Teams and Groups Literature Review

Question: Discuss about theTeams and Groupsfor Literature Review. Answer: Introduction Teams and groups have for a long time characterized the formation of alliance in human beings (Whelan, 2014). The two distinct entities have allowed different entities to achieve a common goal. Although used interchangeably by most people, the aspects bring out different perspectives when used in a given context. A group is usually comprised of two or more individuals who always share common characteristics and interests and identify with each other due to these aspects (Whelan, 2014). Teams, on the other hand, comprise of different members who come together to achieve a common goal and share responsibility for the teams success (South, 2007). It is, therefore, important that one perfectly understands the difference between the two to properly incorporate their use in daily lives. Additionally, the independent concepts advanced by each aspect should also be grasped to properly implement them towards the achievement of common goals. Literature Review Teams and groups differ in several ways with regard to achievement of goals and overall targets. Teams usually have a particular task orientation which requires them to coordinate different tasks and activities to ensure achievement of the set targets and goals (Turner, 2014). However, groups do not always need to focus on specific outcomes or a common purpose when working towards a set of goals. The two concepts also differ from one another with regard to degree of interdependence where team members hugely rely on each other since they bring to bear a set of resources to produce a common outcome (Whelan, 2014). The situation is, nevertheless, different in groups as the individuals can be entirely independent from each other and not rely on the members (Brown, 2015). The aspects may also be differentiated with regard to purpose where teams usually have a set of outlaid targets and particular reasons for existence. Groups, on the other hand, exist for the sole purpose of fact. In this regard, a group may exist since its members share an ethnic or racial background The degree of formal structure may also be used to differentiate the two entities where the team members tend to have specific set of roles and duties that are clearly defined. Groups, however, do not need such formalities and roles usually do not need to be assigned (Braithwaite, 2015). The situation also includes the familiarity of members as the team members are mostly aware of each other as they regularly interact to accomplish the laid out strategies and tasks. This is different in the case of groups where the members may have personal relationships with each other or have no knowledge or interaction whatsoever (Hinds, 2015). Nevertheless, teams and groups share the same ideals with regard to management that enhances the achievement of their objectives. It is important that leaders of the respective teams and groups try to understand the different nature of the members and try to integrate them to allow achievement of overall goal (Landy Conte, 2016). The aspect will make it easy for the members to form and maintain healthy relationships which are important for the team. Additionally, the concept allows the members to develop interpersonal skills which are important especially in the case where the team wants to achieve a long term goal (Meredith, 2011). This concept, however, usually escapes most managers leading to them making wrong decisions concerning their members. One of the major problems with many managers is they attempt to manage people as if they were resources or as simply means to an end. (Reeves Read, 2013) This factor contributes negatively to the output of the members. It creates a situation where they feel as though they are other machines and equipment and the manager fails to appeal to their emotions. Research has shown that team members usually tend to be more thrilled with managers who express their interest to engage with them rather than issue out instructions in a dictatorial manner (Page, 2008). It cripples the ideals that have characterized team membership for a long time. Team membership is also characterized by aspects of delegation of duties. This is the process through which managers transfer the responsibility for a task to a subordinate with the appropriate authority to carry it. It is imperative that the team or group leader understands this concept effectively to avoid possible cases of abdicating control or losing their power to lead the members towards the common objective (Galegher et al., 2014). Therefore, the leader needs to demonstrate a complete understanding of the process through understanding what and when it is appropriate to delegate and to whom. It is also important to understand the concept of empowerment during delegation and develop strategies effective for the empowerment of the members who have been delegated the respective duties. To effectively enhance the concept, the leader should try to enable them get their work done by developing a sense of self efficacy (Dima, 2013). Additionally, there is also need to energize the people through mobilizing intrinsic excitement factors which are responsible for the overall reaction of the people involved. The varied nature of groups and teams may lead to development of corporate psychopaths who may hinder the overall objective of the people involved. They