question 0829

18772447 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

decisions: Should I act? If so, how should I do so? For example, if the team is not performing effectively (team effectiveness), then the leader can make the first strategic choice by monitoring the situation or acting to improve team functioning. If an action seems warranted, then the leader needs to decide whether the action should be directed inward toward team functioning, outward toward the environment, or both. Once the context for the action is determined, leaders need to choose the most appropriate skill for the situation from their behavioral repertoire. It is important to continue monitoring the results of the intervention and adapting accordingly, depending on these results.

The leader might choose to use an assessment tool such as the Team Excellence and Collaborative Team Leader Questionnaire included in this chapter to help conduct the team’s diagnosis and set the steps needed for taking action. Team members are asked to fill out the questionnaire, as is the team leader. The results are fed back to the team members and team leader, allowing them to see the areas of greatest strength and weakness. It is particularly important that both the team leader and team members fill out the questionnaire. Research suggests that team leaders overestimate their effectiveness on these dimensions and often score themselves much higher than do team members (LaFasto & Larson, 2001). By comparing the scores by leaders and by members, the leader along with team members can determine which dimensions of team or leadership effectiveness need improvement. The team and leader can then prepare action plans to correct the highest- priority problems. Such a team assessment approach is very helpful in monitoring and diagnosing team problems. It aids in determining the complex factors affecting team excellence to build a committed team involved in action planning.

Finally, presenting a view from a practical standpoint, Salas, Dinh, and Reyes (2019) reviewed existing research on team leadership and developed key insights that can guide the practice of team leadership. These insights follow the life span of a team from its creation to its sustainment—and reflect many of the components outlined in the Hill Model for Team Leadership (Figure 16.1). These team leadership behaviors reflect the internal functions of task and relational leadership. For example, team leaders create structure and define tasks (task leadership). They also create psychological safety (relational leadership). The external functions discussed in Hill’s model are reflected in ensuring that the organization provides rewards to team members as well as the training needed for growth and development of team members.

CASE STUDIES AND SELF-ASSESSMENT To improve your understanding of the team leadership model, refer to Cases 16.1, 16.2, and 16.3. For each case, you will be asked to put yourself in the role of team leader and apply the team leadership model in analyzing and offering solutions to the team problems.

Case 16.1 Team Crisis Within the Gates

Axis Global is a giant oil and gas company that owns nine refineries worldwide and is headquartered in Paris, France. Axis Global’s refineries convert crude oil into gasoline, jet fuel, and other products, and each refinery has an information technology (IT) team located “within the refinery gates” that reports to the refinery’s management team. Each IT team is responsible for the operation and maintenance of computers and applications that are critical to the safe and efficient operation of its refinery.

In addition to refineries, Axis Global owns and operates oil wells, pipelines, chemical plants, and gas stations across the globe. As a result, some IT operations are standardized across the company, and a centralized team located in Paris makes those decisions for all the IT teams in the company. Recently, the centralized IT organization concluded that IT services company-wide should be outsourced to a third party. Outsourcing

18772447 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

means most of the company’s IT personnel are no longer employed by Axis Global, and the third party will decide which, if any, of Axis Global’s IT employees it will retain, replace, or terminate.

Axis Global has recently notified the Tappan Refinery in Pennsylvania of the global decision to outsource all IT teams. Top executives at the Tappan Refinery are unhappy with the decision because they were not consulted before the decision was made and few details were provided to Tappan’s executives on how the outsourcing would be implemented. In addition, these executives are worried that the decision will negatively affect essential tasks performed by Tappan’s IT team and result in increased costs. The management at Tappan Refinery is opposed to changing its current IT operations.

Russ Saffold manages IT at the Tappan Refinery and has three members on his team: Alejandro Salis, Samantha Umbia, and Todd Greengold. The IT team is well respected by everyone in the refinery, and their interpersonal relationships are solid. All four team members are officially employees of Axis Global and physically work within the refinery gates at Tappan. Because refineries are frequently bought and sold among oil companies, the refineries prefer to operate as self-contained organizations (i.e., “within the gates”). They have a bunker mentality vis-à-vis the larger organization and often see that relationship between a refinery and the parent organization as “us versus them.” Employee loyalty is to the refinery, not to Axis Global.

