Synopsis

Jyoti
Enroll no. 00719103913
MBA M4A

Synopsis
Title:
To study impact of team building and teams on productivity of two FMCG organization.

Introduction:
The area of research is effect of team building on productivity. The researchers would
specifically concentrate on the effect of Team building on a particular employee performance.
The researchers dealt with employee at organizational level. The research in this respect would
enable organization to see effect of Team building on their productivity level in organizations. It
will also serve to confirm previous research findings in similar area.
Many studies have been completed that highlight the effects of team building upon the long-term
productivity of team and the types of team they make on adults, children, and even on
organizations . These studies have provided for a -general consensus that team, the right team at
the right place, with the right number of people, can help employee work hard, focus more
intently upon their tasks, increase productivity and work at a higher rate, and be, in general, more
productive.
Industry and Organization:
The fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) segment is the fourth largest sector in the Indian
economy. The market size of FMCG in India is estimated to grow from US$ 30 billion in 2011 to
US$ 74 billion in 2018. Food products are the leading segment, accounting for 43 per cent of the
overall market. Personal care (22 per cent) and fabric care (12 per cent) come next in terms of
market share. Growing awareness, easier access, and changing lifestyles have been the key
growth drivers for the sector.

ITC Limited:
Established in 1910 as the Imperial Tobacco Company of India Limited, the company was
renamed as the Indian Tobacco Company Limited in 1970 and further to I.T.C. Limited in 1974.
The periods in the name were removed in September 2001 for the company to be renamed as
ITC Ltd. The company completed 100 years in 2010 and as of 2012-13, had an annual turnover
of US$8.31 billion and a market capitalization of US$45 billion. It employs over 25,000 people
at more than 60 locations across India and is part of Forbes 2000 list.
AMUL:
Amul is an Indian dairy cooperative, based at Anand in the state of Gujarat, India. The
word amul is derived from the Sanskrit word amulya, meaning rare, valuable. The co-operative
was initially referred to as Anand Milk Federation Union limited hence the name AMUL.
Formed in 1946, it is a brand managed by a cooperative body, the Gujarat Co-operative Milk
Marketing Federation Ltd. (GCMMF), which today is jointly owned by 3 million milk producers
in Gujarat. Amul spurred India's White Revolution, which made the country the world's largest
producer of milk and milk products. In the process Amul became the largest food brand in India
and has ventured into markets overseas.
Nature of industry:

From the consumers' perspective:

Frequent purchase

Low involvement (little or no effort to choose the item)

Low price

From the marketers' angle:

High volumes

Low contribution margins

Extensive distribution networks

High stock turnover

Objective of Study:

To study teams in workplace.

To study impact of teams in productivity.

To identify role of team building in production.

To study relationship between team building and productivity.

To study team building procedure of organizations.

To study impact of teams on productivity.

Scope of Study:
Team building enhances the performance level and this increased productivity level in
organizations, will definitely aid to achieve higher productivity. An employee performance in
his/her field is the most essential part in organizations, and by measuring the effect, the
researches learn the benefits of enhanced productivity and eventually good results. Over the past
a couple of studies have been carried out to explain as to what effect Team building has on the
productivity level on individual employee.

Methodology:
Sample Size
60 employees will be randomly chosen from both the FMCG organizations.
Method of Data Collection
Primary data will be collected by:

Observation

Questionnaire

Secondary data will be collected by:

Research Papers

Organizations Articles and Journals

Newspaper

Internet

Reliability
To establish the reliability of the measuring instrument, the researchers conducted test-retest
reliability approach. This involved a group of 60 employees from both FCMG organizations. All
of the worker used were experienced and have being working for minimum 2 years. 30-30
employees from both organizations are selected randomly. Questionnaire got filled by each
employee in the sample and difference will be studied.
Validity

The observation has high degree of face validity because the assessment sheet has high degree of
content validity because it completely covers all the dimensions and elements of basic
productivity. All the questions that can help measure the productivity level were present in the
measuring instrument.

Tools:
Data measuring statical tool ANOVA
Measuring System: SPSS

Important Steps when Building a new Team

This article outlines essential steps in forming a new team. These steps are
also useful for existing teams that are interested in assessing their format and
effectiveness.
First, the work of the team needs to be clearly defined and matched to some real needs of the
department, lab or center or of the Institute as a whole. If the team doesn't get a
clear mission or scope statement from the team sponsor, creating these should be part of the
team's kick-off process. (See our Checklist for Team Start-up Microsoft Word tool.)

In the early stages it is important to talk to the team's sponsor about his/her role and how he or
she will support the team's work. What will the sponsor do for the team? What does the sponsor
expect from the team? Teams need the clear support of the organization's leadership, including
concrete support such as release time, funding and resources.
Selecting the right team members is critical. Ideally, teams should be small (not more than ten
people) so that members can develop a high-level of connection and interdependence. Members
need both technical expertise (including writing and presentation skills) and good interpersonal
skills for working in small groups. For teams working on Institute-wide projects, diverse
membership (across MIT's units, across payroll/employee classifications and across gender/race
categories) can lead to a richer team with better results. Content experts, process experts and end
users can all play key roles.
Team kick-off events are an important part of the start-up process. Kick-off events enable the
team to articulate and understand the goals, mission and structure. A well-planned kick-off can
increase team productivity and build team momentum. A formalized start-up activity will help
the team define its mission, deliverables, roles & responsibilities, and success factors.

How can I build a successful team?

Six items are crucial to help teams function effectively.
1. Mission

It is the shared commitment to a specific mission that helps define a team. A mission statement
can provide powerful documentation about the team's purpose. Creating a mission statement
requires team members to think about, discuss and come to agreement on the following
questions:

What is the work we were brought together to do?

Why can this work best be done as a team?

What will be different as a result of our working together?

What will our work create for our organization, our team and ourselves?

For project teams: What will a successful outcome look like for our team? How
will we know we've completed our task?

For standing teams: How will we measure our success in an on-going way?

A team's mission may be based on a directive from management or others outside the team. But
good team discussion about how each member -- and the group collectively -- understands that
mission will make the mission statement meaningful and useful to the team. Mission statements
may be short; they should be written in everyday language that each team member understands
and supports.
2. Goals

Mission statements give a team guiding principles, but goals give the team a real target for their
activity. Goals should be something worth striving for -- important results that the team can
provide for the organization.
The best goals are S-M-A-R-T goals: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant andTimebound. "Improving customer service" may sound like a good goal for a team, but it doesn't really
meet the S-M-A-R-T criteria. A more effective goal would be "Reduce call-back time to
customers to two hours or less within six months." The revised goal is:

Specific (reduce call-back time to customers)

Measurable (to two hours or less)

Achievable (The team would need to decide this. Maybe call-backs need four
hours, or maybe the time can be reduced to 30 minutes.)

Relevant (Again, the team will know - is slow call-back time an issue for the
customers? For the team's manager? Is reducing call-back time important enough to
merit team effort?)

