Organizational behaviour - Essay Example

?Critically evaluate teams as a way of organising work and the challenges involved in managing this kind of organisation. Use an example, or examples, from your own organisation (or others) and apply OB theories and research in your answer. Team-based working has become one of the most important practices followed in all contemporary organisations to accomplish their goals. This is because of the general belief and the fact that the outcome of efforts of a group of like-minded people aligned towards common goal is much higher than the outcome of individual efforts put together. In this sense, a team generally comprises of people with similar abilities and skills and is aligned to common goals; however the team members’ roles and responsibilities within the team may vary in accordance with job requirement for achievement of team’s goals. Besides the propounded nature of team-based working and its advantages, teams as a way of organising work is constantly attacked with multiple challenges. This discourse critically evaluates team-based working concept based on various perspectives considered in organisational behaviour theories and research. This essay also uses team-based working situations and practices at the multinational corporation, Accenture, to understand the criticalities involved in this concept and its challenges. Team-based working involves grouping individuals that share common goals and interests; however, at an organisational level, these groups are formed on the basis of individuals’ abilities, skill-set, and job for which they are hired or job responsibilities. For instance, the IT and consulting giant Accenture, adopts team-based structure in almost all of its functions or departments. At Accenture, the ‘team’ is given greater emphasis and importance than individuals. This reflects in its overall working, structure as well as measurement of performance and delivery of results. Astall of Accenture explains that team-based working at this corporate begins with the way its businesses are structured. Although its businesses are organised along the industry lines such as consulting, IT and outsourcing, its functions are criss-crossed by its workforce grouping on the basis of their core job functions and/or deliverables (Czerniawska, 2007; p.166). Team-based working is not same as group-working; the latter usually refers to two or more individuals that come together to achieve a common goal or share similar interests whereas the former entails and instills synergy through collective working and striving towards achievement of a common goal and usually results in enhanced performance. Katzenbach and Smith (1993; qtd in DeCarlo, 2010) define a team as, “a small number of people with complementary subject matter expertise who are committed to a common purpose, set of performance goals, and a common approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable.” Teams can be of various types such as cross-functional teams, self-managed teams, virtual teams and problem solving or project teams. Accenture uses all these structures of teams to achieve its varied goals in diversified businesses across multiple locations. From a sociological and evolutionary perspective, it is true that ‘man’ is a social being and cannot live in isolation for longer time and achieve his desired goals. The same holds true in terms of his/her actions and performance. On another note, as pointed out by West and Markiewicz (2004; p.2), “To live, work, and play in human society is to cooperate with others.” These reasons are sufficient to advocate team-based working in highly competitive business environment. In an ideal state, team-based working is meant to bring together different people with diverse skills, attitudes, and experiences to come together and work towards a common goal. Such working is seen as an advantage by business leaders as it fosters innovative ideas, reduces erroneous activities/work, improves emotional statuses of employees and reduces individual stress. At Accenture, complex and simple work is performed with the former being mostly undertaken at consulting and IT sectors and the latter at back-office operations. Yet, Accenture strongly supports team-based working at all levels and for all types of work. Nevertheless, management specialists argue that that team-based working comes with unique challenges and issues that can have negative impact on outcomes of team members’ efforts and may hinder achievement of organisational objectives. A few challenges include lack of effective communication, inappropriate focus, solving the wrong tasks, lack of learning, unidentified individual potential, and lack of identity and/or motivation (Stray, Moe & Dingsoyr, 2011). These challenges in team-based structures are indicative of the fact that team-based working is impacted by certain other factors. Based on Katzenbach and Smith’s (1993) definition of a team, it can be devised that the main characteristics of a team should include number of people that make the team; skill set and complementary subject matter expertise; common purpose and performance goals; and accountability and responsibility (Boyle, 1997; DeCarlo, 2010). For these characteristics to be present in a team, it is essential that the team members develop trust in each other; establish effective and strong interpersonal relationships; develop specialized skills that can be put to use during the course of working; and possess a clear understanding of individual and team goals as well as each others role within the team. Lencioni (2006) identifies five dysfunctions of a team, by which he identifies the key characteristics of an effective team. The five dysfunctions include absence of trust; fear of conflict; failure to commit; avoiding accountability; and lack of focus. From trust