Is Establishing Team Work Difficult in Organisations - Coursework Example

Team Work in Organizations Name Institution Course Date 1.0 Executive Summary Team work in organizations is a very significant undertaking that ensures success and a competitive advantage. Great team work also brings about progressively better performance standards when practiced on a daily basis within an organization. Therefore, this assessment will examine whether it is difficult to establish teamwork in an organization. In addition, the assessment will attempt to use theories such as Barnard’s acceptance theory of authority, Maslow’s theory of human needs and theory X and theory Y to assess whether it is hard to establish teamwork within an organization. The assessment will also go ahead and provide relevant organizational examples to support the argument. Table of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary 2 Table of Contents 3 2.0 Introduction 4 3.0 Theories and Concepts of Team Work in Organizations 5 3.1 Barnard’s Acceptance Theory of Authority 5 3.2 Maslow Theory of Human Needs 6 3.3 Theory X and Theory Y 8 3.4 Scientific Management 10 4.0 Conclusion 10 2.0 Introduction Any organization that is determined to gain a competitive advantage as well as a progressively better performance standards, teamwork has to be incorporated in the day-today functions of the organization (Aritz and Walker, 2012). Collaborations and team-focused management of projects are gradually offering both flexibility and innovative possibilities for organizations to prosper. Despite of the active features of teams in action, numerous organizations flop to realize the fundamental determinants of a team-oriented framework, rather gathering staff members into non-connected, non-dependent, individually-driven frameworks (Bansemir, 2013). This type of group-based tactic is distinguishable from the team-particular ingenuities and thus fails to fit the exhaustive determinants of dynamism as well as effectiveness essential in the up-to-date marketplace (Colella and Miller, 2009). Researches carried out have indicated that a team is comprised of two or even more individuals performing responsibilities that are reliant on each other, having specified roles but at the same time sharing a common goal (Gready, 2013). The current developments of various organizations as well as industries are the aspect of team and teamwork. Back in the day, many organizations highly emphasized on individuality where every person needed to present their terms at the end of the day. Thus, various organizations have realized that in order to enhance their final results as well as to lower their cost of production, team work is fundamental in all their undertakings (Sagie and Koslowsky, 2000). Therefore, the capability of a team to cooperate effectively to achieve a common objective is important for any organization or business. Many successful institutions have attested that teamwork is the most effective tactic for making a more distinct effect as well as difference that when individuals work independently (John and Ken, 2009). Consequently, if an organization has both flexible productive as well as a strong team, which is the competitive advantage that is required for better results, the value of the final creation is improved as the production cost is dropped which brings about expanded growth within the organization. The purpose of this assessment if to examine whether it is difficult to establish teamwork in organizations. Furthermore, it will utilize several theories and concepts of teamwork will introduced, indicating fundamental benefits of optimized team management. 3.0 Theories and Concepts of Team Work in Organizations 3.1 Barnard’s Acceptance Theory of Authority This theory states that power or authority comes only when the instructions are obeyed by the subordinates. The line of authority moves from the leader of the manager all the way down to the subordinates who accept his orders (Nohria, Joyce and Robertson, 2003). Furthermore, this theory indicates that no form of authority can exist if the orders are not accepted by the subordinates. Therefore, within an organization, the establishment of a reliable teamwork is not necessarily difficult because using Barnard’s Acceptance Theory of Authority, the overall leader of the team has to come up with a strategy which he can pass down authority to the subordinates who in turn follow the guidelines appropriately therefore achieving a particular goal (Nohria, Joyce and Robertson, 2003). In addition, teamwork within an organization is not very difficult to establish because the employees within that articular organization ought to follow the following factors: they ought to understand the communication (Nohria, Joyce and Robertson, 2003). Also, the employees should admit that the communication being given to them by their superior is in line with every purpose of the organization. Thirdly, the employees should feel that their own activities will be consistent with both the needs as well as the desires of their fellow colleagues. Finally, the employees of a particular organization should feel that they are mentally as well as physically capable of carrying out the order given to them by their superiors (Schermerhorn et al., 2014). Therefore, this theory vividly indicates that the team work within an organization is not hard to establish if the employees participating in such activities are willing and capable of following the conditions provided by this theory. For instance, at Cheap’s, the flow of authority begins with the general manager to the department manager all the way down to the sales people (Carasco-Saul, Woocheol and Taesung, 2015). At Cheap’s Variety Store, there are a number of departments which are staffed with a manager and a few sales people. The managers allot tasks to their staff members which is expected to be done over a certain period of time. In addition, the managers of the company also reward their employees who have managed to attain all their goals through giving them extra time off work (Carasco-Saul, Woocheol and Taesung, 2015). 