A Critical Evaluation of Advantages and Disadvantages of Work-Based Teams From the Perspective of Managers

Introduction

Many organization managers believe that in order to provide greater service to customers and the organization, work-based teams must be initiated. These consists of individuals that work to achieve common goals and objectives. Team building, event planning, and other activities can help staff develop a clear sense of purpose, workable plans and solutions, a strong sense of team membership, and a concentration on customer needs. Ineffective team building and planning meetings have a detrimental impact on the entire organization. They fail to accomplish their stated goals. Without a clear strategic orientation, businesses are subject to stagnation. Everyone works long hours, but often these hours are spent on the incorrect projects or for the incorrect reasons. Minor progress is made in completing important chores, but nothing of significance is achieved (Wanyeki et al.,2019). According to managers Collective action improves teamwork in every institution and business. When working as a team, employees are empowered and the benefits of cooperative work are reinforced. Gathering with others can also help individuals understand the importance of cooperation and how the organization operates, and develop a culture of effective teamwork. Without cooperation, building takes longer, governments fail, businesses lose market share, and people lose motivation achieved (Wanyeki et al.,2019). According to McShone (1998), teams have surpassed individuals as the primary pillars of businesses, and the French language reflects this change. Today’s television programs are more likely to highlight group accomplishments than individual accomplishments. Employers desire employees who can overcome problems alone and as part of a team. This study investigates the perspectives of managers regarding the benefits and drawbacks of work-based teams.

Overview of work-based teams

Work-based teams refers to the idea of individuals working together, such as in a sales team, a sports team, or any other form of organization. Because cooperation is becoming increasingly important, several firms have developed tests to assess prospective workers’ cooperation skills. Collaboration has consequently become a primary goal in the majority of businesses, with the expectation that it promotes employee ownership and cooperation (Adeleke, Kandavel and Sakthivel,2018). Few firms have never used teams, and they have been around for as long as anybody can remember. Companies can be referred to as “teams” as a whole. This is because many businesses are embracing a “team-based” approach to work, in which teams are the primary means of completing tasks. As a result, organizations appreciate teamwork and seek out team-oriented individuals (Ahmad and Manzoor,2017). Teams are replacing people as the backbone of companies, according to McShone (1998). Individual initiatives have lost ground to collective projects in French-language television programming, with the latter garnering more attention. Employers are looking for problem-solving professionals that can work individually as well as as part of a team. According to Hoegl and Proserpio (2004), group work is not novel, organizations like Procter, Gamble and Botany used to use this technique. In response to Japanese competitors’ large market share gains, the industrial and automobile sectors embraced a new team-based strategy in the 1980s. According to Brown et al. (1996) there is considerable evidence that teams outperform typical corporate organizations in terms of making quick and efficient decisions. Future restructuring and reengineering processes, he claims, will necessitate teams, and he demonstrates how small changes, such as encouraging line personnel to offer input and comments, may have a big impact. The Taylorist model, which separates work into limited roles with short, recurring work cycles, and the method described in detail, do not provide enough chance for an innovation and upgrading process, which is essential for quick change and adaptation (Crowley et al.,2014). In recent years, a greater emphasis has been placed in higher education on the development of students’ professional abilities. Organizational skills and the ability to successfully manage time are two of the most sought-after attributes by employers when looking for candidates who would work well in teams. In almost every industry, teamwork and collaboration are two of the most sought-after skills by employers.

Structure of a Work-based teams

Team formation has arisen as a new organizational structure that is viewed as less hierarchical and more egalitarian (Williams, Duray and Reddy,2006). Takuya believes that while working with different team configurations to achieve different goals, the concept of a one-size-fits-all strategy does not applicable (2009). Identifying, assembling, and persuading team members to participate on a variety of tasks needs considerable thought and focus. He believes that there are two basic team configurations for reaching a goal:

Functional teams

Certain departments are like the shadow cast by the rest of the organization when it comes to day-to-day operations. Invisible to the naked eye, but constantly there. The functional leg of the business is defined by these teams, which are largely responsible for finance, sales, and marketing. Often, these teams operate within the broad parameters and policies established by the company’s top management, with minimal interference. Once a need arises, they are primarily responsible for implementing the organization’s overarching strategy. Changes in the regulatory framework or the law of the land, as well as competition in the market, can all play a role in these circumstances. These teams only accept members who have made a well-considered decision to join and who are willing to follow a detailed plan and structure. Some of them may even outlast the company because they are a part of the team permanently (Proehl,1996).

