CC BY
5THE ROLE OF TEAMBUILDING IN IMPROVING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A MODERN ORGANIZATION
Abstract
The urgency of the problem under investigation is due to the fact that teambuilding in modern social organizations is aimed at increasing their effectiveness and should be considered as a social technology, in the fullness of its scientific conditionally, systemic interdependence of social effects and consequences.
The purpose of the article is to generalize and analyze the results of an experimental study of teambuilding role in improving the modern organization effectiveness. The article considers the main approaches to teambuilding understanding, presents the results of experimental work, and suggests technologies for the formation of effective management teams.
The materials of the article may be useful for administrators, managers and psychologists dealing with personnel management.
Keywords
team, teambuilding, technology and model of teambuilding
AUTHOR
Tatyana I. Kulikova Ph.D., Associate Professor, Department of Psychology and Pedagogy, Tula State Lev Tolstoy Pedagogical University, Tula, Russia. 125, Lenin avenue, Tula, 300026, Russia. E-mail: tativkul@gmail.com
Introduction
Working with teams in all spheres of activity is of great importance in modern society. Teams are an integral part of any person's life and accompany his/her activity all the time. Scientific literature devoted to the problems of management persistently endorses the idea that the main tool of the mankind development at globalization stage is the improvement of "organizational structure" - the mechanism of uniting separate and inefficient individually persons into effective groups. One of these groups in the modern organization is a team.
The first studies of teamwork, published in the early 1960s, were devoted to finding the ways to improve managerial work in order to increase general effectiveness of the organization. Management technologies play a leading role in the teambuilding of this kind. Such technologies "are the most closely guarded commercial secret of almost any corporation, because the technology of production can be purchased or invented, and the management technology of a sufficiently large organization can only be grown as a living being together with the organization itself" (Karyakin, 2014). In due course with the expansion of activity spheres, the concept of "team" was highly distorted, and its boundaries are very blurred.
Even taking into account the fact that teamwork is associated with some difficulties, it is hardly possible to meet a person who did not have to participate in teamwork at least once in his life. Teams are created to solve specific problems, and good
teams are the result of carefully planned and painstaking work. Careful design of the team is a profession. To achieve accurate and harmonious work of the team, it is necessary to understand comprehensively the processes taking place in it. This comprehension of the teamwork reasons often leads to the creation of more efficient and united teams.
All this allows us to conclude that teambuilding in modern social organizations, aimed at increasing their effectiveness, should be considered as a social technology, in the fullness of its scientific conditionally, systemic interdependence of social effects and consequences (Doroshenko, Zotova, 2010).
A somewhat different approach for analyzing the problem of teambuilding gives the phenomenon of organizational culture. Category basis for studying organizational culture within the frameworks of management sociology is presented in the works of Russian sociologists: L.Ya. Averyanov, D.S.Klementyev, L.I. Pankova, G.S. Batygin, S.A. Belanovsky, V.I. Dobrenkov, G.T. Zhuravlev, A.I. Kravchenko, V.P. Kultygin, N.I. Lapin, G.V. Osipov, V.A. Yadov, S.T. Guryanov and others.
One can distinguish the following approaches to building a team in foreign social psychology (Belbin, 2014, Lewis, 2004, Parker, Kroll, 2012):
- an approach based on working out and coordination of team goals (teambuilding is defined as the development of the ability of a group of people to achieve their goals);
- an interpersonal approach or an approach that focuses on the analysis of processes and improvement of interpersonal relations (the process of teambuilding is aimed at increasing interpersonal relations in the group, and it is based on the assumption that because of this the team will be able to function more efficiently);
- representatives of a role approach to teambuilding state that this process improves the work of the team, clarifying the roles (as a result of the teambuilding, each member of the team knows his own role and those of the others, what expectations he has for others and others for him);
- an approach to teambuilding based on problem solving (in the opinion of the of this approach representatives, the team becomes more effective as a result of joint problem solving by all the team members, that is, in the process of forming the team, the team members determine the main problems, deal with them and actively plan their activities).
