Final Paper due in 48 hours

combs

08CH_Weiss_Leadership_2e_U.pdf

Home >Education homework help >Final Paper due in 48 hours

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

1. Define teams in terms of leadership composition, relation to groups, and advantages and disadvantages.

2. Describe the stages of a team’s development and identify ways for excelling in each developmental stage of a team.

3. Identify different types of teams and strategies to effectively lead them.

4. Discuss specific ways for transforming groups into effective teams by understanding the qualities and habits of effective teams.

5. Explain strategies and tactics for preventing and managing conflict in teams.

iStock/Thinkstock

8 Leading Teams

176

Section 8.1 Defining Teams

Mary Barra, CEO at GM, has a team leadership approach that is “diametrically different” than older hierarchical models of leadership. Her style relies on team building and seeks consensus. She holds “hall meetings” to solicit advice from team members as to what direction a project should go in, and she challenges people to question their assump- tions. She’s known to be a very good listener, and she needs to be if she wants to solicit the ideas and feedback of team members. At the end of the day, she’s not at all afraid to make the hard choices, but she does so after seeking the perspectives of those around her and trying to build consensus toward the goals and objectives of the team (“What Drives Mary Barra,” 2011).

For Elon Musk, the SpaceX and Tesla inventor, team leadership is getting others to believe in the leader. He was quoted as saying: “A company is a group of people that are organized to create a product or service. That’s what a company is. So in order to create such a thing, you have to convince others to join you in your effort and so they have to be convinced that it’s a sensible thing, that basically there’s some reasonable chance of success and if there is success, the reward will be commensurate with the effort involved. And so I think that’s it. . . getting people to believe in what you’re doing—and in you—is important” (“Elon Musk,” 2013).

Sales teams for Warren Buffet, the renowned investor, require a sales strategy that is simple and understandable by all. It should express a company’s values. According to Buffet, “We have to stop over-complicating sales teams with the obsessive focus on reporting on the numbers and results only (forecasting, pipe- line, big data, results, etc.) at the expense of actually working with our sales teams to get them sell- ing better” (Barrett, 2015).

All of these leaders are seeking ways to get the most productivity

out of their teams. This chapter covers when and how teamwork can be used effectively in organizations, how teams form, and what differences scholars have identified between types of teams. A large component of this chapter explains how the role of leadership changes with a team, given the different structures, and how leaders can develop effective teams. Team leaders’ responsibilities differ with their roles on teams, but still play a critical role.

8.1 Defining Teams A team is an organized group of several members who share a common goal, work interdepen- dently, and coordinate efforts to accomplish desired objectives (Allen, 2009; Larson & LaFasto, 1989). Effective team leadership and followership depend on factors in our organizing paradigm

Mario Tama/Getty Images News/Thinkstock Warren Buffet requires a sales strategy that is simple and understandable by all.

177

Section 8.1 Defining Teams

illustrated in Figure 1.1, Chapter 1: persons, processes, and systems in organizations and their environments. Who the team leaders and followers are—their personalities, how they commu- nicate and problem solve, and how the larger organization and systems support the teams all matter, as we will explain. Teams are formed for a number of reasons, for example when one or a few professionals alone cannot accomplish a task, project, or work that requires greater exper- tise and experience; when creativity and innovation are needed to increase productivity; when work environments provide employees with opportunities to increase their sense of empower- ment and job satisfaction (Badir, Büchel, & Tucci, 2012; Hopp & Zenk, 2012); and when teams are structured with positive attitudes that help produce extraordinary performance (Cameron, Carlos, Trevor, & Margaret, 2011; Seppälä, 2015).

Not all work can or should be done in teams because teams require more resources, coordi- nation, and demands on an organization’s time, and teams create the potential for conflict. When simple tasks can be done by individuals, teams may not be the answer. Also when tasks do not demand a common mission, purpose, or set of goals, individuals may perform the work; and, when tasks are not interdependent (i.e., when the end product does not depend on how the other work elements fit together), a team may not be required (Crawford & LePine, 2013; Naquin & Tynan, 2003). However, as work becomes more complex, demanding higher levels of expertise across geographies, teams are essential.

Teams can vary in size and scope and can occur at all levels of an organization. A team can describe anything from a small group of executives who lead a corporation to smaller groups that are formed around a specific task and are dissolved upon completion of the task. A man- ager may assign two employees to a team to complete a small project together or a CEO may create an interdepartmental team to evaluate the efficiency of communication processes.

Composition of Team Leadership Teams can be led by a formal leader or through a particular division of labor across team members. This distribution of leadership responsibilities is called team leadership capacity (Day, Gronn, & Salas, 2004), with capacity referring to the potential for such leadership to ful- fill those responsibilities. Unlike in traditional organizations, where managers make all of the decisions, these teams ensure their effectiveness through shared responsibility (Hawkins & Tolzin, 2002). One of the most visible examples of this is a company’s traditional executive team, shown in Figure 8.1: the C-suite—the chief executive officer, or CEO, leads a group of top-level officers, often including a chief financial officer, a chief operations officer, a chief information officer, and a head of human resources. Each individual has his or her own spe- cialization and brings something different to the table, and together they work to establish and implement company vision, mission, values, and strategy. Although the CEO directs this team, all partake in the decision-making process. Even in cases of distributed leadership, it is important to designate a leader who is ultimately responsible for delegation and the team eventually achieving its goals. Ideally, team members will agree on both the goals and the intermediate steps, but at times, consensus isn’t possible, and decisions still need to be made.

Team size and composition are important and depend on a number of factors, including nature, type, and duration of the project and work; mission, goals and deadlines; and available exper- tise and resources. Although teams can range in size from five to nine members to even larger numbers, there is some agreement that smaller size is more effective with less potential for conflict and management issues (Coutu, 2009; Curral, Forrester, & Dawson, 2001). However,

178

VP Sales & Marketing

VP Manufacturing

VP R&D

CIOCFOCOO

CEO

Section 8.1 Defining Teams

size depends on the type of team needed. An example is a dispersed team such as a book pub- lishing company. The production of any book likely involves an interdepartmental team: editor, copy editor, cover artist, book designer, marketer, and so on. The team’s goal is to produce the best possible version of the book within a given time frame. Each team member contributes specialized skills and knowledge, such as the types of covers that may appeal to readers of historical fiction or ways to sell a book to large retailers such as Amazon or Walmart. However, they are all working toward a shared goal and must interact regularly to complete their tasks. These team members join the project with diverse, and ideally complementary, expertise and improve the quality of the final product, and their work is interdependent.

How good are you and your team at teamwork and team building? Take an online assessment to help you uncover common teamwork problems that you might be experiencing. To address a low score, consider improving how you orient new members to the team and its mission. Click the following link, type “Team Effectiveness Assessment” in the search bar, and click the first link titled “Team Effectiveness Assessment”: https://www.mindtools.com/.

Teams Versus Groups Teams have been described as groups, which are simply collections of people working together. However, not all groups are teams. There are those who argue that, in the real world, teams and groups overlap and are more similar than different. It is possible that some groups can become teams, but as shown in Table 8.1, the two technically differ in structure, intent, and function. Teams rely less on a hierarchical structure and more on an open and equal exchange of ideas and expertise. Leadership is often shared or might rotate among team members— who might come from all parts of an organization—and leaders rely more on social skills (skills facilitating interaction and communication) and trust to ensure that shared responsi- bilities are met. Also, teams often set their own performance goals and collaborate closely to produce a collective work product.

Groups, on the other hand, function in much the opposite way. Groups often have strong des- ignated leaders who have a formal relationship with followers and can use influence tactics

VP Sales & Marketing

VP Manufacturing

VP R&D

CIOCFOCOO

CEO

Figure 8.1: Traditional executive team

https://www.mindtools.com/

179

Section 8.1 Defining Teams

based on their positions. The structure is much less flexible and egalitarian, and the emphasis is on individual contributions, delegation, and connection to an organizational vision.

