Team work development - Essay Example

Team work development Executive summary The report drawn below tends to discuss the various methods of engaging the group members in a team work process. Argued by Scholtes in the first section of this paper, teamwork is a very important and a fundamental requirement of any organization in the process of achieving her set goals and objectives (Scholtes, 1988). The success of the organization is viewed as the overall contribution of the entire group while the weaknesses are working against by everyone to turn them into strong points. Section two of this paper details the stages in the development of a team work. These include, the forming stage, storming stage, the norming stage and the performing stages all discussed in the paper. The third section of this paper looks at the case study of the Motorola Company’s adopting teamwork and her overall performance in the global market after the adoption. The last section has a reflection of a formal group using the teamwork process to carry out her functions. Introduction Team work is usually a very important aspect of the group in any group or organization which desires to attain her desired goals and objectives. Katzenbach and Smith define teamwork as the ability of all members of a group to work together with a common aim which must be in line with the set goals and objectives of the group in question (Katzenbach and Smith, 2003). Teamwork orientation requires that every person within the group inculcates and puts forth the desires of the group as the first priority in whatever he or she does. According to Johnson the aspect of working as a team requires that the overall load of the group’s responsibilities and needs to be equally distributed among all members so that each and every person within the group is given a key role to play in the group depending on his or her ability (Johnson, 2007). Besies, Tuckman, notes that if each member of the group can be able to freely contribute to the building of the group’s image without looking at the other person within the group, then many groups would be very successful today (Tuckman, 2005). This paper will look at the importance of group work in the performance of various groups and the aspects of building and inculcating the spirit of teamwork in various individuals in any group. Teamwork building and development training take a series of the learning and training approaches. Burn notes the first learning approach as the cognitive approach whereby a person uses his or her personal instinct to learn the good morals and behaviors in a manner which is in line with the success of the group. The reinforcement approach is applied at the mature stage as the group develops into a more focus driven and task oriented team. Considering that most task performance related groups are made up of adult persons, the management and leadership in such teams should realize the need to incorporate adult ideas and views in the development process, what Brooks refers to as andragogy (Brooks, 2005). Hanwit views teamwork building and training process in a series of four stages stipulated below: Forming (awareness) stage This stage as Lewis argues is very crucial in the life cycle of any group and that any group. The forming process is the initial stage and involves the identification of one's self within the group and the ability to work with the team members. At this stage, the group members show less regard in their work and to each other as long as they keep their courses clear (Lewis et al, 2008). The forming stage as the name suggests is the stage at which the group is being formed and is compared to a toddler who is learning how to walk. Lippincott notes that at this stage, feelings, weaknesses and mistakes done by beach member is covered up by him or herself or by the close friends within the group, in addition he adds that there is a lack of shared understanding of what needs to be done (Lippincott, 1994). This usually happens as the group members get acquainted with each other and the various members get to identify the abilities, talents and skills possessed by each member of the group. Any group which passes this is then able to move on to the next stage. Storming (conflict) stage This is the most unstable stage in the entire process of teamwork development. At this stage, the personal identifications are revealed as people get to know each. The weaknesses and strengths of each individual are exposed as the group members interact and discover each others potentials and weaknesses. As opposed to the forming stage, at the storming stage, these character traits are not hidden anymore and clearly expose themselves. Each member’s personal life is open up and the inner issues in his or her life exposed. The team becomes inward looking as each member is seen through based on the characters of each. Singer notes that at the storming stage, there is more concern for the values, views and problems harbored and dug deep in the hearts of the team members. The members tend to open up to others whom they deem close allies and each member knows one after another (Senge, 1994). Norming (co-operation) stage This involves the normalization of the team as each member identifies the part he or she is to play in the group. The team members begin to gain confidence and trust among them and each begins to participate fully in playing his role as they get well acquainted with the norms of the group in line with the group’s goals and objectives. A more methodical and open approach is adopted in the operations of the group. As a result, a straighter course is set forth which is followed in the operations of the group. Respect is slowly but surely inculcated within the group and people begin to value each other. As Hanwit notes, a passion develops in the people and they become well acquainted with the roles they are likely to play in the group (Hanwit, 2007). The members begin to devote much time to ensure that their lines of duties are not the point of failure of the team. Meetings are attended more regularly and without much complaints and discussions on the tangiest issues exhausted at the meetings. Regards strongly develop and each person takes the other as a colleague ready to help and trust in and outside the team as a personal friend and a workmate. Performing (productivity Is the last stage in teamwork development. Here, the output of the various team members is felt within the team as each member becomes key in his or her line of operation with a key aim of maintaining and producing better results for the success of the entire group (McGill and Beaty, 1995). At this stage, leadership qualities and traits are decided upon based on certain known values and skills possessed by each member of the group. Situations are taken into consideration as a determinant for leadership positions given the known abilities and characteristics of each individual member. Burns notes that at this stage, the mission and vision of the organization are well defined for each member and the benefits of being within the group felt across each section of the team (Burns, 2005). The team members begin to carry out themselves in a manner that signifies their personality traits and professional development (Laird, 2005). The team has well-set goals and objectives which actually form the driving engine of the entire group and from which the members draw their responsibility and motivation. Success belongs to all and a failure at any point is taken as the group failure and not an individual weakness. The entire team works hand in hand to ensure the corrective measures are taken to seal the points of weakness and strengthen the strong points. Results are celebrated across the domain and the failure is felt across the team. One’s problems and