Search results

This monograph summarises the key influences of leadership behaviour on the transformation process associated with creation of an effective and high performing team. It clarifies the key factors that are relevant to a team at each stage of the transformation process and the leadership roles that each team member can play. The role of an organisation's senior management is considered both in terms of the impact it has on the transformation process within specific teams and in terms of creating the necessary organisational environment to make effective teams the norm. Some reasons why senior management behaviour is often perceived as inconsistent and unhelpful are explored. Specific recommendations are made to help senior managers to adapt their behaviour, and in so doing become more context‐sensitive to the needs of the environment as it changes. Some tools and techniques are presented that have been found in practice to help senior managers adapt their behaviour to that most appropriate at a given time, and to create the organisational infrastructure needed to make effective teams the organisational norm rather than the exception. A case study is presented illustrating the networked nature of leadership and the culture change associated with making effective teams “the way we do things around here.”

By combining the influence tactics and team development literatures, this paper aims to propose a new team-level approach to influence tactics in self-managed teams and a temporal account of the extent to which team-level influence tactics are associated with team performance as a dynamic process.

Using 75 self-managed teams, we examined the relationship between the proportion of team members who tend to use each influence tactic to a high degree and team performance at initial versus advanced stages of team development.

Results demonstrated at initial stages of team development, a high proportion of team members who tend to use assertiveness was detrimental to team performance, whereas at advanced stages of team development, a high proportion of team members tending to use ingratiation was detrimental, while rationality was positively associated with team performance. Additionally, a Fuzzy Qualitative Comparative Analysis showed that at advanced stages of team development, tactics configuration matters.

This study sets the stage for a team-level theory of influence tactics by examining the relationship between the proportion of team members who tend to use influence tactics to a high degree and team performance at initial versus advanced stages of team development, and the configurations of tactics associated with better team performance at these developmental stages. While the individual-level literature on influence tactics is based on notions of power and politics, in a team context and specifically with self-managed teams, there is a need to integrate theories of team processes and dynamics to understand how influence tactics are associated with performance.

The construction industry mostly adopts teams consisting of a collection of diverse professionals in each of its product delivery projects, where normally the construction project manager (CPM) becomes the leader of such a project team. The purpose of this paper is to identify the leadership roles of the CPM across the team development process.

This was approached through a multiple case study research method carried out using three construction projects in Sri Lanka; two projects on traditional procurement method and another on design and build procurement method. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the respective project managers and with other three distinct team members of each project.

Based on the findings, leadership roles of the CPM across the team development process were revealed with the situational factors that affect these leadership roles in each stage of the team development process.

Even though project leadership is discussed by pervious researchers, concrete evidence has not been provided to show how it should change at different stages of a project. This research addresses this gap and would guide CPMs to change their leadership role appropriately to suit the needs of each team development stage.

To deepen our understanding about the development of team performance, the purpose of this paper is to develop a model that explains how ambidexterity and ethical leadership affect knowledge sharing and team performance through within-team competition.

This study demonstrates the applicability of ambidexterity and within-team competition by surveying 78 teams from the high-tech and banking industries. This study further presents a three-way interaction among ambidexterity, politics and job complexity.

This study finds that both ambidexterity and ethical leadership are positively related to knowledge sharing and team performance through the mediation of team development competition.

This study confirms that ambidexterity and ethical leadership play critical factors for improving knowledge sharing and team performance through the mediation of team development competition. Furthermore, the moderating effects of politics and job complexity are also confirmed in the research.

This two-part study aims to contribute to the body of knowledge on team development by examining the development of self-managing teams (SMTs) in healthcare. Based on an exploration of the team development literature, a perspective on SMT development was created, which suggested that SMTs develop along a non-sequential pattern of three processes–team management, task management and boundary management and improvement–that is largely the result of individual, team, organizational and environmental-level factors.

The perspective on SMT development was assessed in a Dutch mental healthcare organization by conducting 13 observations of primary mental healthcare SMTs as well as 14 retrospective interviews with the self-management process facilitator and advisors of all 100 primary mental healthcare SMTs.

