Is Establishing Team Work Difficult in Organizations - Coursework Example

Is establishing team work difficult in organizations? Name Institution Tutor’s name Table of Contents Executive Summary 3 Introduction 3 What makes teams successful? 4 Creating and managing teams 4 Why teams are difficult to establish in the organizations 6 Establishing and managing teams at the strategic level of organisations 8 Conclusion 9 Executive Summary This essay presents discussion about organisational work teams. It gives insight about tools used to analyse how teams operate in many contexts. Normal work teams can be costumed to yield to the diverse outcome as desired by the organisation. It is the responsibility of the leaders in the organisation to match every team with its intended results. It is important to note that high-performing teams are not easy to be found in an ordinary organisation context. It can steer the team to success particularly in non-routine activities. The strategic management in the organisation is responsible for dealing with VUCA issues that the organisation faces. The senior management can be scuttled by the challenge of trying to establish who may interpret strategic issues differently Introduction A team is a group of organized individuals working towards accomplishing the same goal. Team members in an organization are interdependent, with a unique identifiable characteristic where they can identify themselves as a team. Large organisations usually have more teams with each team working with others teams as well as the organization. Teams enable the organization to gather inputs from its members. Teams also provide a sense of involvement to the team members while pursuing the organisation’s set goals and objectives. The organisations typically use teams as a flexible way of assigning its member of staff to specific tasks and projects, therefore, enhancing cross-functional groups to be formed. What makes teams successful? Serious organizations frequently assess the performance of various teams. Those teams do not perform regularly dispatched to team building sessions to boost their performance. The organization and the team many at times become frustrated and disappointed because some teams do not perform. This is sole because such teams resume work when the mood in the team is very high, but the buzz mood quickly becomes worn off. As a result, both the organization and the teams return to where it was before leading to the same problems reappearing. There is a slight change in the team’s performance, but the overall result goal is not met. Cynicism and frustration can escalate to a new all-time low. One thing that the organisations need to know is that team building can be a very effective strategy to deal with the underperforming team when used correctly. Team building, however, is the solution to the problems affecting the fundamental problems concerning the formation and effectiveness of the teams Careful target interventions are the solution to the establishment and maintenance of performing teams. These intervention strategies should be able to reduce if not eliminate the systemic barriers to the performance of the teams. The critical analysis shows that the barriers to team’s success are not linked to the team’s skills but rather with the factors like team’s design environment the environment that it operates. Creating and managing teams In spite of the America’s individualist ethos, the American managers seem to possess a limitless craving for the information regarding groups. From the mid-80s, the number of articles published about teams in the workplace has been growing day by day. Consultancy services and firms offering technical services to boost teams’ performance have also been growing. Many of the articles appearing on the internet propose that teams are the best solution for an organisation to face new challenges. The problem with the said articles is that they do not provide the information that will guide both the managers and leaders in establishing and maintaining successful teams It is important to note that creating and managing teams in the organisations often lead to effective team outcomes. On the other hand, the success and the longevity of the teams many at times depend on the level of understanding by the leaders in the organisations on how to extract the gains teams can offer. If the leaders and managers don’t understand the skills that they and the teams possess in the creation and maintaining them, such and organisations won’t achieve their intended goals and objectives Creation of effective teams is a great concern to the organisation. Completion is one of the reasons why effective teams are needed in the organisation. The organisation leadership and the management need to form a high performing team to create and sustain the organisation’s competitive advantage in the market. Organisations frequently come up with strategies to boost their revenue. Downsizing and consolidation decisions are some of the strategies with many corporates adopt to boost their financial performance. Such statements like ‘doing more with less’ go hand in hand with teams. Teamwork is known to boost the overall output of the human capital. Leveraging of human resource as teams is one of the effective strategies needed by the organisations as a way of gaining and sustaining competitive advantage over the rivals in the market. Creating and managing teams at the branch level may not be a challenging task as such. Creating and managing interagency and inter-service becomes and an exclusive challenge that will need different leadership techniques. Leaders in such teams will be faced with unique challenges that will need different leadership style. It is known fact that such leaders will be presented with the harder challenge of establishing a standard description of issues and possible acceptable solutions among the team members. Commitment issue is another problem that the teams face. This is because team members will be more committed to the home branch or the home agency and the interagency team. The competitive team dynamics can reduce the efficiency in the achievement of set goals and objectives. Attempt to address contentious issues in the team can scuttle the efficiency of the team Why teams are difficult to establish