perspective, effective teamwork can be established only when team members trust each other’s abilities, actions, decisions, and intentions. Considering that a team comprises of various individuals with different attitudes, interests, abilities and intentions, it is highly challenging to achieve such level of trust among team members. However, it is also true that teams are organised in accordance with the goals/deliverables, which purposely align all team members towards a common goal; moreover, team members are assigned to specific teams based on their skill set and qualifications, which brings uniformity in terms of their thinking and abilities. Teams may also be responsible for multiple functions/goals, which would require varied skills. At this point, team members’ psychological characteristics related to ego, maturity and understanding play a major role in instilling and sustaining team spirit among the members. Secondly, conflict as an outcome of these psychological characteristics remains the threatening factor to team spirit and teamwork. Fear of conflict tends to make team members timid and not express their ideas/opinions with other team members. The team leader’s role becomes critical in addressing such fear and in harnessing actual potential of the team members. Appointing effective leaders at all levels and for all teams is a greater challenge to larger organisations, like Accenture. Such organisations prefer to promote their high-performing and efficient employees to leadership roles; however, leadership qualities cannot be judged based on employees’ performance and/or efficiency. Thirdly, failure to commit has an adverse effect on the team’s performance due to ambiguity of roles and goals, self-interest of team members, lack of confidence, and non performance issues. The reasons for low or no commitment could be differences in values and goals of individuals; lack of motivation; and ineffective leadership. From accountability perspective, lack of ownership, mediocre performance, misaligned goals and objectives, work-related stress etc affect team-based outcomes. Lastly, lack of focus on goals/outcomes ultimately results in failure of the entire team; possible reasons could be lack of competition, lack of growth, lack of opportunity, and self-oriented goals and interests. In order to achieve desired goals, teams must be oriented/aligned to common goals that are in line with organisational objectives; should possess appropriate skills; should receive appropriate training and access to information; receive appropriate feedback as well as appreciation. All these factors that contribute towards success of team-based working indicate that team-based working goes beyond formation of teams or alignment of employees towards specific teams. Team-based working is essentially at three levels: tactical, firm-wide and strategic (Czerniawska, 2007; p.159). This division probably is more suitable for achieving desired organisational goals and to cater to changing organisational needs. For instance, changing needs such as process improvements, automation, business reengineering and elevating customer satisfaction scores, all require temporary teams to be formed in order to give new shape or process to the work and achieve changing expectations; these teams are usually referred to project teams that function at tactical level. Bringing people with different skills together to work on one platform and towards one goal is challenging; secondly, such teams are time-bound; these teams may or may not be geographically bound. In addition, challenges also surface in the form of earning team members’ commitment, trust, understanding and adaptability. Firm-wide teams are formed within the firm based on common goals of each function/department and the members possess similar skills and abilities. Strategic teamwork is by far the toughest challenge in terms of team-based working setups. At Accenture, strategic teams are formed between different business lines, such as consulting and outsourcing/service sectors, to bring about transformation in their business. Here, teamwork happens between Accenture’s consulting and outsourcing workforces, and between client and Accenture. Challenges in such teams are much more in magnitude and impact compared to tactical or firm-based working. One such challenge is the firm’s (consulting/ client/outsourcing) own goals or self interests, which are paramount but members from all the firms involved in the process have to establish collaboration in order to achieve the common goal. Moreover, strategic team-based working usually requires much longer time to accomplish desired goals and the teams are spread across different locations or countries. In addition, geographic differences, cultural differences, time-zone inconveniences pose serious challenges along with other challenges related to team-based working. Tuckman’s (1997) team development identifies five stages during the process of formation of a team: forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning (Hellriegel & Slocum, 2007). This process shows a varied pace with the type of the team. Hellriegel and Slocum (2007) spot seven core competencies that teams must possess in order to be successful: appropriateness (of reasons) of team formation; clarity of roles and goals; leadership participation in identification of responsibilities and tasks for team members; accountability and responsibility; appropriate decision-making methods; conflict resolution at personal and task-levels; performance assessment and improvement. The responsibility of making a team work lies with the leader who should be able to not only identify the development stage of the team and take it forward to the next stages but also ensure the team’s core competencies are established through careful study, participation and, if