Time bound (within six months)

3. Roles and responsibilities

It's particularly important in a team environment that team members know what is expected of
each of them. Without these expectations, members can't develop mutual accountability or trust
in the team. When a team's expectations are clear and members meet (or exceed) expectations,
trust and an increased sense of "teamness" are natural by-products.
Almost all teams at MIT have designated team leaders. Team leaders are the individuals who are
held accountable for the team's results by the team's sponsor. The Team leader often serves as a
spokesperson for the team and may also be responsible for coordinating the team's work.
Facilitators may be a member of the team or a resource person for the team. The facilitator is
responsible for guiding the team's process. This might include helping to set agendas for team

meetings and running the meetings. Sometimes these two roles are played by one person. (Learn
more about facilitators in the Meeting Design and Facilitation Learning Topic.)
4. Groundrules

To be effective, teams need to be explicit about the ways they will work together. Groundrules
are guidelines for specific behaviors. Teams don't need a lot of groundrules to work together
well, but everyone on the team should agree to the groundrules and share responsibility for
ensuring that they are followed.
Possible areas for groundrules include:

How you communicate DURING team meetings (Are interruptions OK? Should
the Facilitator call on you before you speak? What about side conversations?)

How you communicate BETWEEN team meetings (How quickly should you
respond to emails? Are there suggested length limits on emails or memos? How do
you keep everyone on the team informed of your progress?)

What constitutes respectful behavior towards other team members?

Some sample ground rules include:

1.

Be respectful of others -- don't bad-mouth team members within the team or

outside the team

2.

Share your own experiences and opinions; avoid "they say" statements

3.

One speaker at a time

4.

Keep discussions focused on topic at hand

5.

Honor time limits - start and end on time

5. Decision-making

Teams may choose different models for making decisions; the most important factor is that the
decision-making model be explicit and understood by all team members. A clear decision making
model describes who makes the decision and how others will be involved. (Will decisions be
made by consensus where everyone can agree to support the final decision? Will the team leader
get input but make the final decision? Will the team vote?) Knowing what decision-making
model will be used lets team members know what to expect and what is expected; this can help
build support for the final decision.

Good decisions have two characteristics: quality and commitment. Quality decisions are logical,
supported by sound reasoning and good information. Steps towards making quality decisions
include checking to see if all available information has been gathered and shared, that all team
members have been consulted, and that critical input from stakeholders (individuals or groups
affected by the decision) outside the team has been considered as appropriate.
Commitment is demonstrated by the active backing for the decision by every team member. Each
team member agress with the decision, is committed to carrying out the decision, and
understands their individual role in doing so.
Learn more about consensus decision-making in our "Decision-making Models" article.
6. Effective Group Process

Communication:
Using groundrules as a starting point, teams need to develop practices for open communication.
Examples include:
1.

Listen respectfully and respond with positive interest to ideas from team
members.
If an idea is confusing or seems unconventional or odd to you, ask for more
information to understand the idea better. (Saying, "Can you tell me more?"is a
great way to continue a conversation.)

2.

Help create an environment that encourages team members to share all

ideas - even the "half-baked" ones.
Most great ideas are built by teams building on an initial thought. Sometimes it's
the "crazy" ideas that really spark the team's creativity. Treating every idea as
important keeps team members from holding back some "half-baked" thought that
could be just what the team needed.

3.

Don't hide conflicts; try to surface differences and use them to create better
results that all team members can support.

Learn more about effective communication in our Communicating with Others learning topic.
Mutual Accountability:
Each member of a team is responsible for the success of the team as a whole. This is the
interdependence that makes teams stronger than the sum of their parts. Working together towards
specific tangible results is the best way to start creating mutual accountability. Recognize and
celebrate small accomplishments and successes of individuals and milestones (large and small)
for the team as a whole. By acknowledging successes, team members can develop an increasing
trust in their teammates and the team as a whole.

Appropriate self-evaluation:
It is be helpful for team members to "stop action" at regular intervals and check out how the team
is working. These self-evaluations can be as simple as a team discussion: "Looking at X, what
things worked well and what would we like to improve next time?" or they can be deep and
reflective (e.g., "How can we deal with conflict more effectively?").Regardless of the method or
tool used, the real benefit of self-evaluation comes from the team discussion about their
assessments of the team.
See Articles and Tools for survey examples.

Stages of team development

Just like individuals, teams go through stages of development. Although there are a number of
descriptions of the stages of team development, the most commonly used terms are forming,
storming, norming and performing. (Bruce Tuckman, "Developmental Sequence in Small
Groups," 1965 Psychological Bulletin, 63, 384-99)
As in human development, team development is not a linear process -- the introduction of new
members, a change in the organization's climate, or the successful completion of a particular
milestone can cause a team to loop back to an earlier stage of team development.
Recognizing the team's development stage can be really helpful as you work to improve your
team's effectiveness and meet your goals. Each stage has recognizable feelings and behaviors.
For more information, see our "Using the Stages of Team Development"article and the "What
Stage is Our Team In?" tool (Microsoft Word).

GLOSSARY
Content experts: People who know the team's subject well
End users: People who will use the products produced by the team
Mission: The purpose of the team
Process experts: People who are experienced at helping groups be successful
Scope statement:The work that the team should accomplish
Sponsor: The person who set up the team or who receives the team's products

Writing
I.
Introduction

Nurse educators working in academic settings experience unique and significant

pressures to perform their work in a context that is at times confusing and frustrating to
them. One aspect of this work environment is the need for a balance between individual
work and teamwork. Nurse educators often resist group work much as their students do,
and for many of the same reasons. Yet, teamwork is essential to acheivement of
departmental and college goals. This paper is an attempt to make sense of the literature on
teamwork and to identify best practices that the academic nurse leader can bring to faculty
work teams.
There are many nursing iniatives today that examine the impact of work environements
on individual and group effectivness in the clinical setting, but little so far in academia. It is
almost as if nursing faculty are focused on preparing practitioners and forget they
themselves are practitioners themselves - practitioners of the science of teaching and
learning about nursing. High rates of faculty burnout and rampant faculty shortages attest
to the critical need to address the work environment of nursing faculty. This paper starts
this discussion with an examination of the importance of teams and team-building, based on
the author's belief that nurse educators in the academic setting have the same needs in
team situations as other workers.

II.

Theories of teams and workgroups

A.
Traditional conceptualizations
Theories of group and team development began to appear in the literature in the
1940s and 1950s having a broad goal of improving task and social societal function.
Research increased in the 1960s and 1970s in the sociology and psychology literature. One
of the most widely accepted of these early theories was proposed by Tuckman in 1965. He
identified five stages of group development: testing and dependence, intragroup conflict,
development of group cohesion, functional role relatedness, and termination. These five
stages became known later as "forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning". In
the same general timeframe, a similar five step model was proposed in the field of social
work by Garland, Jones, and Kolodny (1973) called the "Boston Model". Both were
developed based on observational research, the first with adults and the second with
children and adolescents. Since these early beginning, research on teams and groups has
become more interdisciplinary and pragmatic.
Team selection has received increasing attention in the literature. Ben Carson,
Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital was interviewed about his
leadership style in the OR with teams under pressure(Clarke, 2009) and discussed the need
to merge different "personalities and egos and make sure that everyone is appropriately
recognized and feels a part of what is going on" (p. 19). Carson feels that putting the wrong
people together is one of the most common mistakes in team building, recognizing the
importance of "fit". Carson suggests planning to have the team "get to know each other in
nonstressful settings like social events". His emphasis is clearly on the people who make up
the team while the team effectiness (quality patient care in the OR) remains the ultimate
goal. The team leader has a responsibility to understand the team as individuals and
provide them with what they need to function well in a very stressful performance situation.