Project teams

A project team, on the other hand, is a very different beast. They’ve been assembled for a certain reason, whether it’s to complete a specific task, fulfill a specific goal, or realize a specific vision. Individual teams focusing on individual projects can aim for a 10% rise in market share over the next three quarters. To attain a common aim, the marketing director, advertising director, finance controller, and operational supervisor may all collaborate. Once the intended market share has been attained within the time range stated, they can delegate control of maintaining market share to the functional team. When an objective is too large for a single team to fulfill, sub-teams are formed within a matrix of teams (Edmondson and Nembhard, 2009).

Advantages work-based teams

Employees Performance

Productivity, Workplace performance and problem-solving have all enhanced organizations that place greater emphasis on teamwork (Manzoor, et al.,2011).According to the findings of a study, teaching people how to work in groups is a difficult task since it is ineffective (Crosby, 1991). The two most significant components, according to Bacon and Blyton (2006), are self-management and interpersonal teamwork skills. These elements improve the flow of information among team members as well as the quality of interpersonal relationships, both of which benefit employee output. The new approach to workplace management emphasizes the importance of collaboration. A variety of metrics can be used to assess the extent of collaboration among all types of organizations, including non-profits (Mulika, 2010). According to one study, a clever manager gives assignments to groups or teams of employees to optimize their time and effort (Ingram, 2000). Researchers discovered that any organization can develop a plan for promoting and sharing best practices in order to maximize output. The design and implementation of this system is primarily concerned with increasing staff education (Washer, 2006). Cooperation, according to Ingram, has the potential to improve individual and organizational performance, but it must be sustained over time (2000). Firms must evaluate performance enhancement activities in the face of increasing competition. Teams provide more involvement, difficulties, and a sense of accomplishment. Teams-based organizations are more likely to attract and retain top personnel. This strategy will result in the establishment of a high-performance organization that is adaptable, efficient, and, most importantly, lucrative.

Boost to productivity

According to Nicholas Bate (2006), as your interests broaden and demand more of your time and attention, your productivity rises. As Nicholas Bate (2006) points out, this is also achievable at home. It shows how to do so without risking your entire well-being. The purpose of time management is to accomplish more in less time. Katzenbach and Smith (1993), two of the world’s foremost specialists on workplace organization, are certain that employees who work in groups perform better, with less stress, and with greater devotion. Because of the segmentation of the organization’s activities and issues, these people are less likely to experience stress. Workers are more inclined to enhance their skills and knowledge when their workloads are reduced, which increases productivity and efficiency.

Good Decision-making and Implementation

Organizations have executed strategic decisions through collaboration in response to a variety of business issues and demands (EWON, 1998). Because an effective team helps an organization realize its ideal strategy and so increases performance, a company’s stance on team formation is critical to the adoption of decision-making. High performance teams understand both the goal and the objectives to be met, as well as the idea that the goal and objectives represent a worthy or notable outcome. Team’s goals and duties are visibly outlined to aid in quick decision-making.

Team trust

When team members have faith in one another’s capabilities, trust grows. According to studies, trust amongst team members promotes development of certain abilities and coordination among individuals (Erdem et al.,2003). Trust and team effectiveness were discovered by Mickan and Rodger (2000). Teamwork is built on trust, and trust leads to workplace synergy and improved employee performance. Individuals are responsible for creating a culture of trust inside their businesses. It is the organization’s obligation to nurture and inspire synergistic teamwork. Performance evaluations should be based on trustworthiness in order to foster organizational ideals (Fenton et al.,2011)). Manz and Neck(2002) define high-performing teams as those in which members share a sense of cooperation and belonging. Output quality, productivity increases, and customer happiness are just a few of the many metrics used to assess a team’s success. Cooperation is possible when trust becomes the team’s most crucial value. When team members are comfortable acknowledging flaws, absorbing criticism, and expressing their emotions, synergy increases (Edmondson, 1999).

