Contrast between Groups and Teams - Essay Example

? Groups and Teams Contents Page Introduction 2. Discussion………………………………………… 6 2 Impact of Belbin’s team role theory……… 6 2.1.1 Leadership Styles……………………… 6 2.1.2 Conflict Management…………………...8 2.1.3 Theories of Group Development……….8 2.2 Survival Game………………………………..11 2.3 Summary of Belbin team Roles………………13 3. Conclusion………………………………………......14 4. References…………………………………………..16 GROUPS AND TEAMS An increasing collection of literature has contrasted groups and teams, with suggestions that there is more effectiveness in teams than in groups. A group can be defined as a collection of persons who work in the same place or are put together to finish a given task. The performance of the group results from a coming together of people with an aim of sharing information, insights and views. The performance of the group results from the coming together of people to swap information. While all teams could be termed as groups, teams can be further defined as a subset of a special group. Its working definition is a select number of people who possess skills that complement each other, are committed to a shared purpose, performance goals and their approach, and consider themselves to be mutually accountable. Whereas groups do not require mutual and individual accountability, teams are built on this foundation. A common characteristic of both is accountability. However, the members of the group are measured by and concerned with individual accountability. Team members, on the other hand, consider themselves mutually accountable. Another common characteristic between groups and teams is their shared sense of purpose. However, while the group carries out the purpose of the organization, teams fulfil a purpose that is jointly planned and determined with the authority within the group. The Belbin model is a teamwork concept that seeks to achieve an accurate and coherent system to explain behaviours of individuals and how these behaviours aid in influencing the success of the team. The premise of this paper is to discuss the impact of Belbin team roles on leadership styles, conflict management, and theories of group development and to apply these theories in a survival game. 1. Introduction Every group has formal norms and rules. Group leaders are normally managers whose leadership is based on the position within the hierarchy (Hass, 2009 p112). Teams are committed to achievement of their desired and agreed goal and to working as one unit. This is achieved via collaborative work that entails respect of the other members of the team. The nature of this high-powered team results in collaboration by team members working on problems that have been agreed upon, thus on-going learning is achieved (Hass, 2009 p112). In achievement of their goals and production of joint outputs, the teams become very creative. While group members produce work output individually, teamwork output is collective and requires joint member contribution. Groups are useful in the completion of critical tasks, since they consider individual evaluation and performance as the basis for success determination (Knowledge, 2009 p110). Groups are therefore focused on the accomplishment of tasks imposed on them under the leadership of a strong supervisor. Teams on the other hand perform at levels that are much higher than a group. This is because of a synergy created by the collaboration and output produced jointly, rather than the pooling of output by individuals. The vitality of teams is enhanced by the team environment that is more informal and allows the development of communities of practice, resulting in creative applications and on-going learning (Knowledge, 2009 p110). There have been a few suggested differences in group and team working environments (McMahon & Leimon, 2009 p25). While the manager, in a work environment, plans and determines their subordinate’s work, and narrowly define the tasks they give to the members, managers in a team environment collaborate as peers with their subordinates, with joint establishment and planning of the work. Teams thus require a broader skill set that allows for individual development, which is accomplished by the cross-training and direct working with the rest of the members. The learning process is on-going and is a part of the unit’s culture (McMahon & Leimon, 2009 p25). The members work together, rather than the traditional individual way with specific tasks, because there is joint accountability. Rewarding is based on the performance of the individual in-group environments, while rewarding is done via a combination of performance of the individual and his/her contribution to the overall performance of the team. According to Dr. R. M. Belbin, rather than a team being a bunch of persons tagged with job titles, it is a congregation of persons with each having a role that is comprehended by the other team members (McMahon & Leimon, 2009 p24). Each member seeks out a specific role and carries out the role that comes most naturally the most effectively. The Belbin team roles are utilized for the identification of individual behavioural weaknesses and strengths while in the workplace. The information gotten can be used for: creation of working relationships that are productive, selection and development of teams with high performance, increasing of personal effectiveness and self awareness, building of understanding and mutual trust, while also helping in the process of recruitment. Belbin’s role team theory covers three areas of need: the task, the group, and the individual (McMahon & Leimon, 2009 p65). The task stands for a need to accomplish a given job, the group stands for the need to get