required, modification of roles and responsibilities of team members. Another critical factor in successful team-based working is the right approach to teamwork. This was evidenced when the project team from Accenture’s consulting business worked with one of their largest clients in helping them optimize their massive data. Based on this experience, Parker (2009) advises that the secret of any project team’s success lies in its approach and discipline; in this case effective team building and team management were the key drivers of success. Diversity in terms of expertise, goals, abilities, attitudes is much higher in project teams than formal teams; yet, diversity in any magnitude is a serious challenge that every team member must understand and adapt to deal with it in the right way. Organisations acknowledge the role of diversity and its significance towards organisational success. To promote and reinforce diversity, organisations adopt diversity management practices and polices in line with the legislative regulations of the country where the organisation operates. But, studies related to organisational behaviour indicate a variety of challenges in effective implementation of diversity management policies and practices in almost every country. Hofstede’s (1980) groundbreaking studies throw light on cultural impact on individuals’ attitudes and behaviour. A few such differences originating in multicultural setups include individualism-collectivism, power-distance, uncertainty avoidance, and gender-role orientation. Although Hofstede’s (1980) studies were specific to geographic locations, these differences can be felt in a team that comprises of people from various backgrounds and cultures, which is a common phenomenon in contemporary multinational organisations, like Accenture. This is another challenge brought about by globalization, which has resulted in mass movement of people across borders. Nations that provide vast job opportunities obviously have increased chances of housing multicultural people, and the same replicates in organisations too. Expatriates need to be trained on these cultural differences before taking on roles in foreign countries. Impact of cultures on behaviour, attitudes, thinking and lifestyles are hard to let go; or, this process takes much longer time. When organisations form tactical and strategic teams, multiculturalism and its impact is profound; this is a challenge because team members would require longer time to develop trust, interprofessional and interpersonal relationships; in resolving conflicts and in taking complete accountability for their roles and actions. Whether organisations are willing to provide such time and space to its members remains a question; in case not, then team members get pressurized due to various dysfunctions, as described by Lencioni (2006). Honesty, clarity and respect are three most important factors for success of any project or tactical team (Czerniawska, 2007). To what extent would individuals of the team keep their self-interests at bay remains a question until the members know each other and have developed required respect and clarity. For this, another critical factor is effective communication. For project teams that are virtually bound, communication media or platform plays a significant role. Another important factor for effective team-based working is the skill-level of the team members and the tasks and responsibilities assigned to them. Assigning high-level tasks to younger or new members can create ego issues with senior and experienced members of the team; and assigning less complex tasks to highly qualified young members also has similar impact on their attitude. Both these can have a negative impact on overall outcome and also on other team members. To get such decisions right, the team leader or manager plays a significant role. However, in most organisations, leadership positions are given to employees based on previous performance rather than leadership qualities. Most of Accenture’s clientele worldwide attribute their success and growth to Accenture’s ability to infuse discipline, efficiency and innovation in their working style (Czerniawska, 2007). Such achievements can only be attributed to the executive leadership that was able to put in place the right strategies through practices, policies, procedures. Organisations like Accenture adopt leadership assessment and training approach, which has had a sustaining impact on its leadership development through “leaders-teaching-leaders” approach (Moorhead & Griffin, 2008). This is probably the reason for Accenture’s success, which would have also had a great significance in shaping their teams at all levels. Differential values of individuals or team members and that of the organisation can be a serious threat to outcomes expected from team-based working. For instance, individuals that value money would work harder to give higher productivity and to earn extra incentives rather than focusing on quality or customer service, which is the value of the business. Increased stress to earn money tends to hamper quality of work. If an individual that values relationships is pressurized to run behind targets by his/her leader might feel frustrated. Similarly, if an individual is highly creative but made to perform routine or monotonous job and not allowed to participate in decision-making or innovative aspects of work will get frustrated in short span of working. In every possibility, a team comprises majorly of nine such individual types, as described by Belbin (1981). These nine individual role types include implementer, shaper, plant, monitor-evaluator, coordinator, resource investigator, specialist, team-worker and complete finisher. The challenge in effective team-based working is that all these roles are equally significant and are required to achieve desired