The role of teams in the organizations cannot be gainsaid. This is especially true in the 21st Century whereby individualism has arguably proved to be the undoing of organizational success. In that context, if I were the CEO of a fortune 500 company, I would inevitably use teams in the organizational dispensation of duties. In this paper I shall briefly discuss about teams. It shall adopt a three tiered approach. First, I shall discuss why utility of teams in the organization is essential. Secondly, I shall discuss the manner advisable in designing and setting up teams. Lastly, I shall consider the methodology applied in deciding which employees are included in what team.
The designing and setting up of teams perhaps is the critical element in organizational setup. The formation of the team must take into consideration a number of factors. It is imperative to note that the success of the team depends on the ability of the team to function. Be that as it may, it is equally critical that teams are not only informed by functional goals. One has to consider emotional and social factors. That is to say in the formation of the team, one ought to consider the ability of the team members to function effectively. Effective functionality connotes the fact that every member of the team should possess skills essential for the discharge of the tasks. In addition, it is worth noting that team tasks are often diverse and complimentary. In that respect, the members must not possess the same skills. It would be prudent to blend different members with diverse skills so that in total the team has a complimentary base of operation. The other factor that ought to inform the functional aspect of teams is the knowledge base of the members. Some members could be highly knowledgeable while others could be of basic knowledge. This facilitates the learning process whereby the personnel with high level knowledge mentor and train the other less knowledgeable members. Ultimately, the tasks would be discharged and some of the team members would have gained new skills and knowledge.
Other than the functional considerations, it remains critical to consider emotional and social factors. In addressing the methodology of choice for team membership, the paper shall discuss some of the factors considered. It is imperative to note that the same blends in with the previous discussion on the design. In that respect, a team must have a team leader, often the member with a dominant character. It would be fatal to pool members with a dominant character together as all would strive to lead. In other cases, some members may pose superiority challenges to the team leader. The same would affect the overall performance of the team. In addition, it is essential to show gender sensitivity in the election of the team members. To this extent, selection of team members must be appreciative of gender balance. Lastly, in formation of the teams, it is necessary to create a mix of cultures so that the teams are readily acceptable for any tasks. Consider a case where all the team members are black men yet the task involves interacting with clients from a predominantly white community. The same may pose challenges as clients may not feel comfortable due to the inevitable race questions in some parts of the country.
I have, therefore, discussed some of the issues arising with respect to teams. In overall, I support teamwork. Ultimately, organizational success depends on the perceptions and management of employees. Teamwork has proved to be important in as far as motivating employees to perform is concerned.
Cavico, F., & Mujtaba, B. (2012). Discrimination and the aging American workforce: legal analysis and management strategies. Journal of Legal Issues and Cases in Business, 1-40.
Manzoor, S., Ullah, H., & Hussain, M. (2011). Effect of Teamwork on Employee Performance. International Journal of Learning and Development , 1(1), 110-125.
Yun, S., & Sims, H. (2007). Leadership and Teamwork: The Effects of Leadership and Job Satisfaction on Team Citizenship. International Journal of Leadership Studies , 2(3), 171-193.