El cubismo pictórico analítico (1908-1912)

The outcomes that are going to be assessed need to be determined before the intervention takes place. These can be assessed throughout the entire intervention, in hopes to see results along the way. Outcomes can deal with the effectiveness of operation, employees, and quality (Ingram, 1996). Effectiveness measures of the operation can include actual sales against budget or the organization’s output in comparison with the target. Absenteeism and accident-free days are things that can be considered employee effectiveness. Quality can be measured by customer complaints or number of improvement projects (Ingram, 1996). Regardless of the type of outcome to be assessed, it is important for the organization to consider what its final goals are before starting the intervention so that specific targets can be aimed for during the intervention and beyond.

7. CHARACTERISTICSOFTYPICALPARTICIPANTS:

Introducing teams to an organization to reorganize its structure requires that all employees become involved, so the characteristics of the participants are diverse (Bass & Avolio, 1994).

Team members can range from blue collar to white collar, with a wide range of education accommodating them. Everyone from supervisors to line workers is involved in the team-based organization intervention. Even those individuals who have just been hired mid-process are placed on a team and educated about the structure of the organization and its goals for the future.

However, individual differences can occasionally cause problems in a team (Varney, 1989).

Mixing people with extreme age differences can cause conflict at times because of these individuals’ value discrepancies. The task to be performed by the group can cause people of different skill levels and educations to be on the same team. Each team member must respect the expertise of the others.

8. T^IME-^FRAMEOFTHEINTERVENTIONITSELF:

Team development should be thought of as an ongoing process, not just a one-time intervention.

The program is designed to alter the way an organization functions, and to become a permanent change for everyone involved (Dyer, 1977). However, from the time that an external consultant enters an organization to assess it to the time he or she empowers the organization to change on its own with only assistance can be about 1 year.

9. T^IME-^FRAMEOFANTICIPATEDCHANGE:

As teams become more and more autonomous, changes within the organization that the team has control over can be seen right away. There will always be teams that are moving along quicker

37

than others and they will be the ones to see improvements first. These teams lead the way and encourage others to work harder to meet goals.

10. R^{ESOURCESTOCONDUCT}INTERVENTION:

Most of the time, an external consultant is hired to come into the organization to assist in the change. This person offers a plan for the intervention and assists to empower supervisors and other chosen individuals to become training facilitators. There are direct and indirect costs associated with team-based interventions. Direct costs include hiring an external consultant and renting an offsite meeting place if necessary. Indirect costs can be described as the cost of the work that team members could be doing if they were not in training (Rushmer, 1997).

In order to carry out training sessions, an overhead projector or flip charts may be used. A computer may also be necessary if facilitator wish to use Microsoft PowerPoint. This training can be done onsite if possible, in a conference room or any space that is conducive to learning and is comfortable for the participants. Training could take up to 200 or more hours, just to get a team off of the ground. Then subsequent training is often necessary to remind the teams of their purpose.

11. E^XPERTISEOFCONSULTANTS:

In order to conduct a team-based intervention in an organization some extensive training and education is required. The consultant must have knowledge of teams and how they effectively work in organizations in order to assess if this intervention is appropriate for the particular organization in question. However, once the consultant trains other facilitators within the

organization, they are empowered to continue the training process. The consultant needs to act as a resource during this time, however, and remain ‘in charge’ of the intervention., guiding the organization in the right direction.

12. D^OPARTICIPANTSNEEDTOPREPARE?

In order to begin an intervention that will effect an organization as much as this one, it is very necessary to allow employees at all levels to be involved in the planning process. This gives employees the feeling of ownership in their current jobs and positions, even if they will be rearranged during the intervention. The process of benchmarking, where supervisors go to other organizations that have already implemented teams, during the beginning stages of the process is an excellent time to involve employees. In this way, they will be more likely to accept the

change if they feel they were a part of the decision to implement it.

13. HOWISTHEINTERVENTIONCONDUCTED?

An effective training process for such an extensive organizational change should be done in phases. The following is a typical team-based intervention (Ray, 1995), however, there are many models of this process.

Phase 1

The first phase requires all of the organizational members to research the possibility of

redesigning into a team-based organization. For example, representatives from the organization can meet regularly for as long as a few years to discuss these majors changes. At this stage, many companies benchmark, or visit other organizations that have already implemented teams into 38

their workplace. This is a good time for the current organization to understand the problems, as well as the successes, of this intervention (Ray, 1995).

Phase 2

In the second phase of this process of change, it is necessary to implement operations training, where the employees learn all about the organization and it’s functions. This is important because as the team-based organization evolves, the employees will become empowered and take on additional responsibilities that will require their extensive knowledge of the processes of the organization. This training can be rather costly because of the development and preparation of the on-the-job and classroom materials needed to carry out the training for all employees. The development of these materials is an ongoing process, since time brings about changes in

equipment and in the processes used to carrying out assignments (Ray, 1995).

