High-Performance Self-Managed Work Teams - Essay Example

Part I In the business environment of the 21st century teamwork has become a factor that differentiates successful companies from struggling firms. The management team of companies must find ways to make teams become more productive. A way to achieve greater results from team setting in the workplace is by fostering cohesiveness. Cohesiveness in a group or team is the degree to which members are attracted to a group and motivated to remain a part of it (Schermerhorn & Hunt & Osborn, 2003, p.201). The purpose of this essay is to evaluate the impact team cohesiveness performance of employees in the corporate world. In organizations in which cohesiveness is present within team settings the members of the team display greater motivation. These employees value the time they spend with their co-workers. There is a lower employee turnover and lower absenteeism in companies with cohesive team units. A cohesive team unit is not achieved overnight; it takes time for employees to build trust in each other. It is more likely to cohesiveness to manifest itself when group members are similar in age, attitudes, needs and backgrounds (Schermerhorn, et al. 2003, p.202). Another factor that is favorable to achieve cohesiveness is to creating small size teams. The optimum size of a team is between four and seven members (Yeatts & Hyten, 1998). When a group is too big it becomes difficult to the member to build close relationships with each other, thus cohesiveness is harder to achieve. Creating cohesiveness within a team is important, but from an organizational perspective cohesiveness is only attractive if it enables the firm to a higher work performance. A way to determine if cohesiveness is adding value to a company is by measuring the match of cohesiveness with performance norms. If a specific work team has a high degree of cohesiveness, but the performance of the team has not improved over time or has declined then it is possible that cohesiveness is having a negative impact on the work output of the team unit. This may occur for a variety of reasons as the cohesive team become complacent or there may be too much socialization within the team. If such a situation occurs the management of a company must confront the problem by applying different techniques to remedy the situation. Among the alternative strategies that can be used to reduce cohesion are: increasing team size, placing team restrictions, rewarding individual results, and making arrangement so that team interacts with other teams in different work scenarios (Schermerhorn, et al., p.203). Despite the possibility of cohesiveness having a negative impact on a group, the more likely outcome is that cohesiveness will improve the performance of workers. In the corporate world managers are faced with team setting in which cohesiveness is not present. The manager or leader of an organization are the people responsible for the performance of their subordinates and are the ones that must find way to increase cohesiveness within team settings. There are several techniques that can be utilized to improve team cohesiveness. A simple tactic that can be utilized is to decrease the size of the team. Another way to increase team cohesiveness is to isolate the team members from having contact with other employees during work hours. An informal strategy a manager can utilize to increase team cohesiveness is creating activities outside the workplace in which the team member can participate and enjoy time together without the presence of work pressures. In order to emphasis the importance of teamwork a company can have incentive system the rewards the employee based on the performance of the team. Cohesiveness is important attribute that team should strive to achieve. Based on the literature on the subject it is my opinion that cohesiveness definitely is a factor that improves the work performance of team. When I had participated in team setting either at work or in school I’ve noticed that when there is cohesiveness among a group things get done faster and the final results and performance of the teams are much better than in situation where there was a lack of cohesiveness. Part II Life is a journey in which people are able to achieve greater things when they realized efforts with the assistance of other human beings. This premise is true in the business where teamwork has become the norm in organization across the world. Teamwork is a cooperative effort by the members of a group or team to achieve a common goal (Answers, 2009). Despite the reality that teamwork is important and essential for the success of an organization there is a perception in our society that teamwork does not provide the benefits that it actual does and that it may be waste of time and effort. Due this perception with our society the phrase a camel is a horse designed by a committee. This paper discusses the reasons why this phrase has become so popular within our culture. People in our society are taught that the can not rely on others to get things done for them. Young people in the United Kingdom during their upbringing are constantly exposed to messages from the media and the school system that their individual efforts will determine their ultimate success in life. Even in team sports it seems like people based the success of the success of the team based on the effort of a single player. For example in the National Basketball Association (NBA) the success of a team such as the Lakers is often measured or view based on the success of its star player, Kobe Bryant. Mr. Bryant is given all the credit, when in reality there are four other players on the court and 12 total players on the team which enable the team to have success during a season. The individualistic mindset of society is one of the reasons teamwork is generally seen as something that is unnatural. One of the potential reasons people like to undermine the value of teamwork with a phrase such as a camel is a horse designed by a committee is because working in team it is sometimes difficult and takes a commitment from every team member. Working in a team setting entails being responsible and communication with each other. Everyone whose ever being exposed to team setting has probably being a part of bad team with poor synergy and lack of cohesiveness. One bad experience does not mean that working in a team setting can not become a great positive experience. Categorizing and creating paraphrases for team setting in general is society’s way to mock something that is difficult to implement. Communication is the key for the success of a team. “Failure to share information is usually the result of not knowing what might happen, or assuming what might happen when certain kind of information is shared” (O’Berry, 2009). Miscommunication in a team setting is a sure formula for team failure. When there are communication problems in a team the paraphrase a camel is a horse designed by committee gains validity. Lack of communication can cause lots of problems that lead to disagreement and friction between team members. A team works better more efficiently when there a team leader in charge of the group. This allows the team to become more functional because every team member knows that there is one individual who is responsible for the decision making. If the team leader mechanism is not utilized the risk of a team being inefficient increases because confusion over who is responsible for the decision can occur along with other types of miscommunications. Despite the general perception of society that teamwork is a fallacy; the truth is that teamwork is a critical success factor in the business world. There are many reasons for society to mock the effectiveness of teamwork, but the root behind this logic is that the members of our society have values which placed a high level of importance on individual success. A phrase such as a camel is a horse designed by a committee is a simple commentary that should be taken literally by anyone in the academic or business community. References Answers.com (2009). Teamwork. Available from < http://www.answers.com/topic/teamwork> [Accessed 9 February 2009]. Yeatts, D., Hyten, C. (1998). High Performance Self-Managed Work Teams. Business and Economics. Available from < http://books.google.com/books?id=c4bhtEPHr6oC&pg=PA257&lpg=PA257&dq=optimum+size+of+a+work+team&source=web&ots=UUI6KnIzFg&sig=zJwCwtfutXasOIS26Uf49tv9ltM&hl=en&ei=2buPSbnwGaGbtwfCmcyWCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result> [Accessed 8 February 2009]. Schermerhorn, J., Hunt, J.,Osborn, R. (2003). Organizational Behavior (8th ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Read More