The last of these approaches is the most common in the interpretation of teambuilding, incorporating all previous approaches.
In general, foreign social psychology has broad experience in the development of theoretical concepts, principles and technologies of teambuilding. Recently, the development of these issues does not take place only within the frameworks of this or that approach. There are three levels of socio-psychological analysis of the team dynamics and structure:
1) level of a particular team member (improvement and development of skills important in teamwork);
2) actual team level (training of the team);
3) level of the organization in which the team works. The further development of the issue is probably connected with determining the links between these three levels.
To date, there is a situation when the term "team" is used more and more often in scientific (sociological, psychological, economic, etc.) literature and in business. And since this term was included in the scientific lexicon very recently, there is still no clear, unified understanding of this term meaning, its accurate axiomatic definition.
A team is usually called a small number of people (usually 5-7, rarely 15-20), who share the goals, values and common approaches to the team-work, have complementary skills; take responsibility for the final results, can change the functional-role correlation (perform any roles within the group); have mutually determining affiliation of their own
and partners to this community (group) (Zhukov, Pavlova, Zhuravlev, 2014).
The essence of the team is common responsibility for all its members. For this kind of responsibility, a specific goal is required, the mission in which all members of the team believe. The mission of the team should include an element related to victory, primacy, progress. There is a difference between the goals of the team and its mission: the goals of the team allow you to monitor your progress towards success, and the mission as more global in its essence gives sense and energy to all specific goals.
Team relations, which traditionally include such concepts as a feeling of fellowship, a spirit of partnership, can manifest themselves only in the business sphere, without influencing the personal life of team members. There exist many examples where successful business partners cannot bear each other when it comes to other areas of communication.
When considering the definition of a team, there may be some misunderstanding of what exactly the difference is between the team and the usual group. Such confusion can occur because people in organizations often consider the groups they belong to as teams, but it is not actually so. Despite this, there are several important differences between a group and a team (Zinkevich-Evstigneeva, 2013).
First, in a group, the work execution usually depends on the individual activities of its members. The result of the team's work depends on the personal contribution of each member to the achievement of the goal, in close cooperation.
The second difference is related to the role of the responsibility for the work. Usually, members of groups unite their resources to achieve the goal, although this is simultaneously the work many individuals, which is taken into account when calculating bonuses. Groups members most often do not bear responsibility for the overall result of the work, but are only responsible for their personal activities. Teams, however, give great importance to the individual work of each member, as well as to the overall result. Team members work together to achieve the result (for example, goods production, service delivery, or solution development), which is the joint contribution of the team to the work, and each team member shares responsibility for the result. The main difference is as follows: in groups, people who control the organization require a personal report on the work done by everyone, while team members exercise self-control (Kapitonov, Zinchenko, 2012).
Third, when group members may only share a common goal, team members, among other things, share the same general responsibility to achieve the goal. Moreover, these goals are often considered as an opportunity to win the realization of a goal (to be first or best in something). For example, the team's work at the company's plant, which has financial difficulties, may seek to make this company a leader in its industry. The team of one of the private general education schools may try to prepare their graduates in accordance with higher standards of knowledge than any other school in the area. Team members concentrate on joint achievement of higher goals, which in combination with the specifics of the tasks makes them deeply interested in the results of their activities. You can say that teams have a "right to own" goals and usually spend a lot of time setting them up. Like groups, teams tend to demonstrate their level of skills and knowledge through the goals set. They set themselves broader goals, which are a significant source of emotional energy, a stimulus for their active realization.
Last, teams differ from groups by the nature of their communication with the management. Usually the management sets a goal before the team and does not interfere with the planning process in the framework of teamwork, that is, teams must have different levels of autonomy. They must have a high degree of freedom and be able to set intermediate goals independently, to plan the work time and be able to bring the results as close as possible to the goal (Shkuratova, 2001).