Phase 3

The third phase involves communicating to all employees the reasons for the desire to move to a team-based organization. This phase must take place in order to gain support from as many people as possible for this change. Without communicating to employees, the attempt at organizational change can be disastrous to the organization’s goals towards the change. Many organizations hold small meetings about the intervention and discuss reasons for the change on an individual and organization-wide level so that all employees may feel included in the process.

During this stage it is very important to remember that supervisors and managers need to be positive towards the intervention (Davis, 1981). Teamwork is most likely to develop when management builds a supportive environment for it. This support helps employees to take those first steps towards the acceptance of teams in the organization. These steps become the basis of further growth toward cooperation, trust, and compatibility, so supervisors need to develop an organizational climate that supports these conditions (Ray, 1995).

Phase 4

Phase four introduces the concept of changing the organizational culture to one that empowers all employees. Here, the consultant includes training for those that will facilitate the overall change, or the internal change agents, on topics such as conflict management strategies, group problem solving techniques, group development theory. A variety of small group exercises are included in this phase so that the change agents have the opportunity to discuss and practice team development issues. Once the training for the change agents is completed, the consultant

continues to assist the new facilitators as an advisor and coach (Ray, 1995).

Phase 5

During phase five, it is ideal for the team members to be involved with the topic selection for the team training. However, in many organizations the team facilitator and managers, or an outside consultant, decide the training topics. Topics that are often chosen are: effective interpersonal communication and relationships, conflict management, team development, problem solving techniques, and team building. Communication is one of the most important topics because effective communication among teams can provide, for example, information on performing tasks, feedback on performance, and information on the organization’s goals (Ray, 1995).

Phase 6

39

The sixth phase is the final one and involves finally implementing the teams. Team roles are established so that the team can utilize all of its members and accomplish tasks efficiently. Team meetings must be a part of this phase so that the newly formed teams can continue to effectively communicate and utilize the skills learned in the earlier phases during training. These group meetings must contain an agenda so that they will be formal and productive. This agenda should be developed by the team and contain topics that are important to the team. This is a way to also empower the employees within the team. If the team is involved in shift work, it is important to try and include as many members of the team at the meetings as possible (Ray, 1995).

14. RESISTANCETOCHANGE:

Symptoms of a dysfunctional team include: apathy and general lack of interest in other team members, confusion about assignments, complaints within the group, role conflict, and low participation and involvement in group meetings (Huse, 1975). These symptoms could be part of something bigger- the overall resistance to change by the team members. If the team is not willing to put forth the effort that it takes to become effective, then those members are trying to resist the change that the organization is trying to make happen.

Teams can run into problems if the members are uncomfortable removing themselves from the traditional hierarchical organizational structure. The participative decisions making can take up time and requires the employees to be willing to completely change their old way of doing things and take on more responsibility (Davis, 1981). It is also possible that teams will not see

improvements right away in their work life, or the organization, and so they do not understand the need for the change. The way that the change is presented to the employees can make or break the change effort. That is why it is so important for upper management to be supportive of the entire process. This gives employees a peace of mind about what is going on around them in their organization (Davis, 1981).

Giving employees greater influence over an organization’s behavior is what they would seem to want. However, increased power and autonomy is not always what some employees are looking for. In order for change to work, especially when that change involves teamwork, individuals will have to interact much more with each other on the job (Bennett, 1980). This means that employees have to rely more on each other to succeed than they did in their job previous to this change.

This new empowerment that the employee possesses can come as a shock and may even leave him or her feeling helpless. Workers who have been involved with hierarchical types of

organizations for long periods of time may not be able to comprehend working for one that gives them the freedom to make choices with a team (Bennett, 1980). In order to make themselves believe that the changes are real, workers may try to ‘test the change’ by offering ideas and making decisions, waiting to see if they are accepted by those they previously considered as their leaders in the organization.

There is no change without stress because employees want everything to be orderly and clear.

However, during this organizational change, it is hard to have everything perfect. The way to try and reduce the stresses of the employees is to set specific goals that will be met during the change process (Bennett, 1980). By forming smaller, more manageable, goals in the beginning, 40

employees’ trust can be won when these goals are met. This will prove that the intervention will be a success if the entire organization supports the changes being made throughout.

15. M^{AINTAININGCHANGE}:

The team-based organizational performance model was developed by Forrester and Rexler (1999) and is used to provide team-based organizations with the fundamental guidelines to help them continue in their team effectiveness. The model is composed of six factors that are meant to be considered simultaneously: (Note- even if an organization cannot do everything listed here, it is important to do at least some of them to insure that the team-based organization stays

productive)

Factor 1: Formation

Establishing teams that are supported by the organization so that they can make the organization productive. This factor makes sure that the teams fit into the organization and that the

organizational structures and systems will always be supportive of teamwork.

Factor 2: Dependability

Affects how well teams in the organization can count on each other. Teams must be well

informed in order to take on the responsibilities that they need to be productive and effective. In addition, teams must believe that they can count on other teams to come through and perform their jobs, as well as the organization as a whole

Factor 3: Focus

The organization’s clarity of vision and its accuracy in marking progress. The vision of the organization must be communicated to the teams and the organization must also set any boundaries with which teams work. Organizations can empower teams if they have goals that can be measured. This gives them a sense of accomplishment, even on a daily basis.

