User:Xyzbb1253/sandbox/tmeftv
Article intended to edit
[edit]Team Effectiveness add organization development
Outline for Team Effectiveness
[edit]Good article criteria
[edit]1. Well-written:
the prose is clear and concise, it respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct; and it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines; and it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Illustrated, if possible, by images:
images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions
Timeline
[edit]Weeks prior to the spring break: Gather info from reputable sources
During spring break: edit the article
Post spring break: create an image
2 weeks after spring break: seek advise from other editors.
Overview of team effectiveness
[edit]The evaluation of how effective a team is, is achieved with the aid of a variety of components derived from research and theories that help in creating a description of the multifaceted nature of team effectiveness. According to Hackman (1987)[1], group effectiveness can be defined in terms of three criteria:
- Output - The final outputs produced by the team must meet or exceed the standards set by key constituents within the organization
- Social Processes - The internal social processes operating as the team interacts should enhance, or at least maintain, the group’s ability to work together in the future
- Learning - The experience of working in the team environment should act to satisfy rather than aggravate the personal needs of team members[2]
For these criteria to be addressed correctly, the evaluation of team effectiveness should both include a measure of the teams’ final task performance as well as criteria with which to assess intragroup process. The three major intragroup process constructs examined are: intra-group conflict, team cohesion, and team-efficacy. Intra-group conflict has emerged as an integral team process variable. Previous research has differentiated two components of intra-group conflict:
- Relationship conflict - This is the interpersonal incompatibilities between team members such as annoyance and animosity
- Task conflict - This occurs when members convey divergent ideas and opinions about specific aspects related to task accomplishment
Team cohesion is viewed as ‘‘a general indicator of synergistic group interaction—or process’’[3]. Furthermore, cohesion has been linked to greater coordination during team-tasks as well as improved satisfaction, productivity, and group interactions. Team efficacy refers to team members’ perceptions of task-specific team competence. This construct is thought to create a sense of confidence within the team that enables the group to persevere when faced with hardship.
Contributors of team effectiveness
[edit]Types of teams
[edit]Work teams
[edit]Work teams (also referred to as production and service teams) are continuing work units responsible for producing goods or providing services for the organization. Their membership is typically stable, usually full-time, and well-defined. These teams are traditionally directed by a supervisor who mandates what work is done, who does it, and in what manner is it executed. Work teams are effectively used in manufacturing sectors such as mining and apparel and service based sectors such as accounting which utilize audit teams.
Self-managed work teams
[edit]Self-managed work teams allow their members to make a greater contribution at work and constitute a significant competitive advantage for the organization. These work teams determine how they will accomplish the objectives they are mandated to achieve and decide what route they will take to complete the current assignment.[4] Self-managed work teams are granted the responsibility of planning, scheduling, organizing directing, controlling and evaluation their own work process. They also select their own members and evaluate the members' performance. Self-managed work teams have been favored for their effectiveness over traditionally managed teams due their ability to enhance productivity, costs, customer service, quality, and safety.[5][6]
Parallel teams
[edit]Parallel teams (also referred to as advice and involvement teams) pull together people from different work units or jobs to perform functions that the regular organization is not equipped to perform well. These teams are given limited authority and can only make recommendations to individuals higher in the organizational hierarchy. Parallel teams are used for solving problems and activities that are in need of revision or improvement. Examples of parallel teams are quality circles, task forces, quality improvement teams, employee involvement groups. The effectiveness of parallel teams is proven by the continuation of their usage and expansion throughout organizations due to their ability to improve quality and increase employee involvement.
Project teams
[edit]Project teams (also referred to as development teams) produce new products and services for an organization or institution on a one-time or limited basis, of which the copyrights of that new product or service will belong to the establishment that it was made for once it is completed. The task of these teams may vary from just improving a current project, concept or plan to creating an entirely new projects with very few limitations. Projects teams rely on their members being knowledgeable and well versed in many disciplines and functions, as this allows them to complete the task effectively.[7] Once a project is completed, the team either disbands and are individually moved to other special functions or moves on to other projects and tasks that they can accomplish or create. A common example of project teams are cross-functional teams. A project team's effectiveness is associated with the speed with which they are able to create and develop new products and services which reduces time spent on individual projects.[8]
Management Teams
[edit]Management teams (also referred to as action and negotiation teams) are responsible for the coordination and direction of a division within an institution or organization during various assigned projects and functional, operational and/or strategic tasks and initiatives.[9] Management teams are responsible for the total performance of the division they oversee with regards to day to day operations, delegation of tasks and the supervision of employees.[10] The authority of these teams are based on the members position on the company's or institution's organizational chart. These management teams are constructed of managers from different divisions (e.g. Vice President of Marketing, Assistant Director of Operations).[11][12] An example of management teams are executive management teams, which consists of members at the top of the organization's hierarchy, such as Chief Executive Officer, Board of Directors, Board of Trustees, etc, who establish the strategic initiatives that a company will undertake over a long term period (~ 3-5 years).[13] Management teams have been effective by using their expertise to aid companies in adjusting to the current landscape of a global economy, which helps them compete with their rivals in their respective markets, produce unique initiatives that sets them apart from their rivals and empower the employees who are responsible for the success of the organization or institution.[14][15]
- very good, but I thought you were going to take up IPA as your stub and work on that? Dr Ashton (talk) 21:39, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
- ^ Hackman, J. Richard (1987). "The design of work teams". Handbook of Organizational Behavior: 315–42.