The systematic approach is fundamental in the work to create an effective team. It is based on the following principles: a principle of fundamental values - the desire to subordinate personal goals to a common goal is shared by all team members; a principle of harmony - the distribution of roles according to personal and professional competences and characteristics of its members, the ability to reach consensus, constructively resolve conflicts; a principle of trust - each member of the team is adequately open and honest with respect to others, has access to strategic information important for obtaining the positive result; a principle of equality - all members of the team are subject to uniform norms and rules and have equal rights, including the right to express their own opinion; a principle of adaptability - redistribution of roles, including the change of a leader, preparation of successors; a principle of additionality - the weak qualities of one team member are compensated with the strong qualities of another in the same aspect.
Materials and Methods
To determine the psychological climate in a group and to assess the strengths and weaknesses of communication development within a company, we conducted a diagnostic survey on the basis of one of the project institutes branch in Tula. This branch had been working in the market of planning organizations for more than 50 years, due to the current economic situation in the country, it was bought by a businessman in November 2014. An interesting phenomenon was noted at the time when this Tula branch was changing hands. Employees were deprived of wages for more than 4 months, rent for premises was not paid - and people had to take work at home. But only 5 people out of 110 employees of the branch resigned at their own will.
During initial interviews with employees, it was revealed that one of the main factors that kept people at this job was "a good friendly team." Among other equal factors, the work in a friendly team and favorable psychological atmosphere allowed the organization to survive and overcome the crisis situation. The study involved 40 people: 28 women and 12 men aged 22 to 56 years. The average age of the subjects was 39 years.
Our research included 4 stages. The theoretical stage involves determining the criterial base of the research, determining goals and objectives, as well as studying literature concerning this issue. This stage included comprehensive study of the researched problem, concepts and phenomena. Studying the mechanisms of teambuilding, as well as revealing the influence of the team's role on the effectiveness of the modern organization. The differences between work collective and team were determined, as well as criteria for determining the level of team solidarity.
At the methodological stage, the general research plan was drawn up. We selected research methods, determined the procedure of the research. The procedure of the ascertaining experiment and the methods of processing the results were determined. The procedure for conducting the ascertaining experiment was clearly aligned with the existing base.
The experimental stage included the preparatory part and the actual experiment itself. During the preparatory part, an individual conversation with the director of the planning institute took place. During this conversation, the interests of management were determined and the peculiarities of the employees' labor process were revealed. Conducting of the actual experiment included the use of pre-selected methods. The survey itself was conducted separately in each department. The staff was provided with handouts, which included certain forms and a brief instruction. The purpose of the ascertaining experiment was to determine the level of team solidarity as an efficiency factor.
The following criteria for team solidarity are distinguished in the modern literature:
1) solidarity and organization of the structure; 2) presence of a common idea and focus on its realization; 3) high level of interaction and the presence of intensive communication between all parts of the team.
Based on the above mentioned criteria, we developed a diagnostic program, which is presented in Table 1.
The methods presented in the diagnostic program (Akimov, 2008) make it possible to obtain quantitative and qualitative data, subjective and objective indicators of the team solidarity level in the organization.
TABLE 1. DIAGNOSTIC PROGRAM OF THE RESEARCH
№ Method name and author Purpose of the methodology
1 Test "Determination of psychological climate in a team" Determination of the psychological climate in a team
2 The method of personality orientation diagnosis by B. Bass Determination of personality orientation prevailing type
3 Daniel Dennison's questionnaire for the diagnosis of organizational culture Evaluation of the strong and weak points of communication development within the company
4 The method "Distribution of roles in a team" (by Belbin) Defining the roles of team members
Results
During the ascertaining phase of the experiment, we diagnosed the psychological climate in the team and evaluated the strong and weak points of the communication development within the company.
According to the results of the questionnaire "Determining psychological climate in a team", such indicators as "responsibility" (19%), "organization" (16%) and "awareness" (16%) are "ideal". This may be due to the specifics of the organization's work. The employees of the branch are criminally liable for the work they do. High indicators of "responsibility" criterion are also connected with this, besides, projects must be submitted within a certain period of time and all activities are regulated. The high levels of "organization" and "awareness" indicators are due to the system of relationships in the organization. Since the company carries out large orders, all the work is divided not only among departments, but also within them. No one action can be performed without agreement. Therefore, the company has well-established communication and information exchange processes.
