TEAMS AND TEAM MANAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP:IMPACT OF TEAMS

IMPACT OF TEAMS

Teamwork represents one form of work organization that can have large positive and / or negative effects on the different elements of the work system and on human outcomes, such as performance, attitudes, well being, and health. Given the variety of team characteristics and organizational settings, it is likely that the impact of teamwork on the work system will be highly variable. Some teams may provide for positive characteristics, such as increased autonomy and more interesting tasks, whereas other teams may produce production pressures and tightened management control (Lawler 1986). One important issue in team design is the degree of authority and autonomy (Medsker and Campion 1997; Goodman et al. 1988). It is, therefore, important to examine the impact of teamwork on the task and organizational elements of the work system. Tasks performed by teams are typically of

different nature of tasks performed by individual employees. Understanding the physical and psy- chosocial characteristics of the tasks performed by the team and the members of the team is highly significant for ergonomists. Teams can provide opportunities for reducing the physical and psycho- social repetitiveness of tasks performed by individual employees. This is true only if employees have sufficient training on the different tasks and if rotation among tasks occurs. In some instances, the increased authority and autonomy provided to teams may allow employees to influence their work rhythms and production schedules. This may have beneficial physical impact if adequate work–rest schedules are used. On the other hand, members of the team may work very hard at the beginning of the shift in order to rest at the end of the day. This overload at the beginning of the shift may have some physical health consequences, such as cumulative trauma disorders. A more balanced workload over the entire shift is preferred. In other instances, teamwork has been accompanied by tightened management control (Barker 1993) and electronic and peer surveillance (Sewell 1998). In conclusion, the impact of teamwork on work organization and ergonomics is largely undetermined and depends on a range of factors. However, teamwork can provide many opportunities to improve elements of the work system.

Impact on Management

The upper managerial levels of organizations have been traditionally targeted in the efforts to sell teamwork. For these management segments, the benefits would come in improvements to the whole organization success and the possibility of spending more time working at the strategic level once the daily decisions can be undertaken by the employee teams. However, one group whose needs are frequently overlooked when implementing employee involvement programs is the middle managers or supervisors. Because the supervisors are a part of management, it is often assumed that they will buy into the philosophies adopted by upper management. Otherwise, according to studies by Klein (1984), even though 72% of supervisors view participation programs as being good for the company and 60% see them as good for employees, less than 31% view them as beneficial to themselves. This perspective is clearly portrayed by Kanter (1983): ‘‘participation is something the top orders the middle to do for the bottom.’’ Concerns among supervisors relate to job security, job definition, and additional work created to implement these programs (Klein 1984). A common fear is that employee participation would take supervisors out of the chain of command. Supervisors typically have attained their positions via promotions intended to reward them for outstanding performance as a worker. Sharing their supervisory tasks can be seen as a loss of status to less-deserving workers. Support from first-line supervisors is essential for success of overall participation programs. Some successful experiences in obtaining this support have included the introduction of presentations to upper man- agement, by supervisors, about teamwork activities and creation of teams for forepersons themselves (Harrison 1992).

Impact on Employees

It is considered that today’s better trained and educated workers have expectations greater than basic pay, benefits, and a safe place to work. According to Lawler (1986), these enlarged expectations include participating in meaningful decisions. On the other side, potential problems from the em- ployee perspective need to be addressed. The literature on the subject of employee involvement has dedicated much less emphasis on the problems than on the benefits. Indeed, when these problems are discussed, they are almost always seen from the perspective of the organization and its manage- ment. Very little has been written about the problems from the workers’ standpoint.

Regarding the negative consequences of teamwork experienced by workers, Baloff and Doherty (1988) state that it can be very disruptive, especially during the crucial start-up period of employee involvement. These authors classify the negative consequences into three categories. First, participants may be subjected to peer-group pressure against what is perceived as collaboration with management in ways that endanger employees’ interests. Second, the participants’ manager may attempt to coerce them during the group activity, or they may retaliate against the participants if the results of their involvement displease them. Third, participants may have difficulty adapting psychologically at the end of a highly motivating participation effort if they are thrust back into narrow, rigidly defined tasks. Lawler (1986) expresses similar concern about some types of participation that do not match the overall structure of organization and inevitably will produce frustrated expectations among the workers.

On the more negative side of the spectrum of the assessments on teams, Parker and Slaughter (1994, 1988) see them as a way of undermining the union and exploiting workers. Team concept is seen as part of ‘‘management by stress,’’ whereby production is speeded up and management actually exerts more control on employees. According to these authors the ‘‘work rationalization’’ that used to be done by management is being made now by the employees themselves. The authors point out that peer pressure related to this kind of involvement is even more restrictive than the hierarchy itself. They state that there are several myths about teamwork, that the team concept involves: job security, increased productivity, more control by workers, working smarter not harder, workers with more

skills, stronger unions, and feeling of teamwork in the shop floor. The authors conclude that teams themselves are not harmful, but rather the way management has put them into practice and the underlying motivations.

All in all, however, if teamwork is properly chosen as a form of work design and if teams are well designed and managed, teamwork can effectively improve productivity, quality, and employee satisfaction.