Effective Team and Performance Management - Assignment Example

?Effective team and performance management Sr.# Topic Pg Introduction 2 2. Reflection 3 3. Alternative s of action 7 4. Learning and conclusion 9 References 11 1. Introduction: “When a team outgrows individual performance and learns team confidence, excellence becomes a reality”. Joe Paterno Managing of teams and enhancing their performance is one of the most crucial elements for ensuring the successful completion of tasks on hand. As a part of our study, we were assigned various tasks which were required to be accomplished in teams, comprised of fellow classmates. The key purpose of this assignment was to ensure accomplishment of a comprehensive understanding of the concept of working in teams, and various factors associated with the same such as, the manner in which teams function, how to enhance the performance of teams; avoid arguments and disagreements and working together towards a common goal; various ways to avoid conflicts within teams; the issue of leadership and emotional intelligence; the impact and influence of decision making and the skill of negotiating with team members, among others. For the purpose of accomplishing this task, i.e., that of working in teams effectively and successfully completing the various group activities assigned to us as a part of this study, we used various models and theories to support and understand the concept of effective team management. The models proposed to be used for this task include conceptual models, mathematical models as well as computational models. For instance, the Cannon-Bowers (Cannon-Bowers et al., 1995) model of team effectiveness; the Tuckman model of team development developed by Bruce Tuckman (1965); Belbin's team role theory - a model which identifies 9 team roles which are associated with each specific personality trait of the members in a team; etc among many others. Finally, my personal reflections of the tasks performed based on my individual experiences will be explained using the John's (2000) model of structured reflection which includes three key factors i.e. experience, reflection and alternative action. These models and theories will be applied to the group activities assigned to us, in order to interpret, examine and analyze the manner in which the concept of team performance and management functions. 2. Reflection For the purpose of this segment, three key tasks undertaken by us will be described, and the corresponding experiences and issues associated with the same, will be reflected upon in a brief manner. The formation process of our team came through coincidence such as when tutor asked everyone to form a group; our group came into existence due to the fact that we were sitting in a same row at that very time. The group was consisted of multicultural members. I was both excited as well as nervous since this was my first time working with such a multicultural group. Before we could work on the assigned tasks, all the team members were given a Belbin questionnaire, based on which our roles in a team would be decided. According to the results of this questionnaire, I was assigned the role of a team worker and implementer. The rest of the team members were assigned appropriate roles according to their respective results. This worked in the favour of our team, since we all were best suited for the roles assigned to us, and helped us function effortlessly. Task 1: Egg flying contest. Description of the task assigned: For the purpose of this task, the team members were asked to choose 5 out of 7 resources provided to them, to enable the egg to be dropped from 2m without breaking it. It also required the teams to select leaders and each team was assigned a time limit of 15 minutes, to accomplish this task. Key issues faced: The key issue faced during this task was deciding on the resources to be selected, that would help us in successfully executing the activity, without breaking the eggs. The members were divided on the opinion regarding which resources to choose, and there were lot of discussions and debates regarding the use and effectiveness of the choice of resources chosen / suggested by each member. Since the task was to prevent the eggs from breaking, every member had different opinions regarding the type of resources that would help in accomplishing this task, and arriving at a common consensus was somewhat difficult at the beginning. However, eventually everyone agreed, after some deliberations and discussions, and the list was ultimately finalized. Task 2: Lost on the moon exercise Description of the task assigned: In this task the group members were asked to analyze a situation where they were expected to interact with a mother ship which was 200 miles away on the lighted surface of the moon, but has crash landed, and ruined. Everything on the ship was destroyed and the task was to make a list of 15 items which were critical for their survival. Key Issues faced: The task on hand was extremely critical since it required us to list 15 critical items which were extremely crucial for survival of our crew. This required us to work as a team, collectively and come up with a list of items which were absolutely essential and most important for the crew to help them survive. The key issue while working on this particular task was to finalize the list, since all 5 of us gave different suggestions regarding the items which would be highly useful for survival of our crew. There were minor arguments due to difference of opinions and agreeing on a common list seemed highly unlikely, as everyone believed their perspectives as most apt. The team leader took charge of the situation and convinced everyone to co-operate with one another, since time was of essence, and after some deliberations, we