Introduction
Organizational culture and climate, morale, and human relations have a great impact on the performance of the organization and its business success. The fact that people work together for a common purpose is not enough to justify calling them a team because there is more to a team than just a common interest. A real team has a sharply defined task, goal, or purpose that binds the members together. They are more tightly-knit than a group. The cases of two companies, Semco Engineering and Grimsville Borough Council (GBC) show that leadership and management should control the organizational climate and morale of employees, monitor social and political changes which have an impact on organizational design and structure.
Teamwork and Teamworking
In general, teams may have a common interest, but they are less focused, less interdependent. Their commitment to the goal is not as great. Just as a group is not a team, neither is a committee. A committee meets periodically for a relatively short period of time and then adjourns. In committees, the agreement to work personally and corporately toward a goal may exist, but the level of commitment and the unifying relationships usually do not (Fullan, 2001). The case of Semco Engineering shows that effective teamwork is based on self-regulations and team dynamics. In this company, committee members normally represent the functional interests of their organizational unit and operate as representatives. A team member, on the other hand, represents the team’s mutual interests. A team is usually characterized by a few individuals who share common characteristics. While members share a common fate and common values, team members are also interdependent–any action that affects one member affects them all. In Semco Engineering, team members share a common goal and are rewarded as a group for achieving it. If the team has not performed as expected, members may feel they have personally failed. However, real teams consistently outperform individuals acting alone or groups of individuals working on similar tasks (Senior, 2002). Each team is composed of different people; therefore, each team is different. There is no average or normal team. What works for one team may not work for another. Organizational teams are formed within the existing organizational structure. In an integrated organization, the leader of an organizational department team is also a member of the next higher level of organizational team, and so on, up to the top of the organization, where the CEO leads the top management team. Democracy is the main function, which supports team dynamics and the development of employees (Bolman and Deal, 2000).
In contrast to Semco Engineering, Grimsville Borough Council has an ineffective structure of groups (teams) which prevents the organization from effective political performance. In Grimsville Borough Council, the project groups are not composed of an array of individuals from different areas within the organization who have been assigned a single task (Fullan, 2001). That task is not clearly defined with explicitly stated goals. However, it requires a unique combination of team member skills. Project teams are good at solving or improving an organizational process that cuts across functional lines. Thus, they are aloof and distant. For Grimsville Borough Council (GBC), the weakness of teamwork comes from its poor focus on a goal. Each team member does not concentrate on specific objectives. In order to improve this situation, Grimsville Borough Council (GBC) should maximize the full capabilities of the total team effort and improve a project team’s success. The input of all organizational functions is required, as no one person has the knowledge to predict the implications of a given action on every function. A task force may consist of only one large team or it may be broken down into a series of smaller teams that address specific cross-functional issues (Senior, 2002). Task forces are an excellent tool to gain organization-wide commitment to a problem as they call for the participation of a broad range of people. Frequently, they provide an excellent communication link, serving to keep people informed. The cases of two organizations allow us to say that the emphasis of effective teams is not on superior/subordinate relationships, nor is it on power and authority. It is the members’ concentration on a clear goal that makes the team function as a unit. The focus on a clear goal ensures that the team will accomplish the purpose for which it exists. Teams are driven by results, and clear goals are the benchmark to measure results (Scott, 2002).
Organizational Design and Culture
Semco Engineering and Grimsville Borough Council have different organizational designs and structures which influence their performance and productivity. Semco Engineering is based on decentralization and delegation of authority. This organization tries to limit bureaucracy and introduce innovative management approaches (Fullan, 2001). Coordination is provided by counselors, partners, coordinators, and associates. This division of power allows the company to control performance and avoid bureaucratization of the structure. In contrast to Semco Engineering, Grimsville Borough Council is based on the old bureaucratic design: central government performance. Centralization of all functions prevents the organization from effective work and limits the personal freedom of employees. The main problem areas are education, community leadership, and financial management (Bolman and Deal, 2000).
Centralization prevents effective communication and delegation. Since the team is goal-centered, communication revolves around the goal. Communication is what teamwork is all about. The stronger the team members’ mutual interdependence, the more vital the communication becomes. The case of Semco Engineering demonstrates that the more effective information is communicated, the higher the level of trust that develops among the team members. As trust grows, the team becomes better organized (Fullan, 2001). As team organization improves, it becomes more effective. The net result of effective communication in achieving the goal. As an antagonistic organization, Grimsville Borough Council places emphasis on the oppositional nature of contradictory class interests. The organization is viewed as a battleground where rival forces (e.g., management and unions) strive for largely incompatible ends. Conflict is regarded as inevitable and as part of a wider class conflict that will eventually change the whole structure of the organization. As with the pluralistic organization, the use of power is a key feature of an antagonistic organization. However, rather than being employed through organizational politics, power is exercised and distributed through more formal negotiations. Power is more closely aligned to a form of social control, through economic control and the legal system, than is commonly found in a more pluralistic organization (Schien, 1996).
