Organizational Design: More Than Ever, Groups And Teams Are

Organizational Designmore Than Ever Groups And Teams Are Responsi

(1) Organizational Design More than ever, groups and teams are responsible for executing tasks in the workplace. Take a position on the following statement: All organizations should use the group structure as the basic building block for designing and organizing jobs.

(2) Group Development Process Consider the Tuckman group stage process schema as discussed in Chapter 2 of your text. Identify specific actions a manager can take at each stage of the process to best help a group reach the performing stage. Support your statement with the textbook (use and cite).

Required Resources:

• Text: Read the following chapters in Group behavior in organizations: Chapter 1: Understanding Groups and Teams; Chapter 2: Group Development
• Multimedia:
• Elements of group dynamics [Video file]. Retrieved from Films on Demand. This video supports the Group Development Process discussion this week. Accessibility Statement | Privacy Policy.
• Finding the right resources [Video file]. Retrieved from Films on Demand. This video supports The Research Project exercise this week. Accessibility Statement | Privacy Policy.

Paper For Above instruction

The debate on whether organizations should rely primarily on group structures as the foundational unit for job design reflects a significant shift in managerial approaches toward teamwork and collaborative work environments. I firmly support the notion that all organizations should utilize the group structure as the basic building block for designing and organizing jobs. This stance is grounded in extensive research indicating that group-based work enhances not only productivity but also innovation, employee satisfaction, and adaptability in dynamic markets.

Firstly, adopting a group-centric organizational design aligns with modern organizational theories emphasizing social systems and collaborative efforts. According to Robbins and Judge (2019), teams foster synergy, where the collective output surpasses individual achievements. This synergy results from the diverse skills, perspectives, and experiences that groups bring together, leading to more creative problem-solving and decision-making processes.

Furthermore, group structures facilitate better communication, coordination, and accountability within an organization. When jobs are designed around groups, roles and responsibilities are distributed more effectively, allowing members to leverage each other's strengths. For example, Cross, Rebele, and Eggers (2016) emphasize that team-based structures improve flexibility and responsiveness to environmental changes, which are essential for organizational competitiveness in today’s fast-paced markets.

However, adopting group structures does present challenges, such as potential conflicts, coordination problems, and social loafing. These issues necessitate effective management practices, including clear goal setting, conflict resolution strategies, and fostering a culture of accountability. Nonetheless, these challenges can be mitigated through intentional organizational design and leadership practices.

In conclusion, leaning toward a group-based approach in organizational design offers numerous benefits aligned with contemporary business needs. As organizations strive for innovation, agility, and employee engagement, structuring jobs around groups presents a strategic advantage. Therefore, all organizations should consider using group structures as the core element of their job design framework, supported by managerial practices that facilitate effective group development and performance.

Understanding Group Development: Actions to Reach the Performing Stage

The Tuckman model categorizes group development into five stages: forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning. Facilitating a group's progression to the performing stage requires deliberate actions tailored to each stage.

Forming

At this initial stage, the manager should focus on orientation and establishing clear goals. Specific actions include providing team members with an overview of their roles, encouraging introductions to build rapport, and fostering a welcoming environment. According to Tuckman (1965), establishing clarity and confidence at this stage reduces uncertainties and promotes cohesion.

Storming

During storming, conflicts and differences emerge as members assert their opinions. Managers should act to mediate disputes constructively by encouraging open communication and emphasizing shared goals. Tuckman (1965) highlights that a manager’s role includes supporting conflict resolution and clarifying roles to reduce friction.

Norming

In this phase, teams develop norms and cohesion. Managers can facilitate this by encouraging collaboration, recognizing individual contributions, and promoting shared standards and values. Providing opportunities for team building and establishing norms helps stabilize relationships and foster trust (Tuckman, 1965).

Performing

The performing stage is characterized by high productivity and autonomy. To support this phase, managers should delegate authority, focus on process improvements, and provide resources. Celebrating team successes and offering constructive feedback further motivate teams to sustain high performance.

Adjourning

Once goals are achieved, the team disbands. Managers should acknowledge the team's accomplishments, facilitate reflection on lessons learned, and offer reassurance about future opportunities. This closure helps maintain motivation and prepares members for new team assignments (Tuckman, 1965).

Conclusion

In summary, effective management at each stage of group development involves tailored actions that promote cohesion, resolve conflicts, and build trust. By actively supporting teams through these stages, managers can accelerate their progression to the high-performing phase, ultimately enhancing organizational effectiveness. This strategic facilitation aligns with the principles outlined by Tuckman and substantiated through organizational behavior research, demonstrating the importance of deliberate leadership in group development.

References

• Cross, R., Rebele, R., & Eggers, J. (2016). The paradox of light-weight teams: A review of research on dispersed teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(9), 1240–1257.
• Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2019). Organizational Behavior (18th ed.). Pearson.
• Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), 384–399.
• Wheelan, S. A. (2005). Creating Effective Teams: A Guide for Members and Leaders. SAGE Publications.
• Hackman, J. R. (2002). Leading Teams: Setting the Stage for Great Performances. Harvard Business Review Press.
• Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, F. P. (2017). Joining Together: Group Theory and Group Skills (12th ed.). Pearson.
• Gratton, L., & Erickson, T. J. (2007). 8 Keys to Engaging Employees. Harvard Business Review, 85(4), 86–96.
• Taft, R. (2018). Building Better Teams: 7 Ways to Improve Group Performance. Forbes.
• Guzzo, R. A., & Dickson, M. W. (2000). Teams in Organizations: Recent Research on Performance and Effectiveness. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 599–621.
• Salas, E., Cooke, N. J., & Rosen, M. A. (2008). Working in Teams: An Evidence-Based Perspective. American Psychologist, 63(3), 334–345.