Developing High Performance Teams 11 Chapter Developing High Performance Teams McGraw-Hill/Irwin Principles of Management © 2008 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Learning Objectives Define teams and discuss their benefits and limitations. Discuss the success factors for self-directed teams. Outline the model of team effectiveness. Explain the influence on team effectiveness of a team’s task, composition, and size. Describe the five stages of team development. Identify three factors that shape team norms List six factors that influence team cohesiveness. Summarize the three levels of trust in teams. Analyze the causes of and structural solutions to conflict in teams.

Teams All teams exist to fill some purpose Team members are held together by their interdependence and need for collaboration to achieve common goals Team members influence each other, although some members are more influential than others regarding the team’s goals and activities See Learning Objective 1: Define teams and discuss their benefits and limitations. See text page: 256

Why Rely on Teams? Teams are generally more successful than individuals working alone at identifying problems, developing alternatives, and choosing from those alternatives. Team members can quickly share information and coordinate tasks. Teams typically provide superior customer service. See Learning Objective 1: Define teams and discuss their benefits and limitations. See text page: 256

Encouraging Teamwork See Learning Objective 1: Define teams and discuss their benefits and limitations. Encouraging Teamwork This slide present the results of a Success Strategies Poll by Business Week. 26% of the respondents indicated: they strongly agree that their company encourages teamwork and 47% agreed for a total of 73% of the respondents agreeing or strongly agreeing about the teamwork encouragement by their company. 21% of the respondents disagreed and 5% strongly disagreed. Ask the students – have they worked at an organization where teamwork was encouraged or discouraged? Explain. How was their working experience? Source: Business Week, August 14, 2006 Source: Business Week, August 14, 2006

Why Belong to Informal Groups They fulfill the innate drive to bond We define ourselves by our group affiliation We are motivated to become members of groups that are similar to ourselves They accomplish personal goals that cannot be achieved working alone In stressful situations we are comforted by the mere presence of other people and are therefore motivated to be near them See Learning Objective 1: Define teams and discuss their benefits and limitations. See text pages: 257-258

Why Join A Fraternity? Networking Professional connection Social connection Advice and mentoring Having fun Parties and Formals Other reasons See Learning Objective 1: Define teams and discuss their benefits and limitations. Why join a fraternity? This slide presents some of the reasons why individuals join a fraternity or a sorority. Ask the students how many of them belong to a fraternity or a sorority? Which ones? How many belong to a professional organization such as a Management Club or Marketing Club? How is it different from a fraternity or a sorority? What may be the advantages or disadvantages of each? Source: Adapted from Business Week Online, May 24, 2006

Trouble With Teams Process losses – resources expended toward team development and maintenance rather than tasks Social loafing - occurs when people exert less effort when working in groups then when working alone. Likely to occur in large groups where individual output is difficult to identify Social loafing is less likely to occur when: Make member’s contributions more noticeable Make the task more interesting Members value group membership and believe in working toward group objectives See Learning Objective 1: Define teams and discuss their benefits and limitations. See text page: 258

Production/ service/ leadership teams Task force (project) teams Types of Teams Self-directed teams Departmental teams Skunkworks Advisory teams See Learning Objective 1: Define teams and discuss their benefits and limitations. See text page: 259 Production/ service/ leadership teams Virtual teams Task force (project) teams

Self-directed Teams The difference between self-directed teams and traditional production/service teams are that self-directed teams: Complete an entire piece of work, whether it’s a product or service, or part of a larger product or service Assign tasks that individual team members perform Control most work inputs, flow, and outputs Are responsible for correcting workflow problems as they occur Receive team level feedback and rewards See Learning Objective 2: Discuss the success factors for self-directed teams. See text page: 260

Virtual Teams Difference between traditional & virtual teams: They are not usually colocated (they do not work in the same physical area) Due to their lack of colocation, members of virtual teams depend primarily on information technologies rather than face-to-face interaction See Learning Objective 2: Discuss the success factors for self-directed teams. See text page: 261