Empirical results supported the perspective on SMT development. SMTs were found to develop along each of the three defined processes in a variety or possible patterns or simultaneously over time, depending on many of the identified factors and three others. These factors included individual human capital, team member attitudes and perceived workload at the individual level, psychological safety, team turnover, team size, nature of the task and bureaucratic history at the team level, and management style and material and social support at the organizational level.

This study provides a non-sequential model of SMT development in healthcare, which healthcare providers could use to understand and foster SMTs development. To foster SMT development, it is suggested that cultural change need to be secured alongside with structural change.

Even though various team development models have been described in the literature, this study is the first to indicate how SMTs in the healthcare context develop toward effective functioning.

Working as a consultant in the field of team development, I frequently find myself at odds with people who have different perceptions about the nature of the work. This confusion was actually expressed in print when in 1980, following the publication of my article on team problem diagnosis, another consultant wrote of his “simpler” method. This turned out to be the “LIFO” system. Again, similar misunderstanding arose in 1982, within a large client organisation in the public sector. The client had undergone major reorganisation, and it had been decided to create an internal consultancy role, a central function of which was to be team development. I was engaged to train those appointed to the role, with emphasis on the skills required by internal consultants. It came as some surprise therefore to be told during a seminar with some of the organisation's directors, that “team building” had recently been conducted in the area concerned. I had not yet trained the internal consultants. It emerged of course that their “team building” and my “team development” were entirely different processes. Impatient to “get things moving”, the organisation had initiated a programme of “team‐building” activity based on packaged exercises, mainly concerned with the analysis of management style.

In this paper, we will show that the debate between advocates of lean production and the socio‐technical approach has concentrated too much on the design aspect of the production structure, while neglecting the development aspect of teamwork. This paper addresses the question whether it is production design or team development that explains business performance and the quality of working life. The data are taken from four departments of the Volvo truck plant in Umeå (Sweden) that is redesigning from socio‐technical based assembly to line‐assembly. We conclude that good design of the production structure is necessary, but not sufficient for good performance; team development is just as important, although it requires a favorable context.

In this article a framework is developed, and validated, that provides an insight into the critical issues associated with the transformation of a loose group into an effective team. In this context, a loose group is defined as a number of individuals brought together to achieve a task, but with no further development undertaken. An effective team, by contrast, is one in which development of a supportive social structure has occurred, with each individual adapting his behaviour to optimise his personal contribution to the team. The insight gained has enabled the authors to identify those issues that limit the speed with which an effective team forms. This in turn has enabled specific recommendations to be made that will help effective teams to form in the minimum time. In the current research program the organisation studied was a multinational engineering company, engaged in the design, development and manufacture of rotating turbomachinery.

This paper aims to review the latest management developments across the globe and pinpoint practical implications from cutting-edge research and case studies.

This briefing is prepared by an independent writer who adds their own impartial comments and places the articles in context.

Researchers based in Israel analyzed the use of six different tactics to get the most out of 75 self-managed teams. The results showed that at early stages of team development, it was detrimental when a high proportion of team members used “assertiveness”. But, at advanced stages of team development, it was more detrimental when a high proportion of team members used “ingratiation”

The briefing saves busy executives, strategists and researchers hours of reading time by selecting only the very best, most pertinent information and presenting it in a condensed and easy-to-digest format.

Aims to investigate the importance of communication and conflict on the development of reengineering teams and attempts to answer the following research questions: is the team development of a reengineering team affected by conflict and communication, and if so, what are the types of communication and conflict that do affect it?

Presents a theoretical perspective with a literature review of such aspects as conflict and communication. Details research methodology and then utilises evidence from a single in‐depth case study. Explains how the analysis occured and discusses the findings.

It was found that conflicts are not productive for the organisation and therefore conflict resolution is sought. In order to resolve the conflicts existent within the teams, the role of face‐to‐face communication was considered to be pertinent.

For industry that is always searching for ways to curtail excessive costs, an understanding of the issues of conflict, team development and communication is offered. This means that by examining the guidelines offered within this paper, a convenient method of identifying and solving these issues is provided.