PERFORMANCE AND PRODUCTIVITY: TEAM PERFORMANCE CRITERIA AND THREATS TO PRODUCTIVITY

OVERVIEW

This chapter is best discussed following a team exercise or case so that students have an opportunity to reflect on the success of the team. One suggestion is to ask each student to write down a method by which to assess team productivity. The students’ different responses can lead to a discussion of performance measures. Then, the instructor can ask what conditions need to be in place for teams to excel on the performance measures identified by the class. Finally, the instructor can move toward a discussion of how to design teamwork so that threats to performance are minimized. To the extent that students and the instructor can link these concepts to real experiences—a class exercise, a case discussion, or individual student analysis— the concepts will become clearer.

lecture outline with Accompanying slides

integrated model of successful team performance (EXHIBIT 2-1)

1 Model serves two purposes

1 Description—what to expect in terms of team performance

2 Prescription—ways to improve the functioning of teams

2 Model asserts that team context affects team’s ability to do three essential things

1 Perform effectively

2 Build and sustain motivation

3 Coordinate people

[pic]

[pic]

team context

1 It includes the larger organizational setting within which a team does its work, the design of a team in terms of internal functioning, and the culture of a team

2 A number of organizational conditions increase the likelihood that a team’s work will be successful

1 Organizational context (such as the basic structure of the organization, the information system, the education system, and the reward system)

2 Team design (the leadership style within the team, functional roles, communication patterns, composition of the team, and training of members)

3 Team culture

1 Prescriptive norms—what should be done

2 Proscriptive norms—should be avoided

[pic]

essential conditions for successful team performance

1 Knowledge, skill, and ability (KSA)

1 Team member skills: Technical, interpersonal (emotional intelligence), decision-making, problem-solving. Choking under pressure

2 Learning curves and expertise

3 Social facilitation versus social inhibition

1 Expertise

2 Practice and rehearsal

4 Flow: Between boredom and choking

5 Stress versus challenge

2 Motivation and effort

1 Motivation gains

2 The Kohler effect

3 Social loafing (Exhibit 2-3)

4 Free riding: Main causes

1 Diffusion of responsibility/deindividuation

2 Dispensability of effort/a reduced sense of self-efficacy

3 Sucker aversion

5 Suggestions for enhancing successful team performance

1 Increase identifiability

2 Promote involvement (Positive illusion bias)

3 Reward team members for performance

4 Strengthen team cohesion

5 Increase personal responsibility

6 Use team charters

7 Provide team performance reviews and feedback

8 Maintain the “right” staffing level

3 Coordination strategies

1 Use single-digit teams

2 Have an agenda

3 Train team members together

4 Practice

5 Minimize links in communication

6 Set clear performance standards

[pic]

performance Criteria (Exhibit 2-4)

1 Productivity

2 Cohesion

3 Learning

4 Integration

[pic]

the team performance equation

1 AP = PP + S – T

1 AP = actual productivity

2 PP = potential productivity

1 Task demands

2 Resources

3 Team process

3 S = synergy

4 T = performance threats (process loss)

[pic]

conclusions

1 Unless a team has a clear goal, it will be impossible to achieve success; however, having a clear goal in no sense guarantees successful team performance

2 Managers want their teams to satisfy the end user or client, but also make sure that teamwork is satisfying and rewarding for the team members

3 If the team does not enjoy working together, sustaining long-term productivity will be impossible

4 Managing a team successfully must include managing and investing in individual members

5 A successful team is integrated with the larger organization

6 Success requires a combination of managing internal dynamics of the team and team’s relationship to other units, groups, and so on, within the organization

7 To ensure team success, a manager can adopt a preventative approach and undertake an analysis of the essential conditions affecting team performance

8 One of the biggest managerial shortcomings is a failure to account for threats to team performance

Key terms

choking under pressure The tendency for a person’s performance to decline when under performance pressure

coordination The combined synchronization of the strategies of all group members

deindividuation A psychological state in which a person does not feel a sense of individual responsibility and, as a result, does not feel as accountable to perform or contribute to a task or problem

diffusion of responsibility In a group, the tendency for each individual to feel less responsible and therefore less likely to take action than if he or she were alone

flow According to Csikszentmihalyi, flow is a psychological state between boredom with a task and intense pressure

free riders Team members who benefit from the efforts of others while contributing little or nothing themselves

goal contagion a form of norm setting in which people adopt a goal held by others

group performance equation A single equation for the manager to use when assessing team performance, represented by AP = PP + S – T, where AP = actual productivity; PP = potential productivity; S = synergy; T = performance threats

integration The extent to which the team’s goals and activities are aligned with those of the larger organization

norm A behavioral rule imposed on, and adhered to by, members of a group; a felt obligation, behavior, or attitude approved and expected by a group

positive illusion bias an unwarranted belief in one’s own superiority

prescriptive norm A behavioral rule that dictates what situations and behaviors a group should adhere to or follow

