Team Dynamics

Week 7

MGF5962 Contemporary management

principles and practices
Topics covered

A. Managing team conflict

B. Team decision making

C. Managing team diversity

Team dynamics and motivation
Social
Team dynamics: forces which determine team
process and performance = “pull” factors of
motivation
Motivation
Work
•Social characteristics
Job situation
•How we are socialised into the workplace
•Supervisor, team leadership, conflict, cohesion,
cooperation, etc.
•Job characteristics
• JCM: skill variety, workload, task identity, level of feedback,
Week 10, 11
and level of autonomy
• Goal setting: SMARTER Weeks 6-11
•Work situation characteristics
• Organisational (incl. team) policies (e.g. HR policies),
practices (e.g., reward and compensation), programmes
(e.g., training), rules (e.g., SOP and KPIs), etc.

Weeks 1-11
A. Managing team conflict
Managing team conflict: goal setting model

• Specific • Accepted
• Participative • Higher
• Measurable Exciting and motivation
(MBO)
SMART • Achievable Reviewed • Higher
goals • Exciting Effective
• Relevant (challenging) commitment
(SMARTER)
• Time- • Receives • Higher
oriented feedback performance
Managing team conflict: communication model
Noise
Semantic problems
Absence of feedbacks
Improper channels
Physical distractions
Status effects
Cultural differences
Perceptual biases
Emotion
Filtering
Language
Information overload
Others (e.g., groupthink biases)
Receiver
Sender Message
Decodes perceived meaning
Encodes intended meaning
JAVED ANWAR Feedback 6
Managing team conflict: emotional intelligence model
model

Emotional Intelligence

Self awareness Handling emotion Empathy Social skills

(know thyself) (displayed emotion) (conflict awareness) (conflict management)

(Adapted: Goleman, 1998; Zhang, Chen, & Sun, 2015)

Managing team conflict: active listening
and SO CLEAR body language
Active listening
• Listen for message content
• Listen for feelings
• Respond to feelings
• Note all cues
• Paraphrase and restate
Emotional Intelligence
Empathy Social skills
(conflict awareness) (conflict management)
Clear body language (SO CLEAR)
• Sit or stand appropriate
• Open movements and expression
• Centre attention on the other person
• Lean appropriate
• Eye contact
• Respond appropriate
• Appear Relaxed
Managing team conflict: communication styles
Assertive
Say ‘no’ without feeling guilt
Listen and respect others
Take responsibility for your own
actions
Act confident
Control attitude and emotion
Speak up without undue fear
Say ‘I don’t know’ when you don’t
Passive
Put others’ right before yours
Minimise your self worth
Avoid responsibility
Apologise unnecessarily and
often
Show unconfident body language
Complain rather than deal with
it/the person
Aggressive
Use hostile tone of voice
Interrupt and refuse to listen
Insult and abuse
Lack in tolerance and patience
Threatening body language
Managing team conflict: conflict strategies model (recap)
Forcing/competing Problem-
One party resolves conflict solving/collaborating
regardless of the consideration of Both parties collaborate to
the other party (win-lose) overcome the conflict (win-win)

Compromising
Both parties give up something (win some-
lose some)

Avoiding Yielding
One or both parties suppress the One party yields to let the other
conflict (lose-lose) party win (lose-win)
B. Team decision making
Team decision making styles: Vroom-Jago model (Adapted from: Vroom & Jago, 1978)

Highly autocratic A1 The manager decides alone

A2 The manager decides alone acquiring information

from subordinates
Three styles:
A= Autocratic
C= Consultative
G= Group/participative
C1 The manager seeks ideas and suggestions from the
subordinates individually, however decides alone

C2 The managers seeks ideas and suggestions from the

subordinates as a group; however decides alone

Highly democratic
G2 The group decides; the manager is the coordinator or
facilitator
Team decision making techniques
Electronic Nominal Group Devil’s Dialectic
Brainstorming
brainstorming techniques Advocacy enquiry
1st: Nominally
(independently)
Everyone has 1st: Two best
record solutions 1st:Expert plan
opportunity to solutions rather
2nd: Present the generated than one (Plan A
generate idea for
solutions to ideas and justify vs Plan B)
problem 3rd: Group evaluates
Brainstorming in each idea 2nd: Devil 2nd: Debate and
virtual (online) criticises to make dialogue over the
network 4th: Members it fool-proof plans for a
Extreme or nominally synthesis
outlandish ideas (independently)
are accepted; no rank order the ideas
idea is too 3rd: Final plan is 3rd: Final plan
ridiculous 5th: Top-ranked idea accepted undertaken
= the final decision
Team decision making techniques (contd.)
Nominal group technique Top-ranked
ideas chosen
Nominal voting for
implementation
Evaluation by
group
Presentation
(incl.
Nominal justification)
brainstorming

