Electron Company - Effective Team and Performance Management - Case Study Example

Effective Team and Performance Management Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Summary 3 2. Introduction 4 3. Bruce Tuckman’s Model analysing theformation of the team 4 3.1. Forming 5 3.2. Storming 6 3.3. Norming 7 3.4. Performing 7 3.5. Adjourning and Transforming 8 4. Belbin’s team roles: 9 4.1. Plant 9 4.2. Monitor evaluator 9 4.3. Implementer 9 4.4. Specialist 9 4.5. Finisher 9 4.6. Shaper 10 4.7. Coordinator 10 4.8. Team-worker 10 4.9. Resource investigator 10 5. Evaluation of the team’s performance 11 6. Recommendation for change in the team 12 7. Challenges that can be faced by the recommendations 13 8. Conclusion 14 1. Summary The report highlights, analyzes and evaluates the team performance of the Electron Company, a small manufacturing company in North of England. The report identifies the critical factors that impact the team performance. The first section elaborates Bruce Tuckman’s Team Development Model and critically analyses how team dynamics and team formation has occurred in the case study. The second section of the report evaluates the effect of social loafing and cohesion on the success of an efficient team. The fourth section elaborates the recommendations for changes that are needed in the team focusing on the leadership and management styles. The last section points out the challenges that are faced by the recommendations made for the changes. Lastly a conclusion is given to sum up all that is learnt from the report and recommended in the report. 2. Introduction The report aims at analysing the Electron Company team case study with the help of Bruce Tuckman’s Team Development Model. It evaluates the performance of the team with reference to this model. Recommendations are also given to bring in changes in the working condition of the company. Electron Company, established in 1997, is a small manufacturing company which is located in North of England. It manufactures components for the telecommunications sector. The UK headquarters have 150 employees with 50 employees in the manufacturing department. The company follows a traditional business structure consist of sale/ marketing, engineering, human resource and manufacturing. It has both full-time staffs and part-time staffs. The electronic department has eight teams and each of which is named according to a colour. The team colours are white, red, blue green, silver, aqua, purple and yellow. The teams consist of 10 team members, some are on hired on temporary contracts and others are the full-time employees. Each team’s objective is to attain improved productivity within 2 months after the formation their team. The performances of the team are judged on the basis of how many electrical components they have made within this two months period. The team members are rewarded for achieving their improvements in the productivity. All the members of the successful team are paid bonus. The performance of the team is analyzed based on the Tuckman’s model of team development. 3. Bruce Tuckman’s Model analysing the formation of the team Bruce Tuckman identified five stages of development that every team practices and he also recommended that all teams confront a fairly unproductive primary stage before becoming an independent unit. The five stages are as follows: 3.1. Forming In the first phase the team formation takes place. The individuals behaviour is determined by a desire to be acknowledged by the others and also avoid controversy or conflict with others. Serious problems and feelings are seriously avoided and the people focus on being busy with their routine work. Individuals also collect information about each other and also about the scope of the task and how to advance with it. The team members gather and learn about the challenges and opportunities that they face and then they agree on the process which they will follow to eradicate the challenges and grab new opportunities. They are motivated for not to be ignorant of the problems and objectives of the team. Team members do their best for the well being of the organization but are very much focused on themselves. Grown-up team members begin to model suitable behaviour even at this early phase. This stage is important because at this stage the members of the team get to know their team mates and exchange some information and even make friends. In the Electron company case, a large number of employees were hired during 2000 and these employees were integrated into one of the teams out of the eight teams. The workers were not familiar with the team’s value and thus they pose an immediate challenge to the relationships that the older employees had formed. Few of the senior members of the company have the responsibility of placing few older and experienced workers in to the new teams thus formed to help the new members to organize themselves and teach them the value of the company. Thus in this stage it is seen that firstly the teams are formed and then older members of the team teach the new members of the team the values of the company (Greer, 2012). 