Chapter 9 - Leadership in Teams Flashcards
Team
Commonplace to describe every work unit as a team.
In many causes, it is about leading. Leadership not necessarily performed by an individual - in team structure it is distributed/ shared.
Managers outside teams set targets but team is self managing to a significant extent.
Teams make decisions about?
How to deliver products/ services
Allocation of work
Rules
Historical roots of team based work
Scientific management (production systems) and bureaucracy (organisational structures and processes).
Scientific management
Division of labour -work divided into narrowest possible tasks, Based on efficiency, hierarchical structure and dividing tasks. Rational approach, popular and adapted in many organisations.
Time and motion studies - scientific system for calculating one best way to do task effectively.
Simple performance pay systems - workers paid based on output with money as only motivator.
Managers plan and control production - managers highly trained heads and workers as ignorant hands
Influence of Scientific Management
Spread through world in early 20th century, created basis for mass production
Spread form manufacturing to clerical work to health and public admin
Applied by Ford to development of production line manufacturing - boring for employees
Delivered massive productivity gains
The basis for so called Fordist mass production
The dominant approach until the 1970s and 80s
Taylorism
Application of apparently neutral, rational and scientific rules and procedures to work
Bureaucracy
Involves the application of Taylorism rules to who organisation.
Organisations structured hierarchically. Clear division of labour. Documented rules and procedures. Dominant organisational form in 20th century.
Problems with Taylorism and Bureaucracy
Rigidity of hierarchical structures and formal positions, rules and procedures restrict innovative problem solving. Only based on efficiency, automatisation, lacks care for employees.
Limits to division of labour - any efficiency gains from division of labour finite, limits creativity/ innovation, difficult to come up with new ideas
Boredom, frustration and demotivation of employees due to narrow repetitive jobs with little discretion.
Human Relations
Concerned with productivity but recognised limits of Taylorism, created basis for teamwork structure.
Limits in terms of productivity gains.
Bad for workers and may lead to industrial unrest.
Questioned if there was a better way to organise work?
e.g. Hawthorne experiments: set out to test effects of better illumination on productivity.
Almost incidentally found that workers who could work in groups and make some of their own decisions about production were happier and more productive.
Led to new way of thinking about what drives productivity. Shifted thinking about organising groups.
Key insights on human relations and group based work
Employees need groups to give their work meaning
Groups must have capacity to make meaningful decision, more autonomy and to develop own rules, norms and values.
If work is organised on a group basis, workers will be happier and more productive.
Rise of teams
Since 1990s there has been massive growth in popularity of team based work influenced by ideas of human relations - with maintenance of Taylorism and bureaucracy in many organisations.
Teams have potential to?
Deliver performance gains
Increase worker well being
Reduce managers’ workloads
Why are teams effective?
Problem solving: groups solve complex problems better than individuals.
Meet human needs and interact with others of different backgrounds e.g. cooperation, task variety, discretion, whole job, therefore increases satisfaction commitment and motivation.
Synergies between skills of different team members
Advantages of teams
Increased productivity
Job satisfaction and security
Easier to fix problems at a base level
Increased communication and support throughout business
Disadvantages of teams
Unclear job roles Lack of understanding of teaming Lack of accountability Resistance to change Increased training and learning More spending and costs faced by firm
Myth of creativity
innovation/creativity often based on teamwork rather than individuals.
sometimes teams can be more creativity than individuals because
Diversity of ideas, expertise and perspectives
Newer groups, newer ideas
New team members, new ideas
Designing creative teams
High levels of intrinsic motivation - set goals Balanced diversity Appropriate expertise and knowledge Clear yet fluid roles Appropriate team size Non-hierarchichal and decentralised Autonomy- responsible for own decision making Effective communication
External dynamics that effect teams
Supportive work environment
Physical space that promotes collaboration and flexibility
How to contribute as a team member
Share unique information and expertise
Dont’ shoot an idea down immediately
Ensure everyone is heard
Trust and respect
Potential problems in teams
Too much cohesiveness- group think (all same opinion, no new ideas developed)
Too much diversity - too much conflict, leads to cultural misunderstandings.
Lack of communication
Not sharing unique information
Challenges of teams
Teams are like any social system - conflict and cooperation; free riding can occur.
Team activities need to be coordinated to ensure everything gets done. Needs guidance, prevent too broad discussions.
Effective teams are largely or wholly autonomous. But some structure to roles needed. Too many team members make it difficult to integrate all ideas.
Could be questioned who leadership can be exercised when there is no leader. No formal leadership but leadership activities are still needed and carried out by various team members.
Distributed leadership in teams
Each kind of leadership requires different kind of expertise. Two sorts of activities that must take place include task activities and maintenance/ process activities
Task Activities
Planning, scheduling, allocation and completion of tasks e.g. ensuring deadlines are met
Maintenance/ Process Activities
Maintenance of functional relationships and processes in a team e.g. developing a shared team vision and team cohesion. Work environment, conflict etc.
4 Kinds of Leadership in Self Managing Teams
According to Barry Envisioning Organising Spanning Social
Each kind of leadership requires different kinds of expertise. Different people have different kinds of expertise & few individuals have all skills necessary to perform all types of leadership.
Therefore, leadership is shared/distributed among team members. Different kinds of teams will need different ‘mixes’ of leadership. The distribution of leadership is likely to change over time as the team evolves.
Envisioning
Facilitating shared vision, create mutual understanding of goals
Organising
Bringing order to team’s activities, coordinating work, allocating tasks
Spanning
Facilitating links with other teams and individuals, teams don’t operate in a vacuum, link to other organisational stakeholders, managers, other teams to present ideas
Social
Facilitating good relations, managing conflicts, developing positive work environment
Distributed Leadership is Emergent
Not imposed/engineered but develops organically as team function.
It is based on expertise/ skills rather than formal position in a hierarchy.
Distributed leadership is more than just activities of individuals - it is a collective activity which is enacted as group members interact.
Role of Senior Managers
Management from above may stifle autonomy which is necessary to team effectiveness
Highlights importance of top management in creating a vision and a direction for the organisation
Shift in activities of managers outside team from monitoring and controlling to coaching and facilitating
One of the biggest obstacles to effective teamwork is the reluctance of senior managers to let go. They should provide overall vision but not control day-to-day activities.
What facilitates distributed leadership in teams?
Shared purpose
Social support
Communication and participation
coaching rom senior managers external to the team
Does distributed leadership work?
Strong association between distributed leadership and team performance in consulting teams, as judged by clients.
