Team Building And Leadership For Improved Workplace Functionality – Case Study

The Importance of Team Building

Question:

Write an essay on Teamwork.

Teamwork in the workplace helps to improve the function and operation of the organization.  When team members become familiar with each other, they understand each other’s problems and even learn how to work together as a team. The importance of team building cannot be neglected. When the members understand the strengths and weaknesses of the members of the team, the job can be done with greater ease. It is usually the managers or the higher authority of the company who are responsible for guiding the team (Avolio and Yammarino 2013). With a systematic approach, a better and efficient team can be developed that would finally result in the increase of the productivity of the company. Again, with the involvement of various team members it is also expected that new creative and innovative ideas can also click in the team that would result in better results.

This paper is based on a case study of the company Calgary Oil Shale Technologies, Inc. where the management is facing issues regarding the team members and the conflicts among them. The focus of the paper is highlighted on the various stages that are included in forming a team. Other than that, the role of a leader will also be analysed. The importance of a leader in a team will be discussed aligning it with the case study provided.

Martin Bouchard, the president and CEO of Calgary Oil Shale Technologies, Inc. (COST) encountered a number of issues regarding the team work of the company, when he thought of solving the morale and the productivity problems of the company’s Alberta field by the means of team building. The company has hired professionals from various backgrounds such as geologists, geophysicists and engineers to handle the technological works. Again, there was also a group of skilled and semiskilled labours for handling other operations of the company. However, the two groups clashed among themselves as a regular basis. These clashes were even highlighted in the local media.

In order to derive a better understanding among the team members, the company hired Algoma Howard, due to her successful experiences, to improve the team work program. She got help from Carlos Debrito, an employee who has been working for 26 years in the company. Debrito agreed to become the leader of the team.

Q1. Howard and Debrito phased in permanent cross-functional teams in Alberta. What types of teams are the ‘fireside chats’ and ‘problem bursting team’? Through what stage or stages of team development did these groups evolve?

Tuckman has proposed the stages of group development (Northouse 2015). As per his opinion, the mentioned phases proposed by him are all necessary and inevitable for a team to grow. Various challenges and problems are bound to arise while working as a team. However, it is also expected that these problems are to be tackled and a plan is to be developed to find better solutions to deliver best results. In this respect, ‘forming-storming-norming-performing’, stages of team development can be discussed as under:

• Forming: In this stage, the members look for a safe and patterned behaviour in the group for better guidance or direction (Fern et al. 2012). The leader of the team is usually responsible for performing this duty. An assurance of safety has to be recognised from the side of the members. Various planning are made about the similarities and dissimilarities for future planning. In this respect, it can be said that certain rules are also implemented while forming a team. It is in this stage that the members attempt to do the tasks and try to understand each other well. The teams of the Oil Company were formed in this stage (Schjoedt et al. 2013).
• Storming: It is the stage when the members attempt to organize the group. It is inevitable that some kinds of conflicts are bound to arise due to some issues in their personal relationship. However, as suggested by Marshall et al. (2014), the individuals in the team have to bend and mould their attitudes, ideas and beliefs for the sake of keeping a good relation with the other members of the team. Whenever there arises certain conflicts, questions automatically arises as who is responsible for the mishap. In this case, it is expected that the members should focus on solving the problems rather than creating havoc about it.
• Norming: This stage is characterised by cohesion among the members of the group. It is expected that the members will acknowledge the contribution of all the members of the team. As opined by Watson (2013), performance of a team is expected to gain momentum when leadership is shared among the members. When the group members are actively engaged in the performance of the team, the members willingly change for the betterment of the performance of the team. In this respect, it can also be mentioned that a level of trust is also generated among the members of the team. There is also a continuous flow of information that results in a creative and innovative approach towards the job.
• Performing: It has been pointed out by Bakker et al. (2013), that if a member is able to evolve to stage four, the member is expected to have a capacity, range and depth of their personal relationship. It is also expected that the nature and the co-ordination of the members of the team should be improve and the productivity also increases. The group become self-assuring and each of the members become task oriented. Support from each member of the group helps in addressing the issues at major point of times (Goetsch and Davis 2014). For gaining overall productivity, working as a team is quiet necessary.
• Adjourning: The final stage is the adjourning, that involves the termination of the task behaviour and disengagement from the relationship. A better concluding work is much important by the end of the teamwork (Armstrong and Taylor 2014).

Case Study: Calgary Oil Shale Technologies, Inc.

The three functional groups included by Howard were operation group that includes the hourly workers, who were responsible for maintaining the logging equipment. Second, was the ‘below ground group’, that consisted of the engineers, geologists and geophysicists, who were the ones who decided where and how to dig or drill and the third one is the one that handled the equipment over calls (Warrick 2016).

