Team Players and Teamwork - Example

1. The client brief (Sub-Taks 1) In terms of task reflexivity, most respondents strongly disagreed that the teams usually review its objectives. The respondents also strongly disagreed that the team uses methods that are discussed well. It is also clear that the team always discusses if the team’s effectiveness in working jointly. Further, respondents also indicate that the team slightly disagreed that they modify their objectives relating to changing circumstances. It is also explicit that the team rarely changes its strategies. The team neither clearly discusses the way it performs, nor reviews its job execution method. According to the respondents, the team rarely reviews the decisions-making strategies. With reference to patient safety and incident management, the respondents indicated that the team does not discuss it. In addition, the team rarely reviews it potential on the management of the patient’s safety. Besides, it does not help in enhancing the individual member’s behaviors and beliefs concerning the patient safety. As regards participative trust and safety, the respondents indicate that the team blames the members whenever there is an error. They also reported that the team never allows the members to raise their issues and problems. Besides, respondents reported that sometimes members feel that the team discriminates upon them. From the study, the respondents’ answers also indicate that team does not fully encourage team members to help each other. It is also clear that the team sometimes undermines the members’ effort, and that their talents and unique skills are inadequately valued. Additionally, study responses show that it is difficult for the team to discuss the issues concerning the patient safety. As well, the team discourages members from reporting the patient’s safety issues. In relation to team learning behavior, the respondents indicate that the team does not consider methods of enhancing the team’s work. The team also fails to address the differences of the members directly. Besides, it regularly finds new information that result in making significant changes. In addition, the study indicates that the team rarely invites eternal people to discuss with the members various issues affecting them. In terms of risk management, the team insufficiently invites external experts to join in the discussions. In terms of individual development, the respondents slightly disagree that the team supports their professional development. Respondents also indicate that the team does not effectively support their individual learning tasks, as well as give helpful ideas and realistic assistance. A few respondents also claim that the team does not aid them in prioritizing their professional development. What is more, the study shows that members do not focus each individual’s work to ensure high standard work. With regards to optimizing the patient’s safety, the team offers members little help. Concerning inter-professional credibility, the study demonstrates that members are uncomfortable with other team members’ procedural suggestions. It also reports that respondents do not trust other members’ knowledge concerning their projects. In the team, it is also clear from the project that the members do not seem to rely on other members’ information during discussions. This is evident in the fact that most of the respondents tend to double-check other members’ input before accepting. Respondents also reported that they do not trust others’ expertise and that the junior members’ input is less regarded in the team. Most of the respondents also claimed that they are uncomfortable with other members’ suggestions regarding patient safety and care. In terms of interpersonal professional learning, it is clear that the professional groups always conflict on the achievement of their objectives. The study findings also indicate that there is a feeling of distrust between colleagues in various professional groups. As well, there is no positive debate among the professional groups in the group. Respondents of the study also reported that professional groups lack collaboration when handling their tasks in the group. The level of trust and cooperation among these professionals in the group is very low. In the case of regular contact among members of the team, the study shows that there is irregular communication. The group meetings are also held occasionally. The results also demonstrate that members of the group seldom communicate with each other. Besides, the group indicates that the team members are not involved in joint discussions concerning patient safety and care. Respondents’ views illustrate lack of regular and shared exchanges regarding their tasks in the group. About mutual trust, the study findings reveal that there is very little friendliness and trust among team members, and that they do not help each other. Sense of empathy and understanding among the member is also minimal. There is also no friendliness and trust among team members in issues relating to the management of adverse incidences. As regards team efficacy, the respondents’ opinions confirm that the team’s goals seem unattainable. As well, the team requires adequate effort and time to achieve their goals. Some of the team members also lack the necessary skills, and that they require sufficient experience and talent to handle their roles. On the issue of team’s longevity and stability, respondents claim that there is a considerable turnover of the members in the team. Some