membership of a group in order to fulfil individual agendas, while the individual seeks to develop and keep a working relationship that aims to finish a task. There exist various types of groups. These are social groups, work groups, and contrived or emergent groups (McMahon & Leimon, 2009 p68). Persons get into groups to achieve group synergy, for commitment and support, to fulfil their interpersonal needs like control, inclusion, and affection. In order to build a team, one needs to have ability for relating with others, have organizational support, vision, commitment and trust from the other members. One also has to be inclusive and allow exchange of ideas. Some advantages of teamwork include that improvement of work quality, improvement in activity co-ordination, and contribute to the effectiveness, efficiency, and effectiveness of resources. For a team to succeed, it needs to clarify the task, define the achievable outcomes, create the strategy design, include brainstorming, have a structured process of solving problems, and be able to achieve a consensus. This paper will be discussing three main areas of team and group dynamics. These are leadership styles, conflict management, and group development. Leadership styles are defined by the type of leader at the head of the group and the kind of leadership most suited to his personality. Four main types of leaders can be definitely described. These are: Autocratic leaders Democratic leaders Participative leaders Laissez-Faire leaders Depending on the dynamics of the team and the specific skills required at the time, any of this type of leadership may be suitable. Conflict management is a process via which a team or group plans to avoid conflict where possible. It also involves the organization of conflict resolution if it happens as smoothly and quickly as possible. All in all, it involves the recognition and resolution of conflict to prevent it from proving cooperation among team members impossible. Groups take a while to evolve into fully-fledged specialised teams (McMahon & Leimon, 2009 p68). The evolution is dependent on structural features, interactive frequency, and size of the group. The Tuckman group development theory is a reliable model used in understanding the development of groups. It consists of four stages that are: Forming Storming Norming Performing These theories will discussed and applied to the case scenario of a survival game, which involves a group of plane crash survivors who have to come together and work to get to the nearest town. 2. Discussion 2.1 Impact of Belbin’s team role theory on: 2.1.1 Leadership Styles The definition of leadership is ambiguous as it depends on the institution or organization where it is found (Robbins, 2009 p6). Several similarities allow for its classification. Leadership can be classified as one that stems from the group process focus, ones personality, ones ability to induce compliance, the exercise of influence, ones particular set of behaviours, and from one’s manner of persuasion. Other modes of classification are based on the initiation of structure, differentiated roles, effects of interaction, instruments for the achievement of goals, and as relation of power. According to Belbin, there is a difference between a leader and a manager. A manager gets work done via the efforts of others, while a leader influences what others should do; usually what he/she wants them to do (Robbins, 2009 p6). A leader influences others to fulfil activities that will complete a goal that is shared. They create management and direction of any changes and create the organizations vision. Leaders motivate and use their leadership to achieve success, all the while creating conditions that are vital in the achievement of these goals. Leadership styles can be divided into four main categories (Robbins, 2009 p7). These are: participative in which leaders let workers participate in decision making, democratic leadership where the leader asks the workers for majority rule, Laissez-Faire where the leader allows the members of the group to resolve all decisions, and autocratic leadership where the leader delegates to the workers on what to perform. Any group member could be a leader if he takes actions, which aid the group in its task completion and the maintenance of relationships within the group that are effectively collaborative. Leadership skills can be acquired by anyone and are specific to a certain group at a certain time (Robbins, 2009 p7). The leader has to possess diagnostic skills that allow him to be aware of the need for a given function in the team or group, as well as being adaptive enough to show diverse behaviour types for various conditions. 2.1.2 Conflict Management Conflicts can arise in any organization from the lack of effective communication or from misunderstanding (Robbins, 2009 p8). Conflict is visible in various forms, which include lowered morale in the team, reduction of productivity, and an upsurge in absenteeism within the team. All these are strong indicators of conflict, and signify that something needs to be done. One form of conflict is interpersonal conflict, for which Belbin’s team roles could provide for the language to help in discussion, and ensures that there are comments made on the individual’s behaviour in the team’s workplace, as well as the effect that these have on the rest of the team members. Team role language aids in minimization of personal attacks, which turn the conflict into a more acute one. Via comparison of Belbin reports for individuals, one can highlight the potential conflict areas and highlight misunderstanding. Common ground can be reached via the use of team role language, resulting in the identification of a working relationship that is successful. 