The main aim of Howard and Debrito was to let these group members talk among each other. For fulfilling the same, monthly gathering for a ‘fireside chat’ was organized. The chats were held near the cafeteria where the members could enjoy free tea or coffee usually brought by two planners. This tactics was applied by them so that the members could talk to each other in a more informal and refreshed way. The second team was ‘problem bursting team’. This was a temporary team and included members from each of the three teams. This team had a team leader, who was a supervisor and was respected for his designation. The problems that were evolved in the fireside chats were resolved in this problem bursting team. In this respect, it is to be mentioned that the leaders of this team was trained and they have the creative solution towards solving the issues that the team members faced.

Q2. What role did Debrito play in the success of the Alberta team-based productivity project? What leadership approach did he employ to help reduce conflict between labour and the professionals? Do you agree with Algoma Howard that if she just had a Debrito in Colorado, the project would be succeeded? Explain.

            Debrito was one of the oldest and the most trusted employee of the company. He was approached by Howard to perform the role of a leader. Thus, the role of a team leader can be discussed here. As stated by Anitha (2014), a team leader is one who provides direction, instructions and guidance to the members of the group. A leader is one who is ready to perform at all level. The person is responsible to interpret and formulate the plan among the other members. A leader is one who represents the organization on the behalf of other members. He is a guide and philosopher and is always ready to solicit support to the members.

Few roles of a leader can be mentioned in this respect:

• The ‘analyser’: A good and well performed leader is the one who is able to analyse the situation well based on the data and information available in the organization. The leader must be confident enough to think logically and act on the basis of the understanding towards the benefit of the organization.
• The ‘structuralizer’: It is has been pointed out by Kossek and Thompson (2016), a leader needs to be highly structured in his or her ways of approach towards a particular concept. The members must be ensured about the fact that whatever step is to be taken by the leader, that must lead to a greater success of the organization.
• The ‘socialiser’: A social leader is the one who socializes and intervenes with the members of the team. As pointed out by Petrou et al. (2016), without gaining proper accountability and mutual collaboration among the members of the team, a leader cannot be considered to be a good socialiser. The problems and the issues of the members can be addressed only when the member is able to socialize with the members of the organization.
• The ‘conceptualizer’: As stated by Schaufeli and Taris (2014), a leader who has a good vision and understanding of the issue and problems that the members of the organization faced is considered to be the eligible leader. It is expected that the leader will focus on mutual accountability and collaboration.

If the same scenario is to be connected with Debrito, then it can be said that he has been a successful leader at the time of performing his role in shaping the employee climate in the work place. The above mentioned qualities are well observed in him.

Again, in case of Howard it can be said that with the experience gathered during her work, Howard suggested using a ‘connection ladder’ for building a proper connection among the members. The approach made by her was to move the person from indifference towards commitment. This approach made by her proved to be successful and the teams came closer by this means. It is due to their joint focus that the long awaited problems have been able to resolve.

Phases involved in Team Development

The main difference this time that was seen in the group activity was that primarily it was focussed only on the problems faced by the members as a group; while, now the focus is to create a mutual understanding among the members of all the groups. In the process, a new ‘rules of engagement’ was included (Galegher et al. 2014). It was encouraged that the members would not only come up with their problems but would suggest certain recommendations to solve those problems.

Q3. What advice would you give Algoma Howard and her team for improving the employee involvement climate, containing cost and meeting production goals at the Colorado facility?

The major approach made by the team was identifying the problems that were highlighted in the fireside chats. Problems aroused in the team when there were certain resented moments between the two teams. Due to the introduction of the problem-bursting team, the managers of the other team felt disempowered because the managers were supposed to solve the issues of the team (Zakoscielna et al. 2014). However, they were now asked to share their problems and derive at a common solution. This created a kind of dissent among the members and the managers.

         It was only after a long one and a half year, the entire team was organized into a ‘cross functional’ team. They were empowered to make their own decision and they elected their own leader as well. The approach was a successful one and by the end of the session, it was found that the members decided to continue with their fireside chats after work (Fitzgerald et al. 2013). The main intension of gathering the teams together and focus on the unity of the members were fulfilled. Debrito and Howard were the two leaders of the two teams.

Looking at the scenario, it can be said that both the leaders need to focus in creating a better understanding among the members of the team. It has been seen that there were conflicts among the members and thus, it is expected that the members have to be conscious enough to understand other’s problems and then deriving at particular decision. Both the persons are very passionate about their performance and their dedication towards the organization is very high (Miller 2013). They always perform their duties in accordance with the morals and values of the organization. No such steps are taken that could harm the sentiments of the members or the business protocol as a whole.