The outsourcing news creates a crisis within Russ Saffold’s IT team. Although Russ will remain an employee of Axis, the other three team members will not. The three team members are now unsure of their futures and find it difficult to focus on their work tasks. Alejandro Salis (age 43) is fairly confident that he will be hired by the outsourcing company as he is the “star” on the team. Samantha Umbia (age 31) fears she will be terminated as she is unable to relocate to the outsourcing company’s location. Todd Greengold (age 62) is worried that he will lose his stock options and pension if he is terminated or transferred to the outsourcing company. And the entire team worries about how they will be treated by their new employer. Morale of the team members sinks, and with the likelihood of fewer positions, competition among them begins to emerge. Russ finds himself in the middle of implementing a decision that is unclear, is opposed by his bosses at Tappan Refinery, and is creating personal issues with his staff. He wonders how he will establish a working relationship with the outsourcing company.

Questions

1. Should Russ Saffold intervene to help his team handle this crisis? If so, what type of leadership action should he take? Internal task? Internal relational? External environmental?

2. What leadership actions, if any, should team members take? 3. What should Russ Saffold do (if anything) to mitigate the two opposing positions regarding outsourcing of

IT (Axis Global versus Tappan Refinery)? 4. What characteristics of team excellence are currently lacking in this team?

Case 16.2 Starts With a Bang, Ends With a Whimper

A faculty member, Kim Green from the Management Department, was asked to chair a major university committee to plan the mission of the university for the next 20 years. Three other senior faculty and seven administrators from across the campus were also asked to serve on this committee. The president of the university, Dr. Sulgrave, gave the committee its charge: What should Northcoast University be like in the year 2020? Dr. Sulgrave told the committee that the work of this task force was of utmost importance to the future of the university, and the charge of this committee should take precedence over all other matters. The task force was allowed to meet in the president’s conference room and use the president’s assistant. The report of the committee was due in two months.

The task force members felt very good about being selected for such an important team. The team met on a weekly basis for about two hours each time. At first, the members were very interested in the task and participated enthusiastically. They were required to do a great deal of outside research. They came back to the

18772447 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

meetings proud to share their research and knowledge. However, after a while the meetings did not go well. The members could not seem to agree on what the charge to the team meant. They argued about what they were supposed to accomplish and resented the time the committee was taking from their regular jobs. Week after week the team met but accomplished nothing. Attendance became a problem, with people skipping several meetings, showing up late, or leaving early. Team members stopped working on their committee assignments. Green didn’t want to admit to the university president that the team didn’t know what it was doing; instead, she just got more and more frustrated. Meetings became sporadic and eventually stopped altogether. The president was involved in a crisis at the university and seemed to lose interest in the committee. The president never called for the report from the committee, and the report was never completed.

Questions

1. Which characteristics of excellence were lacking in this task force? 2. Which characteristics of excellence were evident in this task force? 3. How would you assess Green as a leader? 4. What actions would you take (internally or externally) if you were the leader of this task force?

Case 16.3 1980 U.S. Olympic Hockey Team

The 1980 U.S. ice hockey team pulled off one of the greatest upsets in Olympic history, defeating the Soviet Union’s team 4–3 before defeating Finland 4–2 to win the gold medal. It was only the second Olympic gold medal for the United States in ice hockey since the sport was introduced to the games in 1920.

Winning the Olympic medal was sweet, but what made this such an upset was the U.S. victory over the Soviet team. The Soviet Union had long dominated Olympic ice hockey, having won seven gold medals since 1956 and not losing an Olympic hockey game since 1968.