For highly complex, interdepartmental projects, however, teams may be a better fit. In these cases, working within a hierarchy can be onerous and time consuming. One employee may want input from another in a separate department, and following proper channels of commu- nication means contacting a manager, who contacts an equivalent manager in another depart- ment, who then asks an employee—and then the response follows the same route in reverse. It would be far simpler to flatten the hierarchy (remove layers of structure) and simply work across groups in a team, especially if regular feedback is helpful.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Teams There are a number of advantages when working within a team, as compared to working alone or in a group. Teams are often characterized as achieving high performance levels through close collaboration. This idea is called synergy—when the sum is greater than the component parts. Teamwork creates a situation where this is possible. When members collaborate, their discussions deepen the pool of knowledge available to each individual member (Lick, 2006). Team members can evaluate new proposals and find ways to implement them, and they can also strike down unrealistic solutions before attempting them, saving time and resources. Team members build on one another’s talents and ultimately develop a better, more comprehensive strategy. As members help each other through ideas, the team is likely to make better decisions as a unit and avoid unwanted disruptions, delays, and surprise problems.

Also, because of the egalitarian nature of teams, team members are often compelled to push one another—as well as themselves—to work toward continuous improvement and innovation. In teams, members bear an equal share in success, and members who feel responsible for each other are more likely to become motivated to perform to the best of their abilities. As team mem- bers build trust and work collaboratively, they see the team as a greater social unit that is able to meet larger goals (Batt, 2004) and feel more than monetary fulfillment from their work.

Table 8.1: Differences between groups and teams

Groups Teams

Designated, strong leader Shared or rotated leadership roles

Individual accountability Mutual and individual accountability toward each other

Identical purpose for group and organization Specific team vision or purpose

Performance goals set by others Performance goals set internally

Work within organizational boundaries Not inhibited by organizational boundaries

Individual work products Collective work products

Organized meetings and delegation Mutual feedback, open-ended discussions, and active problem solving

Source: Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (1993). The discipline of teams. Harvard Business Review, 71(2), 111–112. Used by permission.

180

Section 8.1 Defining Teams

However, despite these advantages, we have already observed that teams are not appro- priate for all situations. Building a team that works well together takes time, which can be counterproductive if the task or problem in question is simple. Other disadvantages can stem from the leader’s failure to set the appropriate tone when building the team. One com- monly cited problem with teams is that members can sometimes feel pressured to conform to group standards of conduct and performance. A related concept is called groupthink (Janis, 1972). Groupthink occurs when team members, in their search for unanimity, fail to think critically and instead rush into faulty decisions. The team often stops brainstorm- ing and evaluating new ideas and instead hurries to build consensus, adopt a decision, and move on. This usually happens when a majority accepts one viewpoint and the minority goes along to avoid conflict. Groupthink becomes a serious issue when it becomes the team norm. To mitigate problems with peer pressure and groupthink, leaders need to encourage team members to raise alternate viewpoints, even if it results in dissent, and continuously create opportunities for individual team members to participate in the decision-making process (McFarland, 2007). See “Take the Lead: Leading and Managing Teams” to apply concepts.

Take the Lead Leading and Managing Teams You are the chief operations officer for a large investment management organization. The organization has operations in five major U.S. cities, employing nearly 100,000 associates. You have a team of 10 leaders reporting to you based in these geographic locations. With the annual compilation of next year’s budget, you notice a disturbing trend: The operations have been steadily declining in productivity and profitability.

Although certain economic situations can explain some of the trending episodes, a recent employee-engagement survey showed that leadership is, at best, fragmented in similarities and approaches to running the business. It is apparent that each leader is running his or her operation independently of the others, creating a “silo” effect within the organization.

Based on what you’ve learned about leading and managing teams, determine how you would answer the following:

1. What can you do to identify root causes regarding the leadership silo situation? 2. Where will you find a best practice for moving forward? 3. What resources should you call on to ensure that your best practices are

implemented properly?

See the appendix for possible answers.

There are two other issues with teams: social loafing and the bystander effect. Social loaf- ing is the tendency of individuals to invest less effort when working as part of a team or group (Kidwell & Valentine, 2009). This situation often arises in school group projects: One student does less work than the others but receives the same grade as the rest of the group. What happens in an organization if two people complete almost all of the work and a third rarely attends meetings and contributes little to a product’s development? One method of mitigating the risk of social loafing is to set up performance reviews so that each team member evaluates contributions by others, in effect separating individual contributions

181

Section 8.2 Developing Teams

from the group’s complete effort. Although the team must work together on a task, promotions and evalua- tions are conducted separately and are based in part on individual effort and performance as part of the team, so the team’s success is separated from indi- vidual rewards. The role of leadership in teams is discussed in further detail in the next section.

The bystander effect (Blair, Thompson, & Wuensch, 2005) involves a person not offering help to a victim in the physi- cal, and many times virtual, presence of others. The “diffusion of responsibility” theory states that individuals in such situations ask themselves: “Why should I help when there’s someone else who could do it?” The presence of strang- ers increases the likelihood of the effect (Levine & Crowther, 2008). Tips for overcoming the bystander effect when in such situations include:

1. Make eye contact with a stranger to elicit a “we-ness” perception of that person toward the situation.

2. Take action if you’re a bystander. 3. Use your natural altruistic tendencies, assume people want to help; model

altruism. 4. Don’t worry about the consequences of helping (Whitbourne, 2010).

8.2 Developing Teams Effective teams are built on trusting relationships and take time to develop, which is why many organizations that prioritize teamwork—such as Nordstrom and StarbucksTM—use experienced team members to open new stores and then hire new employees who can adapt and fit into an established culture. Starting a team from scratch can take a long time, and involves several stages. Different models of team development have evolved. We will illustrate one of the classic models here (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977), but recognize that others exist, such as the three-stage model devised by Ilgen, Hollenbeck, Johnson, & Jundt (2005): form- ing, functioning, and finishing. During each stage, followers deal with and solve certain prob- lems and issues before proceeding to performing. Different models offer different insights about team development. Learning to recognize these stages can be helpful for anticipating the needs a team faces in its development.

Tuckman and Jensen’s (1977) classic model is one of the most cited frameworks. The five stages give leaders and followers insight into the team-building process that can assist them

Ryan McVay/Photodisc/Thinkstock Groupthink occurs when team members fail to think critically and rush into faulty decisions. The team often stops brainstorming and evaluating new ideas and instead hurries to build a consen- sus, adopt a decision, and move on.

182

Section 8.2 Developing Teams

in understanding how to help the team move through challenging moments in productive ways.

Stage 1: Forming The first stage of team development is the forming stage. In this stage, team members become acquainted with each other and determine what is standard, acceptable behavior. This stage involves a great deal of uncertainty for team members, as ground rules and tasks are just beginning to be discussed. In changing, competitive environments where decisions must be made fast and competently, team members have to share responsibility and may need to assign work to themselves rather than reporting to another person.

Some of the characteristics of this stage include exploring similarities and differences with different members and experiencing and questioning first impressions, which often include confusion, anxiety, fear, excitement, disorientation, and issues of inclusion, leadership, and trust. It is also not uncommon for members to question whether or not they fit with each other and whether this group may have lower productivity (“Forming,” 2006). The leader must provide direction and lay out the vision, goals, and objectives as well as a road map for the team’s mission during this phase.

Stage 2: Storming As each member’s personality becomes apparent, individuals begin to become more asser- tive in clarifying their own roles within the team. During the storming stage, there may be conflict and disagreement over the perceptions of the team’s goals and objectives.

Members often use this time to debate and disagree over exactly what needs to be done. The team must eventually move past these disagreements or it will never be able to achieve a level of high performance. However, dissent is not entirely negative—for one, it counteracts peer pressure and groupthink, and teams should avoid quashing the spirit of discussion.

Characteristics of this stage include tensions over competition, disunity and unrest, auton- omy versus control, and support versus competition, as members define their roles and responsibilities. One of the leader’s central tasks during this stage is to coach and organize members to focus on the mission of the team while organizing work to be executed effectively. The leader must be understanding, patient, an excellent listener, and present to members to answer questions (“Forming,” 2006; Tuckman & Jensen, 1977).