A similar focus on forming team relationships to improve effectiness is evidenced by

Bandow (2001) who applies the concept to teams using communication technology. CT is
defined as cell phones, teleconferences, faxes, and emails, and teams that are connected
primarily through technology require additional support for relationship-building. Leaders
must provide traditional support (involvement of management, effective team structure,
clear roles and responsibilities and expectations), examine barriers to team support.
Bandow suggests a written team contract, a face-to-face meeting to begin the task or
project with one or two follow-ups, encouragement to socialize as a group, Team dysfunction
can be recognized when members perceive others as not timely or responsive,
uncommitted, do not follow-through, talk behind other backs, avoid other members, and
don't fully participate. When the team perceives these behaviors, trust is damaged and
team members become defensive, withold information, and withdraw from participation.
Managers should distinguish problems that arise from personalities from those that arise
from the task, and deal with each separately.
Nurses McCallin and Bamford (2007) discussed implications from a larger grounded
theory research study done in 2004. That study found that team members resolved conflict
through a process of pluralistic dialoging that involved changing their thinking "by breaking
stereotypical images, grappling with different mind-sets, negotiating service provision and
engaging in a dialogical culture. Changing thinking also also depended on several key
variables that included competency, worldviews, information exchange, accountability,
personality differences, and leadership." (p. 387) In this article, the authors went on to
further analyze personaly differences because in the larger study this had a significant effect
on teamworking, with much energy going into handling dysfunctional team members.
Often, team members are selected for expertise at specific tasks and diversity without
regard to interpersonal skills and personality differences, leading to poor team functioning.
Personality difficulties described included "poor interpersonal skills, disruptive behaviors,
sabatoge, and the use of power-coercive tactics, suggesting a low level of emotional
intelligence" (p. 388). The team members avoided confrontation, and exited the team or
withdrew, denied a problem, became angry or anxious, job satisfaction declined. Leaders
are important in setting the tone for the team by creating a sage atmoshphere and by
encouraging members to speak up, share concerns, and question each other.
B.

Alternative models
A femminist challenge to the tradional stages came in 1995 when Schiller proposed
that women's groups, and maybe some other groups, followed a different developmental
pathway. She observed that intimacy precedes and may be a prerequisite for conflict or
challenging behavior, and developed a model with these five stages: preaffiliation,
establishing a relational base, mutuality and interpersonal empathy, challenge and change,
and termination. A key premise of this work is the need for women to establish a "felt sense
of safety" early in the process before conflict could be addressed. This model may be
particularly applicable to nursing faculty teams, as such groups are predominantly female
and nurses themselves are considered by some to be an oppressed group due to the historic
impact of power differntials in their work settings. Schiller (2007) later applied this model to
vulnerable populations other than women: those who have experienced trauma, culturally

oppressed groups, and people dealing with loss. Schiller (2007) makes a case for applying a
particular model of group development intentionally, based on characteristics of the group
and on motivation of the person applying the model.
C.

Theoires in process of development

Mickans and Rodger (2005) used a constructivist philosophy to inform their model
development. They designed a mixed-methods but predominantly qualitative study of 39
team members in healthcare (15 doctors, 10 nurses, 7 administrators, and 7 allied health
professionals). Participants told stories to develpp bipolar constructs, and then rate those as
effective or ineffective using a five-point scale, 30 conceptual characteristics of effective
teamwork were identified, and thenall 39 participants were asked to rate the comparative
importance of the characteristics and identify four descriptive themes. 27 of the origional
39 returned the questionaire. 202 health care professionals from the same group of
hospitals were then asked to participate in validation of a tool that was developed from the
themes and characteristics, The Teamwork in Healthcare Inventory. The emerging model
was based then on components of three research methods and various levels of data
analysis, reflection, and interpretation. A Healthy Team Model links six categories
distinguisghing effective teams across four emerging themes.
Team Environment

Team Structure

Purpose

purpose

Team Process

Goals

Goals

leadership

Leadership

Individual Contribution

leadership

Communication
cohesion
mutual respect

Cohesion
mutual respect

Mutual Respect

Mickans and Rodger (2005), p. 365.

Purpose must be future-oriented, clear, and relevant. Goals were seen as an intermediary
link between a team's purpose and its outcomes. Leadership was critical, and the team
must agree and share leadership. A good leader would "set and maintain structures for
making decisions and managing conflict, share ideas, and information, co-ordinate tasks
equally, provide feedback about the team's activity, and be able to listen to, support, and
trust team members" (p. 366). Communication requires interpersonal skills, clearly written
records, and time to reflect during meetings. Cohesion was seen as a sense of comraderie
and involvement that was developed by working together over time. Mutual respect meant
that teams were open to the talents and beliefs of each person.

III.

Research on teams and team-building

A.
Integrative reviews and meta-analyses
B.
Descriptive studies
Kapp (2009) reported on a SoTL project involving a team-building intervention designed
to improve senior students' ability to work in teams. The intervention consisted of a one-

hour workshop and subsequent peer evaluations. The workshop was well-described and
included brief intro to purpose and agenda, human continum exercise on personal styles,
randomization of students to teams for the semester, structured team discussion with
introductions and discussion of past positive and negative team experiences, presentation of
this to class, master lists on board, handout on effective teams based on Larson and
LaFasto, and finally creation by each team of a team membership contract of behaviors
important to team performance. Another part of the intervention was student peer
evaluations of their own team performance (total of 3 over semester). Evaluation of the
intervention was conducted using a triangulated approach that included student written
responses to two open-ended questions and a comparison between the student course
evaluations and the evaluations from the previous offering of the course. The two student
response questions asked about team performance and attitude toward teamwork. All
measures indicated success of the intervention.
C.
D.
IV.

Qualitative studies
Tool development studies

Common themes in the literature

Teams are seen generally as open systems that use resources, communicate within
themselves, and produce outcomes. There are various definition of teams, often having the
same elements. Mickans and Rodger (2005) defines a team as "a small number of members
with the appropriate mix of expertise to complete a specific task, who are committed to a
meaningful purpose and have acheivable performance goals for which they are held
collectively responsible" (p. 359). This differentiates a team from a work group which may
or may not be committed, find their work meaningful, or be held collective responsible for
performance. Internal aspects of teamwork include specific task behaviors such as coordination, organization, decision-making, and problem-solving. There is a need for conflict
resolution, cohesion, and interdependence. Team members therefore are required to be
socially competent as well as skilled in their role function. They must be willing to share
information, negotiate decisions, and solve problems. They demand a certain level of
respect, recognition, and encouragement. Mickans and Rodger (2005) point out that team
effectiveness is both an empirical and a political process, since stakeholders and team
members may prioritize team outcomes differently. Thus, clear definiton and
communication of team goals must be coupled with negotiation and conflict resolution
skills.
There are differences between work groups and work teams, and various authors have
attempted to describe them, though there is still much conceptual overlap. Allen
emphasizes that one differnce is that teams are held accountable for team goals, and
individual contributions are managed by and within the team. He applies Hodgetts and
Hegar's 12 characteristics of team building to two hypothetical teams, and finds one is a
team and one is a work group. The characteristics are:
1.
There is a high level of interdependence among team members.
2.
The team leader has good people skills and is committed to the team approach.
3.
Each team member is willing to contribute.

4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.

The team develops a relaxed climate for communication.