2.1.3 Theories of Group Development A group is 3 or more persons. They are referred to as so by their environment, themselves, or individuals (Robbins, 2009 p10). In the group, there are numerous roles that individuals can play. These roles can be divided into three major spheres. Those who aid in the achievement of the group’s goals: information giver, energizer, evaluator-critic, summarizer, clarifier, opinion giver, opinion seeker, information giver, procedural technicians, initiator, information seeker, and recorder secretary. Another sphere has to do with maintenance and keeping the group running. This include: followers, observer interpreters, gatekeepers, tension releaser, compromisers, harmonizers, and encourager-supporters. The third one has to do with self, and they promote self-interest. These are: confessors, deserters, clowns, recognition seekers, dominators, blockers, aggressors, and special interest pleaders (Robbins, 2009 p10). An effective group keeps its members satisfied, increases potential for future collaboration, and manages to achieve its set goals. This is achieved through proper development of the team. According to Tuckman’s model, there are four vital stages in the development of a group (McMahon & Leimon, 2009 p68). These are: Forming: this is when the group has just begun working together. This stage is characterized by member diffidence, uncertainty, and shyness among members. Some extrovert members may assume some sort of leadership role quickly. Storming: after the group is established, members will start to jostle for positions, influence, and authority within the team. During this period, the initial leaders tend not to survive in their role for long, as new leadership emerges after initial shyness fades away. During this stage, the group begins to address the tasks ahead of them. Because of the many differing ideas being brought up, this phase has the ability to destroy the team if badly managed. Members may suffer breakdown in relationships and this may not be reparable. This stage requires a conflict management ability to see the group past it since the group may find itself stuck in this phase. It is also possible for the group to find itself settling for less effective ideas in the process of consensus. This requires strong leadership facilitation. Norming: this stage tends to involve evolution into practices of harmonious working as they agree on values and rules through which they work. The evolving team now begins to work and trust each other as they appreciate the individual contribution that each member makes to the team. The team leaders step back a little as individuals begin to be more responsible for their tasks. One risk that exists in this phase has to do with complacency in the team and loss of drive and or creative edge that was essential in their entry into this phase. Performing: at this stage, the team is now capable of performing in form of a unit as ways to solve tasks effectively and smoothly sans external supervision and unneeded conflict are developed. The team at this point is knowledgeable and motivated. Individuals are autonomous, competent, and able to make decisions. It is expected that conflict and dissent could occur, though this are now handled via means agreed upon by the team. During this stage, the leaders are participative, as the members make decisions, which are necessary. This stage is fluid as leadership changes could cause a reversion to the earlier storming stage as the members question the dynamics and norms instilled by the previous leader. 2.2 Survival game After a plane crashed in Northern Canada, the pilot and co-pilot were killed. Being mid-January, the daily temperatures were minus twenty-five degrees, with the temperatures further dipping to minus forty degrees in the nighttime. The ground was covered by snow, with the surrounding countryside being wooded and criss- crossed by a number of creeks. The town that was nearest to the crash site was twenty miles away. All the survivors were dressed in business type clothing. After the crash, the survivors were able to pick out several items from the wreckage of the plane. These included: A small axe A ball of steel wool A can of Crisco shortening Newspapers Heavy duty canvas Extra set of clothing for every survivor Cigarette lighter A plastic sectional air map Chocolate bars A compass A quart of 100- proof Whiskey A loaded .45- calibre pistol The group had to come up with a list of the most important items out of the twelve in order to survive the long trek to the town twenty miles away. Making decisions under these conditions was difficult since the various survivors are still suffering from the shock of crashing and the death of the plane’s navigators. The situation called for a leader to step up, and at the beginning, John stepped up and tried to arrange a trek. However, the other survivors were unresponsive, since John was not focused on the group process. Rather, he was more interested in getting to safety himself. Over the next hour of confusion, Lydia, a company executive began to exert her influence on the team by showing calmness. She showed courage in egging the survivors after her into the plane to salvage what the survivors could. By asking the survivors on who felt strong enough to follow her, and talking to the rest into calmness, she managed to gain some trust from them as they began to see a glimmer of hope. Lydia was also able to make the survivors comply with what she was planning by being calm and confident of survival. John, however, was not compliant and questioned her motives at every turn. Lydia countered