Teams are vital because they allow individuals to achieve greater things. Teamwork helps us understand the different aspects of each person. Skills, personalities and traits are not similar. Working in a team is beneficial for any organization. To work in a group, a leader must be able to motivate and guide the team. It is important that the person in this role has a clear attitude, thoughts and actions. The role must be performed clearly and with a specific objective. The members are encouraged to perform effectively and efficiently. This is not a guarantee of success because each team member behaves differently. For a team to function, each member must have their strengths and weaknesses identified. For the team to succeed, diverse personalities, skills, and behavior must be coordinated. Each team member has a role that describes their behavior, contribution and interaction with the other members. This is evident in the office and within the team. Working together in a team is not just about performing, but it’s also about sharing, caring and understanding. It builds trust and a shared understanding of what is expected. As behaviors keep changing so do performance also changes.
The performance of the team changes depending on the environment and situation. The performance of the group is not constant. It can be good, or it could be poor. This can be caused by poor decision-making or the performance of members. It is important to communicate to the team members the dynamics of the team in such situations. As time passes, the experience of working with a team will develop a mature attitude and a desire to move into a different role. You can change a team, or pursue new habits so that you become a better leader. This is often a natural process, due to the experience gained or the needs of the moment. It is also possible to choose a role which you are interested in. Keep your team updated on your plans and your actions. The matrix structure is a common feature of modern corporations. This trend was born out of the need to streamline organizations. The goal is avoiding redundant roles and excessive costs.
Dr. Meredith Belbin defines a team as “a tendency that people have to behave, interact and contribute in a certain manner”. The nine roles he identifies are listed below. Many organisations have formed work teams (Devine et al.). Ilgen 1999). Work teams have been formed in many organisations (Devine et al. Cohen and Ledford’s (1994) research from 1996 was cited. These roles promote team cohesion, responsibility and positive interdependence (Mudrack & Farrell 1995), foster individual accountability and positive interdependence (Brush 1998) and encourage members to be aware of their contribution and the group’s overall performance (Strijbos and Ledford 2004). Teams are fundamentally based on roles (Hackman 1990). Many researchers have noted that team roles are important (Cf. Hackman 1987; McGrath 1984; Sundstrom et al. 1990). Social interactions in teams can be facilitated by group discussion. Miller (1978), stated that groups are systems of individuals interacting. Communication and social interactions are vital. The concept of roles has been defined by clusters based on relationship or goal-oriented behavior (Belbin 1982, 1993; Forsyth 1989; Stewart et. al. 2005).
A person may display a series behaviors that are aimed at achieving a specific goal. To understand the role of an individual, it is better to look at a series or behaviors. Benne & Sheats (1948), grouped 27 roles in three categories: Task Roles, Maintenance Roles and Individual Roles. Mumford et al. (2006) classified 10 distinct roles into three categories, namely: task category, social category, and boundary-spanning roles. In many leadership studies conducted after 1950, only two roles categories were consistently identified: Task and Socioemotion. (Bass 1980; Fisher et.al. 1998). This two-factor structural model is supported by empirical evidence (Forsyth 1990, Hare 1974); a taxonomy that encompasses all team roles has not yet been developed (Stewart, et.al. 2005). The classification of team roles cannot be done with a simple two-category structure based on only function. The system has a single-dimensional structure as is demonstrated by how Leadership roles, and Membership roles, are not differentiated. Benne & Sheats (1948), who noted the over-emphasis on leaders in role studies, still hold true today. 2010). Benne, Sheats and others added “individual membership roles”, but most of them were selfish.
In India, team work is the grouping of individuals that works together in order to achieve a goal. A group of people is not necessarily a team. A team includes individuals who possess natural talents, skills or abilities. The members also work in concert to enhance their strengths and reduce weaknesses. Naresh Jamin (2009) argues that team members should learn to help each other and encourage others to reach their full potential. It is possible to break down teams into secondary groups, or even smaller teams. Synergy is created when there is a strong commitment between team members. Academic research on teamwork and teams has increased dramatically over the last 40 years. However, the diffusion of teamwork and teams in society has been volatile.
The concept became popular in business during the last decades of the 20thcentury. Opinions differ on whether this new approach to management is effective. Others see “teams” as an overused, under-utilized four-letter word. Others view it as the panacea for integrating what is perceived as best by managers and workers. Other people still believe in teamwork, but are concerned about the dangers of exploitation of workers. Hackman said that team performance is not the only way to measure effectiveness. Performance is important but a team that works effectively will help its members to grow and adapt.
Team composition and size Team composition and size affects team processes as well as team outcomes. The optimal composition and size of teams will depend on what the team is doing. One study on problem-solving groups found that four people is the optimal number of members. Other works estimate optimal sizes between 5-12 or a group of people that can eat 2 pizzas. Chong (2007) is the source of the following excerpt. Belbin’s (1981), book on successful teams, was published in 1981 and sparked an interest in teams.
