Teamwork Establishment in an Organization
Class Name and Code:
Date of Submission
Organization Teamwork Establishment
Any formed organization has goals and visions that it aims to achieve. Organizational effectiveness, therefore, can be summarized by using five concepts where the organization stresses its strength. This area consists of the organization structure and decision-making; people work poses and system and the culture developed by the team. This essay will also address organization development and the source of the team development since the era of civilization. It will also focus on how different scholars have contributed to organization development by coming up with various organization approaches to support their ideas on different organizational categories (Bayou & De Korvin. 2008).
Improvement of teamwork management is addressed in five techniques that outline how to manage cooperation. The essay also discusses suspense organization around the world like Ford Motor Cop. And also the strategies that these organizations applies to succeed. The organization environment that can be defined as the economic environment is also discussed in this essay. This economic environment consists of external forces that influence business, both in the market and the broader economy. The structure of an organization that is addressed in this essay shows how virtual, and actual workers are managed and the difficulties the managers face. The challenges they face while on their duty managing all the working teams including those working from outside the organization (Pech, & Slade. 2007).
Theories and modules that explain structuring of organization stressed on the teamwork operation with each of the member playing his/her role in the organization in question to their level best. However, most of the workers are reluctant in their duties that result to overladen of the organization managers. The issue of establishment of an effective team work, either virtual or actual in an organization, therefore, remain to be one of the goals that each group desires to achieve. In the models and theories explained by most scholars and researchers who contributed to a large extent on how to make organization structure more efficient, show that structuring of an organization needs a lot of effort from both the managerial stuff and the workers. However, teamwork collaboration makes an organization structure more effective (Gabor & Mahoney. 2013).
Organization environment, which is defined as the economic situation is the external factors that any organization faces. These outer elements may be a market in the case of a business organization or the broader economy. Organization environment consists of two major sub-categories. These categories include the microeconomic environment that include deviled behavior and affects the organization decision making. A team of workers that has the same working cultures will be the most appropriate to be hired to work in a certain branch than employing different expertise who are not related which made harmonization between the workers to be difficult. Macroeconomics environment, on the other hand, affects the entire organization operations (Graham, 2003).
The recent research on team effectiveness in groups and teams shows the factors that are to be considered to enhance teamwork. The relevant factors that are considered include group composition, the motivation of the working stuff, and cohesiveness to achieve. Some of the techniques that managers should practice for success of the teamwork are; sharing clearly defined teamwork objectives, leading by example, promoting effective team meetings, appraising individual achievements and creating a good mood among the workers for instance making fans.
All the team members contribute to the maximum achievement of the organization, and therefore, the managers should lead in performing certain tasks and educate the team members on how to perform them. A collaboration of both the managers and the workers, therefore, becomes a key factor that ensure smooth running of the organization. The whole idea of the skillful management of the working relationships that enable individuals achieve their goals as well as the team goals. Ford Motors is the automobile manufacturing industry which ranked among the best with a well-organized work structuring in the U.S. The structuring of management from the top management mechanism is a well-developed working policies that make its mechanics performs their job more efficiently.
A well-defined team objectives act as guidelines that help the workers to move in one direction with the same aim. OKR is an example of a Google technique used to track and define objective and outcome, shows the progress of a company team objective with the measurable results. The great importance of this technique is that it shows how an individual leader’s expectation with the possible level of achievement.
Efficient team meeting and individual achievement appraisal is considered as time wasting, but they make a great contribution to the company’s evaluation of the team performance to ensure it is working in the right truck. This regular planning preparation minimizes chances of the organization failures. Most of the successive industries like the Microsoft office Corporation which is one of the successive organization in the world hold stuff is regularly meetings to ensure that the company moves in the right track and adjust to the new competitive and innovative environment.
Team working should not be considered as an obligation but should be viewed as fun. Little fun intergradation in the work and humor improves collaboration in the team-work more efficiently. It improves socialization and interaction among the team members.
The duties of organization managers are to oversee how the organization proceeds and make sure that workers perform their tasks efficiently. From the beginning of civilization, management theories have been developed by many scientist that try to explain how a manager could establish teamwork effectiveness in an organization.
