High performing teams
Tobiashyldmo (Talk | contribs) (→Key references) |
Tobiashyldmo (Talk | contribs) (→Abstract) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Abstract== | ==Abstract== | ||
| − | This is | + | This article is about high performing teams. At first the article describe differ-ent types of teams and we outline what differs them from each another. Pseudogroups, traditional work groups, effective groups and high performance groups areintroduced. This article especially outlines the difference between the last two.Johnson & Johnson (2013) describes seven guidelines for effective teams. An effectivegroup utilizes all the advantages by working together and perform better than themembers would have done individually. High performing teams follow all theseguidelines. A high performing team is characterized by the high level of commitmenteach team member have to each other and to the success of the group.Not manyteams reaches this level, as it requires a bigger effort from the team members thatwhat can usually be expected (Johnson & Johnson, 2013).In the end, the guidelines are put in a practical setting and the article look on howthese tools can help us get benefits in both a short and a long term relationship witha team. They are also compared to existing standards described described in Maylor(2010) and put into a context of managing people from the course curriculum. Inthe end the article critically reflects on how theory about groups not always fit thereal world and we discuss whether some of the guidelines are more appropriate thanothers. Guideline six is highlighted as we discuss the important, and dangerous,role of conflicts in teams compared with theory of teams in Wheelan (2016) and aproject management setting in Maylor (2010). Conflicts can give the group energyand direction if it is handled in a good way, but can be destructive if the team isnot fit to handle the conflict or if it is interpersonal. |
==Big idea== | ==Big idea== | ||
Revision as of 01:41, 12 February 2021
Contents |
Abstract
This article is about high performing teams. At first the article describe differ-ent types of teams and we outline what differs them from each another. Pseudogroups, traditional work groups, effective groups and high performance groups areintroduced. This article especially outlines the difference between the last two.Johnson & Johnson (2013) describes seven guidelines for effective teams. An effectivegroup utilizes all the advantages by working together and perform better than themembers would have done individually. High performing teams follow all theseguidelines. A high performing team is characterized by the high level of commitmenteach team member have to each other and to the success of the group.Not manyteams reaches this level, as it requires a bigger effort from the team members thatwhat can usually be expected (Johnson & Johnson, 2013).In the end, the guidelines are put in a practical setting and the article look on howthese tools can help us get benefits in both a short and a long term relationship witha team. They are also compared to existing standards described described in Maylor(2010) and put into a context of managing people from the course curriculum. Inthe end the article critically reflects on how theory about groups not always fit thereal world and we discuss whether some of the guidelines are more appropriate thanothers. Guideline six is highlighted as we discuss the important, and dangerous,role of conflicts in teams compared with theory of teams in Wheelan (2016) and aproject management setting in Maylor (2010). Conflicts can give the group energyand direction if it is handled in a good way, but can be destructive if the team isnot fit to handle the conflict or if it is interpersonal.
Big idea
Application
Limitations
Annotated bibliography
Bibliography
Developed by Tobias Hyldmo. Exchange student from Industrial Economics and Technology Management at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
