The Four Different Types of Teams

Anonymous
timer Asked: Feb 5th, 2019
account_balance_wallet $25

Question Description

Assignment 1: The four different types of teams

Assignment Instructions

Instructions: Select an article that is relevant to the above topics. Research, critique and discuss this article in the light of our topic.

The review should be a two-page MS Word Document, APA formatting is required. The title page and the reference page do not count toward the two pages. (I only need the body of the paper; I have the title and reference pages)

Article to analyze:

Rousseau, V., & Aubé, C. (2018). When leaders stifle innovation in work teams: The role of abusive supervision. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(3), 651-664. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy2.apus.edu/10.1007/s10551...

The below is informational to assist with the above article.

Pathways to Higher Education (n.d.). Chapter 2: Types of Teams and Their Functions. Retrieved from http://pathways-egypt.com/subpages/downloads/Teams...

Unformatted Attachment Preview

C5/1: Teams and Work Groups Types of Teams and Their Functions Chapter 2: Types of Teams and Their Functions When students finish studying this part, they should be able to: 1. Define team types. 2. Distinguish between formal and informal groups. 3. Understand how to build a good team. 4. Explain team role in solving organizational problems. 5. Determine teams as an inevitable tool in performing business. 6. Understand the process of making use of diversity in teams. 7. Define the self-managed teams in organizations. Types of Teams 2.1 Types of Teams Teams can be classified according to their objective. The four most common forms of teams you are likely to find in an organization are problem-solving teams, self-managed teams, cross-functional teams, and virtual teams. ProblemSolving Teams A) Problem-Solving Teams They are typically composed of 5 to 12 employees from the same department who meet for a few hours each week to discuss ways of improving quality, efficiency, and the work environment. Organizations are relaying more and more on problem-solving teams to help solve organizational problems, as shown in Figure 2.1. Problem Figure 2.1: Problem-solving team In problem-solving teams, members share ideas or offer suggestions on how work process and methods can be improved. Rarely, however, are these teams given the authority to unilaterally implement any of their suggested actions, as shown in Figure 2.2. Pathways to Higher Education 9 C5/1: Teams and Work Groups Types of Teams and Their Functions Figure 2.2: Team hoac Self-Managed Teams B) Self-Managed Teams They are generally composed of 10 to 15 people who take on the responsibilities of their former supervisors. Typically, these responsibilities include: a) Collective control over the pace of work, b) Determination of work assignments, c) Organization of breaks, and d) Collective choice of inspection procedures used. Fully self-managed teams select their own members, and the members evaluate each other’s performance. As a result, supervisory positions take on decreased importance and may even be eliminated, see Figure 2.3. CrossFunctional Teams Figure 2.3: Self-managed team C) Cross - Functional Teams Cross-functional teams are made of employees at about the same hierarchical level, but from different work areas, who come together to accomplish a task. Pathways to Higher Education 10 C5/1: Teams and Work Groups Types of Teams and Their Functions Cross-functional teams are an effective means of allowing people from diverse areas within an organization to exchange information, develop new ideas, solve problems, and coordinate complex projects. Crossfunctional teams bring people with different functional specialties to better invent design, or deliver a product or service. The general goals of using cross-functional team include some combination of innovation, speed and quality that come from early coordination among the various specialties Virtual Teams D) Virtual Teams Virtual teams use computers technology to tie tighter physically dispersed members in order to achieve a common goal. They allow people to collaborate online, whether they are only a room apart or separated by continents. The three primary factors that differentiate virtual teams from face-toface teams are: a) The absence of Para verbal and nonverbal cues. b) Limited social context. c) The ability to overcome time and space constraints. Teams Role in Solving Organizational 2.2 Teams Role in Solving Organizational Problems Problems Team decision-making process assists organization to solve nonroutine problems. It is always said the “two brains are better than one.” The advantages of team decision-making process are: a) Problem definition: teams can define the problem more clearly. Team members can visualize the problem from different perspectives. The integration of those perspectives helps the team to reach a clear definition of the problem. b) Data collection: teams are able to collect more data than individual. c) Developing alternatives: teams can develop more alternatives than individuals. Teams usually use different techniques such as brainstorming, nominal groupings, and Delphi techniques. d) Evaluating and selecting alternatives: team discussions can always produce more positive solutions of a problem. Teams also use more objectives criteria in selecting the right alternative. e) Implementing the solution: teams are able to define the roles of each