Teamwork

As we look around different businesses, companies, and agencies around the world, it's hard to deny that teams have become integral and essential components in organizations. There are more businesses and industries implementing team based approach than ever before. There is a growing belief amongst businesses that creating effective teams amongst their employees will provide the much desired competitive edge. There are many reasons for this recent development. Organizations believe that when working in teams, people are better equipped to manage stress, adapt, make better decisions, and altogether be more productive than individuals. Cohen (1993) suggest that between continued pressures to reduce staff, do more with less, increase employee involvement, benchmark best practices both internally and external, empower employees to better serve their customers, and continually improve one's processes, it is no wonder that leaders, managers and practitioners have turned to teams. However, just putting people in teams does not guarantee any success or advantage to a specific organization, and businesses are becoming well aware of that. Team formation is an important process which needs to integrate a number of factors to increase the likelihood of success. In the paragraphs to follow, we will take a critical look at some of the issues which surround the much coveted topic. Under what circumstances are individuals willing to exert themselves on behalf of their team or an organization? What makes people leave an organization and how can they be retained? These questions and others will help to shape the argument of why teams can be a great advantage to an organization. We will also look at potential problems which can result from having people work in teams. Understanding both sides of the argument can increase the likelihood of successful team formation and its contribution to the overall success of the business.

So what are teams? Natale and Libertella (1998) argue that a team is far from a loose-knit group of workers linked together by proximity or even similarity of tasks. By definition, teams are groups of people linked together for a common purpose. But to gain a critical understanding of teams and the purpose they serve, it's important to elaborate on the definition. Katzenbach and Smith (1993, p.112) provide a more detailed explanation of teams in their book The Wisdom of Teams:

A team is a small number of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose, performance goals, and approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable.

When team formation takes place, it is extremely important to understand that not all groups are actual teams. Teams differ fundamentally from working groups because they require both individual and mutual accountability. It is this distinction that turns on performance results (Katzenbach and Smith, 1993). Teams produce discrete work products through the joint contribution of their members and that is what makes possible performance levels greater than the sum of all the individual bests. Best way of putting it is that the team is more than the sum of its parts (Katzenbach and Smith, 1993). Equally as important is the fact that once a team is formed, its must be given power to actually make decisions and given the resources to work together. Defining what constitutes a team is a preliminary step towards identifying measurable variables that reflect team inputs, team processes, and team outcomes (Baker et al, 2003). These variables allow the company to come up with a plan on how to form the teams, how to train them, and what to expect as an output. Simply installing a team structure in an organization does not automatically result in effective teamwork.

Since all teams are made up of individuals, it's important to understand human nature, especially what drives people to perform. Companies which can successfully recognize different attributes that motivate individuals are far more likely to succeed in today's demanding and competitive environment. Hayes (2003, p.15) identified social identification and social representation as two psychological dimensions which must be considered in team related discussions. People have a tendency to think of themselves as part of group, whether it's a religious group, a football team, or some other social group. The reason for that is that human beings have a psychological need to belong and be a part of something. As human beings evolved, they have always found themselves working in teams, sharing a number of responsibilities and tasks to make life more manageable. This concept applies in the workplace, where people often spend more time than with their families. That means that there is great need to replicate the family environment at work. Psychologists who have studied the mechanisms of social identification argue that humans like to be able to think well of themselves, which means that they are highly motivated to obtain positive self-esteem from the things they do (Hayes 2003, p.17). This means that identification with the organization and its goals is an important cause of increased task effort. The argument is that organizational functioning should benefit more from motivated team members than from motivated individuals (Haslam et al, 2003). People have a genuine need to feel good about belonging to a certain group, an important argument for teamwork. Hayes also points out that companies with excessive high turnover rates are often the ones which fail to provide their members with opportunities for social identification (Hayes 2003, p.17). Japanese were amongst the first who incorporated the human approach to their organizational structures, and workers repaid them with enormous sense of loyalty. Hodgetts (1991) reported that this approach produced a number of positive effects, including low absenteeism, low staff turnover, and high degree of employee involvement. Toyota, as well as other automotive companies in Japan is known for its' very low turnover of labor. Similar results could be seen in the experience of the Kalmar-Volvo plant. When work teams were implemented, there was a significant decrease in employee turnover and absenteeism. Also, most of the employees who participated believed that team structure was positive (Keidel, 1985). To tie it all together, team concept increases employee morale and by doing so, decreasing the overall turnover and absenteeism.

The sense of camaraderie promoted by teams brings another very important advantage to an organization. Perhaps one of the biggest benefits a team can bring to an organization is the increased potential that is bestowed upon team members because of their affiliation with the team (Natale and Libertella, 1998). Membership of a team enhances employee's daily activities and also the