Learn free form Wikipedia’s selection and earn gcl, European Chamber’s world recognized commercial certificate
Download 7.78 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Maximum and minimum scores
- Future research and implications
- Styles
- Autocratic or authoritarian style
- Participative or democratic style
- Narcissistic leadership
Ways to measure team compositionThere are a variety of ways in which team composition can be operationalized, or turned into a measurable team characteristic. The common element of the methodologies involves first measuring characteristics of individual team members. Maximum and minimum scoresMaximum and minimum characteristic scores are considered most important when one team member having or lacking a characteristic will significantly impact the team’s performance. For example, a very disagreeable team member may obstruct a team’s ability to agree and cause poorer performance (Bell, 2007). Mean scoreA team score for a particular characteristic can also be measured by taking the average, or mean, of all team member scores. Using this method, the amount of each trait for individual members is combined to form a group-level measurement of that trait. For example, cohesion, a characteristic sensibly measured using a team score due to its synergistic nature, could be measured this way. This would be accomplished by providing team members with a survey for them to assess cohesive traits (i.e. cooperation, harmony) and then calculating the average of the survey scores (Barrick, et al., 1998). VariabilityIt is possible to look at how much diversity there is on a team by calculating the standard deviation, or how much team member differs on a characteristic. For example, team experience, quantified as the continuous number of years a team member has been on a specific team, could be measured this way. A standard deviation of experience would show the variability in team members’ amount of experience in comparison to each other, (Humphrey et al, 2009). Future research and implicationsAs organizations continues to change in part due to globalization of business and advancements in technology, the way in which team composition strategies are implemented must keep up. There is a strong need for further research on how to measure team composition as well as which methods of measurement are most appropriate for which characteristics. Are teams better off with a balance of a trait? Should minimums or maximums of particular traits be avoided? How can it be determined when a team has enough cohesion or social awareness? Should decision-making be facilitated by someone external to the group? To answer these questions, there is also a need to more concretely define the characteristics in order to allow for the generalizability of research findings from one organization to another. To strengthen research results, studies also need to be conducted longitudinally in order to capture changing team characteristics such as emergent states. There are innumerable decisions to be made upon constructing a team of individuals who will be able to successfully perform. It is crucial to consider all of the discussed variables that determine team composition as well as monitor those that are determined by team composition. The overarching perspective looks at the homogeneity and heterogeneity of a team's composition. There is a continuous debate of which type of composition is most desirable. For this, and all factors of team composition, it is truly on a case-by-case basis. This leaves the door wide open for continued research on different teams in different settings with different compositions. The Five Dysfunctions of a Team According to the book, The Five Dysfunctions of a Teamby consultant and speaker Patrick Lencioni, the five dysfunctions are[3]:
Leadership Leadership has been described as “a process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task".[1] Other in-depth definitions of leadership have also emerged. Leadership is "organizing a group of people to achieve a common goal". The leader may or may not have any formal authority. Students of leadership have produced theories involving traits,[2]situational interaction, function, behavior, power, vision and values,[3] charisma, and intelligence, among others. Somebody whom people follow: somebody who guides or directs others. StylesLeadership style refers to a leader's behavior. It is the result of the philosophy, personality, and experience of the leader. Rhetoric specialists have also developed models for understanding leadership (Robert Hariman, Political Style,[46] Philippe-Joseph Salazar, L'Hyperpolitique. Technologies politiques De La Domination[47]). Different situations call for different leadership styles. In an emergency when there is little time to converge on an agreement and where a designated authority has significantly more experience or expertise than the rest of the team, an autocratic leadership style may be most effective; however, in a highly motivated and aligned team with a homogeneous level of expertise, a more democratic or laissez-faire style may be more effective. The style adopted should be the one that most effectively achieves the objectives of the group while balancing the interests of its individual members.[48] Autocratic or authoritarian styleUnder the autocratic leadership style, all decision-making powers are centralized in the leader, as with dictators. Leaders do not entertain any suggestions or initiatives from subordinates. The autocratic management has been successful as it provides strong motivation to the manager. It permits quick decision-making, as only one person decides for the whole group and keeps each decision to him/herself until he/she feels it needs to be shared with the rest of the group.[48] Participative or democratic styleThe democratic leadership style consists of the leader sharing the decision-making abilities with group members by promoting the interests of the group members and by practicing social equality. Laisez-faire or free rein styleA person may be in a leadership position without providing leadership, leaving the group to fend for itself. Subordinates are given a free hand in deciding their own policies and methods. Narcissistic leadershipVarious academics such as Kets de Vries, Maccoby, and Thomas have identified narcissistic leadership as an important and common leadership style. Toxic leadershipA toxic leader is someone who has responsibility over a group of people or an organization, and who abuses the leader-follower relationship by leaving the group or organization in a worse-off condition than when he/she first found them. Directory: forms forms -> Form a-122 File No. Retirement homes act, 2010 application under section 116 of the act forms -> Course overview forms -> Pre-matric scholarship for students belonging to the minority communities forms -> Cutting Greenhouse Gases Global warming forms -> Bowl game blarney: Why Sports Tourism Trumps Logic in the Quest for a true College Football Champion in the United States” Prepared for: Dr. Tom Hinch Reviewed by: Tim Enger 0845772 Due Date: December 10, 2005 Word Count: 6,677 forms -> Steven m. Glassman forms -> Teresa k. Blodgett forms -> Atlanta Falcons Internet Scavenger Hunt forms -> Registration information forms -> Chapter 8 seaman to admiral-21 (sta-21) program Download 7.78 Mb. Share with your friends:
|