Groups and teams
When two or more individuals interact with each other understanding of group dynamics is
important so as to ensure socioemotional needs of individuals are met as well as intended
group tasks (Toseland & Rivas, 2005). Tuckmen and Jensen (1977) proposed the 5 stage
model of group development from their forming stage till the adjourning stage with each
stage building on the next one. Driver (cited in Lucas & Kline, 2008) noted that learning
amongst group members was affected by an inability to capitalize on cognitive diversity and
a lack of cohesiveness. Edmondson (cited in Lucas & Kline, 2008) highlighted the issue of
boundaries and how they inhibit individuals from expressing themselves freely without fear
of unfavorable repercussions.
Teams are the current trend in organizations and as such can be distinguished from groups in
that their overall output is greater than individual input ( Robbins & Judge, 2007). Boyle
(n.d.) attribute team effectiveness to the small number of between 2 and twenty with optimum
results being found in teams of less than ten. Also teams have a mix of skills which are
complementary skills and can`t be found in a single individual and members are accountable
to each other for the performance of set goals making them most suitable for solving complex
problems. However, the downside of teams would be more time is spent in meetings, no
action as members still perform as individuals and if given too much control they might drive
in the opposite direction of organizational goals.
Organizational structure
The way in which job tasks are formally divided, grouped, chain of command, span of
control, decision making authority and degree of formalization determine the overall structure
of the organization ( Robbins & Judge, 2007). Whether flatter structures are more beneficial
than hierarchical ones is still an area of debate. Flat structures enjoy the benefits of
decentralization, better communication, improved team work and greater job satisfaction.
Burke and Tulett (cited in Burke, 2003) notes that structure alone does not guarantee
organizational effectiveness as there is an uncontrollable aspect of human behavior. Job
specialization may increase productivity buy some individuals may find it stifling resulting in
low job satisfaction (Robbins & Judge, 2007).
Kanter (cited in Powell, 2002) saw structures as a means for valuing employees while
Morgan (cited in Powell, 2002) was for self-organizing structures based on values, culture
and norms. Newer trends point towards team structures, virtual organizations and
boundaryless structure which eliminates both vertical and horizontal boundaries ( Robbins &
Judge, 2007).Organizational strategy will affect the structure an entity adopts and Tushman
and Nadler (cited in Burke, 2003) key factors considered as history, size and age of
organization, nature of business as well as information needs and technologies.
Analysis
Values
Values motivate individuals such that those with similar values will have better cohesion because
they have a common purpose. Schwartz`s 10 value types (see appendix 1) where used in the analysis
of the effect of values on performance. The value profiles of 6 team members in Profitera working
on Project PTPTN was depicted schematically (see figure 1) where each radius represents a value
type and the irregular hexagons represent an individual`s value ratings on a scale of 1 (not like me)
to 6 (very much like me).
Figure 1: Team value profiles
Strong ties existed for self- direction(SD) and security (SE) while there was more variability for
Hedonism and Achievement depicted by the increased distance between participant`s responses for
each attribute. The overall results show less variability for 8 out of the 10 attributes supporting the
fact that less variability is associated with better team process such that conflict and self-efficacy will
be reduced increasing team performance. However there should be a more robust test for the
correlation to task performance as for this research performance was measured by the fact the
project the team was working on was on schedule. The implication for managers would be to look
for employees whose values complement the company values so as to increase employee job
satisfaction and performance.
Leadership
According to Kurt Lewin et al (1939) leadership style, an autocratic leader determines all policy, how
tasks will be carried out and selection of team members with direct personal criticism or praise of
team members. This autocratic style of leadership is reflective of Profitera`s project manager and
has led to absenteeism amongst employees. Analysis from Profitera`s attendance records revealed
that on average employees under the project manager were exceeding their medical leave quota of
14 days per year by 41% meaning every month employees where sick on at least 2 days. The fact
that this medical leave was not supported by any medical certification from the doctor revealed that
medical leave was just being used as an excuse for not reporting to work. Most employees
attributed this conduct to the fact that there was limited freedom for individual decision making and
discretion on how to perform task limiting employee innovation thus negatively impacting job
satisfaction. Poor leadership skills and under-trained supervisors are one of the main causes of
absenteeism (Muinro et al. , 2007). This is consistent with several studies that have indicated a
positive correlation between absenteeism and poor leadership styles. However situational factors
like the type of project being worked on may be the reason why the manager decides to adopt a
leadership style. 80% of Profitera`s projects are completed on time so this is not necessarily a bad
leadership styles looking at the outcomes and perhaps the need for a standardized application. Also
individual differences cannot be ignored as some individuals prefer autocratic leaders and the leader
may naturally possess a domineering personality.