may be in the form of bullies who use intimidation, cons that exert influence or even the puppet master who are good at manipulating (Duranti et al., 2012). These distinct features of members may make it difficult to build and maintain interpersonal relationships in groups or teams. In recent times, most people have fallen prey to these psychopaths due to the distraught notion that they have feelings and care for other normal people. This, however, is not the case. They lack empathy but develop extraordinary acting skills enabling them to encourage us to empathise with them (Gibson, 2012). The difficult nature of these people may make it difficult for the team or group to withstand the test of time. They tend to be violent and rude towards other members even though they might be shown empathy. In a group setting, it is important that action is taken immediately and such people are put under medical care. The problem may arise since the individuals may not understand the consequences of their action. The Peter Principle, therefore, calls for proper guidance and counselling to allow the team achieve its targets. Diagnostic Tools Various diagnostic tools have been used over the years to help improve the relationship between members of a team or group. The Johari window has been successful in recent years due to its focus on key issues that affect the wellbeing of the people involved (Lowi Hood, 2011). It involves giving the subjects the opportunity to choose adjectives that best describe their personality. Their peers are also given these adjectives to help explain the behaviour of the subjects. In this regard, the answers are placed in four rooms; room one explains the part of ourselves that we and others see, room two is the aspects that others see yet we are not aware. Room three explains our private spaces that we tend to hide from others while the fourth room explains a part neither seen by the subjects or the peers (South, 2007). Therefore, it is important that effective measures are established to see to it that the distinctive aspects are understood and respected by each member of the group. Accordin g to Mindtools, the tool effectively assists the overall improvement of relationship between teams and groups (Whelan, 2014). It is also important that when selecting teams, one understands the effective personalities of each member to ensure that they come up with proper strategies to accommodate them. The big five personality test, therefore, comes in handy at this particular period to help the members explain their general attitudes and feelings towards each other (Milfont Sibley, 2012). The test does not include a yes or a no to ensure that the right feeling is brought out by an individual. The team leader can, consequently, use the answers to help set strategies for the betterment of the team (Komarraju et al., 2011). The test involves numbers where 1 is strongly disagree, 2 is disagree, 3 is neither agree nor disagree, 4 is agree and 5 is strongly agree (Cobb Clark, 2012). They help communicate the general thoughts of oneself as well as how they impact to other members of the team or group. The Belbin team inventory can also be used to assess the role and behaviour of an individual when in a controlled environment such as a team. It includes feedback from both the observer and the individual regarding their thoughts on the subjects behaviour at a given time (van Dierendonck Groen, 2011). The feedback generated helps classify the individuals into; coordinator, shaper, plant, monitor evaluator, implementer, resource investigator, team worker and completer finisher. Recent developments have seen the introduction of the role of the specialist to help complement the whole aspect. The method (Whelan, 2014) has, however, been criticized since it may not always guarantee accuracy especially in the cases of the overall team role of the individual at the time. There are also possibilities that the role outlined by the traits of the subject may not actually reflect the input and hard work which is actually put in place. Nevertheless, the diagnostic tool has been able to stand the test of time and enabled different individuals understand as well as appreciate their roles and that of their colleagues. Additionally, it emphasizes on the aspects of collective improvement towards a certain objective. Areas for Improvement The aspects, therefore, help point out the need to come up with effective measures which will see to it that the overall cohesion of members of a team or group is improved. There is need to develop interpersonal skills which are vital in such gatherings to further the overall goal. Additionally, it allows easy achievement of set goals and targets especially in the case where the team wants to achieve a long term goal (Beebe, 2014). The issue also lies with the need for the group leaders to effectively adopt strategies which help in the overall betterment of the group or team. Thus, relevant strategies and frameworks for approach need to be explained immediately. The aspect can be enhanced through improvement of knowledge and skills with regard to the functionalities of teams and groups. This can be improved through seminars and training programs where individuals are enlightened on the various issues and thematic concerns surrounding the concepts. It is important that experts are invited to help steer these training programs at a given time. Additionally, there