Chester Barnard (1886-1961) formulated a model that he later fostered it in his book “The Function of Executive.” He developed a managerial theory that explain that organizations operate as cooperate systems. In his theory, he argues that creation of an organization is done only when the individuals can complete the task on their own. He views the organizations as a skin living organism that try to survive in a hostile environment. He also recognized that an organization did not work alone but involve other resources outside the environment which also act as a limiter to organization actions. For example, a group needs capital, labor, resources and equipment to enable it to succeed.
This complexity of organization leads to the development of other managerial theories that try to explain how the team works. Barnard developed much another management hypothesis that include systems equilibrium and Inducement- contribution theory. In system equilibrium theory, Barnard argued that each of an organization requires to achieve a system balance. In explanation of this theory, there is two equilibrium process that is a balance between the organization characters and the environment and equilibrium between the organization and its members. Both equilibria try to balance the body to either environment or its members (Amboise & Muldowney. 2008).
The theory of inducement-contribution theory is a bit complicated as it may argue about circulating in the motivation theory. Due to this complexity of organization management, managers are assigned a substantial task that involve brainstorming to come up with a solution to solve different challenges that an organization face.
Bureaucratic model of organization and management in which it is rational means on how to improve and control human being in an organization. Webbers in his Bureaucratic mood focuses more on how an organization could be made effective. He proposes characteristics of this model that could improve the organization effectiveness that include; the well-defined rules in an organization where a good define rules would make an organization to work in the right direction toward its goals. Chain of command in the organized in a hierarchy way. Such that the comrades should be followed from the top management to the least ranked workers in an organization. Weber also proposed that promotion and employment should be performed in well-demonstrated competence with the protection of employees against arbitrary dismissals and well-organized way of training of officers (Weber, 2009).
Despite Bureaucracy Theory explains the structuring of an organization, however, there exist demerits that outdo this theory. These limitations involve; the excessive reliance on organization rules and regulations that result to employee viewed like a machine in the work. Their mechanism also makes employee resistance to change when a new technique in the system is introduced.
Kurt Lewin (1890-1947) who was a social psychologist cover mainly on leadership skills and its outcome in team decision making and developed the force field theory among other theories. In the leadership styles and their effect theory, in his research which he conducted with his other colleagues, L. Lippitt and R. White; in a group of boys group aimed to portray the impact of the democratic in an organization. In his classification of the management styles that are democratic, autocratic and laissez-faire; showed that the group that practiced democratic leader achieve more cooperation among the members and thus portray that in an organization with a democratic style wound be more likely to achieve the organization goals.
Lewin’s theory of Force Field Analysis showed that people’s activities are affected by the environment surrounding that he considered as a field. He considered the environment as mutually interacting characters that are interdependent on each other. He explained this theory using three principles which include mathematic presentation of concrete stations, the behavior as the function of the field where the organization is laid and the start of analyses in a complete situation and how this analysis vary in its component characters. The aim of this theory is to determine when the organization is progressing, or it’s at static stations so as changes would be made. Examples of the driving forces could be shown in the form of the employee ambitions, individual goals, and the overall organization objectives.
In group decision theory, Lewin carried a research after the World War II in the American government. In his research, he found that in the group of members discussing and sharing ideas there was the likelihood of them agreeing in a common idea and willing to change. However, performing lectures on the same topic including the same members without discussing. The impact of Lewin’s contribution on group dynamics in most of the researchers immerge two key ideas of group dynamisms.
There include Interdependence of fate and task interdependence. The necessity of Fate explains that a group constitutes members with very different characters. The existing of these various character is an addition advantage since every member who have ever achieved a particular goal will be ready to take the role of improving the entire group to foster achievement of the group aims. Task interdependence, Lewin argued that interdependence of the group members to achieve common group goals would create a powerful group dynamisms.
However, many groups have weak forms of interdependence which result in the saturated growth of most of the organizations. Lewin studied closely on the group behaviors, and he understood people behavior are quite different. However, if the members of the group shared common objectives, there is the likelihood of working together to archive the objective in question
(Guzzo, & Dickson, 1996).