Stage 3: Norming The norming stage occurs when team unity emerges and conflict has been resolved. As con- sensus develops and team roles are clarified, members begin to understand and accept each other. Often this is a short stage in the team’s development as it works out its culture and identity.

183

Section 8.2 Developing Teams

Characteristics of the norming stage are evolving trust, acceptance of dif- ferences, increased collaboration, more open communication, devel- oping relationships, and giving and receiving of positive feedback. Rules of engagement have been established, the mission and goals are accepted, and members realize that communi- cation is important to getting impor- tant work completed. Among the leader’s roles during this stage are setting an example, modeling the way, and reinforcing the values and norms of the group.

Stage 4: Performing As the performing stage begins, the team puts a major emphasis on accomplishing its established goals. Now members are committed 100% to the team’s mis- sion, and they prove this through frequent interaction and coordination of their efforts.

Characteristics during this stage include team members’ self-confidence and ability to accom- plish their stated goals and objectives. There is more harmony, shared participation, and cohesion generally among members, who are also more flexible in sharing roles and respon- sibilities for the good of the team.

Stage 5: Adjourning The final stage of team development is the adjourning stage. This occurs only in teams that have a limited task to perform and are then separated. The emphasis of this stage is toward wrapping up and measuring the performance of the group’s final product. Sometimes mem- bers may have strong emotional feelings toward the ending of a team, so it is important for the leaders to monitor and focus on their team’s needs.

Characteristics of this last stage include relief, a sense of accomplishment—if the team has succeeded in accomplishing its goals—and, for some members, sadness at parting with their teammates, many of whom may have become acquaintances and good friends. Assuming the team’s goals have been achieved, it is a time to celebrate and recognize the accomplishments.

Of course, not all teams meet all the requirements of these stages. Some teams may loop back and forth between different stages—for example, storming can be repeated during norm- ing and performing stages. These concepts are used more as a road map than as absolute directions.

Photodisc/Thinkstock Characteristics of the norming stage involve trust, acceptance of differences, increased collabora- tion, more open communication, developing relationships, and giving and receiving positive feedback.

184

Functional team

Cross-functional team

Self-managing team

Virtual team

Technologies

Section 8.3 Leading Different Types of Teams

8.3 Leading Different Types of Teams A team structure is the interrelationship between team members that determines how vari- ous tasks, responsibilities, and authority are allocated—the hierarchical dynamics within a team (Rowe, 2004; Zaccaro & Klimoski, 2002). A team member may have direct control over determining the tasks and responsibilities of other members, or all members may essentially have equal footing. This text focuses on four team types: functional, cross-functional, self- managed, and shared responsibility.

Functional Team The functional team is the classic building block of all teams. It works best in simple environ- ments where tasks are either not very complex or solvable by a functional expert or experts each working separately and together. Team members with different expertise areas (e.g., marketing, production, human resources, sales, research and development) who belong to the same business unit and share a common purpose comprises a functional team, illustrated in Figure 8.2. These teams often appear as departments, such as finance, marketing, and the like, and are also called vertical or command teams because they are led by a manager who oversees a small group of employees. The structure and leadership of these teams tends to be more hierarchical and vertical.

The leadership command structure derives from the functional pyramid team and organi- zation structure. The lone leader at the top of the pyramid is in charge of final decisions. Authority and responsibility for getting work done and goals accomplished reside with that leader. Team member responsibility and authority are limited to the specific expertise area of that person’s department or work unit. Communication flows up and down the vertical structure, rather than across departments. The functional structure is a somewhat rigid team structure that emphasizes team members’ particular expertise (and functional) areas.

Members of functional teams are asked to meet specific goals that are determined by a man- ager. One challenge in a functional team is that leaders and members often tend to focus on their specialized areas of expertise while leaving the overall organization’s mission and goals

Figure 8.2: Four team types

Functional team

Cross-functional team

Self-managing team

Virtual team

Technologies

185

Section 8.3 Leading Different Types of Teams

to the leader to coordinate, effectively eliminating some of the advantages of working as part of a team. Because of this insular vision, functional teams sometimes begin to compete with each other, which can damage the organization’s larger purpose.

There is a strong rationale for the classic functional team. Specific expertise and knowledge areas are required to solve a problem, and a team leader or manager can coordinate informa- tion and communication within and between departments to do so or to create opportuni- ties. However, the use of functional team structures has declined recently for several reasons. The increasing complexity of environments and problems, issues, and opportunities requires increased coordination, communication, information sharing, and speed of decisions. Also, individual team members and teams are more geographically dispersed and require different uses of technologies and ways of coordinating information and decisions to meet organiza- tional goals and market demands.

IBM’s 3-D Internet team was the first to launch a four-day “mini-jam” in 2007 bringing together 300 learning professionals from the company. The company has since been a leader in blending new technologies with old ones—instant messaging and telephony—enabling global teams to leverage IBM’s “Intraverse” to share information and speed decision making (Hamilton, 2008). The IBM commerce portfolio dedicated $24 billion in analytics, using 8,000 consultants and more than 100 SaaS (Software as a Service: a software distribution model that enables vendors and service providers to host applications made available to customers over the Internet) offerings to integrate IBM research, analytics, security, and cloud (“IBM newsroom,” 2015).

Cross-Functional and Virtual Teams A cross-functional team, illustrated in Figure 8.2, is a variation or extension of the func- tional team. A cross-functional team comprises members brought together to perform unique tasks from various functional departments within an organization. (In the figure, the rect- angles represent the team members themselves, and the circles represent their respective departments within the organization.) These teams may be either temporary or permanent, depending on project type. As mentioned before, organizations are increasingly looking for an edge in today’s complex and dynamic competitive landscape. This has led them away from hierarchical structures toward ones that are more horizontal or flat, in the hope that a col- laborative approach will foster innovation.

Still, functional teams are necessary depending on the nature of the tasks; the skills, knowl- edge, and experience needed to complete the tasks; and the amount of coordination needed to complete the tasks. Members who must work and coordinate tasks across functions also need to know how functional teams operate. Functional structures (and teams) may be required for either complex or simple tasks and projects that require independent, in-depth levels of expertise and need to be completed before a product or project moves to another level of development.

The U.S. Postal Service, before the advent of many contemporary technologies, was a function- ally structured organization—and still is, to some extent. However, when tasks and projects required different functional areas of expertise (e.g., research and development, production,

186

Section 8.3 Leading Different Types of Teams

marketing, and finance) working together to complete a project or task, not independently, then cross-functional structures and teams were required. For example, many consumer technology companies even involve customers (and focus groups) as part of the research and development process to ensure that what the customer wants is part of the product design process.

Broad organizational goals require input and cooperation from multiple business units or functional areas. As members from these various business units come together to form teams and cross boundaries with individuals from other disciplines, they become known as cross-functional teams. These are usually formed to create nonroutine products or services to help aid an organization in accomplishing its mission or goals. Team members may also include individuals from outside the organization, such as strategic partners, suppliers, or clients. At Texas Instruments, the corrective-action and quality-improvement teams were both cross-functional, including managers, engineers, and accountants who could evalu- ate processes across departments. When Rubbermaid decided to develop a new product line for cars, it created a cross-functional team of designers, marketers, and engineers to interview customers in order to gain a broad understanding of their wants and concerns (Dumaine, 1990).

Today, advances in communication technology have helped the development of virtual teams: cross-functional teams whose members are geographically dispersed and work in dif- ferent time zones and places and across organizational boundaries, using electronic and web technologies to communicate, make decisions, and share content. Team members no longer need to be in the same location to perform their tasks, and these cross-functional teams are now also cross-cultural. Organizations use virtual teams for customer service, high-quality /low-cost solutions, and increased speed when completing projects (Cascio & Shurygailo, 2003; Knouse, 2004; Zigurs, 2003). Virtual teams tend to be used by companies that com- pete globally and have operations worldwide. At the same time, many companies are increas- ingly using virtual teams within countries; technologies enable professionals to perform and return work products electronically.