should be clear cut goals, objectives and targets for each training session which should be reviewed at the end (Klitmller Lauring 2013). It helps impart the skills and knowledge that will help in the proper understanding of the concept. This is particularly important in an organization setting since there is a lot of incorporation of team work aspects. The members can also be encouraged to accept the diversity of people and, hence, develop interpersonal skills which help team build and maintain workplace relationships. Such skills are important since they help the members of the team find ways to accommodate each other to help advancement of the agenda. It is important to understand the concept of fitting in trough sacrificing or finding common avenues for interaction (Joshanloo Afshari, 2011). This may be through encouraging o team building activities which help create a bond among the members. The leaders too need to understand their roles in the team and relate with each member. They need to understand the importance of proper relationships as well as the concepts of delegation and empowerment. Moreover, the leaders need to develop strategies which accommodate the interests of all the members at the particular time. thus, the leader should first try to learn the importance and contribution of each member through the various diagnostic tools available and ensure that there is an overall understanding. The concept of trust should also be furthered by the manager to allow proper input by the employees. Conclusion Teams and groups are, hence, seen as important aspects of any institution. They help come up with effective measures which are in the interests of the people involved. It is imperative, thus, that they are taken in high regard by the society and incorporated in their activities. However, the fact that there is diversity should also be appreciated and respected. This will allow the members to develop interpersonal skills relevant to the study and the achievement of the group goals and objectives. References Beebe, S. A., Masterson, J. T. (2014).Communicating in small groups: Principles and practices. Pearson Higher Ed. 17(1), 20-40 Belbin, M. (2004). Belbin team roles.Book Belbin Team Roles. Pearson Higher Ed. 18(1), 19-24 Braithwaite, J. (2015). Bridging gaps to promote networked care between teams and groups in health delivery systems: a systematic review of non-health literature.BMJ open,5(9), e006567. Brown, A. D. (2015). Identities and identity work in organizations.International Journal of Management Reviews,17(1), 20-40. Cobb-Clark, D. A., Schurer, S. (2012). The stability of big-five personality traits.Economics Letters,115(1), 11-15. Dima, I. C., Vladutescu, S. (2013). Certain Current Considerations on the Managerial Communication in Organizations. Pearson Higher Ed. 17(3), 10-40 Duranti, C. M., de Almeida, F. C. (2012). Is more technology better for communication in international virtual teams?.International Journal of e-Collaboration (IJeC),8(1), 36-52. Galegher, J., Kraut, R. E., Egido, C. (2014).Intellectual teamwork: Social and technological foundations of cooperative work. Psychology Press. 8(1), 36-52 Gibson, M. F. (2012). Opening up: Therapist self-disclosure in theory, research, and practice.Clinical Social Work Journal,40(3), 287-296. Hinds, P. (2015). Teams and groups.Wiley Encyclopedia of Management. 8(1), 36-52 Joshanloo, M., Afshari, S. (2011). Big Five personality traits and self-esteem as predictors of life satisfaction in Iranian Muslim university students.Journal of Happiness Studies,12(1), 105-113. Klitmller, A., Lauring, J. (2013). When global virtual teams share knowledge: Media richness, cultural difference and language commonality.Journal of World Business,48(3), 398-406. Komarraju, M., Karau, S. J., Schmeck, R. R., Avdic, A. (2011). The Big Five personality traits, learning styles, and academic achievement.Personality and individual differences journal,51(4), 472-477. Landy, F. J., Conte, J. M. (2016).Work in the 21st Century, Binder Ready Version: An Introduction to Industrial and Organizational Psychology. John Wiley Sons. 17(3), 20-40 Meredith Belbin, R. (2011). Management teams: Why they succeed or fail.Human Resource Management International Digest,19(3). 16(1), 10-20 Milfont, T. L., Sibley, C. G. (2012). The big five personality traits and environmental engagement: Associations at the individual and societal level.Journal of Environmental Psychology,32(2), 187-195. Lowy, A., Hood, P. (2011).The power of the 2 x 2 matrix: Using 2 x 2 thinking to solve business problems and make better decisions. John Wiley Sons. 2(1), 8-11 Page, S. E. (2008).The difference: How the power of diversity creates better groups, firms, schools, and societies. Princeton University Press. Reeves, B., Read, J. L. (2013).Total engagement: How games and virtual worlds are changing the way people work and businesses compete. Harvard Business Press. South, B. (2007). Combining mandala and the Johari Window: An exercise in self-awareness.Teaching and Learning in Nursing,2(1), 8-11. Turner, M. E. (2014).Groups at work: Theory and research. Psychology Press. van Dierendonck, D., Groen, R. (2011). Belbin revisited: A multitraitmultimethod investigation of a team role instrument.European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,20(3), 345-366. Wheelan, S. A. (2014).Creating effective teams: A guide for members and leaders. Sage Publications.