in the organizations Many of us in one way or another have been part of a group labelled team. The team does matter if it is a task force at work or school, a committee, even a sports team or even an advocacy group in the community. A group of individuals who interact well is called a team. The fundamental thing that needs to be known about teams is that not all teams are the same. Every team is exceptional in its way. The first difference is the team’s expected outcomes as intended in its formation. Teams such as employees’ involvement, committees, and advisory panels are formed to help advise the management in the organizations. Teams are also established to produce and outcome that is organized action. Organized action teams include expedition teams, negotiating teams, and sports team among others. Project and development team comprise of professionals who work on an original project or an assigned task. Teams should, therefore, be managed and configured towards its intended output. In general, teams in corporate world create outcome that surpass the collective capacity of people who work with the established standards structure of the organization A case example the productivity and outcomes of defence contractors benefit the Department of Defence. Honeywell Corporation is a subcontractor for the Air Force’s B-2 bomber In 1992, Honeywell’s defence avionics restricted it’s the whole of its 1,800 human capital into multifunctional teams. The Albuquerque-based company did an analysis on its supervisors who could facilitate decision making, communication as well as loyalty to the group. This did take them six months to complete the study. The division general manager indicates that the company took a ‘burn the bridge’ strategy because Honeywell to let people know how serious they were. The division manager further said that they made a big fuss out of it to realise its dreams. If not, the goal could not have been achieved. One of the teams established data storage system for the Northrop Grumman’s B-2 bomber. To achieve its success, the team leader was able to manage the team by adopting strategies that boosted group’s loyalty where they directed much of their efforts on the Air Force’s need. To make the project team feel they own the project, their leader gave them all the needed including all the required financial information, finance and whatever was needed. The manager indicated he was sure they could achieve the desired result if the team work together The approach adopted by Honeywell can be a useful guide in establishing working teams. The Honeywell’s senior management ushered in a complete organizational change in half a year. This was a direct message to the human capital that they meant business. They nest step was finding the staff who had the right skills to work in teams. The management knew very well that forming a team is not the end of the road. Work must be done for success to be achieved. The Honeywell’s management did not wish for success, the work to achieve it. The Honeywell’s management carefully identified human capital capable who would take advantage of the opportunities that would make the teams successful. The team leaders on their part were able to reinforce the strong sense of ownership to the team members regarding their project and loyalty. Team members do not need to rely solely on the direction of their leaders. They have a crucial role to pay apart from executing the work. They are supposed to demonstrate two types of loyalty. The first kind of loyalty expected from them is the loyalty not only to the other team members but also identification with the group. Such loyalty helps the group boost achieve effective interaction in the group. The second loyalty expected from the team members is the loyalty towards the organisation objectives. They are also expected themselves with the organisation’s objectives. Recent studies in teams and task groups submit that these outcomes are the results of two coincident group practices Establishing and managing teams at the strategic level of organisations In many cases, it is very hard to develop a top management team in an organisation. Visualising the same is also not possible. The reason is that the job demands of the senior executives at the organisation do not allow them to engage in teamwork activities. The senior members of the organisation deal with the VUCA environment activities. During challenging situations, the top executives come up with critical ideas that look into the organisations future and turn them into initiatives. Many times these ideas are used to resolve policy conflicts through negotiation. Other activities include conceptual tasks such as dealing with the organisation’s short term problems often derived team consensus and staff analysis The team at the strategic level of the organisation can only achieve its success if the obstacles to establishing team consensus on long-term issues are addressed. The effectiveness of the strategic management team can also create multi-facet liabilities in the form in every strategic filter. Diverse terms affect each strategic management’s tailored model for interpreting VUCA matters. The tailored models can depend on the individual norms, professionals’ norms, personal experience or the organisations, culture. Irrespective of the strategic management approaches to the interpretation, the success of team activities will rely on how the team handle conflict as they strive to a consensus Teams are not required in all types of business or all organisations. Behavioural scientists are still trying to find out what motivates the human capital when the team will be most effective, what sort of business can effectively take advantage of teams’ success. Research on the psychology and the philosophy of the team is still at an early stage. Though the effectiveness of the teams can yield impressive results, research have shown that about 50% of self-directed teams end up failing Conclusion Effective teams don’t exist just because the leaders wish they will be. Effective teams exist since its leaders have the capacity to identify accurately when the teams can be effective in the corporate organisation. They are also effective when team leaders how to manage team activities to produce the desired results Read More