• Embed Doc
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
The
Team Building 
Tool Kit—Tips,Tactics, and Rules for EffectiveWorkplace TeamsIntroduction
Several years ago a team was in the process of drafting a set of rules to govern memberbehavior, team meetings, team structure, and even the smaller issues such as how to orientnew members. Many hours were spent researching books and articles about teams, withmembers becoming increasingly frustrated at the length of time it was taking to come up withanything specific and helpful.
The Team Building Tool Kit 
was created to be that single resource for start-up and existingteams as they develop their rules. The format follows the life cycle of a team: GettingStarted, Team Meetings, Team Behavior, Problems of Fear and Control, Team DecisionMaking and Problem Solving, Evaluating and Rewarding Team Performance, and Training.This book was written for all types of teams, from multifunctional to self-managed, in bothprofit-making and nonprofit organizations. In addition, trainers and college faculty will find it avaluable reference for teaching team building skills to others.The book can be used in a variety of ways. The layout is designed to make it an easyreference tool, even in the middle of a team meeting when a question arises (e.g., "how dowe want to handle confidentiality issues?"). It can be read cover to cover, a particularly goodapproach for someone unfamiliar with how to get teams started. Certain sections, such asChapter 4, which discusses fear and control, can be read by team members to help themachieve a common level of understanding before discussing these issues as an entire group.The question-and-answer sections at the ends of the chapters are designed to supplementthe chapter material with real-life situations. (Within each chapter, there are highlightedreferences in the margins to specific questions in the question-and-answer section thatpertain to the text at hand. These references provide a quick, handy way to find the questionand answer that correlates to the topic being discussed.) We've included typical questionsasked of us as we've helped teams get started and mature.
 
The Nature of Teams
It is important to keep in mind that a team is a means to an end—an approach for achievinga goal, whether that goal is improved production, increased quality, better morale, or happiercustomers.Each team has one thing in common: the need for rules to govern itself. Rules play a crucialrole in the team's success:

Rules are usually determined in the early months of a team's development, and, onceestablished, they are difficult to modify or revise.
 

Any changes in team rules require substantial time and often cause team members toget upset.

The team leader plays an important part in the setting of rules; what the leader doesn'tdo can be as important as what the leader does do.

Commitment to behavior boundaries is strongest in small teams.

Teams usually judge their members by how closely they conform to the rules;members who most closely conform to the rules earn the greatest respect.

The more team members work together to develop team rules, the more they willagree with each other.

A team willing to create rules is a team willing to be self-disciplined and to assumeresponsibility for its behavior.

When a team is not clear about its rules, it often lacks control over its members.

Rules help to equalize the power of all members.Many organizations are creating teams. When the team building is done poorly, the teamsare viewed as an end in and of themselves, and little money or effort is invested to help thembe successful. Such teams usually last about six months. They make little difference to thecompany other than to allow it to use the word "team" to describe their internal structure, andthe team members are actually more frustrated than they were before the teams werecreated.Successful teams, on the other hand, are viewed as a strategy—a synergistic blending ofhuman resources—for achieving an organization's goals. Money, effort, and, most important,patience and support are invested eagerly. There is strong recognition that operating as ateam is different from what we are used to from our experiences at school and at home andthat, in order to be successful, we need to learn how to play by new rules.
A Brief History of Team Building
18th and 19th century.
Before the industrial movement began, work was conducted in smallgroups consisting of a master craftsman and a group of apprentices. The master functionedas the teacher, carefully instructing the apprentices in a trade. After many years of training,apprentices were able to determine and improve their own work.
1924.
Elton Mayo, founder of the human relations movement, conducted research at theHawthorne works of Western Electric Company. His study confirmed the relationshipbetween human factors, such as self-respect, recognition, and self-direction, and productivity(Mayo, 1933).
1930s 
. Kurt Lewin researched the aspect of team behavior known as group dynamics anddeveloped a tool called Force Field Analysis to improve team effectiveness (Lewin, 1951).
1940s.
Britain's Tavistock Institute documented that productivity increases when workers areorganized into teams.Abraham Maslow defined his hierarchy of needs, linking motivation and performance(Maslow, 1943).
1950s.
General Foods experimented with self-directed work teams in its Topeka, Kansas,plant. The experiment was successful but was not regarded favorably by traditionalorganizations (Lawler, 1986).Sensitivity groups (also known as T-groups) were studied; these were highly unstructuredgroups in which members shared feelings and offered feedback to one another. The groupsrequired supervision to ensure that they did not drift off into unproductive activities (Lewin,1951).
 
Toyota's production chief, Taiichi Ohno, studied Ford's factories and developed the Toyotaproduction system, a team model for quality and efficiency.
1960s 
. Douglas McGregor listed the characteristics of effective teams and of the leadershipstyles known as Theory X and Y (McGregor, 1960).Two members of the Tavistock Institute,Trist and Bamforth (1951), conducted a studydemonstrating the impact of teams and organizational change (reported inGlaser, 1991). ABritish mining company had introduced a new technique for coal mining called the longwallmethod, which replaced miners with machines and spread the workflow over three shifts toresemble a factory assembly line.Under the old method, mining was conducted in teams of three men: a hewer, a mate, andan assistant using the "hand-got method." The team was responsible for removing the coalfrom the face of the mine and for working together to complete all the tasks. The processdemanded close working relationships that often spilled over into the miners' personal lives.Traditional supervision was neither necessary nor desired.When the new longwall method was implemented, absenteeism increased and productivitydecreased. Trist and Bamforth found that the company had disregarded the importance ofthe miners' team relationships and the impact of these relationships on morale andproductivity.Trist and Bamforth were able to show the company how it could enjoy the benefits oftechnological advances while allowing the miners to maintain the social relationships thatwere so important to them, without returning to the "hand-got method." This early researchdemonstrated the importance of maintaining a balance between established social patternsand technological change in the workplace.Chris Argyris defined the interpersonal behaviors required of effective team members(1964).The quality of worklife movement began in the United States as managers asked employeesfor ideas that would make their jobs easier and more pleasant.General Motors discovered that team-based assembly operations established in conjunctionwith production-line operations resulted in a much higher quality of product and greater jobsatisfaction without increasing the time required to produce a car.
1970s.
In Sweden, Saab and Volvo established work assembly teams and built a new plantin which cars were ferried to different teams of workers. The new system resulted inimproved morale and a 25 percent reduction in production costs (Hunsaker and Curtis,1986).Quality circles (QCs) began to take hold in the United States as a way to improve quality andcut costs.In Japan, five million workers belonged to QCs by 1972.A joint venture between Toyota and General Motors achieved outstanding quality andproductivity levels with its New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc. (NUMMI) teams (Lee,1988).
1980s 
. Honeywell assigned all plant functions to teams (Chance, 1989).Xerox supported team problem solving by encouraging teams to form a "huddle" twice daily(Industrial Relations News, 1981).
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...