This Week's Assignment: Reading A Scenario About S

This Weeks Assignment Consists Of Reading A Scenario About Sandwich B

This week's Assignment consists of reading a scenario about Sandwich Blitz, Inc. and writing about how self-managed teams could be used at Sandwich Blitz to allow Dalman more time to devote to growing the business. Lately, Dalman has mostly been visiting the operating locations and addressing manager operations concerns. Lei has concentrated on financial matters. Both Dalman and Lei are pleased with Sandwich Blitz’s past performance but feel that they are each unable to devote their time and energy to take the business to the next level. All of their time seems to be spent addressing small problems within the existing operation.

Dalman has heard that other businesses have successfully used a team approach to managing with good results and wonders if this could help him as well as the location managers. After reading the scenario above, the section on “Self-managed Teams” in your assigned textbook readings and completing the practice Learning Activities, type a paper in which you explain the difference between traditional and team work environments, how self-managed teams could be successfully implemented at Sandwich Blitz, and how these teams could contribute to Sandwich Blitz’s success. This Assignment addresses the following unit outcomes: — Distinguish between traditional versus team environments. — Describe how teams contribute to an organization’s effectiveness. — Explain how an effective team is built.

Paper For Above instruction

The contemporary organizational landscape has seen a significant transition from traditional hierarchical structures to more dynamic, team-based environments. This shift underscores the importance of understanding the distinctions between traditional work settings and team-oriented systems, particularly through the lens of implementing self-managed teams at Sandwich Blitz, Inc. Such an exploration offers insights into how teams can drive organizational effectiveness and success in fast-paced, service-oriented industries like that of Sandwich Blitz.

Traditional work environments are characterized by clear hierarchical structures, defined roles, and centralized decision-making. In these settings, employees typically perform designated tasks under close supervision, and communication flows downward from management to staff. Decision-making authority resides primarily with managers or supervisors, with little autonomy delegated to frontline workers. The focus tends to be on efficiency through standardization, control, and adherence to established protocols. While this model offers predictability and streamlined processes, it can also lead to rigidity, decreased employee engagement, and limited innovation.

In contrast, team work environments emphasize collaboration, shared responsibility, and decentralized decision-making. Teams are typically empowered to plan, organize, and control their work, fostering a sense of ownership and accountability. Self-managed teams, a specific form of team environment, are autonomous groups that oversee their functions with minimal supervision. These teams often handle broader responsibilities, including scheduling, problem-solving, and quality control, which traditionally resided with management. By distributing authority and promoting mutual accountability, teams can enhance motivation, creativity, and responsiveness to customer needs.

Implementing self-managed teams at Sandwich Blitz could be a strategic move to alleviate Dalman’s and Lei’s workload, enabling them to focus on growth initiatives instead of operational issues. The success of such an implementation relies on several key factors. First, selecting team members with the right mix of skills, experience, and interpersonal qualities is crucial. These members should be capable of collaborating effectively and making informed decisions. Second, providing comprehensive training on team dynamics, conflict resolution, and decision-making processes will prepare members for their roles and responsibilities.

Furthermore, clear goals, performance metrics, and communication channels must be established to align team efforts with the overall business strategy. It is important that management fosters a culture of trust and autonomy, allowing teams to experiment, learn from mistakes, and continuously improve their processes. Leadership should serve as facilitators rather than micromanagers, empowering teams to take ownership of their functions.

The contribution of self-managed teams to Sandwich Blitz’s success can be substantial. These teams can increase operational efficiency by streamlining decision-making and reducing delays caused by hierarchical approval processes. Empowered teams are likely to exhibit increased motivation and job satisfaction, leading to lower turnover rates and higher service quality. Additionally, teams can foster innovation by encouraging diverse perspectives and creative problem-solving, which is vital in a competitive market.

Moreover, self-managed teams can improve customer satisfaction by enabling quicker responses to operational challenges and customizing services based on local knowledge and team insights. As teams develop a sense of ownership, they are more invested in the success of the business, which can translate into increased customer loyalty and revenue growth. Overall, the deployment of self-managed teams aligns with modern organizational trends toward agility and empowerment, offering companies like Sandwich Blitz a pathway to sustained competitive advantage.

In conclusion, understanding the differences between traditional and team work environments is fundamental for organizations seeking to adapt to modern business demands. Self-managed teams, when properly implemented, can be a powerful tool to enhance organizational effectiveness, employee engagement, and customer satisfaction. For Sandwich Blitz, adopting such team structures could provide the strategic flexibility needed to grow and thrive in a competitive fast-food industry, allowing leadership to shift their focus from day-to-day operations to strategic expansion.

References

• Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., & Higgs, A. C. (1993). Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: Implications for design. Personnel Psychology, 46(4), 823-850.
• Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (1993). The wisdom of teams: Creating the high-performance organization. Harvard Business School Press.
• Mathieu, J. E., Maynard, M. T., Rapp, T. L., & Gilson, L. L. (2008). Team effectiveness in organizations: A review of research from the managerial, organizational, and industrial/organizational psychology perspectives. Journal of Management, 34(3), 410-476.
• Salas, E., Sims, D. E., & Burke, C. S. (2005). Is there a “big five” in teamwork? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1(3), 412-433.
• Wageman, R., Hackman, J. R., & Lehman, E. (2005). Team diagnostic survey manual. Leader Effectiveness Research Program, Harvard University.
• Stewart, G. L., & Manz, C. C. (1995). Goals and goal commitment in self-managing work teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80(4), 473-482.
• Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage publications.
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The" what" and" why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.
• Guzzo, R. A., & Dickson, M. W. (1996). Team effectiveness and team development. Team effectiveness and decision making in organizations.
• Levi, D. (2015). Group dynamics for teams. Sage publications.