3.2. Storming Next the team enters in to the storming stage in which various ideas are challenged for deliberation. The team addresses the problems they have to resolve and they address how they will function independently and jointly and what leadership model they will believe in. In many cases, storming can solve the problems rapidly. In other cases, the team never leaves the stage. The maturity of many of the team members usually assist in deciding whether the team will ever go out of this stage or not. The storming stage is necessary for the growth of the team. It can be controversial, disagreeable and even painful to the members of the team who are reluctant to adopt the values of the company. Patience of each team member and their differences should be highlighted (Cooper, 2008). Without patience the team fails to achieve its goal. This phase can turn out to be destructive to the team members and will decrease their motivation if not controlled. During the stage, administrators of the team may be available but are more instructive in their support of decision-making and in a particular behaviour. The team members will therefore determine their difference and members will be able to participate with one another more happily. In the case of Electron Company the team values and the particular work ethics have begun to penetrate the new member’s individual work ethics and this process in fact took a highlighted intensity. Members of the old and experienced teams responded to the change and thus they can successfully understand. By imparting the knowledge to the new team members, it could make them understand purpose of the team’s values and norms (Earley and Gibson, 2009). 3.3. Norming The team aims to have a goal of having a joint plan that that the team should perform. Many may have to surrender their personal judgment and agree with others in order to make the team function. In this stage, all team members take the responsibility and have the ambition to work for the success of the teams goals. In the case of Electron Company, the experienced employees have good control over the new tem members. The older employees experienced that the new team members are adopting the team values and they are acting accordingly. Slowly the value based norms became the objective of the team that the members can easily follow. 3.4. Performing Some teams escalated to the next stage which is performing stage. Here the teams are able to function as a unit. The high-performing teams are those teams which are found to be doing their jobs smoothly and effectively without the need of external supervision. By this time the teams are motivated and knowledgeable about their task and the culture of the company. The team members are competent enough now and can autonomously handle the decision-making process without the external supervision. At this stage if disputes arise in the team they are allowed as long as they can be handled by the team members. The leaders of the team are always active and supportive during this stage. In this stage the team takes the most important and necessary decisions regarding the development of the task they are assigned and also regarding the development of team’s unity. However, even the strong performing teams will revert back to the previous stages in some situations. Many old teams undergo these cycles many times as they respond to changing circumstances quickly. For example, a change in leadership may cause the team to lapse in the storming stage as new people challenge the existing norms and dynamics of the team (Wison, 2010). In the Electron company case, a changing environment was seen in March-April 2008. The team members interacted with each other informally and their behaviour in the team meeting were changed. They did not talk so much about the importance of the teamwork as they used to do (Oakley, Felder, Brent and Elhajj, 2004). This aroused due to dispute in the team and thus linking the case with the performing stage can be said that these changes are well handled by the team leaders and the dispute was in control. Team meetings that took place for one hour every two weeks did a lot to the employee development. It discussed the attitude of the new members and it was an open discussion with the new members. If the old members of the team saw that the new members of the team were not performing according to the norms the topic was talked about in the team meeting. The team meeting could bring up any anybody’s behaviour for discussion (Stanley, 2006). 3.5. Adjourning and Transforming This stage involves the practice of degenerating the team members and form new team. It involves the process of letting go the group structure and moving on. Authors have described this phase as “Deforming and Mourning”. It involved with the termination of roles and the completion of tasks and declining the dependency. This process can be stressful and difficult and is quite unplanned (Belbin, 2007). In the case of Electron Company, new members were introduced in the team by terminating those team members who are not acting according to the norms of the team (Belbin, 2010a). 