finally agreed on the final list. The leader of our team was bureaucratic / task-oriented and ensured that the tasks assigned to us were done in accordance with the rules. Task 3: Crime in Cambridge Park Description of task assigned: This task required us to perform various tasks as a team of detectives, responsible for investigating a serious crime in and around the City Center of Cambridge. We were given a case to solve, and were asked to approach this task by way of various sub-tasks. These tasks included - task 1: assuming key roles such as SIO (Senior Investigating Officer) who would be the team leader responsible for strategic decision making purposes; and task 2: Investigating the crime. For the second task, we were given a list of scenarios to choose from. Key issues faced: This activity required us to assume certain roles, in order to execute the task assigned to us. The selection of roles was a critical issue and many suggestions and ideas were exchanged regarding the best person suitable for each type of role. Since we all belonged to diverse socio-cultural backgrounds, our attitudes and approach towards things were starkly different. Hence it was decided that it would be more apt, to assign roles based on the individual characteristic and personality types of the group members. One of the most crucial decisions was to assign a team leader i.e. the SIO, via a common consensus. 3. Alternative course of action The most recurring problem encountered during the course of this task was frequent disagreements and conflicts among the team members. Most of the conflicts which occurred during the tasks were task-conflict or cognitive conflict and process conflict. Task conflict also referred to as cognitive conflict or C-type conflict refers to conflicts which are the arguments between the team members with regard to the pros and cons of the ideas being discussed and / or considered; while process conflict refers to the type of conflicts which occur between members of a team with regard to disagreements regarding roles assigned to them, and the approach adopted to achieve the desired goals (Thompson, 2004). The conflicts arose because of a clash of opinions and perceptions among the members, which could be attributed to cultural diversity. Most of the conflicts encountered by the teams were positive in nature, and were rarely of a dysfunctional type, which could have potentially ruined the harmony and mutual regard for each other among the team members. Another significant reason for the conflict could be attributed to the vast difference in values and culture of the team members. Since this team comprised of members from culturally diverse background, their attitudes; perceptions and views regarding various issues differed significantly which had a great influence on the manner in which they approached the task on hand. Of the 5 team members, 2 of them were British; 1 was Chinese; 1 was Spanish and 1 from Saudi Arabia. The cultural diversity of the team, accounted for the differing values of the team members. Some team members were more concerned with voicing their opinions and were highly assertive in their approach, while some, including me, were concerned with keeping the team intact, and contributing to decision making that would help the team from falling apart. Furthermore, the personalities of the team members were starkly different from each other, thus it was apparent that their approach and attitude towards resolving issues and accomplishing tasks were bound to be different as compared to the other members. Although diversity in composition of the teams did lead to trivial conflicts but the debates were healthy in nature, and did not interfere with our overall goal of successfully completing the tasks. The best way to avoid trivial conflicts is to ensure that each team member listens to the others compassionately and attentively and show a willingness to be persuaded by the others, rather than stressing their own points and insisting on imposing them on the others. In order to achieve this, the leader must develop a policy or set of rules which needs to be followed in case of conflicts. Also, to avoid disagreements, and discord all the team members should have used better means of communication, to influence the others to think differently, and give others a chance to share than their perspectives. The team members should have used simple statements to avoid misinterpretation and misunderstandings, and helped each other in understanding their perspectives by clarifying the reasons behind choosing a given alternative over the others. Listening attentively is the key to effective communication, and the team members should have listened more attentively in order to avoid misinterpretation of their viewpoints and spare the others from feeling unappreciated. In order to better understand the perspectives of the other team members and to build positive inter-relationships with each other, we should have used simple yet effective techniques such as role playing, where each team member is given a chance to put themselves in their team mate's shoes. Such a technique could have helped everyone in understanding the team members better, and build stronger professional bonds with each other. 