respondents confirmed that they have the impression that many members left the group in the last six months. Relating to to shared leadership and leadership clarity, the study shows that the team is led by many people. Moreover, few team members have no leadership roles and that the team lacks a clear leader. The results also confirm that there are conflicts concerning the leaders of the group. Team members do not focus on maintaining high mutual commitment and motivation. Besides, members lack a clear approach to work, and that they have poor skills of addressing problems and conflicts. It is also evident from the study that other members of the team instruct others on what and how to handle their responsibilities. Regarding the way the team reports and handles incidents, most respondents reported that they have observed very few cases of patient safety in the past six months. They also reported that they have had over ten errors in the same duration, of which most could harm the patients and staff. It is evident from the study that the group has little experience with Root Cause Analysis and the methods, and that the members have never use the RCA techniques and tools in the past one year. On the issue of team foundation, the respondents indicate that the group had no clear vision of its goals, and that its activities are not guided by the charter. Most of the team’s goals are not aligned with the organizational goals, and that it lacks sufficient resources and skills to attain the set goals. It is also worth noting that the team members have no clear roles, and that the team does not measure its performance successfully. Furthermore, the results show that members do not fully understand the customer requirements and that information on changes are not promptly. The unit also lacks appropriate expectations regarding the team. There is also absence of proper and enough training of the team members. With regards to team functioning, the respondents’ views reveal that the team meetings are handled inefficiently. The team does not fully involve all members; hence little cooperation. The rate of improvement in the team is very low. In the case of team performance, the team uses ineffective long and short-term strategic planning procedure and fails to satisfy customer needs. The findings also indicate that the team is less productive and that the team’s functioning greatly interferes with individual members’ performance. 2. Problem solving Based on the information provided by the respondents in the client brief, it is clear that the team experiences various challenges in undertaking its mandate. To begin with, the team lacks a clear vision and mission statement; hence no proper guidance for its activities. There is no effective communication among members of the team, which results in poor general performance. In terms of collaboration, the team members lack adequate collaboration and cooperation in handling their activities. The study also reveals certain form of discrimination among members of professional groups in the group. This, in turn, results in members’ failure to listen, trust and uphold other members’ suggestions, insight and views regarding the running of the team’s affairs. It is also critical to note that the team does not encourage members to invite other professional groups and external experts in undertaking their responsibilities. In relation to the strategies used, the team does not seem to regularly change its plans and strategies to suit the situation. As well, the team offers little training to its members; hence absence of essential skills and experience for successful team management. The team also fails to effectively communicate any changes or developments to the team members. Concerning customer needs, it is evident that the team members have little understanding of customer needs; thus the difficulty in satisfying them. The team does not always hold meetings and members are not engaged in positive initiatives regarding its goals and objectives. In terms of the team’s leadership, members have no clear leaders. This is because everyone seems to hold certain leadership roles. This also causes confusion and disorder among members, especially when carrying out their duties. The team also lacks dedicated coaches and supervisors that can effectively train and guide members on good performance. In fact, the present leaders fail to act as role models in the team. As regards conflict and problem resolution, there are no proper approaches to this; hence poor performance and divisions among the members. Team members also have low morale to work and distrust each other. Additionally, members do not feel free to air their grievances and opinions in the team. As well, the team, does not offer a free environment for the members to share their personal issues and problems, and does not recognize individual performance of the members. In terms of team’s identity, it is evident that few members understand their existence in the team. Since there are no clear objectives, they do not find satisfaction and pleasure in the team. Moreover, many team members tend to leave the group because of dissatisfaction. The level of individual development in the team is low in the sense that the team does not support it. This is because; members neither access useful ideas nor practical support. The work standard is low as members do not consider other’s work. What is more, the level of experience imparted on the members is very minimal. For instance, the use of RCA methods