process loss Under-performance of a group, due to coordination problems and motivational problems

proscriptive norm A behavioral rule that dictates what situations and behaviors a group should avoid

social facilitation The tendency for people to perform better when in the presence of others. (The presence of others facilitates behavior if the task is well-learned, but debilitates behavior if the task is not well-learned)

social inhibition The effect that occurs when people who are the center of attention are concerned with discrepancies between their performance and standards of excellence, and, therefore, perform less effectively

social loafing A form of motivation loss in which people in a group fail to contribute as much or work as hard as they would if they worked independently

sucker aversion A phenomenon that results from group members’ wariness of being taken advantage of or receiving little credit for their work; everyone in the group waits to see what others will do before contributing, which leads to a collective lack of effort

team context Includes the larger organizational context within which the group or team does its work, the design of the group in terms of its internal functioning, and the culture of the group

Suggested Cases AND Exercises

CASE: Framework for Analyzing Work Groups By Michael B. McCaskey

. This case note, written as the basis for classroom discussion, presents a model for understanding the behavior and evolution of primary, stable work groups over time. Model describes contextual factors, design factors, and emergent culture as determinants of group behavior and performance. In addition, it describes emergent behavior, norms, roles, and rituals as aspects of group life. Available from Harvard Business School Publishing; phone 1-800-545-7685 or (617) 783-7600; order online at http://www.hbsp.harvard.edu/home.html (product no. 9-480-009.)

CASE: Managing a Task Force By James P. Ware

. This Harvard Business School case describes several principles for improving the effectiveness of internal task forces. It also suggests a number of guidelines for starting up a task force, conducting the first meeting, managing the group’s activities, and completing the project. Available from Harvard Business School Publishing; phone 1-800-545-7685 or (617) 783-7600; order online at http://www.hbsp.harvard.edu/home.html (product no. 9-478-002.)

CASE: Managing Your Team By Linda A. Hill

. Specifically, the introduction to this Harvard Business School case identifies some criteria for evaluating team effectiveness and outlines in detail the key areas of responsibility of team managers: Managing the team’s boundary, and managing the team itself (including designing the team and facilitating the team’s process). The case also contains a brief appendix on managing transnational teams as well as substantial bibliographic references for further reading. Available from Harvard Business School Publishing; phone 1-800-545-7685 or (617) 783-7600; order online at http://www.hbsp.harvard.edu/home.html (product no. 9-494-081.)

EXERCISE: Game of Envelopes and Money By J. Keith Murnighan

. This is a large group social dilemma game where the parties can win, or, more likely, lose real money. Based on an exercise described by David Messick and Christel Rutte, it shows how difficult cooperation is for large groups of people who cannot interact to boost commitment. Exercise: Takes 5 min. to play and additional time to tabulate results. Available from the Dispute Resolution Research Center (DRRC) and Kellogg Teams and Groups Center (KTAG) CD-ROM set, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University; e-mail: drrc@kellogg.northwestern.edu; phone: (847) 491-8068.

EXERCISE: Leveling: Giving and Receiving Feedback By J. William Pfeiffer

. Participants in this exercise are instructed to (anonymously) write short pieces of adverse feedback about each member of their group, including themselves. Each participant then reveals to the group what adverse feedback he or she is expecting to receive. After each person is given their collected feedback, group members compare their actual feedback to their anticipated feedback, and explore and discuss their individual feeling reactions to adverse feedback. Goals of this exercise include letting participants compare their perceptions of how a group sees them with the actual feedback obtained by the group; legitimizing negative feedback within a group; and developing skills in giving negative feedback. Exercise: 10 min. per participant. Appears in Pfeiffer, J. W., & Jones, J. E. 1994. A Handbook of Structured Experiences for Human Relations Training, Vol. I (Exercise #17, pp. 79–81). San Diego, CA: Pfeiffer & Company.

EXERCISE: Team Assessment By Leigh Thompson, Deborah Gruenfeld, Nancy Rothbard, and Charles Naquin

. This exercise is an assessment tool for team members who have been working together on projects, and who expect to continue to work together in the future. The objective of the exercise is to provide a “safe” forum for team members to air and discuss concerns that otherwise might not get articulated. Further, it provides an opportunity for group members to assess how they perceive the group to be functioning. Finally, it is an opportunity for members to develop and discuss active plans for future work together. Preparation: 10 min. Exercise: 60–90 min. Available from the Dispute Resolution Research Center (DRRC) and Kellogg Teams and Groups Center (KTAG) CD-ROM set, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University; e-mail: drrc@kellogg.northwestern.edu; phone: (847) 491-8068.

EXERCISE: Tower Building By Leigh Thompson, Deborah Gruenfeld, Charles Naquin, and Nancy Rothbard

. Teams have 20 minutes to build the tallest free-standing tower they can, using common materials provided to them (construction paper, toothpicks, stapler, marker pens, etc.). The towers are judged by an ad-hoc panel composed of one member from each team. The exercise focuses on leadership, decision making, and coordination. Exercise: 20 min. to build tower; 20 min. for judging and discussion. Available from the Dispute Resolution Research Center (DRRC) and Kellogg Teams and Groups Center (KTAG) CD-ROM set, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University; e-mail: drrc@kellogg.northwestern.edu; phone: (847) 491-8068.

EXERCISE: Words in Sentences By Francine S. Hall

. In this exercise, small groups of participants (5 to 15 people) play members of small companies that “manufacture” words and then “package” them in meaningful (English language) sentences. The groups must design and participate in running their own Words in Sentences (WIS) company, designing the organization to be as efficient as possible during 10-minute “production runs”, the output of which will be evaluated and recorded by a pre-selected “Quality Control Review Board”. At the end of the first production run, each group has the opportunity to reorganize their company. The purpose of the exercise is to experiment with designing and operating an organization, as well as to compare production and quality outputs under different organization structures or leadership styles. It is also useful in conjunction with teaching topics such as applied motivation and job design, group decision making and problem solving, negotiation and conflict, managers as leaders, and organizational communication. Exercise: 90 min. total (including 15 min. of group preparation, two 10-min. “production runs”, and a 10-min. discussion). Exercise appears in Bowen, D. D., Lewicki, R. J., Hall, D. T., & Hall, F. S. (1997), Experiences in Management and Organizational Behavior, 4th Edition (pp. 249–253). New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Discussion Questions

1. What is meant by the “internal dynamics” of a team? Why is it important to manage both the internal dynamics and external relations of a team?

2. What are the essential conditions for successful team performance?

3. What are some common threats to each of the essential conditions for successful team performance? What are the psychological factors underpinning these threats?

4. Have you experienced social loafing or free riding in a team setting? What could have been done or can be done to avoid these effects?

5. What are some effective strategies for enhancing successful team performance? How can these strategies help to decrease threats to team performance and motivation?

6. What are some of the positive effects of coordination within a team? What are some of the problems that arise from poor coordination? How can a manager ensure better coordination of efforts within a team?

7. What are the criteria by which a team’s effectiveness should be evaluated? Why is it important to evaluate a team’s effectiveness by other criteria besides team productivity?

8. What are the factors in Steiner’s (1972) team performance equation? Explain how this equation can be applied when assessing team performance.

Multiple-choice Questions

1. The organizational context, team design, and team culture are three important aspects that affect the ultimate performance of a team. Which of these three aspects does a leader have the most control over?

a. The organizational context

b. Team design

c. Team culture

d. All three about equally

2. Team culture refers to:

a. The personality of a team

b. The ethnic origin of the team members

c. The extent to which team members are polite and respectful to one another

d. The geographical location of the team

3. A number of factors must be in place for a team to perform well. All of the following are considered essential for team effectiveness, except:

a. Knowledge and skill regarding the team task

b. Motivation to accomplish the goals of the team

c. The ability to identify the different personality styles of team members

d. The ability to coordinate effort and communicate

4. The social loafing effect refers to:

a. The tendency of people in teams to let others make mistakes instead of telling them what to do

b. The tendency for teams to take longer to complete a task than individuals

c. The tendency for teams to be more creative than individuals but experience more conflict

d. People in teams who do not work as hard as they would if they were working individually

5. If you detect a free rider on your team, the best way to remedy the situation is to:

a. Stop carpooling with members of the team

b. Increase the identifiability of that person’s work products, through performance reviews

c. Increase the size of the team

d. Diffuse responsibility for the failure of the team

6. Coordination is the ability of teams to communicate effectively and combine their efforts. All of the following can enhance team coordination, except:

a. Training team members together

b. Practice and rehearsal

c. Setting clear performance standards

d. Rewarding team members for their performance

7. There are several criteria by which to evaluate the success of a team. Which of the following do most organizations (and team members) care about the most?

a. Responsibility: being allowed to set their own performance goals

b. Design: choosing the right team members

c. Results: achieving the goal

d. Rewards: being appropriately compensated for effort

8. Which of the following is true about individual performance under stress and pressure?

a. Performance improves only for tasks that require high motivation

b. Performance on a well-learned task improves

c. Performance on a not-well-learned task improves

d. Stress never enhances performance

9. The Kohler Effect refers to:

a. The observation that less-capable members work harder in a team than they do alone

b. The observation that more-capable members don’t work as hard in a team as they do alone

c. The observation that people work less hard in a group than they do alone

d. The observation that people work harder when they are in a flow state

10. The team performance equation attempts to predict the actual productivity of a team. It states that the AP (Actual productivity) of a team =

a. The potential productivity of a team, plus team synergies, minus team threats

b. The potential productivity of a team, plus team culture, minus free-riding

c. The potential productivity of a team, plus task design, plus team culture

d. Cohesion, plus learning, plus integration