Motivational Benefits and Disadvantages of Using Teams in Organizations - Example

Running Head: Motivational benefits and disadvantages of using teams in organizations Student’s Name: Instructor: Course Code and Name: Institution: Date the Assignment is due: Motivational benefits and disadvantages of using teams in organizations A team is an entity comprising of a group of people linked in a particular common purpose. Teams are always appropriate when conducting tasks especially the ones with high complexity and interdependent subtasks. The team’s concept evolves and in the current field, it has entered the society with the couched assumption that it will bring enjoyment providing increased acquisition of knowledge, higher performance, deeper commitment, and greater innovation without having to depend on formal leaderships (Pearce II, & Robinson Jr, 2009). It is absolute that the complexities of dynamics in groups and the puzzle of ensuring high performance is still a constant struggle especially for organizations and researchers as well as practitioners alike. In this new age of lean organizations, it is possible to assert that many of the work groups existing today are being pushed to evolution through team development. This paper looks into teams as used in organizations with identified motivational benefits as well as some of the key disadvantages in using teams within organizations. The late 20th century theorists in business have popularized the concept of team’s constructions. Differing opinions are in existence on the usefulness of the new management fad. Some of the theorists view the concept team as a panacea finally helping to realize the effective human relations movement's desire in integrating the organizations. The concept is purely the best approach to organizations and suits workers as well as the managers. However, there are still critics who argue well that the concept has a wide range of disadvantages and could at times pose as a risk to the fall of organizations in various circumstances (Pearce II, & Robinson Jr, 2009). There is quite a lot to learn about organizational teams before espousing more on motivational benefits. With the relevant knowledge on teams, scooping the advantages and disadvantages of using teams in any organizational setting becomes easy to apply (Robbins & Water-Mash, 2009). It is appropriate to understand the concepts of team composition, size, and formation. The three concepts derive the motivational benefits and could as well pose and a danger to the cooperation and effectiveness of teams within organizations. Team size and composition has an enormous effect on the processes of teams as well as the outcomes of its practices. The optimal size as well as composition of respective teams is widely debated as varying depending on the task the time purpose to handle. Many studies done, evaluate four members, as the optional size for the best cooperating team in an organization, but there is a level of acceptance of large members of the organization being team members (William, 2003). David Cooper rider in his study suggested that the larger groups are better placed in effectiveness within organizations. His argument was that such teams could address outstanding concerns of the whole organization’s system. It is therefore, a motivational benefit for organizations in having larger groups as teams within its operations. This help put forward most of the routine activities and develops more innovative strategies within organizations. Therefore, while some say larger teams are ineffective in the performance of given tasks, Coop rider argues that the relevance of a given task is of better importance (Burke, 2008). His argument was that determining the effectiveness of teams could only happen through the tasks performed and not by the group size. What is of relevance is ensuring homogeneity and heterogeneity of teams. The more homogeneous a-team is the better for its cohesiveness therefore, acting as a benefit to the organization (William, 2003). The more heterogeneous teams are, the greater level of differences in perspective as well as increased creativity potential, but this is one of the disadvantages of the teams in organizations since they create potential for conflict (Pearce II & Robinson Jr, 2009). The results point to engaging trends in the way organizations are forming and using teams in the current world. First, teams are alive and well in every organizations and they dearly play a valuable role within the organization in deriving its success. Effective teams are worth in organizations they promote the following virtues in given organizations including Commitment, Realism, Accountability, Collaboration, Communication, and A Doable Pace. These are the virtues that any organization would aspire to have at all times within teams to see them off well in routine practices and help them get through with goals of the organization (William, 2003). There is always failure also in the decision-making process when the teams within organizations do not uphold these virtues making it complicated phenomena and contradicting the organization’s operations (Robbins & Water-Mash, 2009). However, even with these benefits, there are requirements needed to propel their existence. The groups have to value some of the values to enjoy the motivational benefits of teams