3.2 Maslow Theory of Human Needs Maslow’s theory suggests that humans are motivated to gratify five elementary needs. These needs are arranged in a hierarchical order. Maslow suggests that humans ought to seek the lowest level of needs first before satisfying the high level needs (Cook, 2008). The hierarchy of needs according to Maslow’s theory is as follows; Psychological needs, security needs, belongingness, esteem needs and self-actualization. In a work setting, employees begin emphasizing on lower needs such as psychological needs (Cook, 2008). These are needs which humans require in order to survive, such as shelter and clothing. This comes in terms of adequate wages as well as a stable income. Managers can tend to the psychological needs of their employees by offering a comfortable working environment. This can therefore create an environment that encourages teamwork between the managers and their employees. In addition, once the employee’s basic needs have been adequately met, they will want their “belongingness” needs met (Gordon, 2010). They are also known as social needs. This level of social connections are fundamental in humans because they show a certain level of acceptance into their social environment. Therefore, managers can utilize Maslow’s theory to fulfil their employees’ needs by ensuring that they know one another. Managers can also encourage cooperative teamwork by giving them an opportunity to tackle both mental and physical challenges together as a team (Gordon, 2010). Moreover, managers can also use this theory by being a kind and accessible supervisor and also encouraging good work-life balance practices. Additionally, esteem needs are key to employee motivation since they require self-esteem and respect from both their managers and colleagues (Gruman and Saks, 2011). Self-respect is more important than even gaining admiration from others. Therefore, in order for managers to motivate their employees effectively, they can offer both praise and recognition when they have done well. This can boost the employees’ self-esteem thus motivating them. Also, managers can offer additional responsibilities to their employees to reflect their beliefs that they are worthy employees (Gruman and Saks, 2011). This act will boost the employees’ confidence thus improving their teamwork performance. Employees require self-actualization so as to reach their full potential. Therefore, the need of achieving what they capable is more of a personal requirement. Therefore, managers can effectively utilize this need by challenging their employees in their area of expertise (Markos and Sridevi, 2010). This can help the employees broaden their knowledge improving their capability in contributing more in a teamwork project. Also, managers ought to invite their employees to take part in decision making activities. This will give the employees a sense of leadership giving them morale in participating in decision making procedures in a teamwork project. In addition, managers can grant them flexibility as well as independence in their jobs. This will help the employees gain confidence in themselves making it easier for them to perform executions in a teamwork project without hesitation. For instance, United States Marine Corps in one of their advertisements utilized strategic words such as “commitment” and “push yourself” to indicate the idea of recognizing ones highest potential (Nohria, Joyce and Robertson, 2003). The branch of Marine Corps is a part of the armed forces and their advertisement clearly showed their degree of self-actualization, at this degree includes the idea of following your dream. In their advertisement, it portrayed a message of team work in progress based on their body language. This showed clearly how Maslow’s Hierarchy of need can be utilized in organizations to promote teamwork among the members. 3.3 Theory X and Theory Y This theory defines two negating perspectives of individuals within a working environment that affects their styles of management. Theory X is most at times characterized as a traditional perspective of both direction and control, whereas Theory Y entails a more self-driven workforce that acquires a curiosity in the goals and objectives of an organization and incorporates some of their personal goals into them (Truss et al., 2013). Therefore, Theory X assumes that: the average individual dislikes work and will always find reasons for avoiding it. Also, this theory assumes that would favour to be guided so as to avoid any form of responsibility, he is relatively unambitious and always desires security above everything else. Furthermore, an individual has to be pushed especially with a threat of punishment so that they can work towards achieving the objectives of the organization (Truss et al., 2013). On the other hand, Theory Y assumes that: individuals will use self-control as well as self-direction so as to achieve the objectives of the organization without any form of external pressure. Also, it assumes that the mental ability of incorporating high levels of imagination, inventiveness and creativity in solving problems within the organization is widely dispersed within the masses (Truss et al., 2013). Finally, Theory Y assumes that individuals often accept and seek responsibilities. Therefore, using this theory, it is not difficult to establish teamwork within an organization because it can use it to examine the productivity degrees of the staff members and consequently come up with motivational techniques (Truss et al., 2013). For example, Coca-Cola since its inception has faced various problems with regard to the effective management of their staff members within the company (Gill, 2007). Therefore, the organization has utilized the X and Y theories so as to enhance the productivity of their employees. This has been possible through examining the productivity levels of their staff members. Coca-Cola also used this theory to create a comfortable working environment which encourages team work amongst their employees (Gopinath and Prasad, 2012). 