There were stark differences between the two teams. Nicknamed the “Red Machine,” the Soviet team was made up of professional athletes who had played together for years as the Soviet national team. Despite this being common knowledge, team members had been bogusly designated as students, engineers, or soldiers to maintain the amateur status then required of Olympic athletes. The Soviets were coached

18772447 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

decisions: Should I act? If so, how should I do so? For example, if the team is not performing effectively (team effectiveness), then the leader can make the first strategic choice by monitoring the situation or acting to improve team functioning. If an action seems warranted, then the leader needs to decide whether the action should be directed inward toward team functioning, outward toward the environment, or both. Once the context for the action is determined, leaders need to choose the most appropriate skill for the situation from their behavioral repertoire. It is important to continue monitoring the results of the intervention and adapting accordingly, depending on these results.

The leader might choose to use an assessment tool such as the Team Excellence and Collaborative Team Leader Questionnaire included in this chapter to help conduct the team’s diagnosis and set the steps needed for taking action. Team members are asked to fill out the questionnaire, as is the team leader. The results are fed back to the team members and team leader, allowing them to see the areas of greatest strength and weakness. It is particularly important that both the team leader and team members fill out the questionnaire. Research suggests that team leaders overestimate their effectiveness on these dimensions and often score themselves much higher than do team members (LaFasto & Larson, 2001). By comparing the scores by leaders and by members, the leader along with team members can determine which dimensions of team or leadership effectiveness need improvement. The team and leader can then prepare action plans to correct the highest- priority problems. Such a team assessment approach is very helpful in monitoring and diagnosing team problems. It aids in determining the complex factors affecting team excellence to build a committed team involved in action planning.

Finally, presenting a view from a practical standpoint, Salas, Dinh, and Reyes (2019) reviewed existing research on team leadership and developed key insights that can guide the practice of team leadership. These insights follow the life span of a team from its creation to its sustainment—and reflect many of the components outlined in the Hill Model for Team Leadership (Figure 16.1). These team leadership behaviors reflect the internal functions of task and relational leadership. For example, team leaders create structure and define tasks (task leadership). They also create psychological safety (relational leadership). The external functions discussed in Hill’s model are reflected in ensuring that the organization provides rewards to team members as well as the training needed for growth and development of team members.

CASE STUDIES AND SELF-ASSESSMENT To improve your understanding of the team leadership model, refer to Cases 16.1, 16.2, and 16.3. For each case, you will be asked to put yourself in the role of team leader and apply the team leadership model in analyzing and offering solutions to the team problems.

Case 16.1 Team Crisis Within the Gates

Axis Global is a giant oil and gas company that owns nine refineries worldwide and is headquartered in Paris, France. Axis Global’s refineries convert crude oil into gasoline, jet fuel, and other products, and each refinery has an information technology (IT) team located “within the refinery gates” that reports to the refinery’s management team. Each IT team is responsible for the operation and maintenance of computers and applications that are critical to the safe and efficient operation of its refinery.

In addition to refineries, Axis Global owns and operates oil wells, pipelines, chemical plants, and gas stations across the globe. As a result, some IT operations are standardized across the company, and a centralized team located in Paris makes those decisions for all the IT teams in the company. Recently, the centralized IT organization concluded that IT services company-wide should be outsourced to a third party. Outsourcing

18772447 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

means most of the company’s IT personnel are no longer employed by Axis Global, and the third party will decide which, if any, of Axis Global’s IT employees it will retain, replace, or terminate.

Axis Global has recently notified the Tappan Refinery in Pennsylvania of the global decision to outsource all IT teams. Top executives at the Tappan Refinery are unhappy with the decision because they were not consulted before the decision was made and few details were provided to Tappan’s executives on how the outsourcing would be implemented. In addition, these executives are worried that the decision will negatively affect essential tasks performed by Tappan’s IT team and result in increased costs. The management at Tappan Refinery is opposed to changing its current IT operations.

Russ Saffold manages IT at the Tappan Refinery and has three members on his team: Alejandro Salis, Samantha Umbia, and Todd Greengold. The IT team is well respected by everyone in the refinery, and their interpersonal relationships are solid. All four team members are officially employees of Axis Global and physically work within the refinery gates at Tappan. Because refineries are frequently bought and sold among oil companies, the refineries prefer to operate as self-contained organizations (i.e., “within the gates”). They have a bunker mentality vis-à-vis the larger organization and often see that relationship between a refinery and the parent organization as “us versus them.” Employee loyalty is to the refinery, not to Axis Global.