Recognition and reward

According to Rabey (2003), individuals who operate in groups are largely motivated by praise and prizes. Managers that see the larger picture are constantly looking for ways to better their teams. People’s drive and self-esteem enhance when they work in groups. Managers must pay attention to their team members’ untapped potential in order to prevent losing critical personnel. Teamwork is defined by (Rosenhauer,2008) as a collaborative approach to work that can result in benefits and increased synergy. To keep their employees motivated and productive, managers must create and implement a proper remuneration structure and encourage their employees’ engagement in team activities. They must also set group objectives that are aligned with the company’s strategic plan, improve employee performance, and adopt equitable payment procedures. After finishing the aforementioned concern, managers can now construct their teams. Every company’s primary focus should be on regularly evaluating the performance of collaborative activities. According to experts, cooperation is a sensitive process that must be managed with care in a supportive business environment. According to Anderson and West (2002), a number of elements contribute to the formation of a good work environment. Rewards and recognition, according to Herzberg, can give both extrinsic and intrinsic motivation . According to Herzberg (1968), extrinsic rewards are the primary driver of positive employee behavior.

Disadvantages of work-based teams

Even when a team has good and productive responsibilities, bad agendas can emerge and hamper the team’s ability to perform efficiently. Individuals may do damaging jobs for a variety of reasons, including personal agendas, a refusal to change, immaturity, and a lack of team leadership and management. It is a leader’s responsibility to keep a close eye on each member of their team and to keep an eye out for potentially risky activities. When difficulties arise, the team must be encouraged to identify and address them as a group (Nurmi,1996).

Longer Project Timelines

Many activities take considerably longer whenever a team is involved. It is vital to boost collaboration, job roles, feedback, and overall organization when a project is administered by a group rather than an individual. It may take longer to complete, cost more, and require additional resources from the company as a result. In a group context, it may be more difficult to come to a consensus, which may slow progress toward goals. Even though it’s important for people to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of alternative solutions, talking too much can lead to inaction.

Free Riders

The burden of a project should theoretically be evenly spread among all team members, although this rarely occurs in practice. When working in groups, some people prefer to take a back seat and allow others handle the bulk of the heavy lifting. Antagonism and a lack of team spirit can result from this practice.

Personality Clashes

Even if a team’s members’ skill sets are complementary, personality conflicts may arise over time. Disagreements can emerge as a result of excessive competition among team members, as well as differences in communication styles and/or work techniques. Personality conflicts, regardless of how they arise, can erode morale, impair productivity, and even lead to factionalism (discussed below). Even if a group has all of the necessary tools for productive collaboration, problems might arise.

Emotional Abuse in the Workplace

When these individuals are not compelled to collaborate with others, their productivity, job satisfaction, and quality of work all increase. The presence of this individual may have a negative impact on the morale and effectiveness of other team members; therefore, it may not be prudent to assign them to a team position.

Organizational Challenges

A new team takes longer to organize and integrate socially and practically than a new solo employee, making it more difficult to get up and running. It may be impossible to forecast the duration or complexity of a given operation for projects with many interconnected components. Delays are occasionally caused by the necessity for additional training for some team members. Before moving on to the next phase of a project, a team member or subgroup must periodically wait for a specific job to be completed.

Blame and Responsibility Issues

Team members commonly point fingers at one another when things go wrong. Though that isn’t always the situation, it is uncommon for individuals to attempt to transfer responsibility and blame away from themselves. When an individual completes a task or project on their own, they are usually held accountable for any mistakes that occur. As a result, determining who is to blame in a group can be significantly more difficult, especially if members of the group have varying viewpoints on the subject.

Employee Assessment Problems

Because a group functions as a unit and has joint effort, it may be challenging for managers and supervisors to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of individual team members. If a team succeeds, it may not be immediately apparent why and how they achieved success. Who in the team put in the greatest time and effort? Who in the group paid the most attention to details? Which members of the team were largely responsible for keeping the group on track and delegating tasks? Understanding why a project succeeds is advantageous. If the team does not preserve detailed records on their process and the roles of each member, it may be difficult to replicate a successful outcome with a different team in the future.

Communication Breakdowns

For a team to be effective, everyone has to have above-average communication skills. Communication difficulties in the workplace might result in a loss of trust and a decline in output. Too often, team members fail to effectively communicate critical information. It is just as simple to misunderstand a teammate’s comments as it is an individual’s, especially if the group communicates electronically via email, task management, or a coworking application.