Plan/team
A Synthesis
Dialectic
Inquiry (debate and Final plan
Plan/team dialogue)
B Devil’s advocacy
Team decision making biases: groupthink model (recap)
Direct
conformity
pressure
Rationalising Overconfidence
unpleasant and escalating
data commitment

Belief in Groupthink Illusions of

group
unanimity
morality (consensus compromises
quality!)

Stereotyping
Mind
opponents as
guarding
weak/evil/stupid
Self-
censorship
 Diversity in the Workplace - YouTube

C. Managing team diversity

Team diversity
Lack of diversity: sources and symptoms

Stereotyping and social Lack of policies

categorisation [cultural, (incl.HR), lack of
cohort-based (gender, practices, and culture
ability, age, etc.)] gap

Prejudices (homophobia,
Glass-ceiling (lack of xenophobia,
equal opportunity for monoculturalism,
women and minorities) ethnocentrism, sexism,
etc.)
Lack of
diversity
Diversity dividends: TBL model
Better business: attracts potential markets
Social (S) • Best talent acquisition from the diverse labour market
• More customers
• Effective leadership by culturally sensitive managers
• Higher level of market competitiveness
• Higher stakeholder satisfaction (social-legal benefits, economic
progress, etc.): CSR strategies achieved
Triple Better workplace: higher productivity
bottom • Higher efficiency
line (TBL) • Happier employees
• Higher ethics
Economic Environmental • Equal opportunities
(E) (E)
Better teamwork: pluralism and ethnorelativism
• Higher level of talent and skills pooled in a team
• Greater innovation and creativity
• Higher cohesion and task focus
• Lower social loafing
• Greater synergy (mutuality, complementarity, and accountability)
Managing Virtual Teams
Robust
technology:
☼Communicate live and
noise-free
◌ Active listening and clear body
language
☼Set up clear norms
◌ Appearance (e.g., “put the
cameras on”)
◌ Performance (KPIs)
◌ Allocation of resources (SOPs)
Know Manage
differences: differences:
☺Cultural sensitivity: ♠ Goal orientation
♥ Ethnorelativism and multiculturalism ֎ SMARTER goals
☺Demographic differences ♠ Adaptive work relationship
֎Be assertive
♥ Time zone differences
֎Choose appropriate decision technique(s)
♥ Skills and capability
♥ Work-life balance
֎Beware of groupthink
♠ Appreciate other commitments
♥ Others
Work-life balance, etc.
Summary
Increase Clarify Align Apply

Roles: identity, Team goals

Goal orientation with Appropriate
(SMARTER expectations,
ambiguity organisational team decision
goals styles
EI: Empathy, Rules for
social skills, and engagement Common
equity (responsibility) interests Appropriate group
decision
techniques
Ratio of task conflict
and
relationship conflict

Cooperation and
interdependence
Colin M Fisher, & Julianna Pillemer. (2021). How to Help (Without Micromanaging). Harvard Business Review, 99(1), 123–127.
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=bth&AN=147590518&site=ehost-
live&scope=site&custid=s8849760
Ely, & Thomas, D. A. (2020). Getting Serious About Diversity. Harvard Business Review, 98(6), 114–122.
Goleman, Daniel. (1998). The emotional intelligence of leaders. Leader to Leader, 1998(10), 20–26.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ltl.40619981008
Hal Gregersen. (2018). Better Brainstorming. Harvard Business Review, 96(2), 64–71.
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=bth&AN=128120420&site=ehost-
live&scope=site&custid=s8849760
Kwan. (2019). The collaboration blind spot. Harvard Business Review, 2019(MarchApril), 66–73.
Rogelberg. (2019). Why your meetings Stink—and what to do about it. Harvard Business Review, 97(1), 140–143.
Vroom, V. H., & Jago, A. G. (1978). On the validity of the Vroom-Yetton model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63(2), 151–162.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.63.2.151
Zhang, Su Juan, Chen, Yong Qiang, & Sun, Hui. (2015). Emotional intelligence, conflict management styles, and innovation
performance. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 26(4), 450–478. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCMA-06-2014-0039