- ^ Hackman, J. Richard; Wageman, Ruth (1 April 2005). "A Theory of Team Coaching". Academy of Management Review. 30 (2): 269–287. doi:10.5465/AMR.2005.16387885.
- ^ Barrick, Murray R.; Stewart, Greg L.; Neubert, Mitchell J.; Mount, Michael K. (1998). "Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness". Journal of Applied Psychology. 83 (3): 377–391. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.83.3.377.
- ^ Neck, C. P. (1 August 1994). "From Groupthink to Teamthink: Toward the Creation of Constructive Thought Patterns in Self-Managing Work Teams". Human Relations. 47 (8): 929–952. doi:10.1177/001872679404700804.
- ^ Manz, Charles C.; Neck, Christopher P. (1995). "Teamthink: beyond the groupthink syndrome in self-managing workteams". Journal of Managerial Psychology. 10 (1): 7–16. doi:10.1108/02683949510075155.
- ^ Cohen, Susan G.; Ledford, Gerald E. (1 January 1994). "The Effectiveness of Self-Managing Teams: A Quasi-Experiment". Human Relations. 47 (1): 13–43. doi:10.1177/001872679404700102.
- ^ Lapoint, Patrica A. (2013). "DESIGN PROTOTYPES INC. PROJECT MANAGEMENT (A): SELECTION OF THE PROJECT TEAM". Journal of the International Academy for Case Studies. 19 (6): 121–125.
{{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter|coauthors=ignored (|author=suggested) (help) - ^ Reed, April H. (2013). "PROJECT DURATION AND RISK FACTORS ON VIRTUAL PROJECTS". Journal of Computer Information Systems. 54 (1): 75–83. doi:10.1080/08874417.2013.11645673.
{{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter|coauthors=ignored (|author=suggested) (help) - ^ Bunderson, J. S. (1 August 2003). "Team Member Functional Background and Involvement in Management Teams: Direct Effects and the Moderating Role of Power Centralization". Academy of Management Journal. 46 (4): 458–474. doi:10.2307/30040638. JSTOR 30040638.
- ^ Guchait, Priyanko; Hamilton, Katherine; Hua, Nan (2014). "Personality predictors of team taskwork understanding and transactive memory systems in service management teams". International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. 26 (3): 401–425. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-05-2013-0197.
- ^ Ou, Amy Y.; Tsui, Anne S.; Kinicki, Angelo J.; Waldman, David A.; Xiao, Zhixing; Song, Lynda Jiwen (8 January 2014). "Humble Chief Executive Officers' Connections to Top Management Team Integration and Middle Managers' Responses". Administrative Science Quarterly. 59 (1): 34–72. doi:10.1177/0001839213520131.
- ^ Kor, Yasemin Y.; Mesko, Andrea (2013). "Dynamic managerial capabilities: Configuration and orchestration of top executives' capabilities and the firm's dominant logic". Strategic Management Journal. 34 (2): 233–244. doi:10.1002/smj.2000.
- ^ Souitaris, Vangelis (June 2010). "Polychronicity in top management teams: The impact on strategic decision processes and performance of new technology ventures". Strategic Management Journal. 31 (6): 652–678. doi:10.1002/smj.831.
{{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter|coauthors=ignored (|author=suggested) (help) - ^ Nielsen, Bo Bernhard; Nielsen, Sabina (2013). "Top management team nationality diversity and firm performance: A multilevel study". Strategic Management Journal. 34 (3): 373–382. doi:10.1002/smj.2021.
- ^ Qian, Cuili; Cao, Qing; Takeuchi, Riki (2013). "Top management team functional diversity and organizational innovation in China: The moderating effects of environment". Strategic Management Journal. 34 (1): 110–120. doi:10.1002/smj.1993.