Implementation of the idea was a pure success for the management. Both productivity and morale of the teams were seen to soar high. With this successful intervention, it was aimed to introduce the same cross functional group technique in the Colorado Company under the guidance of Algoma Howard. However, the scenario turned different in Colorado. At this place, people were not found to take part in the fireside chats. The formulae that were applied in Alberta did not seem to operate in Colorado. The problem-bursting team were also not much committed and enthusiastic towards their approach. When the members were bribed to participate in the games, they did turn up but by the end of the game.

Types and Evolutions of Teams

Same kind of approach can be made in the Colorado chapter of the company. In this respect it can be said that both Howard and Debrito were well recognized among the employees of the organization. They were well treated and respected for their work and contribution towards the organization (Harris et al. 2013). Thus, it is expected that the members will respect the decisions taken by the leaders. Thus, any decision to be made from the side of these leaders will be respected and honoured. This would create a positive impact in Colorado office of the organization.

Conclusion:

The main task of a team is to understand the problems and challenges faced by the members of the team and co ordinate their efforts towards achieving a common goal. The leadership style and the approaches made to improve the condition of the organization have been discussed. Various theories and models have been used to underpin the various approaches made by both the individuals who were playing the role of the leader. It cannot be neglected that the role played by the leader in an organization is very vital and major progress of the organization relies on the efficiency and capability of a leader in managing the team and the members in it.

Reference list:

Anitha, J., 2014. Determinants of employee engagement and their impact on employee performance. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management.

Armstrong, M. and Taylor, S., 2014. Armstrong’s handbook of human resource management practice. Kogan Page Publishers.

Avolio, B.J. and Yammarino, F.J. eds., 2013. Transformational and charismatic leadership: The road ahead. Emerald Group Publishing.

Bakker, A.B., Oerlemans, W.G. and Ten Brummelhuis, L.L., 2013. Becoming fully engaged in the workplace: What individuals and organizations can do to foster work engagement. The fulfilling workplace: The organization’s role in achieving individual and organizational health, pp.55-69.

Fern, M. J., Cardinal, L. B., and O’Neill, H. M. 2012. The genesis of strategy in new ventures: Escaping the constraints of founder and team knowledge. Strategic Management Journal, 33(4), 427-447.

Fitzgerald, L., Ferlie, E., McGivern, G. and Buchanan, D., 2013. Distributed leadership patterns and service improvement: Evidence and argument from healthcare. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(1), pp.227-239.

Galegher, J., Kraut, R.E. and Egido, C., 2014. Intellectual teamwork: Social and technological foundations of cooperative work. Psychology Press.

Gammack, J. and Poon, S., 2013. Knowledge and teamwork in the virtual organization. E-Commerce and V-Business, p.213.

Goetsch, D.L. and Davis, S.B., 2014. Quality management for organizational excellence. pearson.

Harris, A., Day, C., Hopkins, D., Hadfield, M., Hargreaves, A. and Chapman, C., 2013. Effective leadership for team improvement. Routledge.

Kossek, E.E. and Thompson, R.J., 2016. Workplace Flexibility: Integrating Employer and Employee Perspectives to Close the Research–Practice Implementation Gap. The Oxford Handbook of Work and Family, p.255.

Marshall, T., Goldberg, R.W., Braude, L., Dougherty, R.H., Daniels, A.S., Ghose, S.S., George, P. and Delphin-Rittmon, M.E., 2014. Supported employment: assessing the evidence. 

Miller, P. ed., 2013, May. School Leadership in the Caribbean: perceptions, practices, paradigms. Symposium Books Ltd.

Northouse, P.G., 2015. Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage publications.

Petrou, P., Demerouti, E. and Schaufeli, W.B., 2016. Crafting the Change The Role of Employee Job Crafting Behaviors for Successful Organizational Change. Journal of Management, p.12

Schaufeli, W.B. and Taris, T.W., 2014. A critical review of the Job Demands-Resources Model: Implications for improving work and health. In Bridging occupational, organizational and public health (pp. 43-68). Springer Netherlands.

Schjoedt, L., Monsen, E., Pearson, A., Barnett, T. and Chrisman, J.J., 2013. New venture and family business teams: understanding team formation, composition, behaviors, and performance. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(1), pp.1-15.

Warrick, D. D. “What leaders can learn about teamwork and developing high performance teams from organization development practitioners.”Performance Improvement 55, no. 3 (2016): 13-21.

Watson, T. 2013. The Personnel Managers (Routledge Revivals): A Study in the Sociology of Work and Employment. Routledge.

Zakoscielna, K.M., Parmelee, P.A. and Lichtenstein, S., 2014. Perceptions of staff quality improvement training needs among Veterans Affairs leadership. Journal of Research in Nursing, 19(2), pp.131-143.