3.4 Scientific Management The primary object of management within an organization is to ensure that you secure the maximum prosperity for the employer as well as for the employees in general. In an organizational setting, such an action would assist in creating sustainable team work amongst both the employer and the employees because there is an elimination of control which is one of the biggest issues that demoralizes employees (Pentareddy and Suganthi, 2015). Secondly, there is a sense of harmony that is created within the working environment which brings about coordination and eliminates individualism. Thirdly, with scientific management, a sense of team work can be achieved efficiently because each employee within the organization is developed with great efficiency and prosperity. Therefore, the core principles of scientific management which encourage team work within a working environment includes: division of labour, planning, surveillance, performance-related pay, eliminating control as an issue and lastly, ‘science and fact’ to replace conflict (Pentareddy and Suganthi, 2015). 4.0 Conclusion To sum up, team work is comprised of two or even more individuals performing responsibilities that are reliant on each other, having specified roles but at the same time sharing a common goal. Therefore, teamwork is a very important aspect that ensures positive growth as well as development within an organization. Organizations are aggressively using team work as means of achieving competitive advantage over their rivals. Therefore, the capability of a team to cooperate effectively to achieve a common objective is important for any organization or business. The theories that can be used in ensuring proper team work within an organization includes: Barnard’s acceptance theory of authority, Maslow’s theory of human needs and theory X and theory Y. First, Barnard’s acceptance theory of authority involves a line of authority from the leader all the way to the employee. Therefore, teamwork within an organization can be achieved when the subordinates take instructions from the leader and follows them to the latter. In addition, if the employees can understand, admit and feel mentally prepared to perform a certain activity, team work within an organization can be achieved successfully. Furthermore, Maslow’s theory of human needs suggests that human beings are highly motivated if the following five elements of needs are gratifies: psychological needs, security needs, belongingness, esteem needs and self-actualization. Finally, theory X and theory Y also have a direct impact on how teamwork can be achieved within an organization. If the employees are self-driven, have the mental capacity of incorporating high levels of imagination and often accept and seek responsibilities, establishment of teamwork within an organization will be relatively easy in all aspects. 5.0 References Aritz, J and Walker, R 2012, Discourse perspectives on organizational communication, Madison [N.J.], Fairleigh Dickinson University Press. Bansemir, B 2013, Organizational innovation communities, Wiesbaden, Springer Gabler. Carasco-Saul, M., Woocheol, K and Taesung, K 2015, Leadership and Employee Engagement: Proposing Research Agendas through a Review of Literature, Human Resource Development Review, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 38-63. Colella, A and Miller, C 2009, Organizational Behavior A Strategic Approach, 5th edn., New York, Leadership Press. Cook, S 2008, The essential guide to employee engagement: better business performance through staff satisfaction, London Philadelphia, Kogan Page. Gill, L 2007, “‘Right There with You’ Coca Cola, Labor Restructuring and Political Violence in Colombia”, Critique of Anthropology, Vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 235-260. Gopinath and Prasad 2012, Toward a critical framework for understanding MNE operations: Revisiting Coca Cola’s exit from India, Organization, vol. 20, no. 2, pp.212-232. Gordon, R 2010, Dispersed Leadership: Exploring the Impacts of Antecedent Forms of Power Using a Communicative Framework, Management Communication Quarterly, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 260-287. Gready, P 2013, Organisational Theories of Change in the Era of Organisational Cosmopolitanism: lessons from ActionAid’s human rights-based approach. Third World Quarterly, vol. 34, no. 8, pp.1339-1360. Gruman, J.A and Saks, A.M 2011, Performance management and employee engagement, Human Resource Management Review, vol. 21, no. 2, pp.123-136. John, M and Ken, P 2009, Sociology: A Global Introduction, 4th edition, Pearson Education Limited. Markos, S. and Sridevi, M 2010, Employee Engagement. The Key to Improving Performance. International Journal of Business and Management, vol. 5, no 12, p.89-90. Nohria, N., Joyce, W and Robertson, B 2003, ‘What Really Works’, Harvard Business Review, July. Pentareddy, S. and L. Suganthi, 2015, Building affective commitment through job characteristics, leadership and empowerment. Journal of Management & Organization, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 307-320. Sagie, A and Koslowsky, M 2000, Participation and empowerment in organizations, Thousand Oaks, Calif, Sage Publications. Schermerhorn, J.R., Davidson, P., Poole, D., Woods, P., Simon, A & McBarron, E 2014, Management, 5th Asia–Pacific Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Australia. Truss, C., Delbridge, R., Alfes, K., Shantz, A & Soane, E 2013, Employee engagement in theory and practice. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon New York, Routledge. Read More