Team Effectiveness in U.S. Manufacturing Firms See Learning Objective 3: Outline the model of team effectiveness. See text page: 263

Team Effectiveness Model Team design Task characteristics Team size Team composition Team roles Organizational and team environment Team effectiveness See Learning Objective 3: Outline the model of team effectiveness. See text page: 263 Team processes Task development Team norms Team cohesiveness Team trust Team conflict

Team Design Features & Team Processes Task characteristics Team composition Team norms See Learning Objective 4: Explain the influence on team effectiveness of a team’s task, composition, and size. See text pages: 264-273 Team cohesiveness Team size Team roles Team trust

Stages of Team Development Performing *Task oriented, committed. *Efficient coordination. *High cooperation and trust. *Conflicts resolved quickly. Norming *Roles established. *Team objectives agreed. *Common mental models formed. *Cohesion developed. Storming *Conflict with proactive behavior. *Compete for team roles. *Influence goals and means. *Establish norms and standards. See Learning Objective 5: Describe the five stages of team development. See text page: 267 Forming *Roles established. *Team objectives agreed. *Common mental models formed. *Cohesion developed. Adjourning

Question Think of a team that you have been part of for a class project. Identify the five steps of its development and explore whether the team was effective. Why or why not? See Learning Objective 5: Describe the five stages of team development. See text page: 267 Question Students should be able to utilize their personal experience as application exercise to the team development stages.

Team Norms Three factors that influence the norm formation: Subtle events during team’s formation can initiate norms Norms form as team members discover behaviors that help them function more effectively Past experiences and values that members bring with them See Learning Objective 6: Identify three factors that shape team norms. See text page: 270

Team Cohesiveness Member Similarity Team Size Member Interaction Somewhat Difficult Entry Team Success External Competition and Challenges Consequences of Team Cohesiveness See Learning Objective 7: List six factors that influence team cohesiveness. See text pages: 271-272

Do You Need Corporate Retreat for Building Cohesiveness? Get clear on what you want to accomplish Tackle the tough stuff Invite a crowd Get outside help See Learning Objective 7: List six factors that influence team cohesiveness. Building Cohesiveness This slide presents the points for building cohesiveness as an antidote to corporate retreat. The author argues that corporate retreats does not work well and rather the managers should focus on these points. Unless you have a compelling reason to have the retreat, save the money and energy. Cohesiveness comes first from having the direction and strategy to follow. Tackle the conflict and controversy rather than just dealing with niceties. Get more diverse minds involved in solving a problem and you will get better results and understanding. Get professional facilitator if you really want your employees to think outside the box. Source: Business Week Online, January 18, 2006 Source: Business Week Online, January 18, 2006

Question Highly cohesive teams are always effective, productive, and good for the organization. Do you agree? Why or why not? See Learning Objective 7: List six factors that influence team cohesiveness. See text pages: 271-272 Question Highly cohesive teams are good for its members but whether they are good for the organization is dependent on their norms. If their norms are in congruence to the organizations, the yes. Otherwise they are not good for the organization.

Three Foundations of Trust in Teams Type of Trust Description High Identification-based trust *Based on common mental models and values. *Increases with person’s social identity with team. Potential level of trust Knowledge-based trust *Based on predictability and competence. *Fairly robust. Low Calculus- based trust *Based on deterrence. *Fragile and limited potential because dependent on punishment. See Learning Objective 8: Summarize the three levels of trust in teams. See text page: 273

Managing Team Conflict Conflict – a process in which one party perceives that its interests are being opposed or negatively affected by another party Since conflict is a perception, which means that it begins long before observable disagreements Managers need to look for subtle signs of conflict perceptions to prevent dysfunctional behaviors that may follow See Learning Objective 9: Analyze the causes of and structural solutions to conflict in teams. See text page: 274