team member in implementing the solution of the problem. Pathways to Higher Education 11 C5/1: Teams and Work Groups Formal and Informal Groups Types of Teams and Their Functions 2.3 Formal and Informal Groups Groups come in many forms, shapes, and sizes. Most managers belong to several different groups at the same time, some at work, some at community, some formally organized, and some informal and social in nature. The most basic way of identifying types of groups is to distinguish between: 9 Formal groups, and 9 Informal groups, as shown in Figure 2.4. Types of groups Formal Informal Figure 2.4: Types of groups Formal Groups Informal Groups A) Formal Groups The organization’s managers to accomplish goals and serve the needs of the organization deliberately create formal groups. The major purpose of formal groups is to perform specific tasks and achieve specific objectives defined by the organization. The most common type of formal work group consists of individuals cooperating under the direction of a leader. Examples of formal groups are departments, divisions, taskforce, project groups, quality circles, committees, and boards of directors. Formal groups are created by the organization and are intentionally designed to direct members toward some important organizational goal. One type of formal group is referred to as a command group (i.e., those who can legitimately give orders to others). Formal organizational group also may be formed around some specific task. Such a group is referred to as a task group. Unlike command groups, a task group may be composed of individuals with some special interest or expertise in a specific area regardless of their positions in the organizational hierarchy. B) Informal Groups Informal groups in organizations are not formed or planned by the organization’s managers. Rather, they are self-created and evolve out of the formal organization for a variety of reasons, such as proximity, Pathways to Higher Education 12 C5/1: Teams and Work Groups Types of Teams and Their Functions common interests, or needs of individuals. It would be difficult for organization to prohibit informal working relationships from developing. Informal groups develop naturally among an organization’s personnel without any direction from management. One key factor in the emergence of informal groups is a common interest shared by its members. For example, a group of employees who band together to seek union representation may be called an interest group Of course, sometimes the interests that bind individuals together are far more diffuse. Groups may develop out of a common interest in participating in sports, or going to the movies, or just getting together to talk. These kinds of informal groups are known as friendship groups. Task 2.4 Task Interdependence Types Interdependence Types There are three types of task interdependence groups, see Figure 2.5; these types are: ƒ Pooled Task Interdependence: members make separate, independent contributions to group. Group performance is the sum of member contributions. ƒ Sequential Task Interdependence: members perform tasks in a sequential order. It is hard to determine individual performance since one member depends on another. ƒ Reciprocal Task Interdependence: work performed by a member is dependent on work by others. Members share information and work closely together. Task Interdependence Teams Pooled Task Interdependence Sequential Task Interdependence Reciprocal Task Interdependence Figure 2.5: Task interdependence teams How to Build a Good Team 2.5 How to Build a Good Team To build a good team, you should do as shown in Table 2.1. Pathways to Higher Education 13 C5/1: Teams and Work Groups Types of Teams and Their Functions Table 2.1: Building a good team Can you tell more!!!!!! Self-Managed Teams Always Never 1. Deliver on time and alert team ASAP when unexpected delays occur. 2. Attend all team meetings on time. 3. Speak up, Speak out, and interact at all team meetings. 4. Take personal interest in planning and problem solving. 5. Look for ways to go-thesecond-mile on your own. 1. Tell your teammates or leader how much time and effort you are putting into your assignment. 2. Assume the role of resident critic and complainer. 3. Wait for someone to tell/ask you what to do next. 4. Delay actions and make excuses. 5. Isolate yourself from the others. 2.6 Self-Managed Teams Experts agree that tasks assigned to self-managed work teams should be complex and challenging, requiring high interdependence among team members for accomplishment. In general, these tasks should have the qualities of enriched jobs, thus, teams should see the task as significant, they should perform the task from beginning to end, and they should use a variety of skills. The point here is that self-managed teams have to have something useful to self-manage, and it is fairly complex tasks that capitalize on the diverse knowledge and skills of a group. If a theme runs through this discussion of tasks for selfmanaged teams, it is the breakdown of traditional, conventional, specialized roles in the group. Group members adopt roles that will make the group effective, not ones that are simply related to a narrow specialty. The Composition of Self-Managed Teams How should organizations assemble self-managed teams to ensure effectiveness? "Stable, small, and smart" might be a fast answer. Stability. Self-managed teams require considerable interaction and high cohesiveness among their members. This, in turn, requires understanding