Olanrewaju, Smaje, and Willmott (2014) argue that effective digital enterprises, and we would add virtual digitally connected teams, have seven traits. These authors state that to succeed, “management teams need to move beyond vague statements of intent and focus on ‘hard wir- ing’ digital into their organization’s structures, processes, systems, and incentives.” The seven traits include the following:

1. Being unreasonably aspirational in their drive to create value for the organization. For example, Netflix built a successful online DVD rental business; their leadership envisioned a future for the industry that involved digital streaming. Their manage- ment then made a strategic bet that positioned the firm in real-time entertain- ment. As the video-streaming market took off, Netflix captured almost a third of the streaming market and had more than 40 million subscribers to video streaming by the end of 2013.

2. Acquire capabilities and talent. This trait requires that “leadership teams must be realistic about the collective ability of their existing workforce” as they attract digital talent from other industries, because they understand that “emphasizing skills over experience when hiring new talent is vital to success, at least in the early stages of transformation.”

187

Section 8.3 Leading Different Types of Teams

3. “Ring fence” and cultivate talent. This trait involves nurturing digital talent dif- ferently, offering digital teams their “own working patterns, sandbox, and tools.” Walmart established @WalmartLabs®, an “idea incubator,” that the company grew and located as an e-commerce division in Silicon Valley—far removed from the com- pany’s Arkansas headquarters. @WalmartLabs increased the firm’s online revenues by 30% in 2013, “outpacing Amazon’s rate of growth.”

4. Challenge everything, as did Hertz in 2007 when it deployed self-service kiosks and teams just as the airlines had done for flight check-in.

5. Be quick and data-driven, as P&G did when it created a single analytics portal, called the Decision Cockpit, that offered real-time sales data across brands, products, and regions to more than 50,000 employees globally. “The portal, which emphasizes projections over historical data, lets teams quickly identify issues, such as declining market share, and take steps to address the problems.”

6. Follow the money, as did Starbucks when they focused 35 of 100 active IT projects in 2013 on customer- or partner-facing initiatives. “One-third of these projects were devoted to improving efficiency and productivity away from the retail stores, and one-third focused on improving resilience and security.” The company is a leader in customer-experience innovation.

7. Be obsessed with the customer, as is the online retailer Zappos. When it doesn’t have a product in stock, it helps a customer find the item from a competitor. Result: 75% of its orders are from repeat customers.

However, virtual teams can and do create significant leadership challenges for some compa- nies. The leader’s tasks of facilitation, interaction, and knowledge transfer are significantly more difficult with virtual teams. Without face-to-face interaction, members miss nonverbal signs given by the leader, which often set the tone for discussions, and cultural differences can come into play. Team members may also experience loneliness and isolation (Gajendran & Joshi, 2012). Overall, information sharing with the entire group also tends to be less in vir- tual teams ( Mesmer-Magnus, DeChurch, Jimenez-Rodriguez, Wildman, & Shuffler, 2011). Moreover, some cultures value clearly defined hierarchical structures, and building a cross- functional team with a flattened structure can be a significant challenge. Virtual team leaders have two primary objectives: crystal-clear communication and a strict focus on the overarch- ing goal. Without those, it can be especially difficult to stay on track and maintain focused dis- cussions around specific problems in a virtual setting. Virtual teams generally require some managerial and leadership monitoring in helping members keep visible with the rest of the organization, maintaining team trust and cohesiveness, and keeping members on track with team goals (cite).

Self-Managed Teams (SMT) A self-managed team is an autonomous team whose individual members share leadership responsibilities while holding each other mutually accountable for the team’s performance. Such teams range in size from 10 to 15 members and even larger (Erez, LePine, & Elms, 2002). Figure 8.2 illustrates the equality inherent in this type of team. Performance goals for the team are normally assigned by upper management, which usually comprises cross-functional membership in order to provide diversity and balance. At FedEx, the executive team is cross- functional, bridging the departments that manage the organization’s entire infrastructure, and the clerks are in small, self-managed teams.

188

Section 8.3 Leading Different Types of Teams

Self-managed members have a high degree of autonomy, participate broadly in decision making, perform a variety of tasks, and are thus often more motivated because they are more personally invested in the team’s project and goal (Lussier & Achua, 2006); they are directly connected to the company’s vision and they know they can affect key issues for the company. Team members also share authority and responsibility and can implement change without having to wait for a long approval process. They can therefore see the immediate effects of their work and are generally more adaptable and proactive in their behavior than members of traditional teams (Jong & Ruyter, 2004).

As self-managed teams are responsible for making their own decisions, members are expected to work with minimal supervision. However, these teams are not completely independent— organizational leaders still set their overall direction and monitor their performance. Typically, self-managed teams elect a member to communicate performance back to the larger organi- zation. Often this leadership position rotates depending on the project. Self-managed teams typically include members with various specialties and functions, access to resources (such as information, funding, equipment, or supplies), and power to make decisions to solve problems, direct resources, and plan for the future (Daft, 2015). Research indicates that self- managed teams do not always perform better than those that are more traditionally structured. If self- managed team members perceive that their pay and rewards depend on teammate feedback, performance improves for the entire team (Stewart, Courtright, & Barrick, 2012). Also, when self-managed teams feel safe to speak up without being ostracized by their teammates, conflict increased performance (Bradley, Postlehwaite, Klotz, Hamdani, & Brown, 2012).

With FedEx’s self-managed clerk teams, the clerks are given access to employees across the company, from couriers to billing techs, so if they see a problem, they are able to immediately implement a change to the system with- out having to deal with bureaucracy and appealing to higher level execu- tives. Clerks are able to directly explain the problems, consequences, and pro- posed solutions to those affected by the change and in terms each depart- ment can relate to and understand. This ground-up approach—rather than an unexplained mandate from above—also tends to win buy-in from other employees. FedEx was able to eliminate 13% of service glitches company-wide, in large part because of the work of these teams, which were empowered to find and fix systemic problems (Dumaine, 1990).

Shared-Leadership Team A shared-leadership team is one in which every team member is held accountable for both the leadership responsibilities and the results. Self-managed teams sometimes connote

ASSOCIATED PRESS/Matt Sayles FedEx’s self-managed clerk teams are given access to employees across the company and if they see a problem they can immediately implement a change to the system without having to deal with corporate bureaucracy.

189

Section 8.4 Transforming Groups Into Effective Teams

teams that have little focus and perhaps a lack of control (Fenn, Dinkins, & Miller, 2000); shared leadership invokes an idea of discipline. Each member is expected to function as a leader with a stake in the outcome. In shared-leadership teams, power stems from exper- tise rather than a position within the organization. Members are expected to share their skills and experience with the team, especially when decisions must be made. Members of self-managed teams are accountable for their share of work products, which provides one form of external control.

In self-managed teams, the leadership identifies team goals and determines goal-attainment paths. The team empowers itself. Team members obtain training on managing projects, run- ning meetings, and solving problems. With little supervision, some leadership may be required to monitor the team’s progress. Open communication is required from leadership on relating organizational goals to the team. In shared-leadership (or self-directed) teams, by contrast, the team identifies its goals and determines its goal-attainment paths. An environment of innovation, commitment, and motivation is created by the team. Organizational leaders may find it time consuming to track and verify the progress of the team toward organizational goals. Two-way communication is required between those responsible for corporate strategy and the teams. These types of teams can be effective, because they find and solve problems when they observe them (Lee, 2008).

Multiteam System (MTS) A collection of interdependent teams is known as a multiteam system (MTS) (Chen, Kirkman, Kanfer, Allen, & Rosen, 2007; DeChurch & Marks, 2006). An MTS can also be sub- sets of component teams acting interdependently to accomplish at least one contiguous goal, “with all acting in concert toward a superordinate distal goal. Interdependence in MTSs can be in terms of inputs, process, and outputs. The inputs may include human, informational, technological, material, and financial resources” (O’Leary, Woolley, & Mortensen, 2012, p. 141). An example of an MTS is emergency fire and medical teams coordinating activities and responses. As global terrorism thrives, more uses of MTSs will likely be organized and used within and across nations and regions.