The team develops mutual trust.
The team and individuals are prepared to take risks.
The team is clear about goals and establishes targets.
Team member roles are defined.
The team can examine personal and team errors without personal attacks.
Team efforts are devoted to the acheivement of results.
The team has the capacity to create new ideas.
Each team member knows he or she can influence the team agenda.
Allen concludes that "in a group everyone depends on the other, yet each person is
only there to accomplish the task that is set before them. A team, however, works together
and depends on each other to work toward an ultimate goal that benefits the whole team
and not just the individual" (2009). Allen also explains the nature of several types of teams:
functional teams, project teams, product development teams, task force teams, work teams,
and cross-functional teams. Allen provides many benefits to the expenditure of resources on
team building: committment to a project, the project manager, and other team members; a
sense of purpose and comraderie, improved communications, better conflict resolution, and
increased team member job satisfaction. Allen reminds the reader that turning a group into
a team is not an easy process, and quotes Hodgett and Hegar, "most people are not
inherently team players, and some people only want to be recognized for their individual
accomplishments (p. 153)".
Turning a work group into a functional team is addressed by Pryor, Singleton, Taneja,
and Toombs (2009), wo draw upon the work of Robbins and Judge (2007) in differentiating
the two.
Work Groups

Work Teams

share information

goal

collective performance

neutral (sometimes negative)

synergy

positive

individual

accountability

individual and mutual

random and varied

skills

complementary

routine and simple

types of work

complex

managment-directed

empowerment

self-directed leaders

Pryor, Singleton, Taneja, and Toombs (2009), p. 321.

They remind the reader that work groups are comprised of people grouped together for
administrative purposes, where a true team is self-directed. Teams often fail when they are
just groups of people who work together as opposed to a team, when the team structure is
unclear, lack of accountabilty to each other, poor fit, poor reward system for team
performance, vested interests of team members, failure to create a culture of respect and
trust, and management incompetence.
Efforts have begun to understand and enhance multidisciplinary teams. Weaver
(2008) examined faciliators and barriers to interdisciplinary research. Weaver asserts that
"The level of committment is often related to the level of interest in the question being

addressed and whether the outcome of the collaboration meets individual members' career
goals" (p. 109). Weaver also reinforces that "the right combination of personality types and
productive group dynamics is also essential to group work" (p. 109). Other important factors
included: physical proximity, institutional support, learning each other's disciplinary
languages, not letting one discipline dominate the group, role clarification, and conflict
resolution. Weaver provides examples pertinent to academia and to healthcare in this
article.
There have been a number of articles in nursing that examined the concept of
followership as a collarary of leadership. In a team, members serve at various times as
leaders and at other times the same members are in the role of followers. DiRenzo argues
for more awareness and acceptance of followership skills and their importance, and
develolped a list of attributes of exemplary followers:
Characteristics of Effective Followers
self-management
responsibility
integrity
committment
competence
focus
ownership
vulnerability
DiRenzo, p. 29.
DiRenzo also discusses the need for followers to be critical thinkers, and careful in who and
what they follow. Much self-reflection and intention is required of followers, and DiRenzo
states that the same set of skills is required of a good leader. If this is so, the transition
between leading and following at different times for team members will be facilitated.
Musselwhite (2006) agrees, and lists these essential followership (and leadership) skills: be
honest, be supportive, be reliable, always seek the big picture, ask good questions, and be
aware of your own assumptions. In a similar vein, Coffee and Jones (2006) posit that good
followers are prepared to speak up, share a committment to an overarching purpose or goal,
complement the leader by providing a counterweight, and have a skillful appreciation of
change and timing. They define good leadership as having personal and professional
authenticity, recognition of the team members' signifigance, generating excitement, and
creating community on the team.
Many articles in the business literature provide suggestions for effective teams that
are based on traditional models of teamwork and leadership that may or may not be
supported by evidence. Expert opinion is a major source of much of this
literature. Consultant Jean Lloyd (2009) advises these rules for being a team player:

appreciate your teammates, reach out to help others, confront conflicts face to face, stay
focused on the team goal instead of your own glory, cummunicate, and treat all team
members as equals. She offers this team-buliding advice for managers: empower
employees, focus on results, pay for performance, recognize individuals, and set guidelines.
Timothy Brady (2009) advises teams to: understand responsibilities, have common goals,
deal with change, deal with conflict, share information, share ideas, perform team
maintenance, use direct communications, and develop trust.
Leader and writer John Maxwell identified lessons for leading in his 2008 book,
Leadership Gold. His main idea is that leadership can be taught, and that it depends on
relationships with yourself and with others. He advocates knowing your weakness and
playing to your strenghts, always empowering others, and acting with integrity. Reflection
and intention are critical components of effective leadership.
Forman (2008) teaches the following skills to team leaders:
Rhetorical Leadership

How to shape and express stories about an organization's future, including elements
such as the narrative voice and ethos, selection of details, sequencing, and the
rhythm of claims and data, and how to motivate and lead others through
communications.

Data-based Persuasion

How to articluate and defend recommendations in a contested arena where others,

such as competetition internal or external to the organization, are vying for resources,
and how to integrate a substantial amount and variety of primary research into the
arguement.

Ethics, Rhetoric, and Client

Communications

How to distinguish between "spin" and positions that are well-substantiated by data
and analysis and how to manage the pressures of those who demand "rubber-stamp"
endorsements of their preconceived organizational agenda.

Relative Merits of, and

Relationship among,
Communication Chanels

How to decide what to emphasize and what to omit in writing, in speaking, and online.

Group Work

How to provide constructive assessemnts of the work of peers in writing and orally
and how to manage team dynamics, project management, and a group-written plan
and presentaton.

Translation of Technical
Informaton for Nontechnical
and Foreign Audiences

How to use charts, graphs, and stories to explain complex information and how to
communicate with cultures outside of the United States.

Modern Notions of Genre

How to determine the funcitons of different genres (business plan, persentation,

company web site) in helping the organization achieve its goals with specific
audiences (Ifunding from investors, contracts with strategic partners, recruitment of
board and staff (faculty) members).

Students notoriously hate group work, and yet this skill is critical to functioning in
today's work environments. Snyder (2009) reported on teaching this skill to students,
starting with what students dislike most: team meetings are unproductive, some members
do not participate, and group ends up rushing to complete project by deadline. Snyder

suggests addressing these issues in class by having them brainstorm and role play methods
to refocus a group discussion; use active listening, questioning, and restating techniques;
create a timeline by working backward from a deadline, delegate and prioritize; schdedule
team meeting throughout project to discuss progress, encourage group feedback, and share
ideas, accept new ideas and revisions that enhance the project; and resolve conflict. Snyder
also suggestss that students should reflect on their own group perfomance in the areas of
contribution, communication, participation in implementation, and faciliation of decisionmaking.
A resistance to the glorification of teamwork has been expressed by some. In a
medical journal, Eva (2002) questioned the statistical correlation between group functioning
and acheivement. He calls for further research to define when teams work best and when
individual efforts produce better results. He sees teamwork as an advanced skill requiring
specifc training, and admonishes faculty or managers not to expect much from an
unprepared team.
V.

A conceptual model for nursing faculty teams

VI.

Suggestions for application and research

VII.

Conclusion

VII.