and trust. To achieve this, group will cause it to fail to develop a true team identity. Size. In keeping with the demands of the task, self- managed teams should be as small as is feasible. The goal here is to keep coordination problems and social loafing to a minimum Pathways to Higher Education 14 C5/1: Teams and Work Groups Types of Teams and Their Functions Expertise. It goes without saying that group members should have a high level of expertise about the task at hand. Everybody doesn’t know everything but the group as a whole should be very knowledgeable about the task Diversity. A team should have members who are similar enough to work well together and diverse enough to bring a variety of perspectives and skills to the task at hand. Questions for Discussion Questions for Discussion 123- Where were your strongest (highest score) and weakest (lowest score) reasons for joining this group? Besides the four reasons identified here, what other reasons did you have for joining this group? Would your scores be different from those you thought about another group you may have joined? Repeat the questionnaire to find out. Assessment 2.1 “Are You a Team Player?” Direction: The following assessment instrument asks you to examine your behavior as a team member in organizational setting. For each pair of items, place a check mark in the space in the column that best identifies how you behave in a working group at school, in student or community groups, or on your job, as shown in Table 2.2. Interpretation: in each pair of items, the items on the left are more associated with team behaviors than items on the right. 1. In what ways do these behaviors agree with your concept of team membership? How do they differ? 2. What strengths do you think you have working on a team? Weaknesses? Are there times when you have preformed more effectively as a team member? If so, what events or circumstances made you behave differently in the different situation? Pathways to Higher Education 15 C5/1: Teams and Work Groups Types of Teams and Their Functions Table 2.2: Behavioral examination Very like me Flexible in own ideas Open to new ideas Listen well to others Trusting of others Prefer to raise differences and discuss them Readily contribute in group meetings Concerned for what happens to others Fully committed to tasks Willing to help others to get the job done Share leadership with group Encourage others to participate Group needs Group come before my individual needs Pathways to Higher Education Some what like me Both describe me Some what like me Very like me Some what like me Set in my own ideas Avoid new ideas Tune out others Not trusting others Prefer to avoid discussing differences Hold back from contributin g in group meetings Not concerned for what happens to others Have little commitme nt to tasks Prefer to stick to my own task or job description Maintainin g full control of group Expect others to participate without encourage ment My individual My needs come before group needs 16 C5/1: Teams and Work Groups Types of Teams and Their Functions Assessment 2.2 Decision-Making & Creative Problem Solving 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 Statement Self Group I/we seek accuracy of information by adding to or questioning summaries. I/we seek elaboration by relating to familiar events or asking how others understand material. I/we ask for additional information or rationale. I/we seek clever ways of remembering ideas and facts (e.g., posters, visuals, notes, electronic devices, public agendas). I/we ask other members why and how they are reasoning. I/we encourage the assigning of specific roles to facilitate better group functioning (e.g., process observer). I/we ask for feedback in a non-confrontational way. I/we help to decide the next steps for the group. I/we diagnose group difficulties regarding tasks. I/we diagnose group difficulties regarding interpersonal problems. I/we encourage the generation and exploration of multiple solutions to problems through the use of creative problem-solving strategies. Pathways to Higher Education 17 J Bus Ethics (2018) 151:651–664 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3258-8 When Leaders Stifle Innovation in Work Teams: The Role of Abusive Supervision Vincent Rousseau1 • Caroline Aubé2 Received: 7 August 2015 / Accepted: 29 June 2016 / Published online: 8 July 2016  Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016 Abstract A growing body of research reveals that abusive supervision may have negative impacts in organizations. The purpose of the present study is to expand the knowledge regarding the impacts of this dysfunctional leadership behavior by examining its relationship with innovation in work teams. Specifically, we investigate the process through which abusive supervision may undermine team innovation by taking into account the mediating role of team proactive behavior. Moreover, we propose a boundary condition of the negative effect of abusive supervision by considering leader–members interdependence as a moderator. Using a multisource approach, data were gathered from 394 members and 82 immediate supervisors (which represent 82 work teams) in a public safety organization. Results of path analyses reveal that the relationship between abusive supervision and team innovation is mediated by team proactive behavior. Furthermore, we found that the relationship between abusive supervision and team proactive behavior is moderated by leader– members interdependence, such that