8.4 Transforming Groups Into Effective Teams

Traditional hierarchical structures are changing in favor of streamlined, flexible, team- oriented designs, primarily due to changes in external environments such as increased competition, government regulations, or crises—including the recent global eco- nomic downturn. Companies are looking for faster, more efficient, less bureaucratic ways to respond to competitors, and teams often motivate employees to work together more cohesively by distributing responsibility more equally. However, not all teams are equally successful, even those that seem to work well together. Having a strong personality fit or complementary skill set is not enough. In order to be considered effective, a team must meet its performance goals and deadlines in an efficient manner. Scholars agree that effec- tive teams share similar qualities.

190

Section 8.4 Transforming Groups Into Effective Teams

Qualities of Effective Teams Six of the qualities of an effective team are the following:

1. Commitment to goals, tasks, and performance. Team members are focused on a positive outcome, which means staying focused on the end result rather than on disagreements or selfish needs. Goals are placed ahead of individual ambitions, and when decisions are made, individual members support them, trusting that any hesitations have been heard and acknowledged. Team needs and expectations align with their output: The team meets the goals it sets.

2. Clear and efficient group processes. Team members understand the structure and expectations of their team, and they are able to interact with and relate to each other in ways that allow them to increase efficiency over time. In other words, effective teams get results quickly and become better at working together over time. They develop processes and refine them, working together on the team as they do on a product ( Warren, 2003). Roles and responsibilities should be clearly defined. Are team members expected to manage themselves? Report to a team leader? What is each team member bringing to the table?

3. Collaboration. All teams require open and honest sharing of knowledge. Team members need to trust each other and work together, even if they disagree. Team members also communicate constantly. Communication means speaking up and participating, sharing ideas, updating the team on progress, asking for help, and admitting mistakes. This is particularly important in virtual teams.

4. Competence. Team members share their expertise with the group and have a basic level of competence to offer the group. Teams are built on complementary experi- ence, so each member fills a particular role in the group.

5. Team member satisfaction. Team members feel that their needs are being met by the group and that the distribution of work is balanced. Their relationships are mutually supportive with a fair workload, so no one resents the work; rather, team members feel rewarded through their participation. They contribute to the team and receive support and fulfillment in return (Warren, 2003).

6. Team viability. This refers to whether team members wish to continue working together. Although a team may perform well on a given project or task, it may

not wish to work together again on another task, thus requiring the creation and development of a new team (Hackman, 1987).

Recall a team in which you are a member now or have been in the past. Take Assessment 8.1, which indicates how well that team is functioning or func- tioned. After taking the assess- ment, see which specific concepts in this chapter can improve or would have improved your team’s effectiveness.

AP Images/Sara D. Davis General Electric’s plant in Durham, North Carolina, uses production teams that build jet engines from start to finish.

191

Section 8.4 Transforming Groups Into Effective Teams

Assessment 8.1: Team Effectiveness Questionnaire (TEQ)

Instructions On the following questionnaire, indicate, on a scale from 1–5, how well you feel your team performs against each of the following statements: 1 = Not at all or very rarely; 2 = Occasionally; 3 = Some of the time; 4 = Usually; 5 = Very well or all the time.

Each time you score a 4 or 5 for a statement, fill in one square of the following grid immediately above the letter that corresponds to the letter at the end of that particular statement. (The maximum number of boxes you can fill in for each letter is five.) Now, for every 1 or 2 that you gave a statement fill in one square below the corresponding letter.

(continued)

192

Section 8.4 Transforming Groups Into Effective Teams

Assessment 8.1: Team Effectiveness Questionnaire (TEQ) (continued)

The letters correspond to the following eight attributes of effective teams:

A—Clarify vision, set targets and boundaries B—Empower and authorize C—Praise and acknowledge D—Maintain vibrant internal communication E—Encourage divergence and innovation F—Champion the team externally G—Share learning and improve H—Celebrate and exploit diversity

Compare Your Impressions With Others in the Team.

• Where are the similarities. . . and the differences? • What do you think accounts for any significant gaps in your perceptions?

The Team Effectiveness Questionnaire simply provides people with a mechanism for exploring and discussing aspects of behavior found to lie at the heart of effective teams. The higher the positive score, the greater the potential for effectiveness. But more importantly, from a learning perspective, the more variation in those scores between team members, the more there is to understand about why perspectives differ.

The TEQ clusters behaviors into the following eight attributes or qualities.

Clarify vision, set targets and boundaries (A). Members of effective teams (hi TEQ) are clear about what they have to do, where their individual responsibilities lie and how what they do is contributing to the overall (organizational) picture. They are likely to be led by someone who is able to clarify roles, give clear direction, and create a sense of purpose. As demands change, roles and boundaries are reviewed and adjusted. Both woods and trees can be seen by everyone.

Empower and authorize (B). In addition to knowing what to do, members of effective teams also have the power to do what they need to do. They are trusted to act professionally and authorized to do so. Authority and decision-making capability is delegated to the level at which it is needed. Seeking authorization from higher up is kept to a responsible minimum. People outside the team are encouraged to deal with the appropriate team member, regardless of grade.

Praise and acknowledge (C). People’s specific contributions are acknowledged and praise is given for both achievements and effort. Leaders and colleagues understand the importance of acknowledging particular behavior rather than offering generic praise. (“You have really put some effort into building a relationship with that department. . . . I know it has been hard for you.) “Thanks” is far more effective than, “well done.” People feel valued for who they are and what they contribute.

Maintain vibrant internal communication (D). Hi TEQ teams know what to communicate and how best to do it. They do not rely on formal occasions (reviews, meetings, summit conferences) but get in touch in whatever way feels appropriate (given the importance and the urgency of the message). People know what others need to know and actively pass

(continued)

193

Section 8.4 Transforming Groups Into Effective Teams

Assessment 8.1: Team Effectiveness Questionnaire (TEQ) (continued)

information around. They prefer face-to-face contact, however short, and tend not to hide behind emails or letters when difficult or emotionally charged messages are required. Short, frequent, and informal contact is routine.

Encourage divergence and innovation (E). The effective team is encouraged to be playful and creative. New ideas are welcomed and actively sought out, and problems are often seen as opportunities. Experiments are encouraged. Old systems and procedures are valued as long as they are still effective, and innovation is not seen as a threat. People feel able to ask “naïve” questions. (“Why do we still do it that way?” or “Do we still need to do this?”) At any one time, at least one person within the team is thinking about “how we might do something better.”

Champion the team externally (F). Effective teams know that others outside the team hear about their successes. Team members are openly upbeat about the team and the way it works. There is an obvious respect for each other, and people outside the team are aware of it. Leaders are strong advocates of the team externally, and are seen to demonstrate their confidence and trust. They are effective at negotiating for the resources the team needs to do its job effectively.

Share learning and improve (G). Hi TEQ teams are constantly improving their skills, their processes, and their performance. People are curious; they experiment (see E above) and are keen to learn. Time is not wasted on blame or recrimination. Members are clear about the difference between organizationally damaging mistakes—for which there are clear sanctions—and day-to-day errors, which can be used as a basis for improvement. People share their knowledge and skills willingly.

Celebrate and exploit diversity (H). Effective teams seek out different opinions and perspectives in order to reach more robust or innovative solutions. Hi TEQ teams enjoy diversity and are not afraid of exploring differences. They have the skills to build dialogue, confront stale assumptions, and achieve mutually respectful understanding, while still disagreeing. Constructive and creative disagreement is seen as more productive than the effort to achieve consensus at any cost. Source: From Useful Resources at http://www.timkemp.co.uk. Used by permission of Tim Kemp.

Developing Habits of Highly Effective Teams The habits of highly effective leaders can be seen in the multiple steps it takes to create an effec- tive team. Leadership scholars Kohn and O’Connell (2007) structured these steps, which they also called “developing habits,” into a pyramid (see Figure 8.3). Teams are first built on a founda- tion of strong relationships, empathy, and an awareness that the group must come before the individual. Once these new habits of awareness and relationship are in place, teams can develop processes to work together. As team members work, they reinforce their relationships and refine processes, and in doing so, build trust in the team and each other. Ultimately, team members are given roles and responsibilities. Although team leaders play a critical role in team development, we will see that it is also incumbent upon team members to practice these habits.

