Introduction
Reading 11.1
Robbins, Stephen P; Millett, Bruce; Cacioppe, Ron and Waters-Marsh, Terry (1998). Extract from chapter 9 'Group dynamics and building teams'. In Organisational Behaviour: Leading and Managing in Australia and New Zealand . 2nd edition. Sydney : Prentice Hall, pages 306-307.
Integra is an example of a very different approach - one that is not for every profession, organisation or industry. Many people complain that their organisations are too bureaucratic or authoritarian so Integra shows us another view.
Why work in groups and teams? Groups or teams are seen by many as being more effective than either individuals or the departments and committees of traditional organisations. As you will see, teams in whatever shape or form are sometimes extremely effective and sometimes not. The key to knowing when to use a team and to realising their potential for excellence lies in knowing about their strengths and weaknesses.
We have all spent some time working in groups. No doubt you have participated in a group that seems to perform well, accomplishing something that could not have been achieved nearly so well by an individual. You may also have participated in groups that have not performed effectively.
While many employees complain about working in groups, the fact remains that groups are an essential organisational resource. Many employees do, in fact, enjoy working in a group or team environment.
Remember we are all part of somebody's team. There is one person you will meet in every team you are ever in - yourself.
In this chapter we will consider the various types of groups found in organisations and how group problem solving can be managed and improved. Bear in mind a couple of well-known sayings about group work.
None of us is as smart as all of us.
The whole is worth more than the sum of the parts.
One of the truly remarkable things about groups is that they can make 2 + 2 = 5. Of course, they also have the capability of making 2 + 2 = 3.
Think about the following example and the 'group dynamics' as described by a colleague.
Teamwork
Two men entered an inerted cargo tank on a chemical tanker. One of them collapsed on the bottom of the tank. The other managed to reach the deck before collapsing. The successful rescue of the man in the tank was a credit to the well rehearsed shipboard response team.
In the subsequent fact-finding meeting, the Master of the ship blamed the crew for not following the written procedure and 'running around like headless chickens'. They should have woken him up, he said, held a muster to ascertain who was missing, raise the alarm, etc. The rescue team, after this, did not respond in any positive way to the enquiry into the accident. This led to a considerable amount of frustration on board on the part of the Master, who had to write his report of the incident.
A report into the accident following an enquiry by the company's management said '...an apportionment of blame is neither consequential nor relative. The importance is in or learning from the experience...vessels are respectfully prompted to re-address the following....'
Taken from Grewal 1997.
Think back to our discussions on culture, managing change and creative decision-making. Now read the following novel decision:
Reading 11.2
Wygant, Jonathan (1996). 'The Arc Angels'. Chicken Soup for the Soul: Home Delivery . Online. [1 page]