this by using persuasion to make the rest of the survivors comply with her plan. However, John had already sowed seeds of conflict by reacting negatively to his rejection as a leader. Lydia began by trying to talk sense into john. She tried to be considerate but firm with him. When this failed, she was frustrated, as she did not want to have to deal with sulking at that moment. She took some time to reflect on whether she had done anything to hurt him, and coming up with none, she decided to confront him by relating her situation to hers and convincing him that their objectives were similar. Making little headway, she tried negotiating with him and offered to grant him one item to carry, not to be decided on by the group, if he could comply. This softened him a little and he began to comply. However, she knew that what they had was an uneasy truce. After the minimization of conflict in the group, the group began to gel and become reliant on the others. Several characters jumped out of the group, with most of them proving to be followers, most likely due to their shock. After deliberations, the group decided on the order of things to carry from those which they had salvaged. Extra clothing Cigarette lighter Ball of steel wool Small axe Chocolate bars Can of Crisco shortening Canvas Newspapers Whiskey Pistol Map Compass 2.3 Summary Of Belbin’s Team Role (9 Roles ) Belbin’s model is a highly effective and robust teamwork concept concerning teamwork (Belbin, 2010 p13). It was developed by Dr. M. Belbin, a British psychologist, who worked to attain an accurate and coherent system to explain behaviours of individual team members and what influence they had on the team’s success. These behavioural patterns or team roles are: a) Plant- advances new strategies and ideas, looking for breaks especially when faced by major issues b) Resource investigator- deals with the exploration and reporting of ideas, resources, and developments outside the team and creates external contacts which may aid the group in the future c) Co-ordinator- controls the manner in which the group moves forward to attain their objectives via efficient utilization of material d) Shaper- shapes the manner in which the team applies its effort, while seeking to impose some pattern to the group during discussions e) Monitor evaluator- analyses the team’s problems and evaluates the suggestions and ideas to enable the team make decisions that are balanced f) Team worker- supports the team members in their inherent strength by underpinning the shortcomings of the members, and building on their suggestions g) Implementer- turns ideas and concepts into procedures that are practically workable h) Completer finisher- ensures that the team is shielded from mistakes of omission and commission as much as possible. They also maintain in the team a sense of urgency (Belbin, 2010 p13). i) Specialist- they feed information that is of a technical nature into the team via translating information into technical terms from general terms. 3. Conclusion Belbin’s team roles have revolutionalised the way in which teams work. This has, however, come in for some criticism. These items of criticism include: The sample from which Belbin conducted his research was highly selective, as they were expected to be successful executives and had been chosen by firms from prestigious courses at Henley Management College. The model was developed on subject behaviour in artificial environments, even though Belbin used real organizations as examples. It is an ideal world that would see all nine roles covered in a single group. It is possible to have 1 shaper and many followers and perform extremely well. Belbin reports that are automated have been proven to be misleading. Several of the roles come with major weaknesses that may derail the tem. An example is the bad tempered shaper, or the over- enthusiastic co-ordinator. Belbin’s team roles have, however, proved useful in the three areas covered in the paper. Leadership styles will always depend on the personality of the leader and the specific circumstances under which the team is working. Thus, the members up for leadership will have to carry some of then characteristics set out by Belbin. It is also imperative that the leaders understand the various character traits of the members as this could be useful for settling and resolving conflict. However, the area most impacted by Belbin’s team roles is group development. The various traits are vital in this stage as the team jostles for positions, come into conflict, and finally understand each other’s role. The various roles covered by Belbin define the working of group development. References Belbin R. M. (2010). Management teams : why they succeed or fail. Amsterdam ;Oxford : Butterworth-Heinemann. Belbin R. M. (2010). Team roles at work. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Harding S. (1998). Proven management models. Aldershot u.a : Gower. Hass A. M. (2009). Configuration management principles and practice. Boston : Addison-Wesley. Hender J. (2003). Innovation leadership : roles and key imperatives. London : Grist. Knowledge S. (2009). Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. Amsterdam: Select Knowledge Limited. McMahon G, & Leimon A. (2008). Performance coaching for dummies.:Hoboken, N.J : Wiley ; Chichester : John Wiley [distributor]. Mullins L. J. (2005). Management and organisational behaviour. Harlow. : Prentice Hall/Financial Times. Robbins S. P. (2009). Organisational behaviour . Cape Town: : Pearson Education South Africa. Watson G, Gallagher K, Armstrong M, & Development C I. (2008). Managing for results. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. Read More