3. Learning / Conclusion Theoretical Perspectives for Task 1: Shared decision making / participatory decision making: For the purpose of this task, the Averaging (Kaplan & Miller, 1987) method of decision making was used, whereby all the team members put forward their individual opinions and choices, and the decision was made after deliberations and discussions. The key factor in decision making was majority vote, whereby the alternative chosen by the majority was consensually agreed upon by the rest of the members. Analytic Hierarchy Process The Analytic Hierarchy Process (Winston, Albright and Broadie, 2012) is a theory which is based on the values and perceptions of individuals as well as groups. This theory entails that with regard to decision making in groups, judgments are made on the basis of a multilevel hierarchy which is based on various priorities. The group members are required to arrive at a decision based on priorities assigned to each task (Byun, 2001; Sarkis and Talluri, 2004). This method of decision making, involves three key steps; namely - Structuring the problem into hierarchies; comparative judgment and synthesizing the priorities. In this particular task, we were required to throw eggs from a given distance, and do so without breaking them. Our key job was to choose from a list of materials/ things, which would help us in accomplishing it successfully. We had to prioritize our goals, with regard to the given task i.e., our top priority was to ensure that we choose materials which would help us in preventing the eggs from breaking; and the second priority was to arrive at a common consensus regarding the type of materials to be chosen for this task. Once that was done, the accomplishment of the given task became much easier. Theoretical Perspectives for Task 2: Theoretical Perspectives: . Kuhn-Styles to handle conflict: According to research, there is a strong relationship between the style of conflicts faced by members in a team and level of effectiveness in decision-making (Khun & Poole, 2000). The research further stated that groups which apply an interactive style of conflict management are far more successful in taking effective decisions as compared to groups which indulge in confrontational or conflict avoidance styles of management. In this particular task the group members were required to suggest a list of items which would help our crew to survive. One of the most commonly faced issues in decision making in groups, is arriving at a common consensus and agreeing on the alternative picked by the leader or rest of the team mates, to avoid arguments, and / or disagreements. Like all tasks, this task also required us to contribute our thoughts and seek acceptability / confirmation for the same from the other members, since the decision would be based on majority voting / choice. The list of items which appeared commonly on the list of most members, were almost unanimously agreed upon as crucial, while the rest of the items, were selected after some deliberations, coaxing on the part of the team leader, and through mutual co-ordination and consent. Theoretical Perspectives for Task 3: Theoretical perspectives: Leadership theory: According to the Trait theory of leadership, leadership roles are assigned on the basis of certain traits and / or characteristics of individuals. This theory posits that leaders have certain qualities which help them influence their followers, and take charge of activities assigned to them, for the successful completion of the task on hand (Armstrong, 2012). Decision making model: Figure 1: A model of team emotional intelligence, conflict, task complexity and decision-making Source: Troth, (2006) pp. 2 According to Tannenbaum et al., (1992) the ability of teams and / groups to function effectively is dependent on the manner in which they handle conflicts encountered while performing a given task; and interact with one other during such conflicts / disagreements. The inability of teams to overcome their personal conflicts further adds to the complexity of the tasks on hand, making it difficult for them to function effectively ultimately resulting in failure to achieve desired goals. In this particular task, there were widespread disagreement among the members, however, the same were overcome through emotional intelligence, which is described to be the fundamental factor in influencing teams to overcome the conflicts and coax them to arrive at a common consensus (Ashkanasy and Daus, 2002; Jordan and Troth, 2004). Belbin’s team role specifications: Team Roles Person Specification Plant (PL) Inventive, ingenious, eccentric, solves difficult tasks, full of ideas with strong ownership and neglects practical matters. The resource investigator (RI) Sociable, excited, talkative, who discovers opportunities, makes productive contacts, loses interest once initial excitement has elapsed. The Co-ordinator (CO) Mature, assertive, a good leader with objective goals, endorses decision making, delegator but prone to be lazy and want to takes credit for effort of a team. The shaper (SH) Someone who is challenging; thrives on pressure and possesses the drive and courage to overcome hurdles. Monitor-evaluator (ME) Basic of such person’s attributes are sober, strategic, discerning, keep close eye to details, possess excellent judgment capability and logical. Team worker (TW) Co-Operative, Mild, perceptive and diplomatic, good listener. In summary someone who possesses the ability of calming the waters but try to escape conditions that could involves stress. Implementer (IM) Such a person should be disciplined, reliable, conservative and efficient such as who turns ideas into practice. Completer (CO) Such a person should be keen to lookout for errors, delivers on time, known as perfectionist and with obsessive behavior. The specialist (SP) Technical expert, highly focused capability and knowledge, driven by professional standards and dedication to personal subject area. Source: Belbin, 2004 Other general remarks / reflections: The tasks assigned to us as a part of this seminar, helped me in understanding the manner in which teams function and the significance of collective / group effort in contributing to the team’s success. The following is a brief overview of the things I learned during the group tasks: Conflict management: Working in teams often invariably leads to conflicts and disagreements among the team members. I experienced the same while working on the group tasks assigned to us. I learned that although conflicts could lead to disastrous results, particularly with regard to accomplishment of the common team goals / objectives; positive conflicts on the other hand, actually help in learning more about the diverse perspectives. Team members, particularly those with culturally different backgrounds, differ significantly in their approach towards team management. I had the opportunity to observe the manner in which people from diverse socio-cultural backgrounds react in times of stress and handle situations, thus giving me an insight into solving things differently. The most important thing I learned from working in a team, is to manage conflicts effectively by working around them, and listening to the points of views of other team members. Significance of effective communication: I learnt that effective communication is the key to resolving differences of opinion and steer the teams towards accomplishment of a common goal. All members must share their individual opinions and discuss the pros and cons of the same, and arrive at a common consensus based on the views and opinions of others. Interaction and communication with the members helps in analyzing a given problem from various angles, and ensures that the chosen alternative is the best possible solution to the problem on hand. How to become a good team leader: I learnt the various qualities required to be a successful team leader. According to Adair (2008) there are seven qualities that one should possess to become a leader that are enthusiasm, integrity, toughness, fairness, warmth, humility and confidence. I realized during the tasks, that I lacked the quality of self-confidence and assertiveness to communicate my opinions and views to the others. I also learnt that during times of conflict, I wasn’t confident enough about my viewpoints and hence refrained from sharing my views with the other members for the fear of failure, and lack of confidence in my own judgment. In order to be a successful team leader, I must learn to communicate my viewpoints more effectively and in assertive manner, and be more confident about my judgments. The most important learning outcome of this seminar, was the knowledge gained regarding forming of teams. I learnt how teams are formed, and how they are managed effectively. This can be explained with the help of the following model: Figure: Tuckman’s team development Model Tuckman Model for reflection Norming Storming Performing Forming This was my first experience of working in such a culturally diverse team. I have realized that team working is not about merely being in a team and working together towards a goal rather it is more about understanding the nature of team members. In order to reflect on this experience, I have used the Tuckman Model. It is a model which constitutes four stages for an effective team working: such as forming, storming, norming and performing these are in the wrong order (Bales, 1965). References: Adair J, (1987), “Teams”, Effective team building”, Published by Pan Books UK. Armstrong, M., (2012). Armstrong's Handbook of Management and Leadership: Developing Effective People Skills for Better Leadership and Management, Kogan Page Publishers, pp. 6-7 Ashkanasy, N. M., & Daus, S. D., (2002). Emotion in the workplace: The new challenge for managers, Academy of Management Executive, 16, pp. 76-86. Bales R F, (1965), “The equilibrium problem in small groups” Small Groups: Studies in social interaction, New York: Knopf. Belbin R M, (2004), “Key team roles”, Management teams, 2nd edition, Published by Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, UK. Black, D. (1958). The theory of committees and elections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Byun, D.H. (2001). The AHP approach of selecting an automobile purchase model. Information and Management, 38, 289-295. Cannon-Bowers, J.A., Salas, E., & Converse, S.A. (1993). Shared me ntal models in team decision making. In N.J. Castellan, Jr., (Ed.), Individual and group decision making (pp. 221-246). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Davis, J. H. (1973). Group decisions and social interactions: A theory of social decision schemes. Psychological Review, 80, 97-125. Jordan, P. J., & Troth, A. C., (2004). Managing emotions during team problem solving: emotional intelligence and conflict resolution, Human Performance, 17, pp. 195-218. Kaplan M F & Miller C E, (1987), “Group decision making and normative versus informational influence: effects of type of issues and assigned decision rule”, Journal of personality and social psychology, 52: 346-360. Kuhn, T., & Poole, M. S., (2000). Do conflict management styles affect group decision-making?: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Human Communication Research, 26: 558-590 Sarkis, J., & Talluri, S. (2004). Evaluating and selecting e-commerce software and communication systems for a supply chain. European Journal of Operations Research, 159, 318-329. Sen, A. (1977). Social choice theory: A re-examination. Econometrica, 45, 53-89 Thompson, E. P., (2004). Making the team: A guide for managers. Pearson Education Ltd., pp. 224 Troth, A., (2006). A model of team emotional intelligence, conflict, task complexity and decision making. International Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 14(1): pp.2 Tuckman B W & Jensen M A C, (1977), “Stages of small group development revisited”, group & Organization Studies (pre-1986); Dec 1977; 2, 4; ABI/INFORM Global pg. 419. Winston, W. L., Albright, C., Broadie, M., (2012). Practical management science. Cengage Learning Publications, pp. 16-22 Read More