The paper “ Team Management - High-Performance Team Risks, Interpersonal Communication Barriers, and Motivation Risks” is an engrossing example of coursework on human resources. Whether an organization is a single-person operation or a multi-program operation, it requires a team management plan in order to ensure that it operates properly and everything is done smoothly and in order (Cadle and Yeates, 2008). The intent of a team management plan is to achieve the mission and tasks of the team required for the organization to run effectively. A team management plan is a framework for how an organization is run and operated in the day-to-day and long-term operation (Cadle and Yeates, 2008).
It encompasses the standard approach for doing a number of things such as handling money, addressing the way employees do their work, dealing with the operations of the organization to name a few. Thus, a good team management plan is required to address such issues (Cadle and Yeates, 2008). This paper will highlight risks associated with the high-performance team drawing from the theories in each risk and will also identify the process of a team management planHigh-performance team risksPersonality RiskPersonality can be explained by Type A and Type B personality theory that describes two major contrasting personality types (Widiger, 2006).
According to the theory, personalities that are competitive, ambitious, aggressive and more outgoing are considered Type A while those that are relaxed and less outgoing are labeled Type B. Theorist in this field noted that type A personalities were rigidly organized, highly status-conscious, want people to get to the point, proactive and time conscious (Widiger, 2006). They are often high-achieving and workaholics.
They can be irritated and stressed easily. Type B personalities are linked to fewer stress levels, when faced with the competition they focus less on either winning or losing (Widiger, 2006). Diversity in personality in any team affects performance. In any team, there are different personalities such as silent contributors, devil’ s advocates, facilitators, etc. Inhibitor personalities in any team can lead to conflicts and other problems and thus personality issues in teams should be addressed. One way of addressing personality issues is self-awareness by recognizing one’ s emotions and effects (Covey, 2013).
Also, according to Goleman’ s Emotional Competency Framework, leaders can address personality inhibitors that proscribe teams from achieving their full potential such as aggressive, distractive and passive. Conflict RiskConflict is often witnessed in the workplace (Doherty and Guyler, 2008). According to the organizational conflict theory, there are a number of conflicts within a particular enterprise such as interpersonal conflict. Departments have conflicts, senior management experience power struggle and most importantly teams members experience conflict often. Interpersonal conflicts involve conflicts between the individual as a result of not being on the same page.
If such people are forced to work together, friction often occurs. Such situations require the managers to be mediators in order to diffuse the situation and find a solution (Doherty and Guyler, 2008). In contrast with interpersonal conflicts, role conflict come up as a result of roles the parties are expected to perform which leads to the overlapping of responsibilities or status issues. In addition, intergroup conflict occurs as a result of unclear goals of teams due to the overlap of functions that can cause disputation. There are various choices that can be taken to avoid the risk of conflict in teams including avoidance, smoothing, compromise or confrontation (Collins and Rourke, 2009).
Avoidance and smoothing strategies depend heavily on time while confrontation and compromise strategies involve directing one party, coming up with an exclusive decision to resolve the conflict by favoring one party or forcing mediation between the conflict parties.