The Role of Teams and Groups - Essay Example

Question 2: The notion that teams are just a fad is a fallacy. This idea is driven by the fact that within a team, there is a commonalty of purpose and coordinated efforts that end up in a result. Unlike a group, a team comprises of members whose tasks are distinct from each other and the overall aim is also specific. A group can have the same common characteristics but lack purpose as such a group cannot be considered as a team. Since a team has a coordinated effort, the result of a combination of these efforts is a synergy. The resultant performance is greater than the efforts made at an individual level (Rose & Buckley 1999). In a team, there are conditions that can lead to positive results. However, negative impacts are also unavoidable within teams. In this paper, the conditions of positive and negative results are illustrated with respect to negotiations with teams. This illustration aims at determining the fact that a team is not just a group of individuals with a crowd mentality about a common issue. This is because there are many factors that are responsible for developing a team, and these factors include the kind of skills that members of a team have, the motivational policy that is put in place to encourage members of a team in to working hard. These are some of the factors responsible for developing a team, and there are many more. There are many advantages of a team than there could be possible limitations of the same. In management, organizing employees into teams and coordinating their effort has an advantage of increasing the productivity of a business. The improvement in productivity is as a result of the synergy generated within the team. The synergy is built up as a result of a coordinated effort among the members of the team. Since a team relies on a coordinated effort, specialization within a team is highly imperative. This means that a team can comprise of members that perform specific specialized subtask that will be joined with the efforts of others to complete one whole task. In specialization, the team becomes more efficient since the actions performed by each member are limited to their scope and easy for them to achieve (Baldwin & Migneault 1996). Delegation of duty is another important aspect of teams. In management, team leaders can decide to allocate different tasks to members as they deem fit. The criteria used in delegation can be based on talent and capacity of the different members of a group. The result of this effective delegation process is that each member will be awarded responsibility according to talent and scope of their capacity. The tasks assigned will, therefore, be delivered to perfection and with high quality since the members interests, talent and ability are all considered. In the context of negotiations, teams behave the same way. It has to be noted that negotiations or bargains are a complex process that requires a mastery of many principles actions. A team is better poised to offer a competitive bargain or negotiation than individual negotiators. Some of the known advantages of teams in negotiations can be associated with the benefits of collective bargaining in trade unions (Rose & Buckley 1999). From the history of collective bargaining, the most notable perspective is that the group of employees had to select persons with good bargaining power to represent their interests in negotiating with employers. These selected negotiators was a team that had to use specially coordinated efforts within themselves and come up with the optimal position to cover the interest of the employees and the employers as well (Rose & Buckley 1999). In this case, the negotiators who represent a group of workers can be viewed as a team and their achievements are as a result of the synergy that is generated within a team spirit. However, if unchecked, a group negotiation may negatively affect the results of the negotiation. The formation of trade unions and the selection of teams of negotiators resulted in numerous benefits to the workers which included better pay and improved conditions at work. The implication of these advances at work meant that the position forwarded by a team meant a more powerful bargaining position than at an individual level (Rose & Buckley 1999). Power is an important aspect of a negotiation. In the context of trade union team of negotiators, the power comes as a result of the backing that they get from the group that they represent. As such, the ability to induce the employers to cede their position is higher when a team is heading a negotiation process. When both negotiating parties bring their position to the table, the use of power to gain leverage is an essential initial step that can influence the outcome of the negotiations (Volkema 2006). This is because when one group is bargaining from the point of power, then chances are high that it will manage to convince the other party into making concessions, and hence achieving their interests during the process of negotiations. The diversity of teams is a merit that makes teams efficient. This efficiency is derived from the compilation of several unique perspectives and attributes of members of a team. In organizations, diversity implies the existence of several unique talents that can be harnessed to produce excellent results resulting from the different efforts. In the context of negotiations, the impact of team spirits remains the same (Volkema 2006). A team of negotiators can decide to accord each member a unique role to play at the negotiations so as to make the process more effective. This is quite similar to the process of delegation that assigns different roles to team members based on their unique attributes and talents. The result of this formation