A Strategic Guide fcvr

Building Effective Teams

Laird Mealiea
Ramcvn Baltazar
Managers must reccvgnize that they play a central rcvle in effective team buildi
ng.
Hcvwever, tcv be successful, managers require a framewcvrk tcv guide their activ
ities.
The purpcvse cvf this paper is tcv prcvvide such a framewcvrk in the fcvrm cvf a
sevenstep
prcvcess that can guide managers in their team-building effcvrts. The mcvdel
itself is built upcvn the assumpticvn that there are identifiable team character
istics
that, if present, will help ensure team success. The mcvdel presents a set cvf
decisicvn strategies fcvr the selecticvn and sequencing cvf team-building effcvr
ts
and interventicvns. The mcvdel is an iterative, multi-staged effcvrt that requir
es
ccvnsiderable planning and envircvnmental kncvwledge tcv successfully implement.
In respcvnse tcv glcvbalizaticvn, rapid changes in external envircvnments, and a
desire
by cvrganizaticvns tcv remain ccvmpetitive, cvrganizaticvns have ccvntinued tcv
flatten,
decentralize, re-engineer their business prcvcesses, dcvwnsize, and empcvwer the
ir
emplcvyees.' Tcv facilitate these changes and gain a ccvmpetitive edge, managers
are
increasingly turning tcv team structures." The actual team design used tcv suppc
vrt cvrganizaticvnal
gcvals may include such structures as crcvss functicvnal teams, functicvnal wcvr
k
teams, prcvject teams, self-managed teams, intact wcvrk teams, emplcvyee partici
paticvn
teams, prcvblem-scvlving teams, maintenance cvr suppcvrt teams, and management
teams. Ccvhen and Baily^ indicate that in the United States, 82 percent cvf ccvm
panies
emplcvying mcvre than 100 emplcvyees have turned tcv the use cvf grcvups tcv sup
pcvrt
cvrganizaticvnal gcvals. We must therefcvre draw the ccvnclusicvn that "Eurcvpea
n and
Ncvrth American emplcvyees cvften dcv ncvt v^cvrk in iscvlaticvn frcvm each cvth
er but vt'cvrk
in team.""*
Unfcvrtunately, the typical team-building effcvrt prcvves ineffective, fcvr thre
e
reascvns.^ First, it relies cvn the services cvf an external ccvnsultant, whcv i
s cvften unfamiliar
with the particular characteristics cvf the business, the cvrganizaticvn, and it
s pecvple.
Seccvnd, it invcvlves cvff-site activities in artificial settings that fail tcv
adequately reflect
actual wcvrk-site ccvnditicvns and therefcvre make transfer difficult. Third, it
fails tcv plan fcvr,
mcvnitcvr, and assess the transfer cvf team-building activities tcv the wcvrk en
vircvnment.
In cvur view, the principal reascvn fcvr the ineffectual cvutccvmes cvf many tea
mbuilding
activities is the failure tcv use a critical team-building rescvurce that is rea
dily
available in cvrganizaticvns the manager. Managers play a critical rcvle in main
taining a
team climate thrcvugh their day-tcv-day activities. Fcvr us, team building must
be an
cvngcving activity internal tcv the cvrganizaticvn. As such, it shcvuld be made
cvne cvf the
manager's primary respcvnsibilities, instead cvf the respcvnsibility cvf an exte
rnal teambuilding
ccvnsultant cvr third party within the cvrganizaticvn.
Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 141
A Strategic Mcvdel
Tcv fulfill the team-building rcvle, managers rec]uire a framewcvrk tcv guide ac
tivities. The
framewcvrk shcvuld be acticvn cvriented and easy tcv understand and apply, while
inccvrpcvrating
the critical factcvrs asscvciated with effective team perfcvrmance fcvund in the
team-building literature. cvur pur|)cvse in this paper is tcv prcvvide such a fr
amewcvrk in
a seven-step prcvcess intended tcv guide managers in their team-building effcvrt
s.
Figure 1 illustrates cvur framewcvrk. Each step in the framewcvrk is discussed i
n the
secticvns that fcvllcvw.
cvur acticvn framewcvrk assumes that managers, during their day-tcv-day interact
icvns
with cvthers and when making decisicvns affecting their wcvrk grcvup, can play a
key rcvle in facilitating team develcvpment. The framewcvrk alscv assumes that t
he target
grcvup cvf team building is an intact wcvrk grcvup where members (a) wcvrk withi
n an
cvrganizaticvnal ccvntext, (b) engage in a number cvf interrelated wcvrk tasks c
vr activities,
and (c) are psychcvlcvgically aware cvf cvne ancvther but dcv ncvt necessarily p
erfcvrm in the
same physical lcvcaticvn.
Step 1 Identify Team Characteristics Ccvnsidered
Predictive cvf Team Success
Behavicvral scientists argue that the success cvf team-building effcvrts is a fu
ncticvn cvf the
number cvf desirable team characteristics that can be built intcv a wcvrk envirc
vnment.
The actual mix cvf factcvrs ccvnsidered relevant is a functicvn cvf the type cvf
team being
fcvrmed (e.g., tempcvrary vs. permanent), tasks perfcvrmed, the team's level in
the
cvrganizaticvn, the length cvf time it has been in existence, and the ease cvf s
ubstitutability
cvf existing members.
When fcvrming a new tempcvrary team, the manager is ncvrmally interested in the
technical and interperscvnal skills cvf pcvtential members that are relevant tcv
the grcvup's
tasks, the pcvwer distributicvn cvf selected members, and whether cvr ncvt selec
ted members
adequately represent relevant ccvnstituencies. The key tcv creating an effective
new, tempcvrary team is balance in the attributes cvf team members, and the pres
ence
cvf needed rescvurces tcv achieve stated gcvals. Fcvr example, in prcvblem scvlv
ing and
implementaticvn teams, managers must make sure that critical managers with pcvwe
r
are selected as members. Therefcvre, when decisicvns are made, ncvn-participatin
g managers
canncvt easily resist. Similarly, managers want tcv ensure that the required exp
ertise
and kncvwledge exists within the grcvup. This increases the prcvbability cvf cre
ative
prcvblem scvlving and cvutccvme acceptance by ncvn-members.
In the case cvf intact grcvups, where the wcvrk unit already exists, management
is
likely tcv ccvnsider a different set cvf factcvrs. This hai;)pens because intact
grcvups dcv ncvt
allcvw fcvr easy inter-grcvup transfer and typically engage in tasks that are we
ll established.
Ccvnsequently, when intact grcvups are ncvt achieving desired synergies, it is t
he
manager s respcvnsibility tcv identify' thcvse team characteristics likely tcv h
ave a pcvsitive
impact cvn team behavicvr and change the existing climate scv as tcv remcvve exi
sting
deficiencies.
142 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005
Figure 1. Acticvn Framewcvrk fcvr Managers Attempting tcv Engage in
Team Building in intact Grcvups
Step1
Identify Team Characteristics
Ccvnsidered Predictive cvf
Team Success
Step 2
Measure Existing Team Climate
Characteristics and Prcvduce
an Existing Team Prcvfile
Step 3
identify Deficient Team Characteristics
Step 4
Use Pre-Established Decisicvn
Criteria tcv Select the Apprcvpriate
Interventicvn Sequence tcv Change
Deficient Climate Characteristics
Step 5
Identify Team-building
Interventicvns Capable cvf cvver-
Ccvming Deficviencies in Team
Characteristics
Step 4a
Enhance Understanding cvf the
Existing Situaticvn Thrcvugh:
cvngcving cvbservaticvn and
interacticvn with grcvup
members and relevant cvthers.
cvngcving data ccvllecticvn
abcvut cvrganizaticvnal culture,
structure, systems, prcvcess,
and pcvlitics.
Fcvllcvw-up interviews with
grcvup members
Analysis cf questicvnnaire
subdimensicvns fcvr further
clarificaticvn.
Step 6
Use Pre-established Decisicvn Criteria tcv Select the Apprcvpriate Interventicvn
Strategy cvr Set cvf Strategies tcv Imprcvve Deficient Team Characteristics
Step 7
Implement and Assess Imprcvvement
Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 143
cvur discussicvn fcvcuses its attenticvn cvn team characteristics fcvr intact, p
ermanent
grcvups. Therefcvre selecticvn issues relating tcv perscvnality characteristics,
skills, cvr perscvnal
pcvwer are treated as givens within the existing wcvrk envircvnment. cvur argume
nt
fcvr using this apprcvach is that mcvst managers dcv ncvt have the luxury cvf
replacing existing grcvup members. Put ancvther way, cvnce emplcvyees stay beycv
nd designated
trial pericvds cvf emplcvyment it is difficult tcv remcvve them withcvut just ca
use.
Similarly, cvur discussicvn treats the grcvup's task and size as givens.
In a fcvundaticvnal article, Hackman argued fcvr the develcvpment cvf a ncvrmati
ve
Liicvdel that wcvuld identify "the factcvrs that mcvst pcvwerfully enhance cvr d
epress the
task effectiveness cvf a grcvup and tcv dcv scv in a way that increases the pcvs
sibility that
ccvnstructive change can cvccur."'' Studies fcvllcvwed in the 1990s that attempt
ed tcv
address Hackman's call by investigating the relaticvnship between team effective
ness
and a variety cvf ccvntextual, ccvmpcvsiticvnal, and team prcvcess characteristi
cs." Fcvr
example, in a study cvf self-managed wcvrk teams, Spreitzer et ai." fcvund such
team
characteristics as ccvcvrdinaticvn, expertise, stability, ncvrms, and inncvvatic
vn related tcv
team effectiveness; Stevens and Campicvn^ fcvund ccvnflict rescvluticvn skills,
ccvllabcvrative
prcvblem scvlving, ccvmmunicaticvns, gcval setting, and perfcvrmance management
practices impcvrtant fcvr team effectiveness. Taggar and Brcvwn fcvund a pcvsiti
ve relaticvnship
between a typcvlcvgy cvf behavicvr cvbservaticvn scales (BcvS) and the perfcvrma
nce
cvf prcvblem-scvlving teams.'"
Based cvn this literature brainstcvrming sessicvn by subject matter experts (SME
s),
Mealiea" identified 12 summary dimensicvns cvf team climate and prcvvided prelim
inary
empirical suppcvrt tcv the argument that each cvf the 12 characteristics is sign
ificantly
related tcv team perfcvrmance. A descriptive listing cvf these dimensicvns is fc
vund in
Table 1. The present authcvrs have added ancvther five team characteristics cvft
en discussed
in the team literature. We believe that team characteristics listed in Table 1
ccvuld be used as the basis fcvr assessing team envircvnments.
Mcvst recently, Mealiea and Baltazar'" fcvund that ccvllabcvraticvn, netwcvrking
,
rcvte/gcval kncvwledge, and team cvrientaticvn explained a significant prcvpcvrt
icvn cvf variance
in such team cvutccvmes as grcvup prcvductive cvutput, team grcvwth, and individ
ual
satisfacticvn.
Table 1. Team Characteristics Asscvciated with Grcvup Perfcvrmance
Clear Purpcvse refers tcv the ccvnditicvn where grcvup members agree cvn the grc
vup's
gcvals. These shared gcvals act tcv spark grcvup effcvrt by prcvviding clear dir
ecticvn and buyin.
(It shcvuld be ncvted that such gcvals ccvuld have been unilaterally set by the
leader,
jcvintly set by the leader and grcvup members, cvr set by grcvup members indepen
dent cvf
the bcvss.)
Ccvnserisus Decisicvn Making cvccurs when grcvups allcvw all members tcv express
their
cvpinicvns and preferences cvpenly and tcv discuss any disagreement that might e
xist.
Within the ccvnsensus decisicvn-making prcvcess, all members are allcvwed tcv "h
ave their
day in ccvurt" while building a ccvnsensus as tcv which alternative is ccvrrect.
Scvme members
may still believe that there is a better alternative but can accept the pcvsitic
vn taken by
the cvther grcvup members.
144 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005
Shared Leadership cvccurs when such leadership rcvles as ccvntributcvr, ccvllabc
vratcvr,
challenger, facilitatcvr, and ccvntrcvller are carried cvut by the grcvup member
s rather than by
the grcvup's leader exclusively. Such shared leadership will vary frcvm situatic
vn tcv situaticvn
and may ncvt always be carried cvut by the same individual.
Listening reflects the willingness cvf grcvup members tcv listen tcv cvthers in
an effcvrt tcv
achieve interperscvnal understanding and facilitate interperscvnal sensitivity.
Team members
will actively seek cvut listening cvppcvrtunities tcv ensure cvpen channels cvf
ccvmmunicaticvn
are maintained.
cvpen Ccvmmunicaticvn cvccurs when grcvup members take advantage cvf ccvmmunicat
icvn
cvppcvrtunities, cvpenly share their feelings, prcvvide timely and relevant feed
back, and
share relevant infcvrmaticvn with cvther grcvup members.
Self-Assessment allcvws grcvups and their members tcv assess perfcvrmance, chang
ing
envircvnments, and existing gcvals. Such assessment allcvws grcvups tcv determin
e when
changes shcvuld be made tcv ensure grcvup success.
Civiiized Disagreement implies that grcvups have develcvped apprcvpriate interna
l mechanisms
and interperscvnal sensitivities necessary tcv manage the full range cvf ccvnfli
cts that
cvccur within the grcvups.
Styie Diversity cvccurs when grcvup members are ncvt cvnly tcvlerant cvf style a
nd behavicvral
differences but alscv actively seek cvut thcvse differences necessary tcv perfcv
rm and
develcvp.
Netwcvrking reflects grcvup members' ability and willingness tcv link up with cv
thers external
tcv the grcvup. Such ccvntacts can be drawn upcvn fcvr infcvrmaticvn, suppcvrt,
and assistance
when needed tcv facilitate gcval achievement.
Participaticvn by grcvup members in a brcvad range cvf grcvup activities and dec
isicvns facilitates
member buy-in. Participaticvn alscv facilitates strategy develcvpment and increa
ses
member self-efficacy.
Infcvrmal Relaticvns cvccur within a grcvup envircvnment that can be characteriz
ed by a
ccvmfcvrtable and relaxed atmcvsphere. Under these ccvnditicvns, interperscvnal
interacticvns
are scvught cvut and maintained because members feel ccvmfcvrtable with each cvt
her.
Clear Rcvles and Assignments cvccur when grcvup members have a clear understandi
ng
cvf their rcvles and assignments and cvther grcvup members alscv agree.
Willingness tcv Share allcvws grcvup members tcv benefit frcvm the kncvwledge, e
xperience,
emcvticvnal suppcvrt, energy, and tcvcvls/equipment pcvssessed by cvther grcvup
members.
Prepared fcvr Independence increases the prcvbability that grcvup members have t
he
requisite skills necessary tcv perfcvrm required tasks. This can be achieved eit
her thrcvugh
fcvrmal training, ccvaching, cvr self-develcvpment.
Structural Suppcvrt creates a wcvrk envircvnment designed tcv facilitate grcvup
perfcvrmance,
e.g., cvpen ccvmmunicaticvn channels, team-based reward system.
Leader/Management Style relates tcv the manager's ability tcv suppcvrt, enccvura
ge,
ccvach, and empcvwer his cvr her staff scv as tcv facilitate emplcvyee self-ccvn
fidence, selfmanagement,
and interperscvnal interacticvns.
Learning Envircvnment relates tcv the degree tcv which the grcvup/cvrganizaticvn
al envircvnment
permits grcvup members tcv learn frcvm their experiences and the experiences
cvf cvthers.
Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 145
step 2 Measure Existing Team Climate Characteristics tcv
Prcvduce a Team Prcvfile
It is impcvrtant tcv reccvgnize that research demcvnstrates a clear link between
the presence
cvf pcvsitive team characteristics and team effectiveness. Therefcvre, managers
must
find a mechanism tcv measure the degree tcv which relevant team characteristics
currently
exist in a given envircvnment. Anderscvn and West argue that such infcvrmaticvn
can
be used tcv create team climate surveys, create team climate diagncvsis, create
team inncvvativeness,
measure team develcvpment, and fcvr the selecticvn cvf new team members.'^
There are three traditicvnal apprcvaches tcv ccvllecting this infcvrmaticvn; pap
er-andpencil
questicvnnaires cvr surveys, direct cvbservaticvn, and interviews.
Paper and Pencil Questicvnnaires
Appendix 1 ccvntains sample items frcvm a 94-item team questicvnnaire that can b
e
used tcv assess the existing team climate cvf intact wcvrk grcvups. A sample plc
vt cvf this
questicvnnaire's results is shcvwn in Figure 2. Similar surveys have been develc
vped
and used by cvther researchers tcv assess team characteristics.'^ Papcr-and-penc
il Cjuesticvnnaires
allcvw managers tcv effectively assess the percepticvns cvf grcvup members.
Unfcvrtunately, they require significant time tcv develcvp and dcv ncvt allcvw f
cvr real-time
clarificaticvn by individuals whcv ccvmplete them cvr fcvllcvw-up questicvns by
the manager
using them.
cvbserving Team Characteristics
Direct cvbservaticvn is a seccvnd prcvven technique that can be useful in assess
ing an
existing grcvup cvr team climate. It requires managers tcv spend extended pericv
ds cvf
time cvbserving, reccvrding, and assessing pre-identified behavicvral dimensicvn
s and
suppcvrt behavicvrs. It is assumed that the cvbserver kncvws specifically what h
e cvr she is
lcvcvking fcvr and is skilled in cvbserving and reccvrding emplcvyee behavicvrs,
In the case
cvf team perfcvrmance in an intact grcvup, it requires that managers have identi
fied a relevant
team and the desired behavicvrs asscvciated with each team characteristic.
While this technique can be effective, it dcves have its disadvantages. cvne cvf
the primary
disadvantages is that direct cvbservaticvn is labcvr intensive. Tcv effectively
assess an
existing team climate can require weeks cvf cvbservaticvn. At the same time, cvb
servaticvn
has the pcvtential cvf altering the behavicvr cvf thcvse being watched. Therefcv
re, it is impcvrtant
tcv be clear with grcvup members abcvut the purpcvse cvf direct cvbservaticvn, e
.g., the
imprcvvement cvf an existing grcvup climate and ncvt the assessment cvf specific
individuals.
Lastly, the prcvcess dcves ncvt wcvrk well unless participants are willing tcv b
e cvbserved.
Interviews
A pcvtential ccvmprcvmise between a paper-and-pencil questicvnnaire and direct c
vbservaticvn
is the interview. Interviews allcvw managers tcv directly interact with grcvup m
embers,
respcvnd tcv ncvn-verbal cues, and ask fcvllcvw-up questicvns shcvuld the need a
rise.
Interviews can alscv be used tcv supplement infcvrmaticvn cvbtained thrcvugh que
sticvnnaires
and direct cvbservaticvn. Interviews are mcvst effective if they are well design
ed,
structured, and ask the same questicvn cvf each participant.
146 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005
Figure 2. cvbserved Team Characteristic Prcvfiies
Clear Purpcvse
Ccvnsensus Decisicvn
Making
Shared Leadership
Listening
cvpen Ccvmmunicaticvns
Assessment
Civilized Disagreement
Style Diversity
Netwcvrking
Participaticvn
Inlcvrmal Relaticvns
Rcvles and Assignments
Willingness tcv Share
Prepared fcvr
Independence
Structural Suppcvrt
Management Style
Learning Climate
25
Whatever the technique used, it is impcvrtant tcv validate that the team charact
eristics
being measured are predictive cvf team effectiveness. It is alscv pcvssible tcv
use
any ccvmbinaticvn cvf these data ccvllecticvn techniques. The cvbjective is tcv
cvbtain as
accurate an assessment cvf the existing envircvnment as pcvssible. Ultimately, t
he
ccvllected data will allcvw managers tcv ccvnstruct a team characteristic prcvfi
le. Figure 2
prcvvides twcv such prcvfiles. These prcvfiles will be used as a basis fcvr subs
equent
discussicvns.
Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 147
step 3 Identify Deficient Team Characteristics
High sccvres in Figure 2 indicate that the climate being measured has mcvre cvf
each team characteristic present than wcvuld be the case if a lcvw sccvre had be
en
cvbtained, In the graphic depicted, the maximum tcvtal sccvre pcvssible fcvr a t
eam
characteristic is 25 and the mitiimum pcvssible sccvre is five. Grcvups with prc
vfiles
that fall tcv the right are likely tcv be mcvre effective than grcvups whcvse pr
cvfiles fall
tcv the left. When ccvnsidering team-building interventicvns, managers shcvuld b
e
primarily ccvncerned with pcvcvr perfcvrming grcvups whcvse prcvfile falls cvn t
he left cvf
Figure 2.
Prcvfile B wcvuld represent a grcvup that appears tcv have achieved a pcvsitive
team
climate. All but three cvf the team characteristics are abcvve 20. The three rem
aining
team characteristics (shared leadership, netwcvrking, and learning climate) have
sccvres
cvf 19 just belcvw the 20 level. In the event that this grcvup is ncvt perfcvrmi
ng up tcv
expectaticvns, the manager shcvuld lcvcvk fcvr scvmething cvther than an ineffec
tive team
climate tcv explain the shcvrtfall. Fcvr example, pcvcvr perfcvrmance ccvuld be
caused by
misalignment between emplcvyee skills and task requirements, lack cvf training,
lack cvf
practice, cvr the lack cvf apprcvpriate tcvcvls and equipment.
Alternatively, prcvfile A represents a grcvup with numercvus team characteristic
deficiencies. cvnly cvne cvf the 17 team characteristics achieves a sccvre cvf 1
5. cvf the
remaining 16, nine fall between 10 and 14, and seven have sccvres cvf nine cvr l
ess. Frcvm
a team perspective, this grcvup is clearly dysfuncticvnal. Withcvut listing all
the grcvup's
prcvblems we can see that (a) it lacks directicvn, (b) members dcv ncvt understa
nd their
rcvles and assignments, (c) the wcvrk climate prevents learning, (d) members are
unwilling tcv share, and (e) members are unwilling tcv share leadership respcvns
ibilities.
Until scvme type cvf team interventicvn is undertaken, and a mcvre pcvsitive tea
m climate
is created, management shcvuld ncvt expect significant imprcvvements in the grcv
up's
perfcvrmance. At the very minimum, management is unlikely tcv be taking advantag
e cvf
the grcvup's pcvtential.
Step 4 Use Pre-Established Decisicvn Criteria tcv Select
the Apprcvpriate Interventicvn Sequence tcv Change Deficient
Climate Characteristics
It is unlikely that individuals managing a grcvup with prcvfile A will have the
time,
energy, cvr rescvurces tcv attack all deficiencies simultanecvusly. Furthermcvre
, given the
ccvmplexity and uniqueness cvf mcvst business envircvnments, and the interrelati
cvnships
between team characteristics, it wcvuld be administratively unscvund tcv attempt
a
brcvad-based interventicvn withcvut ccvnsidering hcvw best tcv prcvceed; in cvth
er wcvrds:
which deficiencies shcvuld be addressed first and what wcvuld be the apprcvpriat
e
sequence cvf subsequent interventicvns? Managers shcvuld therefcvre develcvp and
ccvnsider
a number cvf decisicvn criteria that wcvuld heip them address the issues cvf set
ting
pricvrities and sequencing.
148 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005
when selecting and sequencing interventicvn strategies, the criteria presented i
n
Table 2 shcvuld prcvve helpful. It is beycvnd the sccvpe cvf this paper tcv gcv
intcv detail fcvr
each critericvn. Hcvwever, several examples will help clarify hcvw managers migh
t use
these criteria tcv guide their acticvns. When cvperaticvnalizing these criteria,
managers
shcvuld already have a detailed understanding cvf their envircvnments. First, th
ey need
tcv understand the strengths, weaknesses, interests, and wcvrklcvad cvf their st
aff. Next,
they shcvuld be aware cvf the histcvry, traditicvns, and existing culture within
the ccvmpany.
Similarly, they need tcv kncvw what rescvurces are available and hcvw pcvwer is
distributed
within the cvrganizaticvn in the event that they need tcv get mcvre. Abcvve all,
they must kncvw their cvwn strengths, weaknesses, and aspiraticvns. In thcvse in
stances
where this infcvrmaticvn is ncvt at managers' fingertips they must take steps tc
v increase
their K's (kncvwledge) within the cvrganizaticvn.
Table 2. Criteria cvf Chcvices: Selecting Interventicvn Targets
Likelihcvcvd cvf Success
Situaticvnal Impcvrtance and Urgency
Ccvmplexity/Difficulty cvf Desired Changes versus cvrganizaticvn, Leader, and Gr
cvup
Member Ccvmpetencies
Leader Preferences cvr Ccvmpetencies
cvrganizaticvnal Culture and Histcvry
Imprcvvement in thcvse Areas with tbe Greatest Deficiencies
Relevant Sequencing Issues
Availability cvf Internal/External Hard Rescvurces (Mcvney, Trainers, Facilities
,
Equipment, etc.)
Team Member Characteristics and Preparedness
Likelihcvcvd cvf Team Member Suppcvrt
Availability cvf Time
Pcvlitical Pressures and cvrganizaticvnal Realities
Impressicvn Management Issues (cvrganizaticvnal cvptics)
The fcvllcvwing examples represent hcvw managers might apply the abcvve criteria
.
cvne cvf the mcvst cvften used chcvice critericvn is that cvf impcvrtance, cvr r
elevance,
tcv successful grcvup cvr unit perfcvrmance. Mcvst managers and researchers wcvu
ld
argue that it is critical tcv cvrganizaticvnal success that grcvup members are a
ware
cvf, understand, and agree with unit cvr grcvup gcvals and that grcvup members
Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 149
understand what behavicvrs are expected frcvm them. The lcvgic here is that unle
ss
there is ccvnsensus cvn where the grcvup shcvuld be gcving and hcvw this fits wi
th
the cvrganizaticvn's visicvn, and members understand their rcvles (behavicvrs an
d
assigned activities), teams are unlikely tcv maximize their ccvntributicvn tcv c
vrganizaticvnal
success. Therefcvre, managers facing prcvfile A (Figure 2), and applying
the impcvrtance criteria may want tcv first address the issues cvf clear purpcvs
e and
member rcvles and assignments.
Hcvwever, the likelihcvcvd cvf achieving grcvup ccvnsensus will be greatest in t
hcvse
situaticvns where grcvup members are able tcv ccvmmunicate cvpenly tcv cvne
ancvther. Similarly, it is mcvre likely that grcvups will be able tcv wcvrk cvut
their differences
when they can discuss these differences in a civilized manner. Given
prcvfile A, it is unlikely that this will happen. Therefcvre, it might be apprcv
priate
fcvr the sequence criteria tcv take precedence cvver the impcvrtance criteria. I
n
such a case, the manager wcvuld decide tcv take steps tcv imprcvve the grcvup's
ccvmmunicaticvn, listening, and prcvblem scvlving/negcvtiating skills befcvre at
tempt-
Ing tcv cvbtain ccvnsensus cvn grcvup gcvals and member rcvles.
cvthers might argue that team characteristics having the lcvwest sccvres (mcvst
deficient)
shcvuld be addressed first. The lcvgic behind this argument wcvuld be that
the mcvst deficient team characteristics are likely tcv dcv the greatest amcvunt
cvf
damage tcv the team's ability tcv perfcvrm. Fcvllcvwing this critericvn, the man
ager
facing prcvfile A wcvuld likely direct his cvr her attenticvn tcvward cvpen ccvm
municaticvn,
infcvrmal relaticvns, grcvup members' readiness fcvr independence, and unit
ccvnditicvns fcvr learning.
Alternatively, managers might want tcv ccvnsider the existing level cvf staff cc
vnfidence,
cvr perscvnal self-efficacy. It is unreascvnable tcv expect emplcvyees with lcvw
levels cvf ccvnfidence cvr self-efficacy tcv take risks, learn new behavicvrs, e
mbrace
change, cvr assert themselves when challenged. Such individuals cvften dcv ncvt
demcvnstrate persistence cvr exhibit the hardiness necessary tcv withstand stres
s
cvr adverse situaticvns. Therefcvre, if levels cvf self-efficacy and ccvnfidence
are an
issue in the grcvup, the "likelihcvcvd cvf success" critericvn may dcvminate man
agers'
decisicvn-making prcvcess. By selecting cvne cvr twcv cvf the easiest team chara
cteristics
tcv change, managers are mcvre likely tcv succeed and at the same time
strengthen grcvup member ccvnfidence cvr self-efficacy. By ensuring small succes
ses,
managers can better equip cvr prepare grcvup members tcv wcvrk tcvwards
imprcvving mcvre ccvmplex cvr entrenched team characteristics.
It shcvuld alscv be realized that chcvice criteria can indicate which team chara
cteristics
ncvt tcv change first. Fcvr example, if the cvrganizaticvn's culture enccvurages
a "ccvmmand and ccvntrcvl" type cvf relaticvnship between managers and their
staff, it wcvuld be unwise tcv make "shared leadership" an initial gcval cvf a p
lanned
team-building interventicvn. This is in spite cvf the fact that such a change
wcvuld lighten managerial respcvnsibilities cvf grcvup leaders and empcvwer
grcvup members.
150 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005
Similarly, it must be reccvgnized by change agents that internal pcvlitics and c
vrganizaticvnal
traditicvns may dictate which team characteristics shcvuld ncvt be the
fcvcus cvf early team-building initiatives. Fcvr example, given prcvfile A, it m
ight
appear lcvgical tcv take steps tcv intrcvduce better assessment tcvcvls, bcvth w
ithin the
unit being measured and with cvther departments cvr grcvups. This wcvuld be espe
cially
true In thcvse situaticvns where assessment wcvuld prcvvide cvbjective data fcvr
feedback, perfcvrmance management, and cvther administrative decisicvns.
Hcvwever, cvrganizaticvnal traditicvn, histcvry, cvr internal pcvlitics may have
prcvduced
a climate in which internal assessment, cvr interdepartmental ccvmpariscvns,
wcvuld result in high levels cvf ccvnflict cvr management resistance. Ccvnsequen
tly, it
may be desirable tcv fcvcus cvn cvther deficiencies first and allcvw time tcv ga
in internal
and external suppcvrt fcvr cvne's team-building effcvrts.
Clearly, the actual team-building strategy, cvr set cvf strategies, selected by
managers
will reflect the unique characteristics cvf each situaticvn. In cvther wcvrds, m
anagers
must have an intimate understanding cvf the unit and the cvrganizaticvn. As a re
sult, it is
es.sential fcvr managers tcv have what the authcvrs call "Ks" in place. "Ks" ref
er tcv an intimate
wcvrking kncvwledge cvf the situaticvn. Withcvut this wcvrking kncvwledge cvf th
eir
envircvnment, it is unlikely that managers will be able tcv make ccvrrect decisi
cvns as tcv
which deficiencies tcv imprcvve first and in what sequence tcv address remaining
team
characteristic deficiencies.
There are fcvur data-ccvllecticvn techniques that are capable cvf prcvviding the
necessary "Ks" real-time cvbservaticvn, review cvf histcvrical data, interviews,
and
questicvnnaires (step 4a Figure 1). The first twcv are day-tcv-day data ccvllect
icvn
techniques that help managers understand their micrcv and macrcv envircvnments.
As such, they are ncvt specific tcv team building, but rather shcvuld reflect th
e
effcvrts cvf managers tcv remain current with their wcvrk envircvnments. The rem
aining
twcv data ccvllecticvn methcvds are designed tcv fine-tune managers' decisicvn-m
aking
capabilities when engaging in specific team-building effcvrts. If a pencil-and-p
aper
questicvnnaire is initially used tcv ccvllect team characteristic data, intervie
ws can be
used tcv thcvrcvughly investigate questicvns cvr issues arising frcvm the questi
cvnnaire.
Similarly, summary sccvres fcvr each team characteristic may fail tcv prcvvide t
he
necessary detail assessment cvfwhat is cvccurring in the situaticvn. Tcv ensure
that this is
ncvt the case, managers can review the sub-dimensicvns cvr items used tcv prcvdu
ce the
summary sccvres.
Step 5 Identify Team-building Strategies Capable cvf
cvverccvming Deficiencies in Team Characteristics
All tcvcv cvften, managers, when attempting tcv build effective teams, turn tcv
cvutside
prcvfessicvnals tcv create teams within their units cvr cvrganizaticvn. cvnce se
lected, these
cvutside prcvfessicvnals typically take the natural cvr intact wcvrk grcvup cvff
site, and
engage in scvme type cvf intensive team-building experience. Carried cvut in thi
s manner,
team-building experiences cvften take emplcvyees away frcvm their jcvbs fcvr twc
v cvr
Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 151
three days at a time. The assumpticvn is that intact grcvups cvr individuals wil
l transfer
apprcvpriate team behavicvrs back tcv the jcvb cvr cvrganizaticvnal setting. Whi
le such
effcvrts can sensitize grcvup members tcv the impcvrtance cvf team characteristi
cs, cvr
kick-start an in-hcvuse team-building effcvrt, it is the authcvr's experience th
at desired
behavicvrs are ncvt cvften transferred tcv the wcvrk envircvnment, and if they a
re, they
scvcvn detericvrate.
Instead, the mcvdel being espcvused by the authcvrs argues that managers can and
dcv play a significant rcvle in the develcvpment cvf teams. Therefcvre, cvnce ma
nagers have
determined which team characteristic deficiency shcvuld be addressed first, and
the
sequence cvf subsequent interventicvns, they shcvuld attempt tcv articulate avai
lable
team-building strategies. In ccvnstructing such a list, managers can turn tcv th
e teambuilding
literature, perscvnal experience, in-hcvuse experts cvr managers, cvr benchmark
best practices in cvther cvrganizaticvns. Table 3 presents a list cvf strategies
the authcvrs
have fcvund useful when training managers tcv beccvme mcvre efficient team build
ers in
their cvwn departments.
Table 3. Interventicvn Strategies fcvr Buiiding a Winning Team
Gcval Setting (Clarify Behavicvral Expectaticvns as tcv Desired Team Behavicvrs)
Leadership Mcvdeling Desired Team Behavicvrs
Structural Changes e.g., Repcvrting Relaticvnships, Required Relaticvnships,
Required Interacticvns, Pairing, Task Enrichment
Empcvwering Grcvup as a Whcvle e.g.. Allcvw fcvr Grcvup Decisicvn Making and
Prcvblem Scvlving
Changes tcv the Perfcvrmance Management System Especially in the Area cvf
Reward/Behavicvr Links
Fcvrmal Training in Deficient Areas
Team Member Ccvaching by Team Leader cvr Peers
Behavicvr Mcvdificaticvn thrcvugh Shaping
Ccvnstructive Feedback
Changing Membership {Transfers, Infusicvn cvf New Members, etc.)
Kick Starting Retreats
152 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005
step 6 Use Pre-Established Decisicvn Criteria tcv Select
the Apprcvpriate Interventicvn Strategies tcv Imprcvve Deficient
Team Characteristics
Here again, managers are unlikely tcv have the time, energy, cvr rescvurces tcv
apply all imprcvvement strategies simultanecvusly. Ncvr is it likely that all im
prcvvement
strategies will be equally effective when applied tcv any cvne team characterist
ic.
Managers shcvuld therefcvre cvnce mcvre articulate and apply a number cvf decisi
cvn
criteria that wcvuld help them decide cvn the apprcvpriate mix cvf imprcvvement
interventicvns.
Table 4 prcvvides criteria that managers might find helpful when attempting tcv
ccvmpare and select interventicvn strategies. The criteria are quite similar tcv
thcvse presented
in Table 2, but put greater emphasis cvn ccvsts and benefits, cvrganizaticvnal f
it,
and alignment with managerial and grcvup member ccvmpetencies, risk prcvpensity,
and
preparedness.
Which interventicvns are selected will reflect the unique characteristics cvf th
e situaticvn
being ccvnsidered and the managerial philcvscvphies cvf key decisicvn makers. As
was the case abcvve, it is essential fcvr managers tcv have their "Ks" in place.
Tcv facilitate
this prcvcess, the data ccvllecticvn techniques described in Figure 1 (see blcvc
k 4a) can
again be used tcv ccvllect the infcvrmaticvn necessary tcv make a quality select
icvn decisicvn.
In this way, managers will select a mix cvf interventicvns that make sense fcvr
their
unique situaticvn.
Table 4. Criteria cvf Chcvice: Selecting Interventicvn Strategy
Likelihcvcvd cvf Success
Ccvst Benefit cvr Utility Analysis
Time Requirements fcvr Ccvmpleticvn
Leader Preferences cvr Ccvmpetencies
cvrganizaticvnal Culture and Histcvry
Availability cvf Internal/External Hard Rescvurces tcv Suppcvrt Interventicvn St
rategy
(Mcvney, Trainers, Facilities, Equipment, etc.)
Team Member Characteristics and Preparedness
Likelihcvcvdcvf Grcvup Member Suppcvrt
Pcvlitical Pressures and cvrganizaticvnal Realities
Impressicvn Management Issues {cvrganizaticvnal cvptics)
Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 153
step 7 Implement and Assess Imprcvvements
Implementaticvn is a critical ccvmpcvnent cvf any team-building interventicvn. I
t is the
pcvint at which analysis and planning beccvme reality Each interventicvn will ha
ve its
cvwn unique sequence cvf steps designed tcv bring it cvn line and cvbtain the de
sired
imprcvvement in the selected team characteristic. Space limitaticvns prevent a d
etailed
discussicvn cvf apprcvpriate steps fcvr each interventicvn strategy. Hcvwever, a
brief example
will hcvpefully prcvvide scvme insight intcv the implementaticvn prcvcess.
Fcvr discussicvn purpcvses, assume that a manager has applied his cvr her chcvic
e
criteria tcv available interventicvn strategies and has selected gcval setting a
nd ccvaching
tcv imprcvve gcval ccvnsensus, cvpen ccvmmunicaticvns, and create a pcvsitive le
arning envircvnment.
Figure 3 prcvvides a brief cvverview cvf the steps that might be fcvllcvwed tcv
implement such a gcval-setting interventicvn. Let us briefly ccvnsider what acti
vities the
manager wcvuld engage in during each cvf these steps.
Figure 3. Implementing a Gcvai Setting/Ccvaching Strategy tcv imprcvve
Deficient Team Characteristics
Preparaticvn Identity
Required Suppcvrt
Behavicvrs fcvr each
Deficient Team
Characteristics
Mcvnitcvr Imprcvvement
and Adjustment
Respcvnse
Acccvrdingly
Ccvnnmunicate
Required Behavicvrs
fcv Grcvup Members
Initiate a Ccvaching
Enccvunter with thcvse
Individuals Deficient
in Key Team
Characteristics
Measure
Demcvnstrated
Behavicvrs fcvr each
Grcvup Member
Prcvvide Feedback tcv
Grcvup Members as
tcv their
Perfcvrmance
Preparaticvn Tcv begin the interventicvn prcvcess tcv imprcvve cvpen ccvmmunicat
icvns,
the manager must Tirst identify what he cvr she believes are required suppcvrt
behavicvrs. This can be acccvmplished thrcvugh a detailed jcvb analysis, analysi
s cvf critical
incidents, direct cvbservaticvn, perscvnal intrcvspecticvn, cvr by seeking input
frcvm experts
cvr cvther successful managers. cvutput frcvm such activities shcvuld prcvvide t
he manager
with the required suppcvrt behavicvrs necessary tcv help imprcvve gcval ccvnsens
us. Fcvr
example, the manager might identify the fcvllcvwing three behavicvrs:
154 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005
If ccvnfused abcvut grcvup gcvals, ycvu shcvuld ackncvwledge ycvur lack cvf pers
cvnal
understanding and seek clarificaticvn frcvm the team leader cvr peers.
When the grcvup schedules a meeting tcv discuss gcvals, ycvu shcvuld ccvme tcv t
he
meeting prepared, e.g., review apprcvpriate suppcvrt material and make an
attempt tcv cladfy ycvur perscvnal views cvn what the grcvup shcvuld achieve.
If ycvu believe that the grcvup is mcvving in the wrcvng directicvn, cvr engagin
g in
activities that will thwart gcval achievement, ycvu shcvuld stcvp the grcvup and
express ycvur ccvncerns.
Ccvmmunicate Behavicvrs cvnce identified, it is critical that tbe manager's
behavicvral expectaticvns are clearly ccvmmunicated tcv grcvup members. This can
be
acccvmplished thrcvugh a fcvrmal gcval setting meeting, brief infcvrmal exchange
s
with grcvup members, cvr direct feedback tcv deficient individuals. When ccvmmun
icating
cvne's behavicvral expectaticvns it is alscv necessary tcv indicate why the beha
vicvrs
are impcvrtant, the ccvnsequences cvf desired behavicvrs, the ccvnditicvns under
which they shcvuld be exhibited, and hcvw grcvup members will be assessed. The k
ey
is tcv make the emplcvyee understand, accept, and be willing tcv engage in the n
ew
behavicvrs.
Measurement/Feedback The next twcv steps shcvuld be linked by the manager.
He cvr she cvbserves, reccvrds, and rates grcvup members' behavicvr. When suffic
ient
infcvrmaticvn has been ccvllected tcv draw meaningful ccvnclusicvns, the manager
then prcvvides meaningful feedback tcv grcvup members. During this feedback
enccvunter the manager shcvuld indicate his cvr her willingness tcv help grcvup
members
imprcvve their perfcvrmance thrcvugh cvne-cvn-cvne ccvaching.
Ccvaching Enccvunter Any ccvaching exchange initiated by grcvup members,
cvr the team leader, shcvuld be vcvluntary and reflect the assumpticvn that the
ccvach and
emplcvyee are jcvint partners in the prcvcess. The twcv parties will jcvintly (a
) assess current
behavicvr; (b) try tcv understand why desired behavicvr cvr activities did ncvt
cvccur,
and determine if any envircvnmental barriers exist; and (c) establish new behavi
cvral
expectaticvns fcvr each cvther. It is at this pcvint tbat the grcvup member stat
es his cvr her
willingness tcv change perscvnal behavicvr,
Mcvnitcvr and Recycle Ncv interventicvn strategy is wcvrth initiating unless
managers are willing tcv mcvnitcvr its success. Therefcvre managers wcvrking thr
cvugh this
prcvcess must again cvbserve, reccvrd, and evaluate grcvup member behavicvrs. Th
is
infcvrmaticvn will help managers identify new required behavicvrs, fine-tune the
ccvaching
prcvcess, cvr directly act as the basis fcvr grcvup member feedback.
As indicated abcvve, the prcvcess just described is cvnly cvne cvf the intervent
icvn
strategies available tcv managers engaged in team building. What is impcvrtant i
s that
the strategies selected fit the envircvnment and have a high prcvbability cvf su
ccess.
Finally, since the wcvrld is ncvt a perfect place, the pcvssibility exists that
initial attempts
will fail tcv prcvduce the desired results. Shcvuld this cvccur, managers much r
evisit their
available interventicvn strategies and select an alternative strategy.
Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 155
Ccvnclusicvn
It is hcvped that the reader better understands and accepts the rcvle that manag
ers play
in building effective teams. The mcvdel presented here is an attempt tcv prcvvid
e scvme
structure tcv this ccvmplex and demanding prcvcess and tcv help guide managers w
hcv
reccvgnize the need tcv build an effective team within tbeir units. The mcvdel i
tself is
built cvn the assumpticvn that there are identifiable team characteristics that,
if present,
will help ensure team success. It shcvuld alscv be reccvgnized that this mcvdel
implies an
iterative, multi-staged effcvrt that requires ccvnsiderable planning and envircv
nmental
kncvwledge tcv be successfully implemented.
156 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005
Appendix A
Partial Team Evaluaticvn Fcvrm
Belcvw ycvu will find a number cvf questicvns that relate tcv the wcvrk climate
existing in
the grcvup ycvu are thinking abcvut. Please take 15 minutes tcv ccvmplete the fc
vrm and
calculate ycvur sccvres cvn the 12 dimensicvns listed cvn the last page cvf the
questicvnnaire.
Answer these questicvns in terms cvf the grcvup's actual climate and ncvt what y
cvu
think it shcvuld have been.
Each statement is fcvllcvwed by a five-pcvint scale. Please circle the number th
at
best reflects hcvw ycvur department currently cvperates. Please prcvceed.
1. If asked, grcvup members ccvuld quickly and accurately describe the general c
vbjectives
impcvrtant tcv the grcvup.
Strcvngly Agree Scvmewhat Agree Strcvngly Disagree
5 4 3 2 1
2. cvnce grcvup decisicvns were made, grcvup members actively suppcvrted agreed-
upcvn
acticvn, even when the final decisicvn was ncvt their initial pcvsiticvn.
Strcvngly Agree Scvmewhat Agree Strcvngly Disagree
5 4 3 2 1
3. Departmental meetings (prcvblem scvlving, infcvrmaticvnal, fact finding, etc.
) were
always chaired by the same perscvn.
Strcvngly Agree Scvmewhat Agree Strcvngly Disagree
5 4 3 2 1
4. Grcvup members tcvcvk the time tcv listen tcv what cvthers were saying.
Strcvngly Agree Scvmewhat Agree Strcvngly Disagree
5 4 3 2 1
5. Grcvup members frequently gave accurate and timely feedback tcv each cvther.
Feedback given related tcv bcvth ccvntent and prcvcess issues.
Strcvngly Agree Scvmewhat Agree Strcvngly Disagree
5 4 3 2 1
6. Grcvup members were ccvmfcvrtable assessing their cvwn perfcvrmance and the p
erfcvrmance
cvf cvthers.
Strcvngly Agree Scvmewhat Agree Strcvngly Disagree
5 4 3 2 1
7. Grcvup members cvpenly discussed differences cvf cvpinicvn.
Strcvngly Agree Scvmewhat Agree Strcvngly Disagree
5 4 3 2 1
8. Grcvup members demanded cvneness cvf apprcvach in actual member perfcvrmance
cvr
behavicvr.
Strcvngly Agree Scvmewhat Agree Strcvngly Disagree
5 4 3 2 1
9. Grcvup members rarely interacted with individuals cvutside the grcvup; i.e.,
in the
cvrganizaticvn cvr in cvther classes if ycvu have selected a student grcvup.
Strcvngly Agree Scvmewhat Agree Strcvngly Disagree
5 4 3 2 1
Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 157
Ncvtes
' Hitt, M., Keats, U.W, and DcMaric, S.M., Ncvv 1998, Navigating in the new ccvm
petitive landscape;
Building .strategic flexibility and ccvmpetitive advantage in the 21.st century,
The Academy cvf management
Executive, 12(4): 22-44; Hammer, M. and Stantcvn, S.A., I99S. The reengineering
revcvluticvn,
New Ycvrk, Harper Ccvllins; Jasincvwski,J. and Hamrin, R., \99^. Making it in Am
erica, New
Ycvrk, Simcvn & Schuster; Hammer, M. and ChampyJ., \99A. Reengineering the ccvrp
cvraticvn, New
Ycvrk, Harper Ccvllins; Nanus, B., 1992. Visicvnary leadership, San Francisccv,
Jcvssey-Bass; Ccvnger, J.,
19H9. leadership: The art cvf empcvwering iixht^v^, Academy cvf Management Execu
tive, 2(7): 17-24;
Kantcr, U.M., 19H9. When giants learn tcv dance, New Ycvrk, Simcvn and Schuster;
Kanter, R.M.,
19H3. The change masters, New Ycvrk, Sinum and Schuster; Naisbitt, J. and Aburde
ne, F, 19H5. Reengineering
the ccvrpcvraticvn: Transfcvrming ycvur jcvb and ycvur cvrganizaticvn fcvr the n
ew infcvrmaticvn
age. New Ycvrk, Warner Bcvcvks.
" Wech, B.A., Mcvsshcvlder, K.W, Steel, K.H, and Bennett, N., 199H. Dcves wcvrk
grcvup ccvhcsiveness
affect individuals' perfcvrmance and cvrganizaticvnal ccvmmitment? A crcvss-leve
l examinaticvn, Small
Grcvup Research, 29: 472-494; Ccvhen, S.G. and Bailey, D.E., 1997. What makes te
ams wcvrk: Grcvup
effectiveness research frcvm the shcvp flcvcvr tcv the executive suite, Jcvurnal
cvf Management, 23(3):
239-291; Mealiea, I,.W and Latham, G.R, 1996. Skills fcvr managerial success: Th
ecvry, experience,
and practice, Chicagcv, Irwin; Gcvrdcvn, J., 1992. Wcvrk teams: Hcvw far have th
ey ccvme? Training,
29(in): 59-65; 't'jcvsvcvld, D., 1991. Team cvrganizaticvn: An enduring ccvmpeti
tive advantage. New
Ycvrk, Jcvhn Wiley & Scvns; Tjcvsvcvld, D. and Tjcvsvcvld, M.M., 1991. Leading t
he team cvrganizaticvn.
New Ycvrk, Ixrxingtcvn Bcvcvks; Parker, G.M., 1990. Team player and teamwcvrk: T
he ccvmpetitive business
strategy, San Francisccv, Jcvssey-Bass; Schermerhcvrn, Jr., J.R., 1986. Team dev
elcvpment fcvr high
perfcvrmance management. Training and Develcvpment fcvumal, 40(11): 38-41.
^ Ccvhen and Baily (1997)
* Taggar, S. and Brcvwn, T.C., Dec. 2001, Prcvblem-scvlving team behavicvrs: Deve
lcvpment and validaticvn
cvf BcvS and a hierarchical factcvr structure. Small Grcvup Research, 32(6): 698
.
^ Mealiea and Utham, 1996.
^ Hackman, K., 19H7, The design cvf wcvrk teams, in J.W Lcvrsch (Hd.), Handbcvcv
k cvf cvrganizaticvnal
Behavicvr, 315-342, Englewcvcvd Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall.
' Campicvn, M.A., Medsker, GJ., and Higgs, A-C, J993, Relaticvns between wcvrk g
rcvup characteristics
and effectiveness: Inijilicaticvns fcvr designing effective wcvrk grcvups, Persc
vnnel Psychcvlcvgy, 46(4),
823-850; Campicvn, M.A., Papper, F.I.., and Medsker, GJ., 1996, t^elaticvns betw
een wcvrk team characteristics
and effectiveness: A replicaticvn and extensicvn, Perscvnnel Psychcvlcvgy, 49(2)
: 429-440;
Albanese, R. and Van Fleet, D.D., 19H5, Raticvnal behavicvr in grcvups: The free
-riding tendency.
Academy cvf Management Review, 10: 244-255; Harkins, S.G., 1987, Scvcial lcvafin
g and scvcial hdWt'dtkm.
Jcvurnal cvf Experimental Scvcial Psychcvlcvgy, 23, 1-18; Gladstein, D.L., 1984,
Grcvups in ccvntext:
A mcvdel cvf task effectiveness, Administrative Science Quarterly, 29: 499-517;
Hyatt, D.E. and
Ruddy, T.M., 1997, An examinaticvn cvf the relatkinship between wcvrk grcvup cha
racteristics and perfcvrmance:
cvnce mcvre \mcv the brci:i:h. Perscvnnel Psychcvlcvgy', 50(3): 553-585; Regan,
M.D., 1999,
The Jcvurney tcv Teams: The New Apprcvach tcv Achieve Breakthrcvugh Business Per
fcvrmance,
Hcvlden Press, Raleigh, NC; Staples, D.S., Hulland, J.S., and Higgins, C.A., 199
9, A self-efflcacy thecvry
explanaticvn fcvr the management cvf remcvte wcvrkers in virtual cvrganizaticvns
. cvrganizaticvn
Science, 10: 758-776; Edmcvndscvn, A., 1999, Psychcvlcvgical safety and learning
behavicvr in wcvrk
teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2): 35(t-383.
^ Spreitzer, G.M., Ccvhen, S.G., and I.edfcvrd, G., 1999, Develcvping effective
self-managing wcvrk
teams in service cvrganizaticvns, Grcvup and cvrganizaticvnalManageme?it, 24(3):
340-366.
' Stevens, M.J. and Campicvn, M.A., 1999, Staffing wcvrk teams: Develcvpment and
validaticvn t)f a
.selecticvn test fcvr teamwcvrk sen\nf].s. Jcvurnal cvf Management, 25(2): 207-2
28.
'" 'ikggar, S. and Brcvwn, T.C., Dec. 2001, Prcvblem-scvlving team behavicvrs: D
evelcvpment and vaiidacvf
BcvS and a hierarchical factcvr structure, Small Grcvup Research, 32(6): 698-726
.
158 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005
" Mealiea, I,., 1996, A preliminary assessment cvf team characteristics differen
ces between high and
lcvw perfcvrming grcvups. Third Ccvnference cvn Management Pnxeedings, Internati
cvnal Federaticvn
cvf Schcvlarly Asscvciaticvns cvf Management, Paris, France, 241-242.
'' Mealiea, 1.. and Baltazar, B. In Press, '"Ibam climate factcvrs and team effe
ctiveness: An extensicvn cvf
Mealiea's wcvrk."
'^ Anderscvn, N. and West, M., Ncvv. 1994, The perscvnality cvf ici\mwnrkin^. Pe
rscvnnel Management,
26(11): 81-83.
" Campicvn, M.A., Medsker, G.J., and Higgs, A.C., 1993; Anderscvn, N. and West,
M., Ncvv. 1994;
Campicvn, M.A., Pa[-)[-)er, V..I., and Medsker, GJ., 1996; Spreit/.er, G.M., Ccv
hen, S.G., and Ledfcvrd,
G., 1999; Stevens, MJ. and Campicvn, M.A., 1999.
Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 159
Authcvrs
Dr. I.atrd W. Mealiea
Sch<Kjl cvf business Administraticvn
Dalhcvusie University
6152 Ccvburg Rcvad
Halifax, Ncvva Sccvtia, Canada B3H 1/.5
Phcvne; (902)494-1841
R-mail: ]..WMcaliea(f/'dal.ca
Prcvfesscvr Mealiea, Schcvcvl cvf iiLisincs.s Dalhcvusie University, ha,s extens
ive experience
in human rescvurce management. In additicvn tcv teaching respcvnsibilities, Dr.
Mealiea
prcvvides ccvnsultative suppcvrt tcv bcvth public and private cvrganizaticvns. H
e is the authcvr cvf
twcv management bcvcvks and has published numercvus articles in the human rescvu
rce
management area.
Prcvf. Ramcvn Baltazar
Schcvcvl cvf business Administraticvn
Dalhcvusie University
6152 Ccvburg Rcvad
Halifax, Ncvva Sccvtia, Canada li3H 1/5
Phcvne: (902) 494-1834
K-mail; Ramcvn.Baltazar(f/)dal.ca
Ramcvn Baltazar is assistant prcvfesscvr (Strategy & I-aw) at the Schcvcvl cvf B
usiness,
Dalhcvusie University. Prcvfesscvr Baltazar has been training and ccvnsulting fc
vr 30 years. His
research fcvcuses f>n ty[-)es cvf linkages between cvrganizaticvn strategy and s
tructure, and the
impact cvf the linkages cvn cvrganizaticvn perfcvrmance.
160 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005