194

Entrusting Team

Members With

Appropriate Roles

Building Team Trust

Establishing and

Regulating Team

Norms

Thinking Laterally

Applying Caring Skills To Team Processes

Strengthening

Emotional Capacity

to Improve Team

Relationship

Expanding Team

Self-Awareness

Practicing Empathy

and Respectfulness

Establishing Foundation-Layer Team Caring Skills

Section 8.4 Transforming Groups Into Effective Teams

First Tier: Establishing Foundation-Layer Team Caring Skills The first tier asks team members to begin thinking of themselves in relation to the group and the group’s goals, rather than focusing on individual needs and goals. This first tier focuses on the internal and external team relationships, the team’s identity, and the team’s practice of empathy. In a 2011 article about teamwork, magazine writer Chuck Salter used the Miami Heat, a team in the National Basketball Association, as an example of what can happen when individual egos are given up for the good of the group. In 2010, the basketball team recruited three superstars to play with each other: LeBron James, Chris Bosh, and Dwyane Wade—all lead scorers on their previous teams. It was a big bet. As Salter wrote, “High-priced talent doesn’t ensure success. . . . Miami is banking on the fact that James, Wade, and Bosh are bud- dies.” The ideal situation for the Heat, Salter stated then would be that the three “start with sacrifice” and trust one another. The bet paid off. In their time together the Heat and their Big 3 went to the finals 4 consecutive years and won the championship twice. Now James is taking his leadership and knowledge to Cleveland, saying in his first season that he’s willing to come off the bench if it’s for the good of the team. Cleveland is bound for a high seed in the playoffs after not making the postseason for years” (McMenamin, 2015).

Habit 1: Strengthening Emotional Capacity to Improve Team Relationships Within a team, three types of relationships matter: Members need to relate well to (1) each other with regard to their purpose and goal; (2) the team as a whole, both understanding and

Figure 8.3: Six habits of highly effective teams

Entrusting Team

Members With

Appropriate Roles

Building Team Trust

Establishing and

Regulating Team

Norms

Thinking Laterally

Applying Caring Skills To Team Processes

Strengthening

Emotional Capacity

to Improve Team

Relationship

Expanding Team

Self-Awareness

Practicing Empathy

and Respectfulness

Establishing Foundation-Layer Team Caring Skills

195

Section 8.4 Transforming Groups Into Effective Teams

accepting the team’s identity; and (3) external groups, from stakehold- ers to clients.

When Rubbermaid employees began to design components for cars, their teams had a specific goal: to under- stand the customer. Team members from engineering, marketing, and design had different questions for cli- ents depending on their field. A mar- keter might ask about other products customers had seen from competi- tors, note positive and negative lan- guage, and try to get a sense of how these products were described and which phrases stuck. An engineer might ask about materials and func- tionality while a designer researched experience. Team members must present a unified front to clients and work together to combine disparate information and expertise into con- crete product proposals. This work was based on their acceptance and understanding of the team’s goal and establishing relationships according to that purpose.

Habit 2: Expanding Team Self-Awareness A team is self-aware when it has a strong team identity—the team under- stands who it is and what it stands for: its shared mission, values, competen- cies, and strengths. Team identity is developed through both conversation and practice as team leaders and members understand what differentiates their team from oth- ers and define how they interact with each other and with external groups.

Identity can come through adversity. With the Miami Heat, “adversity” is an asset. Salter noted: “The real bonding didn’t occur until the Heat Troops began to shed blood on the battlefield— to lose, and lose badly” (2011). After the team suffered a “humiliating defeat” in their first game and “blundered through the next few weeks,” the three stars and their teammates held a players-only meeting and talked it out. Salter wrote that “guys were telling each other to stop playing afraid. . . . Under duress, Miami found its identity” (Salter, 2011). The team went on to win 21 of the next 22 games.

ASSOCIATED PRESS/Lori Shepler A team is self-aware when it has a strong identity. When Chris Bosh, Dwyane Wade, and LeBron James started playing together for the Miami Heat they suffered losses and had to overcome adversity on the court. Under duress, the team found its iden- tity and won two NBA titles in four years together. LeBron James has since transferred his leadership skills back to the Cleveland Cavaliers where they went back to the NBA finals in his first year back.

ASSOCIATED PRESS/Tom DiPace

196

Section 8.4 Transforming Groups Into Effective Teams

Habit 3: Practicing Empathy and Respectfulness As team members develop their relationships with each other, the team as a whole, and external stakeholders and clients, they also deepen their empathy, or their ability to share and understand one another’s feelings. In effective teams, members learn to pay atten- tion to the emotions of others by allowing silence, gauging interactions, and responding to unspoken cues. In order for leaders and followers to succeed, all parties must realize that they have an equal responsibility to the needs of the others. Leaders set the tone, and their goal is to foster a relationship that is honest, engaging, forward thinking, and cooperative. When leaders treat their team members as equals, each individual is more likely to add sig- nificant contributions to a team. In turn, followers should feel that their leaders are worthy of their trust, planning ahead for the future, inspiring to be around, and capable and valu- able to the organization or team.

The grocery store chain Whole Foods Market® uses teams to manage stores and departments. The purpose of the store-level teams is to exchange experiences, share problems, and come up with solutions to make each store run more smoothly. When one store, faced with constant turnover in a management position, hired the fourth manager in two years, she immediately set the tone and showed that she empathized with her new team by encouraging members to speak up and tell her about the place. She had industry experience that she could share, but she wanted to listen to them first. By listening, this new manager could understand the exist- ing culture before establishing her role in it. She also demonstrated her approachability and let employees raise problems and work out solutions on their own without imposing her opinions from the outset (Fishman, 1996). This had multiple benefits: First, employees bought into the solutions because they had proposed them, and second, she fostered a culture of both empathy and problem solving.

Second Tier: Applying Caring Skills to Team Processes In the second tier of developing an effective team, the foundational habits have already been developed. Team members have formed relationships with each other and are aware of their interactions, so they can begin to create team culture and processes. This would likely hap- pen during the norming stage of team development discussed earlier. Whole Foods teams keep caring alive outside their stores and store hours frequently by doing volunteer stints for organizations like the Land Conservancy of Southern Chester County and the Chester County Food Bank in Wilmington, Delaware. Known as Ministry of Caring, store managers and teams participate (Shea, 2015).

Habit 4: Establishing and Regulating Team Norms As discussed earlier, team leaders are primarily responsible for setting up norms and encouraging systems of communication, time management, and relationship management to emerge. These habits are informed by previous experience in teams but are also specific to the new forming team. Regulating these norms must be a continuous process, and team members must play a part here so the team can continue to function as a unit. Creating these systems both reinforces relationships and keeps the team on the same page, moving toward a shared goal.

For teams that form and disband for short-term projects, being able to establish norms quickly at the outset becomes key. The corrective-action teams at the Texas Instruments plant

197

Section 8.4 Transforming Groups Into Effective Teams

disband immediately after solving short-term problems, meaning teams are constantly made, deployed, and dissolved. An engineer might be part of multiple corrective action teams, but each will have its own team norms depending on task, leader, and other members. Past expe- rience can provide alternate approaches to processes, but in the end, the immediate team finds and refines effective ways of working together.

Habit 5: Thinking Laterally The second half of the process tier involves developing new habits of mind. Instead of tradi- tional, sequential, analytical thinking, an effective team employs “lateral thinking,” a phrase coined by Edward de Bono (1990). The purpose of lateral thinking is to be provocative and innovative, breaking free of traditional methods.

In de Bono’s description of lateral thinking, he proposes six “hats” or approaches to brain- storming. Colored hats make this process concrete, so team members can picture stepping into a new mind-set each time they switch approaches.