The outsourcing news creates a crisis within Russ Saffold’s IT team. Although Russ will remain an employee of Axis, the other three team members will not. The three team members are now unsure of their futures and find it difficult to focus on their work tasks. Alejandro Salis (age 43) is fairly confident that he will be hired by the outsourcing company as he is the “star” on the team. Samantha Umbia (age 31) fears she will be terminated as she is unable to relocate to the outsourcing company’s location. Todd Greengold (age 62) is worried that he will lose his stock options and pension if he is terminated or transferred to the outsourcing company. And the entire team worries about how they will be treated by their new employer. Morale of the team members sinks, and with the likelihood of fewer positions, competition among them begins to emerge. Russ finds himself in the middle of implementing a decision that is unclear, is opposed by his bosses at Tappan Refinery, and is creating personal issues with his staff. He wonders how he will establish a working relationship with the outsourcing company.

Questions

1. Should Russ Saffold intervene to help his team handle this crisis? If so, what type of leadership action should he take? Internal task? Internal relational? External environmental?

2. What leadership actions, if any, should team members take? 3. What should Russ Saffold do (if anything) to mitigate the two opposing positions regarding outsourcing of

IT (Axis Global versus Tappan Refinery)? 4. What characteristics of team excellence are currently lacking in this team?

Case 16.2 Starts With a Bang, Ends With a Whimper

A faculty member, Kim Green from the Management Department, was asked to chair a major university committee to plan the mission of the university for the next 20 years. Three other senior faculty and seven administrators from across the campus were also asked to serve on this committee. The president of the university, Dr. Sulgrave, gave the committee its charge: What should Northcoast University be like in the year 2020? Dr. Sulgrave told the committee that the work of this task force was of utmost importance to the future of the university, and the charge of this committee should take precedence over all other matters. The task force was allowed to meet in the president’s conference room and use the president’s assistant. The report of the committee was due in two months.

The task force members felt very good about being selected for such an important team. The team met on a weekly basis for about two hours each time. At first, the members were very interested in the task and participated enthusiastically. They were required to do a great deal of outside research. They came back to the

18772447 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

meetings proud to share their research and knowledge. However, after a while the meetings did not go well. The members could not seem to agree on what the charge to the team meant. They argued about what they were supposed to accomplish and resented the time the committee was taking from their regular jobs. Week after week the team met but accomplished nothing. Attendance became a problem, with people skipping several meetings, showing up late, or leaving early. Team members stopped working on their committee assignments. Green didn’t want to admit to the university president that the team didn’t know what it was doing; instead, she just got more and more frustrated. Meetings became sporadic and eventually stopped altogether. The president was involved in a crisis at the university and seemed to lose interest in the committee. The president never called for the report from the committee, and the report was never completed.

Questions

1. Which characteristics of excellence were lacking in this task force? 2. Which characteristics of excellence were evident in this task force? 3. How would you assess Green as a leader? 4. What actions would you take (internally or externally) if you were the leader of this task force?

Case 16.3 1980 U.S. Olympic Hockey Team

The 1980 U.S. ice hockey team pulled off one of the greatest upsets in Olympic history, defeating the Soviet Union’s team 4–3 before defeating Finland 4–2 to win the gold medal. It was only the second Olympic gold medal for the United States in ice hockey since the sport was introduced to the games in 1920.

Winning the Olympic medal was sweet, but what made this such an upset was the U.S. victory over the Soviet team. The Soviet Union had long dominated Olympic ice hockey, having won seven gold medals since 1956 and not losing an Olympic hockey game since 1968.

There were stark differences between the two teams. Nicknamed the “Red Machine,” the Soviet team was made up of professional athletes who had played together for years as the Soviet national team. Despite this being common knowledge, team members had been bogusly designated as students, engineers, or soldiers to maintain the amateur status then required of Olympic athletes. The Soviets were coached