Team Performance

Evaluating Individuals in a Team:

There are many roles that a member of a team could take up, and they all can be sorted into three categories. The categories are split into three groups: team task roles, team-building roles, and individualistic roles (Colqitt et al., pp. 348-350, 2012). Team task roles assess the employee's role in completing the teams' goals. Some examples include coordinator or procedural-technician. Team building roles are relatively straightforward. These roles label how each member works in the group, such as an expediter who encourages participation or a harmonizer who excels at conflict resolution. Individualistic roles are roles that antagonize or work against the team's best interests.  For example, a slacker might skylark, and a blocker might disagree with any idea because theirs was not chosen.

Evaluating each member’s performance can include several steps. If the member is not gravitating to a position in the group, get that team member involved by discussing their skillset and building engagement through learning (Carboni et al., 2021).

Evaluating the Performance of a Team as a Whole:

Teams require particular degrees of task interdependence and coordination, but the degree to which they need each of those aspects depends on the team's goal (Colqitt et al., pp345-347). For example, let us use a theoretical example: the team at Apple made a brand new iPhone, but it was also shaped like an apple. To market this product might take some interdependence, but some team members' work may only affect specific team members. So in this team, a graphic designer may not need to meet with the finance manager who is funding the research and development of the portrayed product. However, the graphic designer may need to meet with a finance member from a different department to expense a license for photo editing software.

So evaluating teams requires a manager to see what roles the individuals are falling into and if correct levels of interdependence and coordination levels are being applied (Sprigg, et al., 2000). Adjusting the level of interdependence can also help increase autonomy, thus allowing workers to take on tasks at a time that would best fit the production goals.

Refrences:

Colquitt, J. A., LePine, J. A., & Wesson, M. J. (2021). Organizational behavior: Improving performance and commitment in the workplace (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Carboni, I., Cross, R., & Edmondson, A. C. (2021). No Team is an Island: How Leaders Shape Networked Ecosystems for Team Success. California Management Review,                 64(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/00081256211041784

Sprigg, C. A., Jackson, P. R., & Parker, S. K. (2000). Production Teamworking: The Importance of Interdependence and Autonomy for Employee Strain and Satisfaction. Human Relations, 53(11), 1519–1543. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267005311005