in negotiation is a stronger bargain due to the effectiveness of members of the negotiating team (Rose & Buckley 1999). Effectiveness, in this case, is caused by the ability to specialize in the fields that best suits their capabilities. Despite all these beneficial conditions of teams within the context of negotiation or organization management, there are still some disadvantages that are associated with teams in different contexts. In management, the disadvantages of team formation could result from the diversity of cultural background that causes language barriers (Acuff 1997). In the context of negotiations, diversity causes a number of problems that could have a negative impact on the negotiation process. First, the most common problem that is associated with team negotiators is related to teams strength which is diversity. Team negotiators often present a wider range of ideas and positions that it becomes difficult to harmonize (Rose & Buckley 1999). In most cases, the divergent views of the team can result in negotiation meetings to drone for a longer period than expected leading to a loss of time. Moreover, the numerous analyzes presented by the members of the team at a negotiation serves to consume a considerable amount of time (Robbins, Odendaal & Roodt 2003). Secondly, the negotiation process requires the negotiators to take and give offerings and positions. In a case where decisions have to be made, the responsibility to take the decision is vested in all the members or in some cases a single lead negotiator (Acuff 1997). Two problems are bound to arise, in this case. One, if the decision is taken by an individual, blame is to be put squarely on that person should the position taken not bear any good. Two, if the decision is based on the group, then a longer time will be taken to reach a consensus, and this makes group negotiations take longer (Neider & Schriesheim 2005). A group negotiation will always take longer, because of the difficulty in reaching consensus, based on the need of satisfying the needs of different members of the team. Nonverbal communication is an important aspect of a negotiation. Through a controlled non-verbal communication, the negotiator can gain some power to use as leverage in the process. In team negotiations, this aspect becomes difficult to control. The main reason for this difficulty is that different individuals react to situations differently. As such, the non-verbal communication by a team of negotiators will result in a multi-faceted communication of a position that could be difficult for the other party to understand. In a case where a party to a negotiation has a weak best alternative to a negotiated agreement, concealing it will increase its strength. Concealing an alternative can be achieved through non-verbal communication processes like silence (Acuff 1997). Acuff (1997) explains that in as much it is possible to conceal the intention of an individual through silence; silence is not a recommended tool that can be used for purposes of negotiations. This is because it can help in raising suspicions between the parties communicating and negotiating. Suspicions will always play a role in undermining negotiations and communication between two parties. In conclusion, it is noticeable from this preceding discussion that a while a group of individuals can be a fad; teams cannot be categorized as such. This notion stems mainly from the fact that teams are organized groups with membership playing distinctive roles. In the end, the collaborative efforts of the members of a team are enjoined to complete a specific task. There are conditions where the application of teams could result in more positive value to the organization or group forming the team. A possible application of teams that can yield a positive result is in management of people and delegation of duty. When persons are organized in groups, the outcomes are increased due to the synergy generated from the combined efforts. These advantages of teams are also directly applicable to negotiations. In the context of negotiations, the positive effects of teams include a stronger bargaining power that creates leverage in negotiations. This power is normally got from the backing that a negotiating team has from the group that it represents. Other conditions that make a team more poised to produce positive results in negotiation can be linked to the diversity and delegation of duty. However, there are no merits of a team also comes with possible demerits. Diversity is the strongest position of a team. This is because different members have different strengths. In a multicultural setting, the diversity is likely to create a language barrier. In the context of negotiations, diversity creates a condition of likely disagreements from the many perspectives presented by members. This many perspectives would make negotiation meetings. References Acuff, F. L. (1997). How to negotiate anything with anyone anywhere around the world. New York: AMACOM. (p. 100-102) Baldwin, D. A., & Migneault, R. L. (1996). Humanistic management by teamwork: An organizational and administrative alternative for academic libraries. Englewood, Colo: Libraries Unlimited. (p. 19) Neider, L. L., & Schriesheim, C. (2005). Understanding teams. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Pub. (p. 154) Robbins, S. P., Odendaal, A., & Roodt, G. (2003). Organisational behaviour: Global and Southern African perspectives. Cape Town: Pearson Education South Africa. Rose, E., & Buckley, S. (1999). Self-directed work teams: A trainers role in the transition. Alexandria, Va: American Society for Training and Development. P. 29 Volkema, R. J. (2006). Leverage: How to get it and how to keep it in any negotiation. New York: AMACOM. (p. 3-4) Read More