Employees’ New Year’s Resolution for Their Managers Deal with workplace conflict faster – 18% Be less of a micromanager – 14% Recognize work well done – 12% See Learning Objective 9: Analyze the causes of and structural solutions to conflict in teams. Employees’ New Year’s Resolution for Their Managers This slide presents the results from Business Week’s recent poll of employees. About 18% of the employees cited their resolution for their managers to be dealing with the workplace conflict faster. Ask the students – what would happen if the conflict were to allow to linger on? (Some very negative aspects could be on the morale and motivation of employees, lowered productivity, possible tarnished reputation, and so on.) Source: Business Week, January 8, 2007

Task vs. Relationship Conflict Task-related conflict – (aka Constructive conflict) occurs when team members perceive that the conflict is in the task or problem rather than in each other Relationship conflict – occurs when team members view differences as personal attacks that threatens their self-esteem and resources See Learning Objective 9: Analyze the causes of and structural solutions to conflict in teams. See text page: 274

Minimizing Relationship Conflict Emotional intelligence – conflict is less likely to occur when this is high Cohesive team – conflict is suppressed when the team is highly cohesive Supportive team norms – this can hold relationship conflict at bay during constructive debates Problem-solving conflict management style – team members that take this approach are less likely to trigger strong emotions See Learning Objective 9: Analyze the causes of and structural solutions to conflict in teams. See text page: 275

Interpersonal Conflict Management Styles High Forcing Problem solving Assertiveness (motivation to satisfy one’s own interests) Compromising Low Avoiding Yielding Cooperativeness (motivation to satisfy other party’s interests) See Learning Objective 9: Analyze the causes of and structural solutions to conflict in teams. See text page: 276

Interpersonal Conflict Management Styles (cont) Problem solving – tries to find a mutually beneficial solution for both parties Avoiding – Tries to smooth over or avoid conflict situations altogether Forcing – tries to win the conflict situation altogether Yielding – involves giving in completely to the other side’s wishes, or at least cooperating with little or no attention to your own interests Compromising – involves actively searching for a middle ground between the interests of the two parties See Learning Objective 9: Analyze the causes of and structural solutions to conflict in teams. See text page: 276

Conflict at Siemens Klaus Kleinfeld brought American-style management to Germany’s Siemens: Sold money losing mobile phone unit to Taiwan’s BenQ for $1.4 billion [Public pressure required Siemens to pay $46 million to retrain workers after BenQ closed the business] Put troubled communications-equipment unit into joint venture with Finland’s Nokia [Workers felt betrayed and now the transaction is on hold due to a scandal] Invited workers to comment on his blog to get closer to employees [Received dozens of scathing posts accusing him of destroying the company’s culture] See Learning Objective 9: Analyze the causes of and structural solutions to conflict in teams. Conflict at Siemens This slide presents some of the decisions by the Siemens CEO, Kleinfeld, and the reactions by the workers of the company. Ask the students what types of conflict handling styles have the CEO used so far? Which style may be beneficial? (The styles so far has been forcing, avoiding and to some extend compromise with reaching out to the workers) The CEO has been able to generate the results in financial numbers, however, employee morale is down and conflict is up. The differences in culture plays a big role here as well. German employees are big on unions and taken care of where as American CEO’s focus more on the bottom line results is conflicting. Source: Business Week, January 29, 2007

Question Problem solving Yielding Compromising Avoiding Which interpersonal conflict management style is preferred because it minimizes the risk of relationship conflict? Problem solving Yielding Compromising Avoiding See Learning Objective 9: Analyze the causes of and structural solutions to conflict in teams. See text page: 276 Answer: A

Structural Solutions to Team Conflict Emphasize Superordinate goals – common objectives held by conflicting parties that are more important than the departmental or individual goals on which the conflict is based Find ways for employees to understand each other’s differences Look into ways to reduce the intensity of interdependence See Learning Objective 9: Analyze the causes of and structural solutions to conflict in teams. See text page: 277