Teams
Adoption of teams has to be justifiable through
Organisational structure
Although Profitera makes use of team the underlying organisational structure is not the team
structure. Profitera adopts a functional departmentalization structure (see Appendix). This structure
is benefits from efficiencies in grouping people with similar skills and specialization but however
suffers from cross-departmental communication. Business analysis and requirements department
captures the software requirements from clients and this information is input for the technical
consulting department. Incorrect interpretation of the client`s requirements at the point of
requirement gathering (1st phase in software development lifecycle) will affect the work of the
development and implementation department and as such it seems that Business analysis
department gives orders to technical consulting department yet they all are at the same level on the
organisational structure. The result is conflicts on who reports to who and the department heads
end up blaming each other and no one takes responsibility for any performance slack. This ambiguity
affects motivation and performance hence project teams have been adopted to clear the structural
conflict as they have a clearer reporting structure and there is more participative decision making
which increases job satisfaction but these are dissolved when projects are completed and employees
report back to their respective departments. As such profitera`s application of a departmentalized
structure together with teams is an attempt to get the best of both worlds and maybe beneficial for
other small IT firms.
References
Burke, M.E., 2003. Philosophical and theoretical perspectives of organizational structures as
information processing systems. Journal of Documentation, 59(2) pp. 131 – 142 [e-journal]
Available through: Emerald Insight database [Accessed 01 May 2012]
Colleen, L. and Kline, T. 2008. Understanding the influence of organizational culture and
group dynamics on organizational change and learning. The Learning Organization, 15(3) pp.
277 – 287 Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09696470810868882 [Accessed 30 April
2012]
Powell, L., 2002. Shedding a tier: flattening organizational structures and employee
empowerment. International Journal of Educational Management, 16(1) pp. 54 – 59 [ejournal] Available through: Emerald Insight database [Accessed 30 April 2012]
Toseland, R. W. and Rivas, R.F., 2005. An introduction to group work practice, 5/e.
Available through: http://centreofthepsyclone.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/group-workpractice.pdf [Accessed 18 April 2012]
Tuckmen, B.W. and Jensen, M.A.C., 1977. Stages of small group development
revisited.Group and Organizational Studies, 2(4), pp.419-427. Available at:
http://www.freewebs.com/group-management/BruceTuckman(1).pdf [Accessed 25 April
2012]
Richard Boyle n.d. in: Committee for Public Management Research, Discussion Paper 4,
Team-Based
Working.
Available
at:
http://www.cpmr.gov.ie/Documents/TeamBased%20Working.pdf [Accessed 25 April 2012]
Analysis links
1. Impact of personality
http://administracion.itam.mx/workingpapers/Poling_Woehr_Arciniega_Gorman.pdf
team based working pg 22
http://championsclubcommunity.com/covey/files/2010/06/The-7-Habits-of-Highly-EffectivePeople.pdf
team performance
http://users.utu.fi/juhtiur/jakelu/team.pdf
team effectiveness Malaysia
http://eprints.ptar.uitm.edu.my/4682/1/LP_MOHAMMAD_ISMAIL_07_24.pdf
http://www.internationalconference.com.my/proceeding/asbes2011_proceeding/001_056_AS
BES2011_Proceeding_PG0001_0020.pdf
when to use teams
http://www.swdsi.org/swdsi05/Proceedings05/paper_pdf/Team%20Pathology%20by%20JBishop%20A-Mahajan%20%28F2B1%29.pdf
leadership and job satisfaction
http://www.ajbmr.com/articlepdf/ajbmr_17_16i1n7a11.pdf
http://etd.uum.edu.my/1729/1/Omar_Mohammed_Ali_Ababneh.pdf
http://www.eurojournals.com/ibba_9_03.pdf
Appendix 1
Table 1.
Brief Definitions of the 10 Value Constructs and Examples.
Value Definitions
POWER: Social status and prestige, control or dominance over people and resources (e.g., He
likes to be in charge and tell others what to do. He wants people to do what he says).
ACHIEVEMENT: Personal success through demonstrating competence according to social
standards. (e.g., Being very successful is important to him. He likes to stand out and to impress
other people).
HEDONISM: Pleasure and sensuous gratification for oneself. (e.g., He really wants to enjoy life.
Having a good time is very important to him).
STIMULATION: Excitement, novelty, and challenge in life. (e.g., He looks for adventures and
likes to take risks. He wants to have an exciting life).
SELF-DIRECTION: Independent thought and action-choosing, creating, exploring. (e.g., He
thinks it’s important to be interested in things. He is curious and tries to understand everything).
UNIVERSALISM: Understanding, appreciation, tolerance and protection for the welfare of all
people and for nature. (e.g., He thinks it is important that every person in the world should be
treated equally. He wants justice for everybody, even for people he doesn’t know).
BENEVOLENCE: Preservation and enhancement of the welfare of people with whom one is in
frequent personal contact. (e.g., He always wants to help the people who are close to him. It’s
very important to him to care for the people he knows and likes).
TRADITION: Respect, commitment and acceptance of the customs and ideas that traditional
culture or religion provide the self. (e. g., He thinks it is important to do things the way he learned
from his family. He wants to follow their customs and traditions).
CONFORMITY: Restraint of actions, inclinations, and impulses likely to upset or harm others
and violate social expectations or norms. (e.g., He believes that people should do what they’re
told. He thinks people should follow rules at all times, even when no one is watching).
SECURITY: Safety, harmony and stability of society, of relationships, and of self. (e.g., The
safety of his country is very important to him. He wants his country to be safe from its enemies).