Utilizing Course Material And Outside Research

Utilizing Course Material And Any Outside Research You Feel Will Stren

Utilizing course material and any outside research you feel will strengthen your analysis, you will be uploading your assessment of a team at work describing the type of team it is and the leadership dynamics associated with the group. Your first task is to decide if it is a true team or a work group based on our text definition. It is also permissible to analyze a team you are part of outside of a work environment. It is important to understand group dynamics and the elements that make up high-performing teams and groups in the 21st century as we are moving to virtual working relationships for organization success. Your task is to select a group of people at work and define this collection as a work group or a team based on course theory discussed in Chapters 7–13 in our text.

You will diagnosis this collection of individuals using explicit course theory and outside resources to determine what is working and not working based on organization behavior (OB) principles discussion in our course and supported by course theory. Academic rigor calls for proper APA citations and references to demonstrate your ability to apply theory to operational challenges faced at work. Typical page range is six to 10 pages not including cover page and reference page. Note: Students in the past have also compared groups and teams at work and why one seems to be a better performer over another … something to consider.

Paper For Above instruction

Analysis of a Work Group or Team: Leadership Dynamics and Performance Evaluation

In an increasingly interconnected and virtual world, understanding the distinctions between work groups and teams is fundamental to organizational success. This paper examines a selected group within a professional setting, analyzes its structure and functioning based on established organizational behavior (OB) theories, and evaluates its leadership dynamics and overall effectiveness. The goal is to classify the group accurately—whether it functions as a true team or a mere work group—and to identify factors influencing its performance, strengths, and challenges.

Understanding the Difference: Work Group vs. Team

The distinction between a work group and a work team is pivotal, as delineated by Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2021). A work group is characterized by individuals who share information and make decisions independently, primarily oriented toward individual accountability. In contrast, a work team is a unified entity with complementary skills, mutual accountability, and a collective purpose that integrates individual efforts into a cohesive whole (Robbins & Judge, 2019). This differentiation is crucial for diagnosing organizational dynamics and deploying appropriate leadership strategies.

Selection and Description of the Group

The group selected for this analysis comprises a cross-functional project team within a technology company tasked with developing a new software product. The team includes software developers, UI/UX designers, a project manager, and a marketing strategist. Their purpose is to collaboratively deliver the product on time and within scope, with roles and responsibilities clearly defined but with a high degree of interdependence. This scenario exemplifies characteristics of a potential high-performing team, including shared goals, interdependence, and collective accountability.

Application of OB Theories and Diagnosis

Applying Tuckman's (1965) stages of group development, this team is currently in the 'performing' stage, characterized by high cooperation, effective communication, and problem-solving capabilities. However, an analysis following Hackman's (1987) Model of Effective Team Performance reveals that certain conditions—such as clear purpose, competent team members, and supportive leadership—are well-established, but aspects like trust and conflict resolution need strengthening.

From a leadership perspective, transformational leadership theory (Bass & Avolio, 1994) provides insights into the team’s dynamics. The project leader demonstrates transformational traits by inspiring motivation, encouraging innovation, and fostering a shared vision. Yet, there are moments where transactional leadership behaviors temporarily emerge, especially during deadline pressures, which could impact team cohesion.

Moreover, the team exhibits elements of high cohesion, as per Carron, Widmeyer, and Brawley (1985), which contributes positively to their performance. Nonetheless, variations in individual engagement—particularly among new team members—highlight the ongoing need for team-building strategies and trust development (McShane & Glinow, 2021).

Strengths, Challenges, and Recommendations

The team’s strengths include a clear shared goal, complementary skills, and strong leadership that aligns with transformational principles. These factors have led to high-quality deliverables and positive stakeholder feedback. However, challenges such as occasional communication breakdowns, insufficient trust-building exercises, and the stress associated with remote collaboration hinder optimal performance.

To address these issues, recommendations include implementing regular virtual team-building activities, establishing transparent communication protocols, and fostering psychological safety (Edmondson, 1999). Enhancing conflict resolution mechanisms and providing developmental opportunities for less experienced members will further improve team resilience and productivity.

Comparison and Reflection

In comparing this group to other teams within the organization, it becomes evident that teams with high levels of trust, shared leadership, and clear roles tend to outperform less cohesive groups. The ability to adapt to virtual work settings and maintain open communication channels differentiates high-functioning teams in the 21st-century workplace, as highlighted by Larson and LaFasto (1989).

This analysis underscores the importance of deliberate leadership practices, continuous development, and a culture of collaboration. Understanding these dynamics allows organizations to cultivate teams that can navigate complex projects effectively and sustain high performance over time.

Conclusion

In conclusion, accurately diagnosing whether a collection of individuals functions as a team or a work group is essential for deploying targeted strategies that enhance performance. By applying course theories in organizational behavior and integrating outside research, this analysis has demonstrated that the selected group operates as a high-performing team with specific areas for growth. Emphasizing trust, clear communication, and transformational leadership will further solidify its success in shaping future organizational outcomes.

References

• Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. Sage Publications.
• Carron, A. V., Widmeyer, W. N., & Brawley, L. R. (1985). Group cohesion in sport and exercise settings. In J. L. Duda (Ed.), Advances in sport and exercise psychology (pp. 123-154). Human Kinetics.
• Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383.
• Hackman, J. R. (1987). The design of work teams. In J. W. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 315-342). Prentice-Hall.
• Ivancevich, J. M., Konopaske, R., & Matteson, M. T. (2021). Organizational behavior and management (12th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
• Larson, C. E., & LaFasto, F. M. J. (1989). Teamwork: What must go right/what can go wrong. Sage Publications.
• McShane, S. L., & Glinow, M. A. V. (2021). Organizational behavior (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
• 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.