Wearing their first hat, team members find facts without attempting to interpret or prioritize them. The goal of this approach is to free information from judgment so that team mem- bers can evaluate it without preconceptions. Second, team members assess their emotional responses to the issues at hand. This step is the opposite of the first step, focusing solely on intuition. Do they have a gut response telling them to focus on some aspect of the problem or the data? Third, team members evaluate why an idea may not work. In this step, they are invited to express dissent and to find the limits of an idea through rigorous testing. Fourth, team members look for positives in an idea. Why might this idea work? What are the potential benefits? They are then invited to think outside of the box and to brainstorm alternatives. Is the proposed solution the only one? What are other possibilities? The final aspect of lateral thinking is organization. Here the pieces come together through discussion into a plan that is executed. Team members have examined the facts and their intuition, tested positives and negatives, and explored alternatives. They have come up with a rigorously tested proposal that they need to write up and implement.

Lateral thinking has the potential to break down barriers that may exist within a team. It flattens hierarchy and levels the playing field among participants, demanding that each team member participate in every step of the process, from questioning to supporting an idea. The discussion veers away from power and focuses on finding and evaluating solutions. Teams become more effective because they have a concrete approach to understanding a problem and potential solutions, examining every side of the issue together.

Third Tier: Building Team Trust The third tier involves a single, sixth habit, in which team members learn to trust their own abilities and the abilities of others—in effect establishing trust in the team itself.

Habit 6: Entrusting Team Members With Appropriate Roles In the final step of developing an effective team, clearly defined roles and responsibilities are distributed to members. This can only happen once the team understands its mission and goals; documenting and sharing roles can help team members complete tasks and coordinate

198

Section 8.4 Transforming Groups Into Effective Teams

with each other, using processes developed in the previous tier. Because teams share lead- ership, responsibilities go beyond simple job descriptions. A team designer will of course design the product but may also have strong project management skills and be able to set benchmarks and track the group’s progress, while the team’s engineer may have a talent for capturing key points in meetings and may send follow-up notes to team members to make sure everyone is on the same page. Leadership roles may rotate during the stages of the team’s work and processes may continue to evolve. As they do, members of an effective team will adapt to changing roles and responsibilities.

As responsibilities are assigned according to individual strengths, team members build confidence and trust in their abilities and in the team as a unit. In an effective team, mem- bers are confident in their assignments and trust that all tasks will be executed compe- tently. As team members continue to work together effectively, trust grows, creating a positive feedback loop so that accomplishments and trust reinforce each other. Team trust develops as team members and the identity of the team evolve. During a team’s forming stage, members have a “seed” of trust that needs to develop, along with their knowledge and the team’s mission, direction, goals, and emerging culture. This trust has more time and opportunity to develop in the storming stage if the members assume their roles and share expertise and leadership responsibilities. As expectations are shaped, communica- tion flows openly, and work tasks are met according to plan, more trust ensues going into the norming and performing stages. See “Take the Lead: Transforming Groups Into Effec- tive Teams.”

Take the Lead Transforming Groups Into Effective Teams You’ve successfully started your own nonprofit business-development consulting practice. (Nonprofit organizations are still businesses, and the need to develop relationships with sponsoring organizations and receive donations and sponsorship of events is crucial to their success.) At the end of your first year, you begin the task of planning for the future. In doing so, you recognize that you are spending so much time working in your practice that you aren’t working on your practice. Although you are consulting others, you have not been developing future prospects or structuring your own organization above and beyond yourself acting as a solo entrepreneur.

You recognize that you simply need to be in more than one place, or need to hire others who can assist you in performing the assignments. Heading into this new team-creation phase is an exciting time, as you realize that you can quickly scale your business based on the number of nonprofit assignments you’re engaged with.

Based on what you’ve learned about transforming groups into effective teams, consider how you would answer the following:

1. What are the key qualifications in filling your team? 2. Where will you identify potential candidates? 3. How will you ensure that your team gels together? 4. What will you use to measure and manage success?

See the appendix for possible answers.

199

Section 8.5 Preventing and Managing Conflict in Teams

8.5 Preventing and Managing Conflict in Teams Building an effective team can be challenging because of the expectations each member brings, along with a potentially wide range of personalities, mental models, and perceptions of what the team should accomplish. As noted earlier, social loafing and the bystander effect can impede team effectiveness. In order for individuals within a team to begin to work together, leaders must address the issues and fears that members face. Often, faulty leader- ship practices are the primary reason that teams do not succeed (Stewart & Manz, 1995). Patrick Lencioni (2002) developed what he calls “the five dysfunctions of a team,” which delineate potential problem areas that team members may face.

Absence of Trust Trust is essential to an effective team, and it requires both willingness on the part of team members to be vulnerable and belief that this vulnerability will not be used against them. Part of the purpose of creating a team is to combine a range of skills and knowledge, meaning team members will have some areas where they are experts and others where they may be novices, which is a vulnerable position. It is important to note that trust at the team level is, in part, a reflection of the larger vision, mission, stated values, and culture, as well as a credible strategy of the larger organization.

Lack of trust is one primary area of dysfunction within a team. An insecure individual may insist on always being right by not letting others challenge an assumption or proposed solu- tion. This undermines a team’s unity, putting an individual’s interests ahead of the team’s shared goal. Trust building takes time, requiring shared experiences and a positive feedback loop in which vulnerabilities are shared and respected. Conducting trust-building exercises can help accelerate this process, but the best way for a leader or shared-leadership team to foster a culture of trust is by modeling it.

In early meetings, a leader can show vulnerability by revealing lack of knowledge in an area and calling on team members to share their expertise to fill gaps. As team members share their own vulnerabilities, the leader’s role shifts to modeling how the team should respond, by not punishing the action. In this process, it is particularly important for leaders to be honest in their responses so that expectations are clear and trust becomes a team norm.

Fear of Conflict Successful teams debate to find solutions to problems they may face, and conflict can lead to a more rigorous outcome. During these conversations, team members trust that they will not face resentment or reprisal afterward for any disagreements and that debate is a constructive step toward a shared goal.

In a dysfunctional team, conflict does not take place in discussion, because members either are afraid to challenge each other or fear repercussions. Fear of conflict means team members will not push each other to think more deeply, so oftentimes proposed solutions skim the sur- face of the problem. Leaders can serve as models of desired team behavior by refraining from jumping in and providing an immediate resolution to a debate, letting the conversation evolve

200

Section 8.5 Preventing and Managing Conflict in Teams

and allowing team members to sort the issues out on their own. Leaders can also step in to aim discussions in positive directions, focusing on issues rather than individuals, so team members understand that ideas—not abilities—are under debate. In a healthy team, conflict leads to faster and more complete solutions, and members leave discussions energized by what they’ve accomplished and ready to tackle the next problem.

Beyond modeling constructive behaviors, leaders can explicitly describe the purpose and desired outcome of a debate, essentially setting ground rules and encouraging honest par- ticipation. If team members do not recognize conflict as part of the team’s process, they will most likely avoid it, even if they disagree with a solution. Leaders can actively create a space in which constructive dissent is both encouraged and practiced.

Lack of Commitment Team members are committed when they are invested in the outcome and clearly understand how the steps they are taking lead to that result. Two leading factors in lack of commitment are a need for consensus and a desire for certainty.

In order to make a decision, some teams err on the side of unanimity, believing that buy-in can only happen if everyone agrees on the proposed solution. An effective team can quickly reach a decision and have buy-in even without complete consensus. This happens through trust and understanding that even if the solution is not what an individual team member may have chosen, all opinions were heard and considered in the decision-making process.

Teams also get stuck when members want to be absolutely certain that their decisions will result in the desired outcomes. This kind of risk aversion can cripple a team. An effective team commits to a decision, even if the outcome is not assured, and considers alternative paths as needed. Teams are formed for action, and a desire for certainty can lead to endless waffling.

Leaders can mitigate a lack of commitment through simple methods, for example, reiterat- ing important decisions at the end of a meeting to ensure that team members are still on the same page. This allows anyone with lingering concerns to speak up, and if all concerns have been addressed, they can commit and move on. Strict deadlines also ensure that decisions are made in a timely manner. Teams that struggle with certainty look at worst-case scenarios so that they understand the consequences of both a wrong action and lack of action. Coming up with a back-up plan also provides some level of certainty. Finally, leaders must model deci- siveness so that teams stick to schedules and do not spend too much time seeking consensus or certainty.