this relationship is stronger when the level of interdependence is high. Taken together, the findings of this study improve the understanding of why and under what circumstances abusive supervision may impair team innovation. & Vincent Rousseau vincent.rousseau@umontreal.ca 1 School of Industrial Relations, Université de Montréal, Stn Centre-ville, P.O. Box 6128, Montreal, QC H3C 3J7, Canada 2 Department of Management, HEC Montréal, Montreal, Canada Keywords Abusive supervision  Leader–members interdependence  Proactive behavior  Team innovation  Work teams Introduction Abusive supervision is a prevalent form of negative behavior that has received a growing interest in research (Martinko et al. 2013; Schyns and Schilling 2013; Tepper 2007; Zhang and Bednall 2015). For example, a supervisor displays abusive behavior by being rude or putting a subordinate down in front of others. Such negative actions represent the manifestation of an unethical leadership in organizations (Brown and Mitchell 2010; Palanski et al. 2014; Ünal et al. 2012), because abusive behavior violates normative standards concerning the formal authority devoted to a supervisor over subordinates. Research has shown that abusive supervision may have serious consequences in organizations (see the literature reviews of Martinko et al. 2013; Tepper 2007). Considering that the team-based structures are common in contemporary organizations, some recent empirical studies have begun to explore the consequences of abusive behavior from team leaders on team processes and team outcomes (e.g., Farh and Chen 2014; Jiang and Gu 2016; Liu et al. 2012; Priesemuth et al. 2014). Those studies have shown that abusive supervision may affect teams as whole social systems. Indeed, given that the accomplishment of tasks in a work team setting is characterized by interdependence between individuals (Van der Vegt and Van de Vliert 2002), the actions of a team leader may have a systemic effect on the whole team over time. Moreover, team leaders’ behaviors are likely to affect all members because of their status of authority and their role as representatives 123 652 of the organization (Burke et al. 2006; Wageman and Fisher 2014). Although the previous studies help to understand the effects of abusive supervision on some team outcomes, more research is needed to fully comprehend the consequences of abusive supervision in team settings. Considering the dynamic context of many organizations, fostering innovations are seen as crucial for organizational success and growth. In the workplace, teams may play a key role in designing and implementing innovations (Anderson et al., 2014; Sacramento et al., 2006). According to West and Wallace (1991), team innovation refers to ‘‘the intentional introduction and application within a team, of ideas, processes, products or procedures new to the team, designed to significantly benefit the individual, the team, the organization, or wider society’’ (p. 303). This conception means that intentional attempts are needed to obtain expected benefits from changes (West and Anderson 1996). As shown in the previous studies, team leaders may enhance innovation in their team by exhibiting positive forms of leadership, such as transformational leadership and coaching (e.g., Chen et al. 2013; Rousseau et al. 2013). However, the effects of negative forms of leadership, such as abusive supervision, on innovation are not well understood. Indeed, negative behaviors do not correspond to the absence of positive behaviors (Byrne et al. 2014; Collins and Jackson 2015; Einarsen et al. 2007; Mullen et al. 2011; Schyns and Schilling 2013). Consequently, the present study differs from the previous research by examining the role abusive supervision, as a negative form of leadership, in regard with innovation at the team level. In the perspective of contributing to both abusive supervision and innovation literatures, we propose in this study that team leaders who engage in abusive behavior can undermine teams’ ability to innovate. To understand the role of abusive supervision, it is necessary to emphasize two important questions: why and under what circumstances may abusive supervision harm innovation in teams? The first question relates to the underlying mechanism of the effect of abusi ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment

Tutor Answer

Chucks574
School: UC Berkeley

Thank you so much

Running head: ARTICLE REVIEW

1

ARTICLE REVIEW:
Name:
Institution affiliation:
Date:

ARTICLE REVIEW

2

Introduction
In most organizational setups, teams play an essential role in enabling the organization to
realize its objects and long-term goals. This is majorly attributed to the fact that it is through
teamwork that innovative ideas that organization depend on to be able to thrive in the market are
discovered. However, the innovation of a team is greatly influenced by the leadership of the
team. According to Rousseau and Aube (2018), abusive supervision of a team affects team
innovation negatively by eliminating team proactive behavior and that, team proactive behavior
is highly dependent on the level of leader-members interdependence.
Article summary
With teams playing a pivotal role in enabling an organization to realize success by
coming up with innovative ideas, a better understanding of the factor...

flag Report DMCA
Review

Anonymous
Goes above and beyond expectations !

Similar Questions
Hot Questions
Related Tags
Study Guides

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors