Teams as a Compliment to Organizational Culture
As the reading from last week was regarding teams and this week is on organizational culture, an article on the integration of the two seemed quiet appropriate!
In
an article from Recardo & Jolly (1997), they suggest that initiating successful teams start with an organizational cultural analysis to understand the most effective
teams for their needs. The authors define teams on a continuum of team types as illustrated in this figure. The teams go along a continuum from reactive to proactive. Those on the farther left end tend to be for short-term tasks whereas those that are farther towards the right end are more autonomous and long term.
The authors indicate that a since
culture defines the beliefs and behaviors of employees, one can’t define a team
type without a sense of culture first. Denison
& Mishra mention that defining culture is difficult to measure and not
particularly comparable. Recardo & Jolly agree but suggest that it’s a
worthy field of study because they have found through their research that when business strategy (such as team development) and
culture are aligned, then tend to have better performance than organizations
that do not.
Like Lorsh, Recardo & Jolly
mention the significance of “cultural fit” (pg.4). The suggest that an organizational analysis is helpful because the type of team that will be successful is dependent on the organizational structure and given task (among other factors). Lorsh describes fit of a
cyclical harmony that is composed of three parts: the employee’s personality,
the task at hand, and the design which when successfully combined, leads to
motivating an individual to do a good job. It is successful when an employee
receives feedback that their performance of a given task is good, leading the
person to want to continue to perform well and perhaps even improve. This, when
applied to teams could potentially lead to the same result.
Organizational design
can be described through a myriad of lists compartmentalizing measurements;
it’s no surprise that the research literature in this field offer a variety of methods to do so.
Hofstede's framework uses polar differences (i.e. job-oriented vs.
employee oriented, professional versus parochial) seems effective processes and
approaches. However, in it’s specificity, I felt that it actually lacked cultural
framework for a full cultural perspective. Lorsch wrote that the design of
organization is primarily wrapped around structure, rewards as well as
procedures and measurable results. Although broader, I felt these constructs to
be more encompassing of the various faucets of culture. Not necessarily an
improvement, but a third approach is from Recardo & Jolly, who include broaden
the three dimensions of Lorsch’s description by suggesting that there are eight
dimensions to take into account: communication, training and development,
rewards, decision making, risk taking, planning, teamwork, and management
practices. This table briefly explains each dimension.
|
Communications
|
Includes direction of, openness, & formality
|
|
Training and Development
|
Opportunities to learn, education availability,
types of training
|
|
Rewards
|
Individual or group recognition, fiscal
incentives, company growth, performance feedback
|
|
Decision Making
|
Process of, decision making speed, centralization
|
|
Risk Taking
|
Acceptance of innovation, openness to
improvements
|
|
Planning
|
Long-term or short-term, proactive or reactive,
formality, extension to employees
|
|
Teamwork
|
Collaboration within and across departments, trust,
formality
|
|
Management Practices
|
Policy administration, reliability,
evenhandedness
|
In the case of team development, this 8-dimension approach of
analysis seems suitable, however, just as culture changes from company to
company the constructs of a definition seem to change depending on desired
results.
As a further discussion, it would
be interesting to apply some of Hofstede’s dimensions to team development, such
as looking at cultures that score high on individualism versus cultures that
score high on collectivism. Exploring the most effective or useful team types
as described on the continuum above would perhaps give some insight into
organizational cultures and team effectiveness.
Recardo, R., & Jolly, J. (1997). Organizational culture and teams.
S.A.M.Advanced Management Journal, 62(2), 4-7. Retrieved from
Hey Ashley,
ReplyDeleteGreat article! We should combine your information about the 8-dimension approach and my interview about Hofstede's dimensions and create a training package for businesses.:-) I'm surprised though that more organiations don't incorporate some form or organizational culture traing into the workplace. Versions if the 8-dimension approach and Hofstede's dimensions would be beneficial to people in organizations, especially large global organizations. Have you ever been exposed to any kind of formal organizational training or been exposed to these concepts in the workplace? I haven't.
Hi Ashley,
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed how you synthesized these last two weeks into a comprehensive presentation.
What I learned when I worked on my mid-term project for 500 is that you can assemble a team of highly motivated people who are stars when they work individually but put them in a room together and they can break apart into different cliques based on work or cultural backgrounds. However the one thing that can mitigate what these "faultlines" is a strong organizational culture that communicates with teams its expectations.
Looking at Melanie's question, I haven't been exposed to this kind of vetting but I do know that potential employees are quizzed by a variety of department heads on the teamwork/communication/problem solving metrics with the hopes of finding workers who align with Meredith's culture. J
Ashley,
ReplyDeleteThis article was great to see a different perspective of
organizational culture - rather than its affect on organizations, but
to understand the needs of the team. As you define the needs as
communications, training and development, rewards, decision making,
risk taking, planning, teamwork, and management practices, your broad
definitions help me see how they can fit into the organization effect.
However, it would have been helpful to see concrete examples. I think
its really helpful to see that concrete structures are part of
organizational culture, and how these give incentives and skills for
individuals to perform well and consistent.