within the organization. It is necessary for team leaders to have a multi-faceted approach when working with teams in a particular organization. This is the only way the organization will enjoy the motivational benefits of the teams (Burke, 2008). Their expectations within teams operations include being strong communicators as well as diplomats with developed and advanced project management skills, for instance decision-making, organization, and prioritization (William, 2003). Additionally, there are requirements of personal attributes, for instance flexibility, intellectual ability, and courage demanded a team leader if its effectiveness is to be felt in any given organization (Pearce II & Robinson Jr, 2009). The motivational benefits of teams also do not just develop from forming a team. So many organizations form teams with a prospect of enjoying the benefits but in reality, these teams operate inefficiently. There is an urgent need for collaborates in respective teams within organizations if the said benefits feature and apply in organizations. Teams need to be cohesive with each other. This is the main challenge for leaders in organizations because they function to facilitate cohesiveness that is difficult to realize (Burke, 2008). Therefore, it becomes difficult to assist the organization with proper working teams meaning that realizing the benefits of organizations becomes one of the enormous challenges in particular organizations. Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs is a theory explaining why teams do not work appropriately and why the organization does not reap the benefits of teams in its operations. Maslow‘s developed theory of motivation to explain how the motivation from teams can apply in the effectiveness of organization’s operations (Linstead, 2009). His theory was of suggestion that people always want and need what they value as scrupulous in teamwork. The respective wants among team members explain perfectly how the operations can be successful, and the organization reaps more of motivational benefits (Robbins & Water-Mash, 2009). Maslow suggested that physiological needs are quite valuable if the teams have to develop cohesiveness in a given organization. These cover the basic needs, including satisfaction of hunger and thirst. With this in place, other elements of requirement include safety needs, social needs and esteem requirements (Linstead, 2009). It is crucial to realize that organization's teams are composed of individuals, there is no way you can overlap individual hierarchy of needs and be able to provide for the teams. In organizations pursuing to reap benefits from teams, they have to develop an understanding of the hierarchy of the need to make it happen and enjoy team cohesiveness with its benefits in place (Pearce II & Robinson Jr, 2009). Finding creative and new solutions to problems especially for today’s world challenges is cumbersome for many organizations. In order to be competitive as organizations within a particular field, there is a need to produce better products from organizations and preferably in a shorter time. This means that organizations will need teams since it is the only way to effective production within organizations (Burke, 2008). Developing collaborative teams becomes abundantly common in organization’s practice nowadays developing appropriate popularity across the globe and building the best organization’s reputation. A collaborative team is a proper definition of what organizations require in their functioning to make it in later processes. This means that individuals have to be open in communicating, sharing common ideas, thoughts, or beliefs, as well as working towards achievement of a common goal. This has been the secret of the high productive organizations in the current business world (Pearce II & Robinson Jr, 2009). There are surmountable advantages for organizations’ teams in allowing and incorporating collaboration between existing employees and collaborates with other organizations. A compelling example is when in an organization, the project is extremely large for a single person to handle, or just in a particular division that individuals cannot tackle. This means that team work is appropriate and comes in to develop better approaches increasing the level of knowledge input and innovative ideas to coming up with solutions in practice (Linstead, 2009). Another advantage of team’s collaboration in organizations is the capability of decreasing production time through the approach of spreading out the available resources. Many projects develop deadlines dependent upon initiatives, which changing is not possible (Ken, 2005). It is therefore, imperative that resources pulling be fast into the project so that the task can complete on time. Without teams, this cannot happen; many of individuals will do things on their own. However, with teams, it is possible to provide motivations along members therefore, making the tasks move faster and meeting the deadlines on time (Robbins & Water-Mash, 2009). Even if many people believe in teamwork within organizations, at times the whole concept does not even come crosser to working. There are many challenges that face teams that lead to a fall out and ranked as disadvantages of trusting teams in completing tasks. Teamwork is a considerable influence in changing expectations