4. Belbin’s team roles: Dr. Meredith Belbin, a UK researcher found that teams need the right blend of people to do task efficiently. He identified nine types of people in team and identifies their strength and weakness. The types are as follows: 4.1. Plant They are creative and innovative types of people in a team. They can solve difficult problems quickly. They are too occupied and thus they are cannot communicate effectively. 4.2. Monitor evaluator They are sober and take strategic decisions. They looks at all options and judge accurately. Their main limitation is that they lack drive and the ability to influence others. 4.3. Implementer They are disciplined and reliable. They turn ideas into practical actions since they are rational. Their limitation is they have an inflexible bent of mind. They respond slowly to the changes that are happening around them. 4.4. Specialist They are single-minded and dedicated to their works. They provide knowledge and skill which are very rare. The main limitation is they only contribute only on a narrow front. 4.5. Finisher They are anxious to find anything innovative and they have a good habit of delivering in time. 4.6. Shaper They are challenging and dynamic and they prosper when they are pressure. Their main limitation is that they often offend their co-workers or people’s feeling. They are quite often reluctant to delegate (Belbin, 2010b). 4.7. Coordinator They are mature and confident and clarify their goals. They promote decision-making. They are good manipulators and that is their bad side. 4.8. Team-worker They are co-operative and diplomatic too. They listen and build their own ideas. But they are indecisive in crucial times 4.9. Resource investigator They are extrovert and enthusiastic. They explore new opportunities and develop new contracts. They have the bad habit of losing interest in a work once their main enthusiasm is lost. Belbin’s team roles can be linked with the Electron Company case to see what type of members are there in the team and what is their strength and weakness. After analyzing the team member’s action, it is seen that the team- worker role, coordinator role and the sharper role can be put forward. Like a coordinator each team member of the Electron Company has the confidence to achieve their team goals and they also have the power to take part in decision-making. Each team members are cooperative and they build their own ideas like the team-workers (Cooper, 2008). 5. Evaluation of the team’s performance In the early 2000, new employees were hired and the individuals are integrated in to the eight teams that are formed. The new workers were unfamiliar to the team’s value which posed a serious challenge to the culture of the company. This had a great effect on the values that the older members of the team have developed (Hanley, 2007). This could have led to conflict of ideas between the new and the old members of the team but the company started to hire new workers on temporary basis so that they do not pose such difficulty to the team. If the employees are hired on temporary basis they have to do their work efficiently within that stipulated time and thus they do not get the chance of going against their older member’s values. Once they start performing well and follow the culture of the company and also the values set by the older members of the team, the company decides whom to make the full-time worker. The experienced team members help the new team members in adopting the values of the team and assist them to reach the team goals. As the team values are penetrated as the individual work ethic the new team members get the authority to take individual decision. The experienced team members expect that the new team members should work according to the norms set by them (Lord, Roussin and Sommers, 2010). Thus as the new members obeyed the values and the culture of the company they found confidence in their work and they took part in controlling themselves. It is observed that around March-April 2008, the team members have changed in their behaviour and their presence in the team meeting have also changed. They did not talk about the team values and the importance of the team work. They did not find it important to obey the team work values. These created a severe problem in supervising the team because they did not listen to their supervisors. The issue was rectified by making team meetings. In the team meetings which took for one hour every two weeks different issues regarding the team members are discussed. The team members who do not obey the values of the team have to face the team meetings where they are asked about their reason of not obeying the values and not performing their task efficiently. They are even questioned about their behaviour towards their senior team mates. The team meetings made a lot of changes in the values on knowing about the difficulties that are faced by the new team members. These amendments are done to the values of the team to ensure that the team members are motivated and they can feel themselves to be the part of the team (Katzenbach and Smith, 2003). 