Researchers have pursued two different lines of research in order to better understand teams and the teamwork they perform. Belbin (1981 and 1993), Woodcock, Margerison, McCann and Davis all wrote about teams. Parker (1990), Spencer & Pruss (1992), and Davis et al. (1992) were all interested in the role of a team and its impact on team performance. These studies showed that the team’s performance was affected by the type and quantity of roles each team member played. The optimal number for performance ranged from 15 roles (Davis et.al., 1992) down to four (Parker, 1990). The difference in the definition of roles is attributed to this variation. Lindgren (1997) argued that ‘roles,’ in a psychological social sense, were behaviors one exhibits within the constraints imposed by the external world on one’s job position, e.g. leader, manager, supervisor, worker etc.
Personality, on other hand, was internally motivated, and it remained stable through time. These traits influenced behaviour in predictable ways. Another line of investigation focused on measuring teams’ ‘effectiveness. Deihl, Stroebe, Gersik, Evenden, Anderson and Furnham are among those who have written about the ‘effectiveness’ of teams. (1993), Cohen & Ledford (1996), and Katzenbach (2000) were all concerned with the measurement of high-performing teams. McFadzean 2002 believed the emergence of a few models of effective teams was indicative a wide range of variables like personality, size of group, norms at work, relationships of status, structure of group, etc. Team ‘effectiveness,’ and how it is measured, can be affected by a variety of variables. These include personality, group size (including the number of members), work norms, status relationships within groups etc.
David Cooperider believes that the more people in a group, the better. The reason is that a large group can deal with the issues of the entire system. Cooperider states that a large group may not be able to perform a task effectively, but that it is important to consider the importance of the task. This is because, in order for a team’s effectiveness, the task must be clearly defined. In terms of composition, every team will contain a certain amount of heterogeneity as well as homogeneity. The more homogeneous and cohesive the group is the better. The more heterogeneous a group is, both the more creative it can be and the more conflict-prone. Team members often have multiple roles. Sub-teams can be formed from large teams if necessary.
Bruce Tuckman identifies four main stages of team development: forming, storming and norming. Types of Teams Independent and interdependent Interdependent teams Rugby teams are a good example of independent teams. They cannot achieve any task without the support and cooperation from all their members. Specializing in different task. The team’s success depends on each individual member. All-rounders are dependent and have never won on their own. Independent teams Track and field teams are a good example of independent teams. Students solve maths sums. Professionals such as Doctors, Lawyers and Teachers are independent contributors. Although they are all working together, it is likely that each team member will be providing support to the other. This could include providing advice, practice time or moral support. These teams can be considered independent.
Differences in Coaching between Independent and Interdependent Teams A team such as a football squad requires a very different coaching style. A team such as a gymnastics club requires an entirely different style. Since both games have benefits and costs, the intrinsic motivations are different. Teams that are interdependent perform better when they receive collective rewards. Teams that are independent do better when they receive individual rewards. Multidisciplinary and inter-disciplinary Teams are often found in fields of study or employment, like the medical industry. Multidisciplinary teams consist of professionals who treat patients independently, depending on their specialization. The problem being treated might or might not be connected to another issue being addressed by an individual member of the team. In an interdisciplinary approach, all team members work together to achieve the same goal. In an inter-disciplinary team approach, core members often take on roles usually held by others on the team.
It’s a team of individuals from different fields like marketing, finance, operations, and human resource, working together toward a single goal. The cross-functional team includes stakeholders, suppliers and customers. It is often self-directed groups that are tasked with a particular task and include input from different departments. It increases creativity and also provides alternative solutions to problems. Cross functional teams provide the competitive edge that is needed in today’s world. Cross functional teams are multitasking, and the members of these teams are responsible for all day-to-day activities. Cross-functional teams are often viewed as being competitive, and also critical to the success of any firm. In the boardrooms of companies, you can see such teams. It is possible to achieve a solution for an organisational problem by bringing together a team of people with diverse backgrounds. Some organisations are designed with cross-functional workflows in mind, creating a pipeline for working managers.
In many team-building frameworks, it is assumed that you will be able to pick the right members from the start and determine their direction and tone. Leaders usually do not have the luxury of choosing their own team; they are forced to work with what they inherit. Leaders who want to transform a group and take it over need help with the transition. Here’s an effective three-step method: Assess your team and its dynamics. Then, you can reshape your team’s composition, its sense of direction and purpose, the operating model and the behaviors in accordance with the challenges that the company faces. Thirdly, accelerate your team’s progress by achieving early successes.
Pearce, Sims and others (2002) published a study in Group Dynamics that found shared leadership to be an effective predictor of the effectiveness of teams. According to research, shared leadership may also promote greater team interactions, improved collaboration and coordination and innovative solutions. While co-leadership is energizing, rewarding and can lead to new ideas, it can also be draining if there’s no strong relationship. If we want to be able to co-lead, it is important to develop this skill. For co-leadership to be successful, sustainable and enjoyable, you need to divide the roles and responsibilities and share ownership. Multiple people are affected by co-leadership. Taking responsibility in both cases of success and failure. Being open to renegotiating the roles you play based on leadership and situations is important.