Conclusion

A team consists of more individuals who work together to achieve a common objective. Teamwork necessitates breaking down tasks into digestible portions so that everyone can participate. Inadequate staff collaboration has a long-term impact on a company’s success, which explains why firms are falling behind in the contemporary day. As a result, the organization’s limited resources are depleted, and its growth over the long term is restricted by collaboration restrictions. Employees are empowered and the benefits of collaborative work are reinforced when they operate as a team. Teamwork also helps individuals understand the need of cooperation and how the organization works, as well as develop a culture of effective teamwork. Without collaboration, construction takes longer, governments fail, businesses lose market share, and people lose drive Teams have surpassed people as the most important pillars of business, and the French language reflects this evolution. Besides great achievement teamwork may also turn disastrous to an organization if not properly managed for instance there might be communication breakdown between teams and management, challenges in assessing the strength of each individual employee, blame games incase of failure and personality clashes.

References

Ahmad, I. and Manzoor, S.R., 2017. Effect of teamwork, employee empowerment and training on employee performance. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(11), pp.380-394.

Bacon, N. and Blyton, P., 2006. Union Co‐operation in a Context of Job Insecurity: Negotiated Outcomes from Teamworking. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 44(2), pp.215-237.

Barkalova, O., 2013. Concept of Teamwork. Управління розвитком, (18), pp.146-147.

Bell, S.T., Brown, S.G., Colaneri, A. and Outland, N., 2018. Team composition and the ABCs of teamwork. American Psychologist, 73(4), p.349.

Bergiel, B.J., Bergiel, E.B. and Balsmeier, P.W., 2008. Nature of virtual teams: a summary of their advantages and disadvantages. Management research news

Conti, B. and Kleiner, B.H., 1997. How to increase teamwork in organizations. Training for quality.

Crosby, B.L., 1991. Technical Notes Stakeholder Analysis: A Vital Tool for Strategic Managers.

Crowley, M., Payne, J.C. and Kennedy, E., 2014. Working better together? Empowerment, panopticon and conflict approaches to teamwork. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 35(3), pp.483-506.

Drew, S. and Coulson‐Thomas, C., 1996. Transformation through teamwork: the path to the new organization?. Management Decision.

Edmondson, A.C. and Nembhard, I.M., 2009. Product development and learning in project teams: The challenges are the benefits. Journal of product innovation management, 26(2), pp.123-138.

Erdem, F., Ozen, J. and Atsan, N., 2003. The relationship between trust and team performance. Work study.

Fenton, K.N., Castillo, S.H., Claro, C.D. and Novick, W.M., 2011. Teamwork and program organization in developing countries. World Journal for Pediatric and Congenital Heart Surgery, 2(2), pp.219-224.

Griffin, M.A., Patterson, M.G. and West, M.A., 2001. Job satisfaction and teamwork: The role of supervisor support. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 22(5), pp.537-550.

Hatcher, L. and Ross, T.L., 1991. From individual incentives to an organization‐wide gainsharing plan: Effects on teamwork and product quality. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12(3), pp.169-183.

Herzberg, F., 1968. One more time: How do you motivate employees (Vol. 65). Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review.

Hoegl, M. and Proserpio, L., 2004. Team member proximity and teamwork in innovative projects. Research policy, 33(8), pp.1153-1165.

Kandavel, R. and Sakthivel, D., 2018. Teamwork and Its Impacts on Employees’ Morale. International journal of research and analytical review, 5(04), pp.1058-1064.

Manzoor, S.R., Ullah, H., Hussain, M. and Ahmad, Z.M., 2011. Effect of teamwork on employee performance. International Journal of Learning and Development, 1(1), pp.110-126..

Mickan, S. and Rodger, S., 2000. Characteristics of effective teams: a literature review. Australian Health Review, 23(3), pp.201-208.

Nurmi, R., 1996. Teamwork and team leadership. Team performance management: An international Journal.

Proehl, R.A., 1996. Enhancing the effectiveness of cross‐functional teams. Leadership & Organization Development Journal.

Rosenhauer, S., 2008. Teams and Teamwork as the Basis of Effectiveness. diplom. de.

Twomey, K. and Kleiner, B.H., 1996. Teamwork: the essence of the successful organization. Team Performance Management: An International Journal.

Wanyeki, M.N., Maina, C.W., Sanyanda, J.N. and Kiiru, D., 2019. IMPACT OF TEAMWORK ON EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE: STUDY OF FACULTY MEMBERS IN KENYATTA UNIVERSITY. Journal of Human Resource and Leadership, 4(1), pp.1-8.

Williams, E.A., Duray, R. and Reddy, V., 2006. Teamwork orientation, group cohesiveness, and student learning: A study of the use of teams in online distance education. Journal of Management Education, 30(4), pp.592-616.