Factor 4: Buy-In

Commitment teams and individuals have to the goals and direction of the organization. The organization must let teams know just how much freedom the teams will have in their daily processes. This will depend on the number of teams, the diversity of team functions, and the skill level of the teams. When teams have the freedom they feel they should have, and the resources they need to act, they are more likely to buy into the organizations goals and values.

Factor 5: Coordination

Making sure that the organization is acting in unison, since the decision making process is much more lateral now. Teams must be able to talk with one another in an organized fashion in order to remain informed about what each team is doing.

Factor 6: Impact

The advantage that team-based organizations gain from this type of structure. Team-based organizations can go beyond what has been done because this structure lends itself to developing new strategies and products to enhance the organization’s productiveness.

Factor 7: Vitality

41

The processes that the organization implements to assure that its employees find meaning in their work. Since members of the teams are finding more meaning in their work through the new structure, this gives the organization so much more spirit and life. This should be fed upon and used to the advantage of the organization to retain this high level of energy (Forrester et al., 1999).

16. F^OLLOW-^UP:

Formal follow-up does not have to come from the external consultant. However, he or she is usually available if the internal facilitators have questions throughout the process. The formal follow-up is something that the organization itself can implement if it chooses to do so. The Team Effectiveness Worksheet (Winum & Seamons, 2000) is an example of a way for an organization to assess a team and its functions. The worksheet is divided up into four areas:

Purpose of the team, Interpersonal Processes within the team, Team Culture and Values, and Team Performance. Every 6 months after the intervention is complete the organization can assess its teams with this inventory. The results of this can determine the training and development needs of the teams in order for them to remain productive groups within the organization (Winum et al., 2000).

17. SPECIALCONSIDERATIONS:

Since this intervention is reorganizing the organizational structure into teams, instead of having employees continue to work as individuals, it is important for human resource functions to also reorganize into a more team-based structure (Robbins et al., 1995). Selection can enhance the team process by the attempt to hire employees who possess traits such as responsibility, learning ability, and cooperation. Performance appraisals must be consistent with the goals of the teams and must not focus on personal outcomes, but rather the processes that the team goes through to get to those outcomes. Recognition systems can enhance an employee’s feeling of empowerment and may be given individually. However, it is also important to give teams rewards for jobs completed as a whole to promote team cooperation and adhesiveness (Robbins et al., 1995).

42

REFERENCESFOR TEAM-BASED ORGANIZATIONS

Banker, R. D., Field, J. M., Schroeder, R. G., Sinha, K. K. (1996). Impact of work teams on manufacturing performance: A longitudinal field study. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 867-881.

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Productions.

Bennett, D. (1980). Successful team building through TA. New York, NY: AMACOM.

Carroll, S. J., & Tosi, H. L. (1977). Organizational behavior. Chicago, IL: St. Clair Press.

Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the show floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23(3), 239-281.

Cohen, S. G., & Ledford, G. E. (1994). The effectiveness of self-managing teams: A field experiment. Human Relations, 47, 13-43.

Davis, K. (1981). Human behavior at work: Organizational behavior. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Company.

DuBrin, A. J. (1978). Fundamentals of organizational behavior: an applied perspective. New York: Pergamon Press, Inc.

Dyer, W. G. (1977). Team building: Issues and alternatives. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Forrester, R. & Rexler, A. (1999). A model for team-based organizational performance. The Academy of Management Executive, 13(3), 36-50.

Guzzo, R. A., & Dickson, M. W. (1996). Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and effectiveness. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 307-339.

Huse, E. F. (1975). Organizational development and change. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Company.

Hut, J., & Molleman, E. (1998). Empowerment and team development. Team Performance Management, 4(2), 53-66.

Ingram, H. (1996). Linking teamwork with performance. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 2(4), 5-10.

Pinto, M. B., Pinto, J. K., & Prescott, J. E. (1993). Antecedents and consequences of project team cross-functional cooperation. Management Science, 39(10), 1281-1297.

43

Ray, R. G. (1995). A training model for implementing self-directed work teams. Organizational Development Journal, 13, 51-62.

Robbins, T. L. (1995). The empowering role of self-directed work teams in the quality focused organization. Organization Development Journal, 13(1), 33-42.

Rushmer, R. K. (1997). How do we measure the effectiveness of team building? Is it good enough? Team management systems- a case study. Team Performance Management, 3(4), 244-260.

Taylor, G. D., & Hobday, G. (1992). Work modeling techniques to bridge ‘management gaps’ in team-based organizations. Industrial Management, 34(5), 6-8.

Varney, G. H. (1989). Building productive teams: An action guide and resource book. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Wellins, R. S., William, C. B., & Dixon, G. R. (1994). Inside teams. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Wellins, R. S., William, C. B., & Dixon, G. R. (1994). Inside teams. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.