TEAMS AND TEAM MANAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP:IMPACT OF TEAMS

By -

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.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

DUALITY THEORY:THE ESSENCE OF DUALITY THEORY

By -
Image
THE ESSENCE OF DUALITY THEORY Given our standard form for the primal problem at the left (perhaps after conversion from another form), its dual problem has the form shown to the right. Thus, with the primal problem in maximizatio n form, the dual problem is in minimization form instead. Furthermore, the dual problem uses exactly the same pa r amete r s as the primal problem, but in different locations, as summarized below. 1. The coefficients in the objective function of the primal problem are the right-hand sides of the functional constraints in the dual problem. 2. The right-hand sides of the functional constraints in the primal problem are the coef- ficients in the objective function of the dual problem. 3. The coefficients of a variable in the functional constraints of the primal problem are the coefficients in a functional constraint of the dual problem. To highlight the comparison, now look at these same two problems in matrix notation (as introduced at the beginn...
Read more

NETWORK OPTIMIZATION MODELS:THE MINIMUM SPANNING TREE PROBLEM

By -
Image
THE MINIMUM SPANNING TREE PROBLEM The minimum spanning tree problem bears some similarities to the main version of the shortest-path problem presented in the preceding section. In both cases, an undi r ecte d and connected network is being considered, where the given information includes some mea- sure of the positive length (distance, cost, time, etc.) associated with each link. Both problems also involve choosing a set of links that have the shortest total length among all sets of links that satisfy a certain property. For the shortest-path problem, this property is that the chosen links must provide a path between the origin and the destination. For the minimum spanning tree problem, the required property is that the chosen links must provide a path between ea c h pair of nodes. The minimum spanning tree problem can be summarized as follows: 1. You are given the nodes of a network but not the links. Instead, you are given the po- tential links and the positive length for each ...
Read more

INTEGER PROGRAMMING:THE BRANCH-AND-CUT APPROACH TO SOLVING BIP PROBLEMS

By -
TH E BRANCH-AND-CUT APPROACH TO SOLVING BIP PROBLEMS Integer programming has been an especially exciting area of OR since the mid-1980s be- cause of the dramatic progress being made in its solution methodology. Background To place this progress into perspective, consider the historical background. One big break- through had come in the 1960s and early 1970s with the development and refinement of the branch-and-bound approach. But then the state of the art seemed to hit a plateau. Rel- atively small problems (well under 100 variables) could be solved very efficiently, but even a modest increase in problem size might cause an explosion in computation time be- yond feasible limits. Little progress was being made in overcoming this exponential growth in computation time as the problem size was increased. Many important problems arising in practice could not be solved. Then came the next breakthrough in the mid-1980s, with the introduction of the b r an c h- and-cu t approach to sol...
Read more