disappointments are taken as a group’s problem and one's success is celebrated by the entire group as the team members begin to have a stronger passion for the group as well as for each other. According to UK Department of Trade and Industry, a group that survives all these stages is likely to display the qualities of a very operational progression enhancement team driven by the following factors: clear objectives put in place to drive the team’s goals and mission, openness and confrontation among the member groups, development of support and trust among the team members, well defined lines of co-operation and well spelt conflict resolution mechanisms put in place to be followed upon the development of any form of technicality (UK Department of Trade and Industry, 2006). Case study of teamwork in Motorola Company Upon the realization of the important contribution of each member of the organization as a team player, the management of Motorola Company decided to invoke a team spirit. This is due to the complexity in the industrial processes as the company manager notices and which required building a team spirit from within and without. Galvin asserts that a team and not an individual has been regarded as the most fundamental unit in the development of any modern engineering organization as this spurs good interactive and offers effective communication grounds for the entire team. People are therefore able to share information and knowledge across the professional fields with the help of other members who are professionally trained in such (Galvin, 1996). He notes that a broad range of profession is required in developing an innovative idea among the group members in product growth and testing up to the market place. Professional experts such as engineers, material scientists, financial analysts, artists and other people specialized in various fields collaborate in a bid to create a standard product that is able to meet the ever changing needs of the consumers in the global market. The need to compete effectively in a changing market was actually set in at the Motorola company by the national government upon the realization of the need to produce in line with the heightened competition in the global market augmented by the acute fall in American production in the automobile industry in the early 1980s. The global competition gave incentives to top American companies such as 3M, Motorola among others to focus on enhancing their performance through teamwork. As a result, the then chief executive officer and chairman of Motorola Inc., Christopher Galvin, issued a decree stating “there is no longer a place in Motorola for an engineer that cannot work in a team” (Galvin, 1996). The issues that would be commonly handled at individual and professional levels were given priority at the company level and every matter affecting any individual became the key concern of the company. Due to this, efficient teams developed at all levels with established group leaders. Production site was given a multifaceted array of operators who would ensure that all considerations were in place to produce better quality products, the marketers looked for market qualities and communicated back to the production engineers. The new products were marketed at high standard and outstanding worldwide media houses were used by the company marketers. Ensuring that quality controls were already put in place, the company embarked on luring the local and international market bodies to purchase her products (Galvin, 1996). The company in this way was able to dominate the global market with her products all brought about by the team playing aspect of the entire group. Today, Motorola Company is one of the leading mobile service providers in the entire globe. Reflection The description below is a reflection of the operations of a learning group I belonged to with regard to carrying out the production process as a team. The group members were very co- operative in meeting the needs of the group and each member ensured that he or she performed the task given to the latter besides attending most of if not all meetings. I particularly was very co- operative and attended most of the meetings unless in a few occasions where I could not attend for which I gave outstanding reasons. Our group emerged top in the overall class performance. Cogs notices that the process of develpping teamwork within a group follows a five stage model that explains the development process as follows: the polite stage which involves the development process, the where are we stage characterized by the complete loss of the group members as they are unable to discern the lilmits of their actions, the bid for power stage characterized by the struggle for leadership positions among the group members, the constructive stage where the group members begin to realize the need to belong to the same group, and the esprit stage where the team functions as a complete team with a common goal (James, 2010). My group was very cooperative as far as Cog’s model is concerned and we managed to succeed in most of the things. I was elected to chair the team and I carried out my responsibilities with utter diligence bringing every member on the board to work out our ways as a team eyeing a common goal. Conclusion In conclusion, I would like to note here that without equitably contribution of all members of any group forming the team, the output is usually minimal. All persons however have got important functions to perform in the success of the group and thus each should be given a chance to participate in realization of the group’s dreams and objectives. Team building is a difficult task that requires the participation of each member of the group and the net results are tremendous if the group survives the hurdles bound on their way. As seen in the two case studies, the Motorola Company and our group mention later in this text, the success of any group are strongly pegged on the overall contributions of the whole people involved. References Brooks, J. (2005). Training and Development Competence: a practical guide. London: Kogan Page. Burns, R. (2005). The adult learner at work, . Sydney: Business and Professional Publishing. Galvin, C. (1996). People and Team Work Building. Presented at the ASEE International Conference on Engineering Education. (pp. 25- 31). Washington, DC: McGraw. Hanwit, J. (2007, March 3). Four Stages of Team Building. Retrieved March 3, 2007, from http://www.ttacev.org/articles/team.uk Industry, U. D. (2006). People DEvelopment and Team work. London: Cambridge University Press. James, H. (2010, September 11). Retrieved September 11, 2010, from Cog’s Ladder of Group Development.html.: http://www.teleport.com/~oro/ndindex/Cogs Johnson, D. D. (2007). Joining Together: Group Theory and Group Skills. . Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Katzenbach, J. a. (n.d.). The Wisdom of Teams. Creating the High-Performance Organization., 45. Laird, D. (2005). Approaches to training and development. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley. Lewis, P. A. (2008). Assessing Teaming Skills Acquisition on Undergraduate Project Teams. Journal of Engineering Education, , 87, 149- 155. Lippincott, S. M. (1994). Meetings Do’s, Don’ts and Donuts: The Complete Handbook for Successful Meetings. , ISBN 0963796631. Pittsburgh, PA: Lighthouse Point Press,. McGill, I. &. (1995). Action Learning, second edition: a guide for professional, management and educational development. London: Kogan Page. Scholtes, P. (1988, July 7). The Team Handbook. How to Use Teams to Improve Quality, 2- 7. Senge, P. M. (1994). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Currency/Doubleday. Tuckman, B. (2005). Psychological Bulletin. Developmental Sequence in Small Groups, 63, 384-389. Read More