and tools is absent in the team. Incident reporting is also rated low in the study as few cases are often handled. The number of inaccuracies is also alarming and that most of them have detrimental effects on the clients and the staff. (Sub-Taks 2)Solutions and recommendations In order to succeed, the group has to adopt certain measures. First, it is critical for the team to have an explicit concord of purpose. This implies the need for free debate of its objectives until members dedicate themselves and that the objectives make sense to them. Second, the team should be self-conscious regarding its operations. This means that the team needs to clearly discuss its processes. It should have clear and common mechanics, rules, expectations, and mechanics necessary to achieve its objectives (Parker 2011, p. 19). The third measure required by the team is setting clear and challenging performance goals. The team should set and attain a consistent series of successes in the process of achieving big goals. In relation to the team’s climate and atmosphere, a comfortable, relaxed and informal group is recommended. This implies an environment that is free from tensions, and one that involves people and enhances their interest in work (Salas and Karen 2012, p.8). Parker (2011, p. 21) further says that a team can avoid discrimination among members by encouraging adequate debate in which the participation of every member is allowed. This should be done with caution that members remain focused on the purpose of the group. In case the dialogue digresses, some should correct it instantly. The team should also stress on members listening to each other and that everyone should be given equal time to express their opinion. Members should not fear to present their creative ideas regardless of their status. The team also needs to have its leadership shift regularly to suit the changing situations. This implies that the most important matter is for the team to have the activities undertaken correctly rather than focus on who rules what. This will enable the team to achieve its set objectives at the appropriate time. In terms of conflict in the team, it is vital for the members to note its importance (Salas and Karen 2012, p.8). Yet, team leaders should devise suitable conflict resolution and management measures so as to avoid them developing into enmity and interfering with team’s purpose. Besides, the team should encourage disagreements among members regarding their different opinions. Even so, disagreements must not be overridden or suppressed by hasty team action. Assignments should be clear for all members and that everyone should stick to set rules, responsibilities and duties (Salas and Karen 2012, p.8). A successful team should also encourage criticism among the members. This should, however, be considerably comfortable, free and frank. This is because criticism is a positive ingredient aimed at removing barriers that the team experiences. Furthermore, to be effective, the team should ensure that majority of the decisions are made at the point of a common agreement (Parker 2011, p.23). Nonetheless, those that disagree with the common agreement of the team should not keep their different opinions private, rather they should not let an evident consent cover their difference. This also implies that the group should accept a simple mass as a suitable basis for a decision. In addition, individuals should also be allowed to express their ideas and feelings (Salas and Karen 2012, p.8). What is more, the team should ensure that every individual carries their own weight. Exceeding or meeting the other group members’ expectations is necessary. Every individual should also respect the group’s mechanics, which include reporting in time, preparing before the meetings, and completion of their roles at the set time (Cardno 2012, p. 143). In terms of mutual trust, the team should encourage its members to concentrate on whole group. It is also important to avoid personalizing opinion differences and problems. According to Salas and Karen (2012, p.9), it is also imperative for the team to uphold cohesion. This means that its processes should run smoothly without any interference, and that members should be allowed to contribute equally in order to deliver something bigger than their own parts. Each member’s contribution should be combined flawlessly and in the agreed deadlines, and members should feel satisfied that they achieved something from other members as well as the process. Lastly, Cardno (2012, p. 145) asserts that a team will succeed only if the members are well trained to use the standard techniques and tools. In this case, all members should have appropriate skills required in handling the RCA techniques and tools in order to effectively address some incidents. This is helpful in enhancing effective incident response and minimizing cases of inaccuracy and damages in the team. Works cited: Cardno, Carol E. Managing effective relationships in education. Los Angeles, CA London: SAGE, 2012. Pp. 143-150. Print. Parker, Glenn M. Team Players and Teamwork: New Strategies for Developing Successful Collaboration. New York. John Wiley & Sons, 2011. Pp. 19-30. Print. Salas, Eduardo, and Karen Frush. Improving Patient Safety through Teamwork and Team Training. Oxford: Oxford University Press, USA, 2012. P.8-10. Print. Appendices Some of the tools used in the study include: The TCAM Questionnaire Team Assessment Questionnaire; TeamSTEPPS There is an attached example of the TCAM questionnaire Read More