Semco Engineering adopts an effective approach based on democratic principles and values. Keeping informed as a team leader is important, and team meetings are important to ensure good communication. Equally important, however, are the one-on-one informal channels of communication. In Semco Engineering, team leaders spend much of their time managing by wandering around–that is, establishing one-on-one communication with each team member. That communication should take place on the team member’s turf whenever possible. People are more relaxed, more open, and more likely to tell you what is really going on when interacting in their own work areas (Schien 1996). The result is that the leader is visible and well informed and shows interest and support in each member. Moreover, the team member gets a chance for one-on-one communication. Keeping the entire team informed is crucial; effective teams communicate constantly and in all directions: up, down, sideways, backward, one-to-one, and one-to-many. Good team communication easily covers gaps in knowledge. Each team member knows what is going on and what needs to be accomplished, and thus embarrassing surprises can be avoided (Bolman and Deal, 2000).
The examples of Semco Engineering and Grimsville Borough Council demonstrate that authority should be seen as flowing from the top down, and as being delegated by one’s superior Goal setting does not work as effectively in antagonistic organizations as in other organizational forms (Schien 1996). The reason lies in the indisputable fact that every organization has a goal. In some organizations, goals are more sharply focused and there is general agreement on how they should be attained. In other organizations, goals are very general, and although there may be general agreement on the goals themselves, there are differences in how they should be attained. In still other organizations there is disagreement on the emphasis that should be placed on the goal (Scott, 2002).
Organizational Culture
Teamwork and organizational design influence organizational culture and performance. The case of Semco Engineering proves that well-thought organizational design and teamwork lead to a positive climate and high morale of employees. To the extent that organizations can agree on goals and on the means to attain them, organizational politics can be reduced. In the absence of this qualification, there will be differences of opinion and conflict. Not all conflict is harmful (Schien 1996). Differences of opinion that take in all available points of view are useful in formulating the right goal. However, if the conflict becomes bitter, focused on personalities, or results in power struggles, the organization will be harmed. Few organizations retain the dispassionate efficiency to consistently focus on totally clear and agreed-upon goals. What is clear is that in all organizations, at least some stakeholders will disagree as to means or ends (Senior, 2002). Therefore, there will always be some degree of political activity and the use of power. Nevertheless, generalizations can be made about the kinds of organizations in which there is more likely to be agreement on goals and the means to attain them. Generalizations can also be made about the kinds of organizations in which there are likely to be differing perspectives about the means and ends (Bolman and Deal 2000).
The case of Grimsville Borough Council demonstrates that inadequate organizational design and structure, ineffective group work, and teamwork lead to low motivation and poor culture within the organization. Employees worry about changes and experience some stress caused by work problems (Senior, 2002).
In these organizations, we can expect more political activity because there is more disagreement, conflict, and even outright hostility. In order to improve the situation, Grimsville Borough Council should change its design and motivate employees. Generally speaking, employees should share information as often as possible. Employees set their own work agenda, but they should convene formally at least once daily. Short meetings at the beginning and the end of the day are preferable. Teams need to discipline themselves to effectively use time (Schien 1996). There should be a limit on the time spent in formal meetings. Twenty minutes is usually sufficient time to share information. As a guide, a team should not dwell on any given issue for more than about five minutes (Senior, 2002). If more than five minutes are required, it should be placed in the “too hard to handle file” and a special one-hour meeting should be scheduled to focus on that issue alone. That approach attains several objectives: the team receives information in volume and is informed on key issues, team time is conserved, and important issues receive in-depth attention (Bolman and Deal, 2000).
Conclusion
The case of two organizations, Semco Engineering and Grimsville Borough Council, shows a close link between three organizational indicators: teamwork, organizational structure, and organizational climate. Poor and inadequate structure inevitably leads to low motivation and poor performance. A demanding performance challenge tends to create a team. Individuals become team members by focusing on challenging tasks or a demanding performance challenge, not by focusing on how to build effective teams, By focusing on performance goals–as opposed to trying “to become a team”–most small groups can deliver performance results that require, and produce team behavior. Organizations with high standards and high-performance expectations spawn more “real teams” than organizations that promote teams per se. Real teams expect a lot of themselves and high standards are difficult to attain, but when we challenge people, it improves the odds for better performance and the attainment of challenging goals. Expecting high performance creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. People try to do what they are expected to do, and high standards are attractive as they create self-respect and pride.
Bibliography
Bolman, L. G., Deal, T. E. 2003, Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice and Leadership (3rd edition). Jossey-Bass.
Fullan, M. 2001, Leading in a Culture of Change. Jossey-Bass; 1st edition.
Schien, E. H. 1996, Organizational Culture and Leadership. Jossey-Bass.
Senior, B. 2002, Organizational Behavior. Pearson Higher.
Scott, W. Richard. 2002, Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open System Perspectives (5th Edition). Prentice Hall.