6. Recommendation for change in the team Teamwork is important to analyze the development of the successful working relationship among the team members (Sapru, 2013). The recommendations for the change in the team are as follows: 1. Pathgoal theory is a contingency theory which focuses on the effectiveness of the leadership of a leader who adopts a particular behaviour style to lead his/her subordinate in the right direction and also analyse the situation in which the subordinate is working. The experienced team leaders of the team should possess such leadership quality so as to make his team members comfortable with their decisions and also help them in performing a task (Adair, 2006). 2. There should be a regular supervision for analysing the performance of the team and their works should be compared with the other so as to induce in them that they have to be the best team (Jacobides, 2006). 3. The teams should be worthwhile and should be created be created in such a way that there should not be ego clashes between the team mates. 4. A sense of trust should be created among the new members of the team towards the senior members so that they obey their senior’s instruction (Larson and LaFasto 2005). 5. The individual effort and talent of the team members should be evaluated. These will build a self confidence in every employee. They should be rewarded if their performance is good. 6. Individual’s technical skill as well as their experience should be counted before coming to a team decision (Brooks, 2006). 7. Challenges that can be faced by the recommendations The following are the challenges that can be faced by the above recommendations made: 1) The team members can feel that they are not equally responsible to one another for the team’s aim. Lack of commitment and the hard work of the individual may possess a serious barrier to the team’s goal and the personal goals (Stanley, 2006). 2) Team members may become totally ignorant of the new information and adhere to the decision exploiting their position in the team (Mitsch, 2010). 3) The team may lack unity among themselves and thus they can interrupt each other while they are talking. These may lead to a complete silence from one member of the team during team meetings. 4) When there are serious tensions, conflicts cannot be solved and the team mates make aggressive gestures and personal comments (Anderson, 2006). 5) When the team members’ posses lack of creative thinking then they are unable to grab new opportunities. 6) If the leaders are inefficient in driving the whole team then the team will suffer multiple problems due to lack of coordination (Belbin, 2004) 8. Conclusion In Electron Company the team members are giving their best possible work for the accomplishment of the team objective. The older team members set the team values which are followed by the new team members. The company started to do team meetings when they are reported by the senior members of the team that some new team members are not working according to the values of the team. Thus it can be concluded that though Electron Company faced challenges from the new employees but they cleverly eradicated it through their amendments in rules and hiring policies. These ensured the smooth running of the company. Reference List Adair, J., 2006. Leadership and motivation. London: Kogan Page. Anderson, L., 2006. Team teaching: Benefits and Challenges. The Centre for Teaching and Learning, 16(1), p. 3. Belbin, J., 2010(a). The management of teams: why they succeed or fail? Burlington: Elsevier Linacre House. Belbin, R., 2004. Beyond the team. Burlington: Elsevier Linacre House. Belbin, R., 2007. Changing the way we work. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Belbin, R., 2010(b). Team works and roles. Burlington: Elsevier Linacre House. Brooks, I., 2006. Organisational behaviour. New Jersey: Pearson Education Ltd. Cooper, S., 2008. Brilliant leaders. New Jersey: Pearson Education. Earley, P. and Gibson, C., 2009. Multinational work teams. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Greer, C., 2012. Supervisory management. New Jersey: Pearson Education. Hanley, R., 2007. A path–goal theory of leadership effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16, p. 330. Jacobides, M., 2006. The Inherent Limits of Organizational Structure and the Unfulfilled Role of Hierarchy. [online] Available at: [Accessed 13 July 2013]. Katzenbach, J. and Smith, D., 2003. The Discipline of Team. < http://www.meridiancoaches.com/resources/Discipline_of_Teams.pdf> [Accessed 13 July 2013]. Larson, C. and LaFasto, F., 2005. Teamwork: what must go right / what can go wrong. New York: Sage Publications. Lord, S., Roussin, J. and Sommers, W., 2010. Guiding professional learning communities. London: Sage Publication. Mitsch, B., 2010. Team advantage. California: John Wiley & Sons. Oakley, B., Felder, R., Brent, R. and Elhajj, I., 2004. Turning Students Groups into Effective Teams [pdf] Available at : < http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/Oakley-paper(JSCL).pdf> > [Accessed 13 July 2013]. Sapru, R., 2013. Administrative theories and management thought. Delhi: PHI Learning Pvt. Limited. Stanley, J., 2006. Path–goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy, and a reformulated theory. Leadership Quarterly, 7, p. 324. Wison, C., 2010. Bruce Tuckman’s Team Development model [pdf] Available at: < http://www.performancecoachtraining.com/resources/docs/pdfs2/BruceTuckman_Team_Development_Model.pdf > [Accessed 13 July 2013]. Read More