outcome. The challenges increase when the teams come together for short-term, like project teams; are too small in size; face scarcity of time and resources; during crisis; and are managed by ineffective leaders. Hall (2005) argues that professional cultures are barriers to effective teamwork as they hinder establishment and development of professional interpersonal and interprofessional relationships. While professional cultures are taking over ethnic and national cultures throughout the world through communication technologies (Harvard, 2005), Hall’s (2005) argument points towards the basic cultural habits, attitudes and behaviours that are strongly attached to people, no matter where they live or move. Decision-making abilities of individuals depend upon their common sense, which needs to be applied to certain situations. Application of Peters and Waterman’s (2004) basic principles of management can actually have an adverse effect on team-based outcomes with teams that have multicultural members. For instance, individuals’ common sense is more often shaped by their experiences, contexts, and processes rather than an established process/procedure. When professionals are involved in decision-making process, chances of disagreements, varied views, ego clashes and misunderstandings are extremely high in multicultural teams. Harvard (2005) justifies that effective communication is essential even in highly established professional cultures and this is possible only by harmonizing differences between professionals through understanding, communication, feedback, insight and foresight, all led through common vision. In fact, team-based working model facilitates better communication compared to vertical hierarchy or traditional setup. In multicultural settings, communication training explaining non-verbal communication cues, body language, and behaviour would be of great help; such training will actually enhance chances of effective communication within the team. Improved knowledge about cultures and communication mechanisms will also help in better understanding of the contexts and processes being referred to by fellow team members. To sum up, on one hand team-based working facilitates better outcomes in less stressful manner and helps in establishing better relationships with other employees and customers and with employees across different functions. This structure improves communication process and helps in obtaining better understanding of expectations and goals, procedures and processes, and individuals’ abilities and weaknesses. On the whole, the team’s value and assets, in terms of people, knowledge, and resources, increases greatly compared to average value of individuals of the team put together. On the other side, team-based working comes with numerous challenges such as high potential for dysfunctioning of the team in the absence of right team members, effective leadership, appropriate resources and objectives, and the right approach to teamwork. Effective coordination and communication and appropriate cooperation among team members is essential to maintain harmony among team members and in turn achieve desired objectives. Challenges surface in terms of differences at various levels such as profession, culture, personality, attitudes, roles, self-interests, and respective functional or organisational expectations. References Belbin, RM (1981) Management teams: Why they succeed or fail, London: Heinemann. Boyle, R. (1997). Team-based working. Committee for Public Management Research Discussion Paper 4. Available from http://www.cpmr.gov.ie/Documents/Team-Based%20Working.pdf (Accessed March 21, 2012). Czerniawska, F. (2007). The trusted firm: How consulting firms build successful client relationships. New Delhi, India: Wiley-India. DeCarlo, D. (2010). Extreme project management: Using leadership, principles, and tools to deliver value in the face of volatility. California, USA: Jossey-Bass. Hall, P. (2005). Interprofessional teamwork: Professional cultures as barriers. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 19 (1) , 188-196. Harvard, P. (2005). Team culture communicating = Semantics + semiology. In Carayannis, E.G, Kwak, Y-H and Anbari, F.T’s The story of managing projects: an interdisciplinary approach. Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group. (72-88) Hellriegel, D and Slocum, J.W. (2007). Organisational behaviour. 11th ed. Ohio: Cengage Learning. Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation, leadership and organisation; Do American theories apply abroad? Organisational Dynamics. 9(1), 42-63. Lencioni, P. (2006). The five dysfunctions of a team. New Delhi: Wiley-India. Moorhead, G and Griffin, R.W. (2008). Contemporary views of leadership in organisations. In Organisational behaviour managing people and organisations. New Delhi: Dreamtech Press. (342-365). Peters, T.J and Waterman, R.J. (2004). In search of excellence. New York: HarperCollins. Available from, http://www.harpercollins.com/browseinside/index.aspx?isbn13=9780060548780 (Accessed March 24, 2012) Parker, J. (2009) Purolator delivers on ambitious approach to data optimization. SAP NetWeaver Magazine. Available from http://www.accenture.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/PDF/Accenture_Purolator_Delivers_on_Ambitious_Approach_to_Data_Optimization.pdf (Accessed March 21, 2012). Stray, V.G, Moe, N.B and Dingsoyr, T. (2011). Challenges to teamwork: A multiple case study of two agile teams. In Sillitti, A et al’s Agile processes in software engineering and extreme programming: 12th international conference, Madrid, Spain. New York: Springer. (146-161). West, M.A and Markiewicz, L. (2004). Introduction to team-based organisations. In building team-based working: A practical guide to organisational transformation. Massachusetts, USA: BPS Blackwell. (1-3). Read More