, R. &   Behnke, L.   1995 SDWT requires tools to be successful Harris Semiconductor Available: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=484398. Retrieved on August 28 2009  Rose, Ed & Buckley, Steve 1999 foreword to Self-directed work teams: a trainers role in the transition Virginia: American Society for Training and Development Roy, Mario 2003 Self-directed workteams and safety: a winning combination? Safety Science Vol.41, Iss.4 p: 359-376 Available:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VF9-47HKSM2-5&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=994000249&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=2910d69a7e00c5b83fee2dc5c3f91492. Retrieved on August 28 2009 Sprague, David, A. 1992 Self-directed Work Teams: A Key to World-class Operations? Journal of Industrial Management & Data Systems Vol: 92  Iss: 7 p: 22 - 26 Available: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/viewContentItem.do?contentType=Article&hdAction=lnkpdf&contentId=849710. Retrieved on August 28 2009 Spreitzer, Gretchen M., Cohen , Susan G. & Ledford, JR, Gerald E. 1999 Developing Effective Self-Managing Work Teams in Service Organizations Group & Organization Management, Vol. 24, No. 3, p.340-366 Available: http://gom.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/24/3/340. Retrieved on August 28 2009 Webne-Behrman, Harry 1998 The practice of facilitation: managing group process and solving problems California: Greenwood Publishing Group What are self-directed work teams ? 2007 Available: http://www.stanwickconsultants.com/page22-self-directed-workteams-autonomous-teams.html. Retrieved on August 28 2009 Yeatts, Dale E. & Hyten, Cloyd 1998 preface and acknowledgements to High-performing self-managed work teams: a comparison of theory to practice London: Sage Read More