LEADING INSPIRING PEOPLE

Leading Inspiring People



Leading Inspiring People

 Introduction

Contemporary management theories and practices stress to importance of work teams to effective and efficient task performance in organizations. Robbins, Coulter, Cox & Cox provide the rationale behind the predominance of team-based organizational structures, by presenting some main empirical findings that support the notion that teams outperform individuals: (2007)

Well-structured and managed teams provide a way to better use employee talents because they allow each member to focus on what they do best

Teams are more flexible to changes and respond to them quicker and better

Teams are rather modular work units in the sense that they be rather easily assembled, deployed, changed and disbanded

In team-based organizational structures employees are more involved in the work process and empowered

Cross-functional teams reduce the barriers among functional areas

Group decision making generates more complete information and knowledge, generates more diverse alternatives and increases acceptance of a solution and legitimacy of decisions.

This paper will examine the issue of teams from two perspectives: First, it will compare and contrast teams and groups in the workplace, highlighting the nature of teams as a comprehensive form of groups and thus as a primary goal of managers. Second, it will examine the role of workforce diversity in teams, explain the advantages and drawbacks of diversified teams and discuss several methods to increase the effectiveness of such team structures.

The Differences between Groups and Teams in the Workplace

Generally speaking, groups emerge whenever two or more people are working together towards establishing a common goal. Groups can be formal (i.e. part of the organizational structure, such as departments) or informal (social), and can differ in dynamics, size, etc. However, the common nature of all groups is that it is not necessary to deploy any managerial effort to build a group, as they simply arise due to the circumstances. As such, groups are rather fragile work mechanisms; they resemble social groups, tend to be very responsive to struggles over power and have unique cultural systems such as norms, values and narrative. However, since work groups can be practically almost every professional encounter between individuals, the level of cultural development differs significantly among groups.

Many people tend to confuse groups with teams. As a preface for explaining the difference between the two concepts we can imagine a basketball match between the Bulls and the Celtics: all members of each side (players and supporters) share the same goal, namely to win the match. The supporters on both sides all share this goal and are grouped together to enjoy the game and to show their support. The players, however, must play as a team in order to win; they must “work intensely on a specific common goal using their positive synergy, individual and mutual accountability, and complementary skills” (Robbins et al., 2007).

The concept of teams emerged from the efforts of the science of management to maximize the benefits of joint performance over individual work, while minimizing the negative elements of groups. Broadly speaking, teams represent a higher form of groups, which receives tasks, responsibilities ...