Working Groups and Teams
While working in a team or group setting, there are factors of each member that make one more enviable than the other to attain a specific goal. Groups and teams differ in the leadership structure, how the member is held accountable and the technique of assessing effectiveness. Organizations; globally, depend on teams to advance innovative solutions, develop novel products and realize other major objective (Bhatnagar & Tjosvold, 2012). Groups normally hold the members to personal accountability lines; the membership does not have to contribute 100% of the time. On the contrary, the most effective element of a team, is the ability to deliver a diverse view concerning various topics and issues that enhance the final deliverable.
The results of the self-assessment on my effectiveness as a team member are what I anticipated. It is my belief that I am a good team member and an effective leader. In fact, most of my scores on the two were impressive. Concerning team contribution, I considered the questions on team work contributions with a managerial perspective; not making a direct contribution to the team, but rather maintaining quality checks, keeping the team on track. Although the results may be miscued, I do think that in a setting where utmost contribution is expected from me, I would not experience any challenge in offering support to any team.
Based on self assessment, I find my strengths being my ability to contribute to a team, interaction with the team members and overseeing the team. Born a leader, I have the qualities to motivate individuals to realize their best. Even though, I might seem to be pushy at times, I strive to keep the team on track particularly when working within a learning environment. It is often challenging to keep track of the team’s progress; particularly when the team members work remotely. However, I do overcome this by checking on each team member; assessing personal progress and find out if he or she needs help. Even though the simulation reveals that my weaknesses include expecting high quality even when it is not attainable, I feel that my actual weakness is also my strength. My leadership qualities are both a weakness and strength. I am a robust and result-oriented leader, many at times I push member of my team to actualize perfection.
As a team member I do not engage in any form of social loafing whatsoever; I do often want to maintain a high team spirit. Social loafing refers to a situation when members of a team tend to exert less effort while working in a team setting than when working along. The concept behind team work is basically conceived as a way of improving the completion of a task or project, by pooling the talents and skills of people in that team. Nonetheless, in some teams, there exists a tendency amongst team members to make insignificant contribution towards the realization of the team’s objectives. The team dynamic is often affected since some members may be considered to be weak contributors to the team purpose. As a result, it tends to split the team and cultivate a lack of cohesion. To overcome social loafing, as a team leader I often establish personal accountability while encouraging team loyalty and implementing peer assessment.
Being a team member provides various advantages to the continued success of an individual in the workplace. Working within a team setting contributes significantly to the overall performance because team attain more than individuals. Other than accomplishment, there is the element of credibility; for the team as well as individuals, which is important in any office setting. Being an effective team player contributes to the professional growth of an individual, it provides the experience and access to professional contacts which are needed to prosper in any particular field.
As proposed by Tuckman, the development of a group undergoes five stages; namely forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning. At the forming stage, the group members begin coming together (Martin, 2006). This stage is often characterized by uncertainty and anxiety; individuals are cautious of their behaviors as a result of the desire of each to be accepted by all. At the storming stage, competition and conflict are at the utmost level because members understand the task at hand; they identify themselves as a group; and feel they can begin addressing some of the issues concerning the group such as leadership, rules, authority, responsibilities, evaluation and structure. These issues should be resolved for the group to progress to the next stage (Martin, 2006).
At the norming stage, the group develops cohesion; every single issue surrounding the group has been resolved. The morale of the group is high since the talent, experience and skills of each member are appreciated. At the performing stage, the group is characterized by high productivity (Martin, 2006). The members are supportive, loyal and unified and competent; hence allowing for a high degree of autonomy in the decision making and brain storming in the problem solving process. As the project or group’s task is coming to an end, it is important to look at the group from the perspective of the welfare of the group rather than from the viewpoint of managing a group through the preceding four stages. It is important to celebrate the success of the group; reviewing, evaluating and capturing the best practices for future endeavors. This will enable member to say goodbye; breaking the tight bonds that had developed in an effective way.
Finally, the effectiveness of the members of a team has a significant influence on the groups’ development process. Effective team members share clear goals; they understand and support the set goals. The members also have the required set of interpersonal and technical skills, and have confidence in each other’s skills, character, ability and integrity. They are also influenced the team’s culture and have a unified commitment to the team.
References
Bhatnagar, D., & Tjosvold, D. (2012). Leader values for constructive controversy and team effectiveness in India. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(1), 109-125.
Martin, B. (2006). Outdoor leadership: Theory and practice. Champaign, Ill: Human Kinetics.