References

Allen, J. (2009). Building a group into a team. Internet Journal of Healthcare Administration,
6(1), DOI 15312933.
Bandow, D. (2001). Time to create sound teamwork. The Journal for Quality and
Pasrticipation, 41-47.
Brady, T. (2009). Successful team building. Fleetowner's Small Business Review 96.
Clarke, K. (2009). Team building under pressure. Associations Now, 19.
Coffee, R. & Jones, G. (2006). The art of followership. European Business Forum, 25, 22-26.
DiRenzo, S, (1994). A challenge to nursing: Promoting followers as well as leaders. Holistic
Nursing Practice, 9(1), 26-30.
Eva, K. (2002). Teamwork during education: The whole is not always greater than the sum of
the parts. Medical Education, 36, 314-316.
Forman, J. (2008). Way beyond the basics: Working on cross-disciplinary faculty
teams Business Communication Quarterly, 211-216. DOI 10.1177/1080569908317080.

Garland, J., Jones, H., & Kolodny, R. (1973). A model for stages of development in social work
groups, in S. Bernstein (Ed.), Exploration of group work: Essays in theory and practice (pp.
17-71). Boston, MA: Milford House.
Hodgetts, R. & Hegar, K. (2007). Modern Human Relations at Work. Ohio: Mason.
Kapp, E. (2009). Improving student teamwork in a collaborative project-based
course. College Teaching, 57(3), 139-143.
Lloyd, J. (2009). Works and plays well with others. The Receivables Report, 9-11.
McCallin, A. & Bambord, A. (2007). Interdisciplinary teamwork: Is the influence of emotional
intelligence fully appreciated? Journal of Nursing Administration, 15, 386-391.
Maxwell, J. (2008). Leadership Gold. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.
Musselwhite, C. (2006). Why great followers make the best leaders. Harvard Business
School Publishing Corporation. 3.
Pryor, M., Singleton, L., Taneja, S., and Toombs, L. (2009). Teaming as a strategic and tactical
tool: An analysis with recommendations. International Journal of Management, 26(2), 320333.
Schiller, L. (1995). Stages of development in women's groups: A relational model. In R.
Kurland and R. Salmon (Eds.), Group work practice in a troubled society (pp. 117-138). New
York, NY: The Haworth Press.
Schiller, L. (2007). Not for women only: Applying the relational model of group development
with vulnerable populations. Social Work with Groups, 30(2), New York, NY: The Haworth
Press.
Snyder, L. (2009). Teaching teams about teamwork: Preparation, practice, and performance
review. Business Communication Quarterly, 74-79. DOI 10.1177/1080569908330372.
Tuckman, B. (1965). Develomental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6),
384-399.
Weaver, T. (2008). Enhancing multiple disciplinary teamwork. Nursing Outlook, 56(3), 108114.

Team Building Literature Review

Page historylast edited by Linda Comer 5 years ago

Draft Draft Draft!!!

Matrix

Author

Date Description of Article or Book

2008

Salas,

Integrative review of the literature on Teaming.

Cooke, Rosen
Identified 8 discoveries and 5 challenges,, more than 130 models and frameworks of team
performance. Core concepts include input-output framework, multilevel and dynamic
nature of teams, team members engage in both individual taskwork and teamwork
processes. Emphasized importance of shared cognition, effectiveness of team training,
factors that influence team performance, the multidisciplinary nature of team research and
theory, need for better measures of teamwork processes and team effectiveness, and need
to study multicultural teams.
McCallin,
Bamford

2007
Nursing. Australia.
Need to examine team processes as well as team effectivness. Proposes emotional
intelligence as model for examination of team processes. Dysfunctional team members,
avoidance of confrontation, need for members to "fit: the team, need for trust-building,
communication a priority, leaders set the tone.

Weaver

200
Nursing.
Multidisciplinary teamwork. Issues of personality type, level of team committment,
leadership. Developed model, gave table to strategies to enhance teamwork grouped into
promoting the promotors, barring the barriers,and the 14 C's of teamwork.

Author

Date Description of Article or Book

Mickan, Rodger

2005
Healthcare. Australia.
Theory development article on effective healthcare teams. Good definitions, examination of
teamwork. Constructivist approach to development of a model. Participants in study were
15 doctors, 10 nurses, 7 administrators, and 7 allied health professionals. Identified 6
categories conceptually linked across 4 emerging themes (team environment, team
structure, team processes, and individual contribution). Developed 4 stage guide for
reflective analysis and team development.

Snyder

2009 Teaching students to work in teams before faculty assign group work. Strategies for helping
students learn collaboration skills (refocusing a discussion, active listening,
questioning, restating, working backward from a timeline, delegation and prioritization
techniques, keeping a project on track through communication, felicity and tolerance, and
conflict negotiation. Also use of self-reflection at the end of the project about how individual
student functioned in the team.

Kapp

2009 Describes a team-building intervention in a senior-level project course (a 1-hr workshop and
then peer evals).

Eva

2002 Editorial positing that teamwork is not better than individual work. Cites weak correlations
between group functioning and achievement, and a model where productivity = potential
productivity - losses due to process.

Brady

2009 Brief article giving tips for successful team building. Focus on shared understandings,
communication, tolerance, willingness to face conflict, and development of trust.

DiRienzo

1994
Nursing.
Article focusing on followers and developing skills needed, discusses relationship of leaders
and followers.

Kersten

2009 Article identifies what followers learn from leaders, and how leaders behavior impacts
followers.

Musselwhite

2006 Brief article on follower skills which author equates with leadership skills.

Goffee, Jones

2996 Business article on followership, states that followers want 4 things from leaders authenticity, significance, excitement, and community.

Hurwitz and

2009 Literature review on followership. Examines research and theories.

Author

Date Description of Article or Book

Hurwitz

Hurwitz and
Hurwitz

2009 Develops core competencies and a model of followership.

b

Xyrichis, Ream

2007
Nursing. UK.
A concept analysis of teamwork. Used Walker and Avant's model. Defining attributes:
exercising concerted effort, employing interdependent collaborating, utilizing shared
decision-making. Antecedants: two or more health professionals, open communication and
information sharing, understanding of professional roles, common health goals.
Consequences: for health professionals - job satisfaction, recognition of individual
contribution and motivation, improved mental health; for patients - improved quality of
care, value-added patient outcomes, and satisfaction with services; for the healthcare
organization - satisfied and committed workforce, cost control, workforce retention and
reduced turnover. Definition: a dynamic process involving two or more health professionals
with complementary backgrounds and skills, sharing common health goals and exercising
concerted physical and mental effort in assessing, planning, or evaluating patient care.
This is accomplished through interdependent collaboration, open communication, and
shared decision-making. This in turn generates value-added patient, organizational, and
staff outcomes.

Klein,
DiazGranados,
Salas, Le, Burke,
Lyons

2009 Examined whether team-building works. Meta-analysis of 20 study reports revealed 60

correlations. Careful attention to procedures for meta-analysis. Process and affective
outcome were most amenable to intervention, all components of team-building had
moderate effect on outcomes, but goal-setting and role-clarification had largest effect size.
Larger teams benefitted more than smaller teams.

Maugham

1971
UK.
Case study report of a consultation and follow-up evaluation. Satisfaction of manager
with consultation, reports of increased morale and willingness to work together.
Interventions may improve affect but not effectiveness. Questions reasonableness of
expectation that a five-day intervention would effect permenant change in teamwork.

Author

Date Description of Article or Book

Allen

2009
Healthcare.
Described twelve characteristics of teambuilding. Emphasizes importance of mission
statement, vision statement, standards of behavior, Defines types of teams, traditional
stages of group development, benefits of team-building.

Glista, Petersons

2003
Case study of an effective interdisciplinary faculty team. Factors deemed critical in
fostering team development include strong institutional support for meetings,
background preparation, and writing time. Secretarial support for mintes and assistance
with grant writing (a grant was the group project), incentives such as lunch for the team,
recognition and awards for participation, a small stipend, and positive consideration in
evaluation and tenure and promotion. Shared indirect costs across colleges. Chairs
endorsed faculty participation. The biggest barrier was scheduling and meeting issues,
finding time to write, full workloads.

Forman

2008 Article on cross-disciplinary faculty team, case report.

Saavedra, Van
Dybe

1999
Research study on social exchange, emotional investment, and group performance.
Sample was 28 work groups consisting of 134 individuals (undergraduate students). Found
emotional investment was key variable in prediction group effectiveness, along with costs
and rewards.

Thomas, Jacques, 2008

Adams,
Cross-organizational research study in project management about work-team building.
KihnemanWCU authors.
Wooten
Applied project management steps to group process stages. Found correlation between
formation of project teams and effectiveness of project.
Schiller

2007 Applies feminist model (relational) of group development to vulnerable populations. Nice
discussion of group development theories. Relational model proposes that
intimacy precedes conflict that the need is to establish a "felt sense" of safety (trust) in the
early stages. Article discussed influence of model on what is observed.

Pryor, Singleton,

2009 Paper analyzing teaming as a strategic and tactical tool. Differentiates work groups vs.

Author

Date Description of Article or Book

Taneja, Toombs

work teams. Identifies essentials for team success, reasons for team failure, and a model
for high performance teams.

Bandow

200
1

Article on how organizational climate can help or hinder effective teams. Suggestions for
team building, symptoms of ineffective teamwork.

Lloyd

200
9

Business article on how to be a good team member. Same general suggestions:

communicate, recognize and appreciate, help, deal with conflict, stay focused on team goal,
respect all members. 5 steps for effective team building.

Chiu, Lin, Chien

200
9?

Study of intricacies to team processes, supports transformational leadership methods.

Clarke

200
9

Interview with physician Ben Carson of JHU about teams and pressure situations. Team
member selection is critical, leader must give recognition and include all personalities, social
events to build relationships help.

Kezar, Lester

200
9

Research on faculty grassroots leadership in 5 sites. Identifies barriers as academic

capitalism, rising publication standards for tenure and promotion, expanded roles in service
and teaching, rise in number of part-time and no tenured faculty. Supports include shared
governance, leadership development programs, faculty development programs, and
mentoring programs. Identified departmental or school-wide approaches to support faculty
grassroots leaders, campus-wide approaches, and multi-level approaches.

Conrad

197
8

A grounded theory of academic change. Critical role of administrative change agent.

Interest groups, exerting power in an unstable situation, create need for new policies.

Treadwell,
200
Lavertue, Kumar, 1
Veeraraghavan

Reliability and validity study of a tool: the Group Cohesion Scale-Revised.

Discusses implications of group cohesion. Cronbach alpha was acceptably high for use of
tool in research (.77-.90). This should be considered a state, rather than a trait, instrument.

Wheelan, Burchill 199

9

Nursing.
Wheelan's model of group development (similar to traditional models). Developed 60-item
questionnaire with 4 scales and 15 items per scale. Tested on 14 units (teams) and found
that lower scores on dependency and inclusion and lower scores on conflict and counter
dependency were associated with higher levels of group productivity across settings.

Knight, Trowler

200
0

UK.
Article drawn from in-depth interviews with academics and from literature review. Sees
changing nature of higher education as a barrier to improving practice in teaching.
Specifically facults intensification, "hard" managerialism, a loss of collegiality, greedy
institutions, aging, malaise, and marginality. Questions benefits of transformational
leadership, transactional leadership, and instead proposes interactional leadership.

Rathe, Conchie

200
8

Book reporting model development from Gallup research. Focuses on leading from
strengths and developing team to complement strengths.

Maxwell

200
8

Book of advice for leadership from successful leader, speaker, guru.

Kouzes, Posner

200
7

Book provides "evidence-based" guide for leadership development.

Hansen-Turton,
Sherman,
Ferguson

200
7

Book of conversations with nurse leaders.

Team building is the use of different types of team interventions that are aimed at enhancing social
relations and clarifying team members roles, as well as solving task and interpersonal problems that
affect team functioning.[1]
Team building was originally a group process intervention aimed at improving interpersonal relations
and social interactions but over time has developed to include achieving results, meeting goals and
accomplishing tasks.[2] It refers to the activities in which teams can engage to change its context,
composition or team competencies to improve performance. It is distinct from team training, which is
also a team-development intervention that is designed to improve team functioning and
effectiveness.
Team building differs from team training in a number of ways. Team building is not necessarily formal
or systematic in nature, does not target skill-based competencies and is typically done in settings
that are not in the actual environment where the team works on the task.
Team building generally sits within the theory and practice of organizational development, but can
also be applied to sports teams, school groups, armies, flight crews and other contexts. There have
been many issues in past literature about the conceptual definition of team building. However, now

there is consensus and conceptual clarity about what team building constitutes exactly. Its four
components are:

Goal setting: aligning around goals

Interpersonal-relationship management: building effective working relationships

Role clarification: reducing team members role ambiguity

Problem solving: finding solutions to team problems

These team-development interventions have proven to have positive effects on cognitive, affective,
process and performance team outcomes. Team building has seen the strongest effect on affective
and process outcomes. According to Klein et al. (2009), team building is one of the most widely used
group development interventions in organizations today. Of all organizational interventions, teamdevelopment interventions were found to have the largest effects on financial measures of
organizational performance.[3] Recent meta-analyses show that team development activities,
including team building and team training, improve both a teams objective performance and
supervisory subjective ratings on performance.[4]

The four approaches[edit]

The following are a summary of the four approaches as described by Salas and his team: [5]
Goal setting: this intervention emphasizes setting objectives and developing individual and team
goals. Team members become involved in action planning to identify ways to achieve goals. It is
designed to strengthen team member motivation to achieve team goals and objectives. By
identifying specific outcome levels, teams can determine what future resources are needed.
Individual characteristics (e.g. team member motivation) can also be altered by use of this
intervention. Many organizations insist on teams negotiating a team charter between the team
and responsible managers (and union leaders) to empower the team to accomplish things on
behalf of the organization. Successful goal settings help the teams to work towards the same
outcomes and make them more task and action oriented.

Role clarification: this intervention emphasizes increasing communication among team

members regarding their respective roles within the team. Team members improve their
understanding of their own and others respective roles and duties within the team. This
intervention defines the team as comprising a set of overlapping roles. These overlapping roles

are characterized as the behaviors that are expected of each individual team member. It can be
used to improve team and individual characteristics (i.e. by reducing role ambiguity) and work
structure by negotiating, defining, and adjusting team member roles. It includes an
understanding of the talent that exists on the team, and how best to use it, allows members to
understand why clear roles are important. The members should also realize that they are
interdependent and the failure of one team member leads to the failure of the entire team.

Problem solving: this intervention emphasizes identifying major task-related problems within
the team. Team members become involved in action planning, implementing solutions to
problems identified and to evaluate those solutions. They practice setting goals, developing
interpersonal relations, clarifying team roles, and working to improve organizational
characteristics through problem-solving tasks. This can have the added benefit of enhancing
critical-thinking skills. If teams are good in problem-solving skills, they are less likely to need
external interventions to solve their problems.[15]

Interpersonal relations management: this intervention emphasizes increasing teamwork skills

(i.e. mutual supportiveness, communication, and sharing of feelings). Team members develop
trust in one another and confidence in the team. This is based on the assumption that teams
with fewer interpersonal conflicts function more effectively than teams with greater numbers of
interpersonal conflicts. It requires the use of a facilitator to develop mutual trust and open
communication between team members. As team members achieve higher levels of trust,
cooperation and team characteristics can be changes as well.

Effective[edit]
According to Sanborn and Haszczo (2007), the effectiveness of team building differs substantially
from one organization to another.[6] The most effective team building efforts occur when members of
the team are highly interdependent in performing the task, highly knowledgeable and experienced in
the task to be accomplished, and when organizational leadership actively establishes and supports
the team. Effective team building must also incorporate an awareness of the ultimate objective of the
task. They must work to develop goals, roles and procedures to achieve it successfully. In addition to
task-orientated team building efforts, team-building efforts must also be relationship oriented. To
ensure effectiveness, team building should work towards the establishment of policies and
procedures and working with the environment, including support systems. Caveats to team building
effectiveness is that team building as an intervention is designed to work when the members of the
team are actually involved in solving the problem and when they are already intact as a team (i.e.

they worked with each other before) to be able to problem solve. The members of the team must
have the willingness and ability to speak up about their needs.

Effects of team building strategies on all four outcomes, with 10% and 90% credibility intervals

Effects on performance[edit]
Team building is a specific team development intervention that has been scientifically proven to
positively affect team effectiveness, when exerted with its intended purpose. [7] Team building is aimed
at specific needs, and thus has been proven to have specific outcomes on teams. Based on the
research conducted by Klein et al. (2009), goal setting and role clarification were shown to have
strongest impact on cognitive, affective, process and performance outcomes. However, they had the
most powerful impact on affective and process outcomes. This implies that team building can help
benefit teams experiencing issues with negative affect, such as lack of cohesion or trust. It could
also improve teams suffering from process issues, such as lack of clarification in roles. Although the
four approaches were useful in enhancing team functioning, goal setting and role clarification have
proven to be the most impactful. This is because, drawing upon theory, providing teams with clearly
set and challenging goals enhances motivation to work harder to be more effective and reduces
conflict.[8] Role clarification helps to set individual purposes, goals and motivation. Finally, larger team
sizes (those with 10 or more members) appeared to benefit the most from team building
interventions. That is because larger teams generally have a greater reservoir of cognitive resources
and capabilities than smaller teams.[9] The following table provides the main results of the effect of
team building strategies on cognitive, affective, process, and performance team outcomes: [10]

Challenges to team building[edit]

Dyer recognized three challenges that team builders will face in the future with regard to effective
team building.[11] They are:

The lack of teamwork skills in tomorrows workforce: one of the challenges facing leaders of
organizations is to find employees who have the ability to work effectively in a team
environment. Most of the organizations rely on educational institutions to train their students with

the skills. Dyer believed that students are rather encouraged to work individually for a higher
grade and succeed without having to collaborate with one another. This creates an emphasis in
self-interest- rather than an orientation to collaborate with others - than can work against the
kinds of behavior needed for successful teamwork. According to a research study conducted by
Salas, team training proved to have a positive effect on cognitive, affective, process and
performance outcomes.[12] That is, across a wide variety of settings, tasks, and team types, team
training efforts were successful.

The increasing need for teams to work together in virtual workplaces and across
organizational boundaries: according to Dyer, organizations will find it increasingly important for
individuals to work together who are not in the same physical space. Such teams will prove to be
a challenge as they are unable to build concrete relationships within the team members. A study
conducted by Oertig and Buergi to compare face-to-face communication and virtual project
teams indicated that face-to-face communication is very important in building an effective
working environment for the team.[13] Face-to-face contact was a key to developing trust and this
was initiated by a formal team building sessions with a facilitator to agree to the relationship
and define the rules as to how the teams are going to work. Informal contact was also
mentioned, e.g. sitting down over lunch to break barriers. Team building training will need to be
suited according to virtual teams who are working in geographically distant places.

Globalization and teamwork: the globalization of industry also will make team more
challenging in the future. Teams of the future will be compared more and more of team members
who have dissimilar languages, cultures, values and approaches to solving the problems. This
challenge will need to be addressed by arranging more one on one meeting that have proven to
be successful in some organizations.[14] This challenge will be enhanced when combined in
virtual workplaces when teams do not have the opportunity to have face to face
communications. Training of understanding and communication across team members can
address this issue.

Application of team building[edit]

Intervention in schools[edit]
Diana and Joseph, in their paper on team building tools for students, describe how instructors can
motivate students to develop teamwork skills and provide a guideline on how to achieve it.
[15]

Typically professors assign a team to work on a project and the only advice they give is - best of

luck. Diana and Joseph argue that this is not enough and professors should intervene more and help

the students build a team that they can work effectively with. Professors should establish the
importance of teamwork by providing specific examples of job situations that would require
teamwork skills and how helpful this skill will be in their professional career. If students are able to
understand the importance of teamwork skills and how they would benefit from it, they will be willing
to contribute more to learn these skills. The following are guidelines provided to instructors for
successful team building interventions:

Defining the task: the first approach to an effective team building is that the instructor defines
the goals and tasks required to be completed by the end of the project and a clear set of
objectives to achieve. The most important instruction given at this step is clear timelines and
deadlines for progress reports. This will ensure that the students are on track with their project
and what is expected from them is clearly communicated in the beginning.

Create a psychological contract: at this step, the instructor provides the team with a set of
rules to specify their role in the team and the consequences of not following the teamwork
norms. For example, what would happen if the team does not submit their work or if one team
member does not contribute to the team effectively? The important goals achieved in this step
are assignment of responsibilities, establishment of deadlines, ensuring contribution by all group
members and documentation of group norms and conduct. This will help the team in conflict
management as they will know what will be the consequences of lagging behind at a given point
and help in management of interpersonal relationships.

Establishing team member roles: the instructor should stress the importance of a balance
between task and relationship roles by clarifying different roles. Task roles are essentially
information that will help the team to perform the task at hand and relationship roles are social
interaction between each team member. Establishment of roles will help the students in
distribution of labor and to focus on work that they are good at. They will also know who is to be
held accountable for different tasks and who can fix them as they arise

Meeting with team members: the instructor should attend some of the team meetings and
observe the discussion taking place. They should not necessary lead the discussions but
surprise the students by attending the meetings without prior notice. Instructor can get a firsthand experience on what is actually happening in the team and give constructive feedback on
how to improve certain aspects of the situation and move on. While the instructor is attending
the meetings, he should reinforce the rules of teamwork skills as the students will be more
familiar with these. Diana and Joseph recognize a list of seven basic rules that must be
communicated to the teams: know your team members, communicate accurately and

unambiguously, accept and support one another, check for understanding, share ideas and
understanding, check for agreement and resolve conflicts constructively and quickly.

Conflict management: the next steps are to create a problem solving mechanism in the
groups so they can manage any problem that arises within. The instructor should emphasize on
the importance of conflict management as and when they arise so it does not harm the overall
dynamics of the team. Diana and Joseph provide a decision making score wherein students can
see at what stage they are and resolve the issue. For example, students may be at a 0-1 score
of no decision where none of the members are able to reach to a common consensus to a
score of 10 where needs of all members are explored and all are satisfied with the material
presented. The middle stages are situations when some dominant team-members are happy
while others are not.

Individual accountability: finally, groups should keep a track of their team meetings and
activities in a log so the non-performers are held accountable and get what they deserve. This
also includes a list of different roles and parts of the projects that was completed by each
member so the instructor can see who contributed to which part. If individuals know that they will
be held accountable for not performing in the project, this process will keep them motivated and
reduce any sort of social loafing within a team.

Team building in organizations[edit]

At the organizational level, team building is a philosophy of job design in which employees are
viewed as members of interdependent teams instead of as individual workers. [16]According to the
authors of the encyclopedia of industrial and organizational psychology, team building [in
organizational level] will be ongoing rather than a one-shot session and will be composed of training
and discussion specific to that team. [17]

Interventions in sports[edit]
The concept of team building was introduced in sports in the 1990s [when?]. A study was conducted in
2010 by Rovio and other researchers to analyze the effects of teambuilding on sports teams. [18] The
results indicated that team building has a positive impact on the functioning of teams as it
contributes towards group cohesion. The key concepts of team building identified in organizations
were applied to sports teams as well. Sport researchers lay a significant amount of emphasis on
group cohesion, which was used to define team building in the late 1980s.

According to Yukelson, In sports, teams are made up of a collection of interdependent individuals,

coordinated and orchestrated into various task efficient roles for the purpose of achieving goals and
objectives that are deemed important for that particular team. [19] The purpose of teambuilding in
sports is to develop those behavior and skills that will lead to effective team functioning. One of the
fundamental strategies for building a team is to develop a sense of team identity among the team
members. This can be done by instilling a sense of we in the team. Team members cannot work in
isolation and are independent of each other.
An experiment was carried out by Sencal, Loughead and Bloom to determine whether the team
building intervention program stressing on the importance of goal setting increased cohesion in a
sports team.[20] A total of 86 high school basketball players were studied as participants under either
of the two conditions - season long goal setting intervention program and a control program. In the
intervention program, participants were asked to individually assign targets for the team and
negotiate with other team members to finalize a goal score for the team. The coach reminded them
throughout the season about this goal by different approaches such as pasting a copy of it in their
locker rooms. Under the control condition, their study concluded that the coach would occasionally
encourage them to cheer for other team members and support each other. The research concluded
that at the beginning of the study, all the participants had the same level of cohesion for the team but
the team with the season long goal setting intervention program performed better in their games. It
was found that the level of team cohesion did not increase in the team as a result of ceiling effect
with the intervention program but the level decreased significantly for the control group. This must
have happened, as they were not focused on their goals as the team with the intervention program
did and occasional social events such as outings and dinners did not help in increasing the cohesion
level. Therefore, team building intervention program in teams proved to be successful and showed
significant improvement in the level of cohesion which positively impacted the performance.
Following are the core components to consider in building a successful sports team:

Shared vision and unity of purpose: the beginning of any team building should start with the
coach communicating the goals and objectives to the team. By doing so, roles are defined and
group norms for productivity get outlines. The coach should motivate them to work effectively
together to reach the goals.

Collaborative and synergistic teamwork: the team members should know what is expected
from them by providing them with a clear understanding of their role in the team. Mission
statements have proved to be successful in encouraging everyone in the team to support each
in achieving the goals together.

Individual and mutual accountability: the team members should be trained that the team
comes first. Everyone should be accountable for any individual action or the actions of the team
as a whole.

A positive team culture and cohesive group atmosphere: according to Martens, team culture
refers to the psychosocial leadership within the team, team motives, team identity, team sport
and collective efficacy.[21] The coach should build a positive team culture that allows for the
smooth functioning of the team. This can be done by selecting team players after careful
judgment of how much they value dedication, commitment and the willingness to work hard to
achieve the teams goal to win, not to achieve any personal goal. A coach usually delivers a
speech in the locker room before the game which has proved to be motivating for a football team
in 2014[weasel words].[22] The coach mentions what is it like to be a part of the team and reminds them of
successful players in the past and how beating the particular team will give the team the respect
and success they need.

Team identity: a successful team building endeavour is to instill a sense of pride in group
membership such that team members are proud to be a part of the team. Team identity can be
created by motivating team members to be committed to team goals and have pride in the
performance by working together as one single unit.

Open and honest communication processes: an open and honest communication process
should be encouraged within a team so that the lack of unity does not affect them during a
game. The main components of communication such as trust, honesty, mutual sharing and
understanding should be emphasized. The team members should be encouraged and given the
chance to speak during debriefing sessions can help build these components of communication.

Peer helping and social support: finally, teammates should be encouraged to help each other
during games and before and after a game too. They should support each other if they lose a
game or motivate each other if they win the game. Sport teams should function as a family
wherein players are not just focused on their own individual goals but rather are concerned
about the well-being of the entire family.

LITERATURE REVIEW
In spite of this popularity of the concept of team building, however,

several reviewers (e.g., Buller, 1986; Woodman & Sherwood,

1980) have observed that there is no conclusive evidence that team
building renders an increase in team productivity.
Druckman and Bjork (1994) noted that the enthusiasm for these approaches among practitioners "is
not matched by strong empirical support for their effect on team productivity" (p. 125). Similar to this,
Smither, Houston, and McIntire (1996) concluded that "Research findings on the effectiveness of
team building provide a complex mix of results that make drawing firm conclusions difficult" (p.
324). : More than 20 years after Beer (1976) attempted to formalize the: notion of team building,
some of the most fundamental questions : about the effects of team building remain: Does team
building enhance productivity? Why? Under what conditions? This article reports the results of a
meta-analytic integration of previous research examining the effects of team building on productivity.
Robinson & Robinson (1994) and also Thamhain (1988) define a team as a group of people, but all
groups do not qualify as teams. At times, a group may be formed just for administrative purposes or
for achieving personal goals or for social affiliation. At other times, committees can stifle creativity
and hinder decision-making. However, occasionally, a group of people combine high morale,
effective task productivity and a clear relevance to the organization. A team is a group of people who
work interdependently, who are committed to common goals, and who produce high quality results.
Katzenbach and Smith (1994) defined a team as "A small number of people with complementary
skills who are committed to a common purpose, productivity goals, and common approach for which
they hold themselves mutually accountable."
Teamwork is a symbiotic process which leads to a much better result that is greater than the
integration of individual productivitys. Thamhain (1988) describes effective teams as the ones that
produce high quality results and succeed in spite of many difficulties and cultural or philosophical
differences. Effective teams have several task-oriented and people-oriented characteristics. Thamain
(2004) debates that the working environment within the project team has a significant impact on
project success, and therefore suggests that the project manager has a significant leadership role in
blending the team.
Teams can be depicted in terms of many philosophers and theoretical frame works and team based
philosophy with in organization is becoming increasingly popular and common place ( Sheard and
Kakabadse 2001). Recently in the uk as many as 82% of the company with 100 or more employees
reported using team structures (Gordon 2002). Banker et al. (1996) argued that the use of teams
has led the tremendous organization improvements in variety of industries. In south Africa the
scenario is the same team instead of jobs , have become the critical building block of future org
(robins et al 2004:99).