Avoidance of Accountability Although teams are based on the assumption that all members will commit and fully partici- pate in reaching goals, a team member may act in counterproductive ways, either in work or in interactions with others. In a dysfunctional team, members and the leader tolerate unproduc- tive behavior in order to avoid conflict. In the long run, avoiding accountability leads to dis- sension and ineffectiveness within the team. Team norms are one way of influencing account- ability. If a majority of team members show their dedication and productivity, peer pressure

201

Section 8.5 Preventing and Managing Conflict in Teams

encourages outliers to conform for fear of disappointing the rest of the team. No one wants to be the weak link. Leaders can also hold members accountable by compiling and distributing lists of goals and assignments, publicly showing the division of responsi- bilities and the way each step contributes to a larger goal, and making it obvious if a team member fails to complete a task. Set- ting team rewards instead of individual ones can also reinforce accountability by making team members more likely to speak up if one person is contributing less. In a worst-case scenario, a leader can intercede to make sure that there are no divisions within the team. Leaders should attempt to ensure that team members understand that they are sharing responsibility, not trying to create a culture of consensus.

In a team such as the ones formed at the GE plant, each member made a unique contribution. In a traditional plant, 15 people might work on one part of the manufacturing process while another group of 10 completes the next step. With each team producing one engine from beginning to end, the roles and responsibilities are clear, which encourages accountability. There are severe consequences of jet-engine failure, so the stakes are high, resulting in mul- tiple layers of accountability: to the team, to GE, and to future pilots.

Inattention to Results Teams are formed to meet a specific task, and a dysfunctional team loses sight of the group’s goals. For some members, simply being on a team is enough. They enjoy the experience of working in a group or the prestige of being assigned to a special team. Others are more con- cerned with attaining personal ambitions and continue to focus on individual rather than team goals. In order to keep the focus on the bigger picture, leaders should make the results clear and only reward behavior that works toward achieving the team’s goal. They can do this through both having the team make a public commitment to attaining the goal and tying team rewards to results.

It is particularly important for the team leader to set the tone when it comes to meeting goals. If the leader appears to focus on anything other than the team’s stated purpose, followers will do the same. Instead, leaders should help direct the team toward group goals and use positive reinforcement by recognizing team member contributions.

Transforming a group into a team or creating a team from scratch involves developing culture and acting as a model for follower behavior. Trust also plays a critical role in team building. Leaders can apply similar skills and methods to large-scale organizational changes. As with team building, change involves a multistep process that leaders can understand and guide followers through while fostering openness and trust among employees.

Amana Images/Thinkstock Dysfunctional team members tolerate unpro- ductive behavior in order to avoid conflict. In the long run, avoiding accountability leads to dissension and ineffectiveness within the team.

202

Summary & Resources

Chapter Summary Leadership as persons, processes, and systems applies to teams as well as other dimensions in the text.

Building a team and supporting it through its life cycle requires three foundational ele- ments: trust, shared purpose, and leadership—sometimes shared, other times appointed. Team leadership shares a counterintuitive task: to give up some authority in order to empower and motivate followers to action. With the current rate of environmental change, organizations need to continuously evolve, meaning that followers must be adaptable.

Earlier we discussed adaptable versus nonadaptable cultures; the same is true for individual leaders. Leaders, for example, who are more production oriented than consideration oriented (see Chapter 1) may be less receptive to change and to followers’ needs. Such leaders may also not have high emotional intelligence, which may affect their ability or interest with regard to hearing followers’ needs and innovative ideas. Instead of simply providing instructions, lead- ers must provide opportunities and support for followers to propose creative solutions.

Leaders must understand the different types of teams as well as strategies for leading those teams. Having an understanding of how teams form and develop, as well as how highly effec- tive teams function is also critical for leaders. Again, caring and trust underlie much of what goes into strong team building.

Research indicates that effective teams tend, in general, to be smaller in size; and, when and if teams grow too large, leaders and managers would best consider subdividing them if possible. Selecting individuals who fit with a team’s mission, purpose, and goals and who have the neces- sary skills and abilities should also have compatible personality characteristics. Of course, tal- ent that can help a company innovate and increase productivity is also a major consideration.

Finally, debate and conflict will invariably arise in all teams, even the most productive ones, and so leaders must have a strong grasp of how to effectively manage conflict when it does arise. It is just as important for leaders to know the roots of conflict as it is for them to know strategies to resolve it when it occurs.

After reading this chapter, consider your past and present experiences with teams. In what ways are you now ready to try leadership and management responsibilities in a team? What developmental activities and experience do you need to increase your effectiveness?

Web Resources

How Good Are You and Your Team at Teamwork and Team Building?

https://www.mindtools.com/

Critical Thinking Questions

1. Describe an experience you had in a job or educational institution that resembled a “group.” Then describe another experience of working in a “team.” Which experience did you enjoy most and least, and why?

https://www.mindtools.com/

203

Summary & Resources

adjourning stage This occurs only in teams that have a limited task to perform and are then separated.

bystander effect Involves a person not offering help to a victim in the physical, and many times virtual, presence of others.

communication process The flow of information in an organization. An effec- tive communication process involves send- ers and receivers connecting with each other’s intended and accurate messages and meanings.

cross-functional team Comprises mem- bers brought together to perform unique tasks from various functional departments within an organization.

forming stage The first stage of team development, which includes exploring simi- larities and differences and experiencing and questioning first impressions of members in search of each member’s fit with each other in the new team.

functional team A team composed of members with different expertise areas (e.g., marketing, production, human resources, sales, and research and development) who belong to the same business unit and share a common purpose.

groupthink Occurs when team members, in their search for unanimity, fail to think criti- cally and instead rush into faulty decisions.

multiteam system (MTS) A collection of interdependent teams that can also be sub- sets of component teams acting interdepen- dently to accomplish at least one contiguous, superordinate goal. Interdependence in an MTS can involve inputs, processes, and outputs.

norming stage The third stage of a group’s development in which conflict and prob- lems from the previous storming stage are resolved, common interests are shared, and bonding occurs, which increases harmony and helps form the group’s identify.

performing stage The fourth stage of team development, in which the team terminates a project or mission, says goodbye to each other, and celebrates—if the team was successful—goal attainment.

self-managed team (SMT) An autonomous team whose individual members share lead- ership responsibilities while holding each other mutually accountable for the team’s performance, based on organizational goals. This type of team membership balances diversity and accountability.

2. Briefly describe the types of conflicts one might expect to experience in each of the five stages of a group’s development.

3. Using concepts from this chapter, explain specific ways that a group could become a team. 4. If you were assigned to work a year in one of the following types of teams and had

to choose only one, which would it be and why? (a) functional team, (b) cross- functional team, (c) self-managed team, (d) shared-leadership team, and (e) multiteam systems (MTSs).

5. Using concepts from this chapter briefly describe the pros and cons in working in each of the five types of teams in question 4.

6. Describe the challenges and advantages of leading and managing virtual teams in an organization. In what ways would you excel and in what ways would you have dif- ficulties in leading a virtual team? Explain.

7. Using Section 8.2 of this chapter, which of the 6 habits of highly effective teams would you find easy, then difficult, to lead and develop? Explain.

Key Terms

204

Summary & Resources

shared-leadership team One in which every team member is held accountable for both the leadership responsibilities and the results.

social loafing The tendency of individuals to invest less effort when working as part of a team or group.

social skills Skills facilitating interaction and communication.

storming stage The second stage of team development, in which members com- pete and struggle to define their roles and responsibilities during the process of becoming a team. This is a natural process through which trust and cohesion begin to develop.

synergy When the sum is greater than the component parts.

team An organized group of several mem- bers who share a common goal, work interdependently, and coordinate efforts to accomplish desired objectives.

team leadership capacity The distribution of leadership responsibilities; capacity refers to the potential for such leadership.

team structure The interrelationship between team members that determines how various tasks, responsibilities, and authority are allocated—the hierarchical dynamics within a team.

virtual team A team comprised of mem- bers who are geographically dispersed and work in different time zones and places and across organizational boundaries, using electronic and web technologies to commu- nicate, make decisions, and share content.