According to the results of the personality orientation diagnosis by B. Bass, it can be stated that most employees are orientated to business - 40%. This indicator tells that more than a third of all subjects are interested in solving business problems, in doing the work as well as possible, they are interested in business cooperation. Such employees are able to defend their own opinion, which is useful for achieving common goals.
35% of the respondents focused on communication. This indicates the desire to maintain relations with people under any conditions. Such employees are often focused on joint activities, they are also characterized by dependence on the group and desire for approval. Such emotional attachment has a beneficial effect on the overall psychological climate in the team.
Only 25% of the subjects were focused on themselves. People who have such an orientation want direct rewards. They are aggressive in achieving status and are prone to
rivalry. At the same time, the 25% indicator is not critical.
This percentage ratio indicates a healthy team that is focused on the result, on common goal. At the same time, the importance of the collective itself is great. And healthy competition shows the presence of ambitions among employees who are able to realize themselves in this organization.
According to the results of Daniel Dennison's questionnaire, it was revealed that 36% of the respondents believe this team to have clear understanding of corporate objectives and strategic goals. A clear understanding about the company's strategy by employees provides an understanding of how the members of the organization can contribute to the implementation of the strategy.
22% of the total number of respondents tell about sufficiently developed level of involvement. The company is actively developing a sense of participation and responsibility among its employees. Employees have the right, necessary authority, initiative and ability to manage their own working process.
Analysis of the results of the methodology "Distribution of roles in a team" (by Belbin) allows us to conclude that there are all possible roles in this team. The presence of all types may indicate a well-coordinated teamwork and the existing positive relationships in this team. This distribution of roles has a positive effect on solving problem situations and on the speed of work execution and decision making. Each employee is valuable at different stages of work. Also, this distribution of roles is due to the fact that employees of different departments took part in the experiment (Belbin, 2013).
Most of the employees played the role of "executor" (22%). Executors are very effective organizers and administrators. They may have a lack of flexibility and dislike unverified ideas. The main quality of Executors is discipline; While all other natural abilities or intelligence are almost always secondary. The main function of the Executor in the team is organization of work. Executors are reliable, conservative and efficient. They have high internal stability and a low level of anxiety. Executors mainly work for the team, and not for the sake of satisfying their own interests. They perfectly realize ideas in practical actions.
The second in number was the role of "fine finisher" (18%). Such employees are very diligent and honest. They always look for errors and shortcomings, they assume control over the terms of assignments execution. Finishers are people who have this gift in full measure. They are characterized by attention to details and ability to keep in mind the planned things, missing nothing until the work is done. The presence of such people in this organization is really very important. Each planned object must be issued in accordance with all the rules and in due time. Such employees are the basis of the organization.
Approximately the same was the number of "formers" (17%). Formers always act as drivers for action, and if the team is inclined to inertness or complacency, the presence of a Former will remove it from this state. Such a person is always dynamic, easily challenges and exerts pressure. The style of Former's leadership is to motivate, to succeed. The presence of Formers in the team brings new ways of working and solving the set tasks.
The number of employees with the role of "collectivist" was 13%. Collectivists are very soft, receptive and diplomatic people. Collectivist plays a relationship-oriented, supportive role in a team. If team members are difficult to communicate, Collectivists can have a soft impact on the situation and prevent possible conflicts, thereby assisting the formal team leader to carry out the task. Representatives of this type are often found among the top management of organizations. They are excellent instructors for young managers.
Equal percentage of employees were determined with the roles of "thinker" and "chairman" (10% each role). Employees with such a role are inventive, have a rich
imagination. Thinkers act alone, sitting in their corner and contemplating different options. They have high intelligence and a very high level of creativity. The presence of Thinkers in a team is necessary during periods of stagnation and crisis situations. Chairman is strong domination and devotion to the goals of the team. This is usually a mature, confident, self-disciplined employee. He can clearly formulate goals, promote decisions, and delegate authority. He has a clear idea of the strengths and weaknesses of the team and maximizes the potential of each team member.
