All jobs should be designed around groups - Term Paper Example

?All jobs should be designed around groups? In an organization, it is important that all jobs should be designed around group work. This is because it manifests the true basis of work realms and meshes the same with the activities and processes which are being run under its aegis. Group work is always an interesting act more so because it ensures that the different individuals within it are assigned their respective tasks. The benefits of designing jobs around group work are such that these embody their individual inputs, as these would bring in a lot of positives for the concerned organization, and the activities would increase in their respective speeds as well. Group work is always an appreciable undertaking because it gives the organization what it richly deserves – room for maneuvering its troops when the going gets tough. Group work also allows employees to cover up for one another and thus form a coherent basis with the people who matter the most within the organizational domains. Also the leaders take a sigh of relief when they come to know about the employees working in a group fashion. This solves nearly all their problems because the work gets done and the tasks become easier without any doubt. The group work finds out which employees are best suited to a particular job and what efforts are underway to achieve the same (Kraut, 1990). It is also imperative to understand how group work can embody a great amount of success in the wake of achieving figures, data and other relevant notions, all of which remain significant within an organization. The traits behind a particular skill and job are found out, which remains one of the most pivotal positives behind the group work (Michaelsen, 2002). Whether or not these groups are able to muster up confidence for the sake of the business in the long run is something that shall come into reckoning with the results that have been drawn up with the passage of time. The serious benefits of designing jobs around groups are such that these make the task of a leader very simple as he can rely on his group to deliver in the crunch times, as well as in moments of despair (Sanna, 1999). The group collaborates on a single platform which is essentially something that breeds confidence not only within the entire group but also under the aegis of the organization in the long term scheme of things. The element of interdependence is something that could easily be understood from the jobs that are assigned within a group formation (Olmstead, 2002). There is a common goal in sight and in mind, which is achieved through persistence, hard work and immense commitment. The unifying relationship amongst the individuals is the basis of the groups that have been instituted upon, and which shall bear confidence amongst the individuals so that success and results could be envisaged and drawn upon. What these members within a group would eventually do is to build not only their own selves but also the entire group as a whole, which remains another benefit behind designing jobs around groups (Fink, 2002). What these groups do in essence is to build competition as each one of the individuals wants to excel within his/her respective area. The management of such groups is for the end benefit of the organization in the long run because the management realms know that group formation would mean completion of tasks in an easy going way. The individual achievement premise is similarly very important because this raises the bar immensely within an organization. The employees want to give their very best and remain on top of their work tasks (Vautier, 1999). This makes the look competitive which they really become with the passage of time. What is even more important is the fact that the individual achievement domains are backed up by the organizational top heads that look for building up on the areas of strength with the changing times and thus attain the best possible mileage out of an individual in the long run. However, there are shortcomings and weaknesses which are present within such realms which crop up every now and then, and thus mar the basis of growth and development on a strategic basis (Akst, 2007). A group would also offer the same mileage but it is the individual achievement premise that shall rule the roost in the long run, and thus aim to take care of the predicaments within the organizations that seem present at all times. Encouraging competition would lead to a great deal of optimism within a workplace setting as it ensures smooth harmony to come about within the organizational domains. It means that an organization is ready to commit to success and thus bank upon the good deeds and acts which have been brought forward by the organization’s most prized resources – the employees themselves (Malveaux, 1996). This has been a source of inspiration for the employees as they look forward to building up their own resources in the long run. Individual achievement means quite a good amount of success for the employees who would always appreciate if they are given the encouragement and support that they direly require within their folds. The individual achievement domains are usually dealt with a stern approach because a great amount of success for the sake of the organization depends upon the same. If the organization does not know how to take care of the requirements of the individuals who are working under its realms, then it should be ready for the looming problems which would come up in the future (Porter, 1998). In essence, the management is important because it has to encourage and support the individuals all along as this is the need of the hour. Encouraging competition would take care of the employees and build up their resources all the same. It would ask of them to give their best and remain in loop with the changing dynamics that are present within any organization in the time and age of today (Simmel, 2008). Hence in all fairness organizational success is directly proportional to the efforts that have been made within the employee resource mechanisms and this would be the case in the future as well if proper utilization of resources is deployed. In my opinion, group work is indeed an excellent tool for finding out the best available resources within the organizations and these can easily be done if the top management understands its due role and goes about encouraging them as and when required. What is most important here is a vision that is based on solid understanding of the organizational norms because I believe that the encouragement and support elements should always be cultivated across the board. Hence for attaining long term success, it is imperative to touch upon the areas of strength which shall bring the employees together on a single platform and thus facilitate in achieving the end goals and long term objectives. The jobs should be designed around groups because these form the cornerstone of finding out which employee possesses what and what should be the course of action in the wake of completing tasks within an organizational level. I believe that organizations need to go out of their way to show that they care for the employees by giving them confidence. All said and done, research has been apparent and this is one of the most significant reasons why I am in full support of the formation of groups within the domains of an organization. This will muster up confidence within the employees and give them the idea platform to showcase their respective strengths. References Akst, D., 2007. Strive we must. Wilson Quarterly, 31(4), 46-54 Fink, L., 2002. Team-Based Learning: A Transformative Use of Small Groups. Praeger Kraut, R., 1990. Intellectual Teamwork: Social and Technological Foundations of Cooperative Work Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Malveaux, J., 1996. Speaking of Education: Sports, Competition and Society. Black Issues in Higher Education, 13 Michaelsen, L., 2002. Team-Based Learning: A Transformative Use of Small Groups. Praeger Olmstead, J., 2002. Leading Groups in Stressful Times: Teams, Work Units, and Task Forces Quorum Books Porter, M., 1998. On Competition. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing Sanna, L., 1999. Group Performance and Interaction. Westview Press Simmel, G., 2008. Sociology of Competition. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 33 Vautier, K., 1999. Promoting Competition in Global Markets: A Multi-National Approach. Edward Elgar Read More