in the team. One of the biggest challenges facing teams in sound decisions as well as practices within organizations is change of the mindset that happens in respective individuals within the team (Burke, 2008). The routine is particularly often that it compromises the whole concept collapses and a draw back to the organization happens. There are high expectations in teams that they will succeed in a particular activity once they come together, but a single individual can compromise everything and halt any advancement of a goal-oriented activity in an organization. In such a situation, the team is a liability and not any close to an asset in the organization. Another substantial disadvantage when it comes to teams in the organization includes scheduling of activities. Usually, when it comes to making decisions on individuals, it is simple because one can make it fast. However, in the case of teams, they compose of many people and there is a level of diversity (Ken, 2005). In this case, coming into terms with a particular schedule makes things exceedingly difficult and one might not set an appropriate time for everyone (Burke, 2008). In this case, it happens that there is always absence or lateness of individuals in a particular team meaning that teamwork fails in some circumstances like this. The lateness or absence of the individual is always a feature to consider since his contribution fails bringing down the decisions made in the respective team (Linstead, 2009). Developing New Skills in teams is always a difficult task. Bringing everyone into terms with the training requirements as a team always acts as a cumbersome process because the level of understanding and integrity is always different per the individual (Burke, 2008; Pearce, & Robinson Jr, 2009). The development of skills can only be effective and applicable in individual basis but seriously ineffective when it comes to large teams (Watson, 2006). A sizeable negative aspect of the teams is that they are controlled by personal agendas running as the priority. In other words, the teams always face problems because individuals bring in their emotions, feelings and expectation in the group process. Groupthink the theory is a dominant theory explaining the disadvantages of influential groups or teams in decision-making. It is always cumbersome to make appropriate decisions, and this is a negative attribute when it comes to teams (Burke, 2008). Conflict in teams is always inevitable, yet it is a dreadful thing in the management and running of all organizations. Where there is conflict, there is always a negative outcome because the people cannot agree on a particular concept or approach (Linstead, Fulop, & Lille, 2009; Robbins, Millet & Waters-Mash, 2008). Therefore, it is usually exceedingly difficult to develop an understanding of each other when using teams as the approach for bringing in solutions, in organizations. Conflict in teams is always destructive, and most of the times bring down sound decisions with the organization always lagging behind when it comes to progress in productivity (Pearce II & Robinson Jr, 2009). Disengagement is another outstanding disadvantage of teams in organizations. Teams achieve more only because at that time they have fully engaged memberships with a great focus on the goals of organizations therefore; happen to do everything with a positive orientation. However, there are times that frequently individuals find themselves in extraordinary trouble when they disengage from teams due to other commitments (Burke, 2008; Pearce, & Robinson Jr, 2009). This time, the teams face a considerable challenge in every practice they purpose to do. In this case, it is always difficult for organizations because many of its activities remain unattended to because of the disengagement of some members from their respective teams. This might continue and eventually cause a fall out of the organization. Conversely, Silo thinking is another enormous disadvantage when it comes to teams as the tool for organizations progress. The challenge applies because the organization’s teams have challenges because they have varying professional disciplines as well as functions (Linstead, Fulop, & Lille, 2009; Robbins, Millet & Waters-Mash, 2008). It is exceptionally easy for the team members with such advanced skills to make prospects of progress in the organizations therefore; developing negative thoughts and prospecting lose terms. This is the worst enemy in the organization because it ends up complicating the whole affair of teamwork and brings in laxity and inadequate innovativeness in the organization finally contributing to a fall in the operations of the organization (Burke, 2008). There is also lack of clarity in the team’s situation within organizations. Most of the times, in any activity within organizations, need planning to set responsibilities and make everything clear when it comes to dissemination of duties. However, in the team’s approaches at times, there is no clear-cut responsibility setting and challenges face the concept of working out the routine activities (Pearce II & Robinson Jr, 2009). Therefore, the teams blur the vision of individuals and the blame game is always the next crucial thing that challenges the teams. It usually ends up in ineffective practice within organizations and finally brings down any progress