Equal percentage of employees were also determined with the roles of "appraiser" and "scout" (5% respectively). Appraisers are sensible, discerning people with strategic thinking. They see all the alternatives, they weigh everything. Representatives of this role clearly do not show themselves in a team until the time comes to make important decisions. Appraisers are characterized by a high intellectual level, high criticality of thinking, especially with regard to their ability to put forward counterarguments. Appraisers are slow enough in their reasoning and always prefer to think cautiously. Appraisers may lack inspiration or the ability to motivate others. Scouts are inclined not so much to offer original ideas, but "to collect" fragments of others' ideas and to develop them. Scouts are particularly skilled in studying resources outside the team. With average indices of intellectual level and creativity, they are sociable, curious and socially oriented. Thanks to these qualities and the ability to use resources, Scouts are easier than Thinkers integrate into the team.
Discussions
The analytical stage included the processing of data obtained during the ascertaining phase of the experiment using mathematical statistics and correlation analysis based on Pearson criterion in order to establish the relationship between team building and the modern organization effectiveness. We numbered among teambuilding criteria the focus on communication, adaptability and involvement, responsibility, organization and interaction. Among effectiveness criteria - focus on business, mission and coordination, organization, collectivity and solidarity. The indicator (r = 0, 7) shows direct relationship between team building and the effectiveness of modern organization. This suggests that the higher is the level of team solidarity, the higher is the effectiveness of this organization.
On the basis of the theoretical and methodological analysis of the existing models of team building and empirical research data, we developed and proposed a model for the team building in modern organization and described in detail teambuilding technology (Figure 1).
FIGURE 1 - MODEL OF TEAMBUILDING IN A MODERN ORGANIZATION
This model allows us to present the technology of teambuilding, which can be divided into several stages (Kulikova, 2011 ).
I stage - preparatory. At this stage, a thorough analysis of the organization, its specifics, characteristics and working conditions is made. Preliminary discussions, interviews with management and employees are conducted to determine the goals and tasks of the following work. It is necessary to define the desired final result clearly, and to build further work accordingly. We also conduct psychological diagnostic research at this stage to identify the level of team solidarity, determine the presence or absence of intragroup relations, and determine the personal characteristics of employees.
II stage - educational. Discussions in this case will serve as a feedback mechanism, you can see whether the received information is understood correctly by the employees of the organization, what is their attitude to this work. Delivering thematic lectures, leading discussions on a given issue. This work is carried out to expand and deepen knowledge about teamwork. Understanding the mechanisms of team interaction by the employees of the organization will contribute to the formation of a favorable "territory" for further training. In addition, the discussion is a kind of feedback mechanism and allows you to understand how employees are disposed to teambuilding.
III stage - preparation of the plan for training teambuilding. Goals, objectives and training plan are coordinated with the head of the organization. The final list of the training participants and the organizational moments of the training are specified: duration, routine, place, necessary equipment, etc.
According to most experts, the most popular team-building (group) events for today are active trainings with elements of role-playing games. The technique of teambuilding is often realized in the process of playing various situations by creating the game reality where participants can easily be absorbed in the process of doing exercises. During the training, participants can go through all the stages of group dynamics, including aggression and feedback. The task of the psychologist-instructor is to help the participants to analyze the experience effectively and apply it to real working situations. The result of the trainings is improvement of the overall team work efficiency - the level of trust to the organization is raised, the team is built, united around a common goal with a real leader. A new type of relationship within the team, based on a deep acceptance and
understanding of each other, increases the personal responsibility of team members for achieving a common goal. The conflict level is reduced, the constructiveness of the employees and the creative activity of the team increases, which creates conditions for personal development.