In conclusion, according the arguments based on them varies theories that try to summarize the whole ideology of the enhancing teamwork, is evidenced that organizing a team is not an easier task. An organization constitute of complex systems that operate at different levels to achieve a common goal. Each of the systems is operated by various peoples who also have different characters. To harmonize the whole organization to achieve the desired goals is a task that not many could be able to handle. However, managers should lead as an example to show other the other members the way forward. Motivating them and understanding internal and external forces that face the organization to be able to handle any challenge in the most appropriate way. The possible challenges that may occur should be well structured in to minimize loss. Also, managers should be fixable to change according the organization situation for the wellbeing of the body. In any group of workers, an achievement is made when there are a well-established interaction and interdependence among the members (Amboise & Muldowney. 2008).
Guzzo, R. A. & Dickson, M. W. 1996. Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and effectiveness. Annual review of psychology,47(1), 307-338.
Bayou, M. E., & De Korvin, A. 2008. Measuring the leanness of manufacturing systems—a case study of Ford Motor Company and General Motors. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 25(4), 287-304.
Pech, R. J., & Slade, B. W. 2007. Organizational sociopaths: rarely challenged, often promoted. Why?. Society and Business Review, 2(3), 254-269.
Pech, R. J., & Slade, B. W. 2006. Religious fundamentalism and terrorism: why do they do it and what do they want? Fore-sight, 8(1), 8-20.
Marshall, A. J., Ashleigh, M. J., Baden, D., Ojiako, U., & Guidi, M. G. 2014. Corporate Psychopathy: Can ‘Search and Destroy ‘and ‘Hearts and Minds’ Military Metaphors Inspire HRM Solutions? Journal of Business Ethics, 128(3), 495-504.
Pech, R. J., & Slade, B. W. 2007. Organizational sociopaths: rarely challenged, often promoted. Why? Society and Business Review, 2(3), 265-269.
Pech, R. J., & Slade, B. W. 2004. Manoeuvre theory: Business mission analysis process for high intensity conflict. Management decision, 41(8), 984-1000.
Pech, R. J., & Slade, B. W. 2007. Organizational sociopaths: rarely challenged, often promoted. Why? Society and Business Review, 2(2), 255-270.
Pech, R. J., & Slade, B. W. 2004. Manoeuvre theory: Business mission analysis process for high intensity conflict. Management decision, 42(8), 987-1000.
Pech, R. J., & Durden, G. 2003. Manoeuvre warfare: a new military paradigm for business decision making. Management Decision, 41(2), 168-179.
Gabor, A., & Mahoney, J. T. 2013. Chester Barnard and the systems approach to nurturing organizations. The Oxford Handbook of Management Theorists, 134-151.
Weber, M. 2009. From Max Weber: essays in sociology. Routledge.
Wren, D. A., & Bedeian, A. G. 2004. The evolution of management thought.
Graham, P. 2003. Mary Parker Follett–Prophet of management: A celebration of writings from the 1920s. Beard Books.
Burnes, B. 2004. Kurt Lewin and the planned approach to change: a re‐appraisal. Journal of Management studies, 41(6), 977-1002.
Cooke, B. 2009. Writing the left out of management theory: the historiography of the management of change. Organization, 6(1), 81-105.
Coghlan, D., & Brannick, T. 2003. Kurt Lewin: The” Practical Theorist” for the 21st Century. Irish Journal of Management, 24(2), 31.
Amboise, G., & Muldowney, M. 2008. Management theory for small business: attempts and requirements. Academy of management review, 13(2), 226-240.
Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. 1999. Management entrenchment: The case of manager-specific investments. Journal of financial economics, 25(1), 123-139.
Greenberg, J., Pyszczynski, T., & Solomon, S. 2006. The causes and consequences of a need for self-esteem: A terror management theory. In Public self and private self (pp. 189-212). Springer New York.
Marshall, G. 2002). In search of the spirit of capitalism: an essay on Max Weber’s Protestant ethic thesis.
Hofstede, G. (1994). Management scientists are human. Management science,40(1), 4-13.