initiated by the innovative members (Watson, 2006). The current trend of organizations has shifted focus to virtual teams as the main tool in the running of respective organizations (Linstead, Fulop, & Lille, 2009; Robbins, Millet & Waters-Mash, 2008). In understanding teams within the organization, with analysis of the motivational benefits and disadvantages, the virtual teams are a clear example to analyze and understand their concepts and values governing them (Linstead, 2009). Virtual teams are a better approach enabling teamwork in particular situations where people do not interact physical in office situations (Ken, 2005). Such teams are of use more by companies as well as other organizations cutting real estate, travel, relocation, and other business costs a terrific deal. This is what has been the motivational benefit for organizations in building global presence and thriving in the competitive world of business. Virtual teams’ governance is almost similar to traditional teams when it comes to fundamental principles and achieving success (Burke, 2008). One formidable challenge of virtual teams is the concept of building and maintenance of trust between its members. Trust is always critical when it comes to promoting communication between team members (Linstead, Fulop, & Lille, 2009; Robbins, Millet & Waters-Mash, 2008). Therefore, when it is bleached, there is always an element of poor maintenance of the organization and therefore, leads to blocking communication (Watson, 2006). The result is always fatal because the organization cannot sustain motivation of the individuals involved. This is a critical issue and must be handled with care when it has to do with organization’s development. It is always advisable under such teams to come up with strategies that see off some of the approaches in decision making to avoid bleaching the trust built in members (Burke, 2008; Pearce, & Robinson Jr, 2009). Teams facilitate enormous advantages to the organizations if well structured. In this respect, it is essential to have an overview of some of these structures of teams and their relevance in organizations in bring out advantages to its operations. There are five explained work teams, which every organization requires when operating. This is what the organization should hold all times bringing in the relevance of teamwork and achieving as much from the teams. The Leadership Team is a part of every organization meaning that it should always have the best structure in any organization (Clegg, Komberger, & Pitsis, 2008; Watson, 2006). This team is the guiding principle in organizations therefore, needs a better structuring if the team is to be of any relevance to the organization. Many of the times, organization’s senior managers as well as department heads, make up the leadership team (Watson, 2006). The main aim of the team is to pull together resources and lead the organization in its daily processes. The leadership team takes the responsible in the organization for the strategic direction of its practices. In taking full advantage and benefiting the organization, a leadership team is responsible for planning, setting of goals, providing guidance to, and managing the organization adequately (Linstead, 2009). Other many teams in the organization play crucial roles including motivation teams, environmental teams, employee welfare teams among others all playing crucial roles. However, as the discussion earlier in the paper, these teams should hold the virtues of appropriate teams and hold up to the standards expected for each team. This way they have a better approach making better use of their approaches as well as practices in benefiting the organizations (Clegg, Komberger, & Pitsis, 2008; Watson, 2006). Conclusion It is evident that teams are fruitful in all organizations. This is the main theme of the paper in analyzing how motivational beneficial the teams can be in delivering the best for organizations. However, it is also apparent that the same teams can be a challenge and a disadvantage to the organization in the ways discussed in the paper. Therefore, there is a need to asses the fruitfulness of teams in all situations and making the best out of that while improving on the areas that these teams become a disadvantage. This is the sole goal of the organizations since when teams are used for the right purpose; they can lead to a successful organization. References Burke, W. W. (2008). Organization Change: theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications Clegg, S., Komberger, M., & Pitsis, T. (2008). Managing & Organizations (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications Ken, B. (2005). "Go Team! Take your team to the Next Level." Koehler publishing Inc. San Francisco, CA Linstead, S., Fulop, L., & Lilley, S. (2009). Management & Organization: a critical text. Hound mills, Basingstoke: Palgrave, Macmillan. Pearce II, J.A., & Robinson Jr, R.B. (2009). Strategic management: formulation, implementation, and control. Boston McGraw Hill Irwin. Robbins, S., Millet, B., & Waters-Mash, T. (2008). Organizational behavior (5th ed.). Frenchs Forest, N.S.W: Pearson Education Australia. Watson, T.J. (2006). Organizing and Managing Work (2 ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education. William, G. (2003). Team Building, Addison-Wesley, Reading Read More