IV stage - after-training support with the purpose of adapting the built team and its work in the conditions of the enterprise. The team can work independently at this stage, as everything that happened at the teambuilding training session was explained to its participants - they understood all the processes and changes occurring in the group. It is necessary to involve a manager or a head of personnel department in the process of teambuilding. Participation at the preparatory stage and then in the training, will allow him to evaluate the employees more accurately and understand what the goals and objectives of the organization the built team can solve.
At the stage of after-training support, new forms of communication learned by employees during the training are fixed. For example, clear schemes for documents circulation, changes in functions and relations between departments of the organization are introduced. The process of teambuilding is closely connected with the specifics of the organization and requires an optimal return from each participant. But "the game is worth the candle," as the built team is able to solve problems that seemed unsolvable earlier, and the organization can reach a new level of development. And all this happens with minimal time and material resources.
V stage - stage of control. The effectiveness of teamwork in the team is discussed and, if necessary, some correction is made. At this stage, a critical approach is very important, which will allow us to make an objective analysis of the resources adequacy. The leader supports the team spirit, establishes a control system and encourages self-control, replaces team members in case they do not want or cannot act in accordance with accepted standards and norms.
Conclusion
Thus, the results of the teambuilding model introduction at the enterprise are the following:
- increasing creativity in the field of team interaction;
- establishing understanding of the overall goals and objectives of the organization and relating them to the personal goals and objectives of the employees;
- awareness of interdependence in achieving the goals and objectives of the organization and meeting the personal needs of employees;
- improving the psychological climate;
- improving efficiency and discipline;
- increasing employees' loyalty;
- elimination of barriers when information flows, reduction of information distortion;
- improvement of interpersonal relations in the team;
- manifestation and resolution of conflict situations;
- emergence of new forms of staff motivation;
- increasing the staff's need for additional training and application of the acquired skills in practice;
- breakthrough in the development of new kinds of the organization's activities.
The results of the research to determine the role of teambuilding in improving the
effectiveness of the modern organization showed that, under all equal conditions, the existence of an effective and solid team leads to higher effectiveness index. The presence
of intra-group and inter-group relationships, openness, readiness to contacts, focus on the common goal - are those characteristics that distinguish the team from the group. A clear understanding of strategic goals by employees, their interest in development, favorable socio-psychological climate serves as strong motivation for more effective work. It was also found that organizations that worked on team building and team improving managed crisis situations faster and with less losses.
REFERENCES
Akimov, A.K. Psychological diagnostics [Electronic resource]. URL:
http://www.koob.ru/akimova_m_k/psih_diagnostika_akimovа (reference date is May 22, 2018).
Belbin, R.M. (2013). Types of roles in the management teams. M.; HIPPO.
Belbin, R.M. (2014). Teams of managers: The secrets of success and the reasons for failures. M.; HIPPO.
Volkogonova, O.D., Zub, A.T. (2010). Managerial psychology. M.; Infra-M.
Doroshenko, V.Yu, Zotova, L.I. (2010). Psychology and ethics of business communication / Ed. prof. V.N. Lavrinenko. M.; Culture and sport, UNITY.
Zhukov, Yu.M, Pavlova, E.N., Zhuravlev, A.V. (2014). Technologies of teambuilding. M.; Aspect-Press.
Zinkevich-Evstigneeva, ^D. (2013). Effective team: steps to create. A guide for those who want to create their own team. St. Petersburg; Speech.
Kapitonov, E.A., Zinchenko, G.P. (2012). Corporative culture: theory and practice. M.; Alpha-Press.
Karyakin, A.M. (2014). Teamwork: the fundamentals of theory and practice. M.; ECONOM-Pro.
Kulikova, T.I. (2011). Psychological trainings. Tula. Publishing House Image Print.
Lewis, J. (2004). Managing the team: How to get others to do what you need. St. Petersburg; Peter.
Parker, G., Kroll, R. (2012). Team building: A collection of exercises for coaches. St. Petersburg; Peter.
Shkuratova, I.P. (2001). Motivation for self-disclosure in interpersonal communication. Psychological messenger. Issue 3, 315-323.
