|
|
The Research Context Recently in our organization, the decision was made to merge two education teams. One team was responsible for the design, development, and delivery of internal (employee) training and professional development. The other team was responsible for the design, development, and delivery of external (client) training. The process of bringing the two teams together into one shared culture and vision continues. Responsibilities, structure, goals, vision, and culture evolve almost daily. Our ultimate goal is to work as one education team that meets or exceeds both the internal and external training and development needs of our organization.
To contribute to this team to the best of my ability, I need to better understand how I communicate with my colleagues in a team environment. To help myself develop this understanding, I chose to research the nature of communication and teams in the corporate world. Initially, I searched for research and information on communication and personality styles in the workplace. While there is significant research available on these topics, I did not find the majority of it useful for understanding how I function as part of this team. So, I modified my search to include team dynamics, communication, and leadership. This search yielded more satisfying results that ultimately focused on the relationship between trust and successful teams.
Teamwork in Corporate Environments A Review of the Literature By Susan K. Tiss Research interest in the nature of teams and teamwork in the corporate environment is extensive. Both work-based and project-based teams have become more common in the private and public sector. (Thacker, 1997) Teams now play a significant role in the structure of many organizations. In some cases, teams have become the ideal representation for how organizations should work. (Erdem and Ozen, 2003) Modern corporations expect that employees will not only “put in a day’s work” but will work well in a collaborative and collegial environment (Tarricone and Lucca, 2002). The elements that enable teams to thrive and be productive and successful that are mentioned most often in the research literature include a common focus or goal; a shared vocabulary or understanding; effective communication; a sense of responsibility and empowerment; leadership; and trust. While the quality of leadership is a significant component of successful teams (Thaker and Yost, 2002; Thacker, 1997, and DeMarco, 2001), the most frequently identified and emphasized component is the element of trust. The readings suggest that all other components are subordinate to trust. If trust is not present, none of the other components are adequate to sustain a team. The readings further suggest that each of the subordinate components can impact trust, but trust is an element in its own right, separate from these other elements while at the same time, composed of them. Trust in this context is “a whole greater than the sum of its parts.”Trust: Trust can be divided into two general categories: cognitive and affective (Rocco, Finholt, Hofer, and Herbsleb, 2000; Erdem and Ozen, 2003). Cognitive trust is judged based on capability, reliability, and competence. Teammates earn and demonstrate cognitive trust with predictable behavior and fulfillment of professional commitments (Rocco, Finholt, Hofer, and Herbsleb). Trust is rooted in cognition when it is based on rational criteria such as the expectation that a person will perform a task correctly and on time (Erdem and Ozen, 2003). Affective or emotional trust is more difficult to quantify. It is identified by emotional bonds and demonstrated through the sharing of personal ideas, concerns, and feelings. Where there is affective trust, there is “a mutual, emotional investment [in the] relationship” (Erdem and Ozen, 2003, pg. 132). Cognitive and affective trust both promote a successful team environment. There is some evidence that cognitive trust is easier to develop and maintain in distributed teams (Rocco, Finholt, Hofer, and Herbsleb). The research is not clear on whether this is true for centralized teams as well. It appears that cognitive trust may develop first, while affective trust evolves more slowly, over a longer period of time, and is not necessarily earned or demonstrated though activities specific to the work being done by the team. The collaboration and cooperation that typifies the most successful teams relies on both types of trust. Cognitive trust plays a larger role in the beginning of the team relationship. As the team grows and evolves, affective trust increases in importance and begins to eclipse cognitive trust (Erdem and Ozen, 2003). This is also true for team leaders. Team leaders that communicate in a more informal, affective manner and promote emotional bonds and collaboration are more likely to motivate creative and successful teams (Thacker, 1997).Trust and the other factors that influence teamwork: Other factors that influence teamwork are impacted by and have an impact on trust. For example, communication can help assess trust but, if communication breaks down, trust is reduced (Rocco, Finholt, Hofer, and Herbsleb). Ironically, the more trust there is, the more the communication is perceived as satisfactory or better. The less trust there is, the more dissatisfied team members are with the quality of communication. So, rather than the quality of communication increasing or decreasing trust, the opposite relationship seems to be true (Thacker and Yost, 2002). A shared vision or goal has a significant impact on the success of a team. For such a common vision to be agreed upon, understood, and sustained, interdependence and mutual understanding must be developed and nurtured. For this to occur, the perception of safety and support must be present in the team climate (Loo and Loewen, 2003). In other words, trust must be present and recognized. Finally, members of a successful team must develop a sense of responsibility and empowerment for both themselves and the group. Team members must feel safe and empowered to take responsibility for the team’s work and provide critical feedback to other team members (Avery, 2000). Here again, actions which demonstrate responsibility and empowerment earn trust and trust provides the climate where team members feel empowered and become willing to take responsibility.Trust as a Critical Feature of Teamwork: In summary, trust provides teams with a safe environment and allows team members to focus on the task or project rather than on group dysfunction (Thacker and Yost, 2002). Great leaders and successful team members understand not only how to earn trust but also how to entrust. Such people understand that to acquire trust, one must give trust (DeMarco, 2001). “The giving of trust is an enormously powerful gesture. The recipient gives back loyalty as an almost autonomous response” (DeMarco, 2001 pg. 153). It is important to note that in this context, a leader is not necessarily someone who occupies a pre-defined leadership role but, rather, someone who behaves as leader and influences others with or without officially delegated power. References: Thacker, Rebecca A. (1997). Team Leader Style: Enhancing the Creativity of Employees in Teams. Training for Quality, 5(4)146-149. Retrieved November 11, 2004 from http://80-proquest.umi.com.lib.pepperdine.edu Erdem, Ferda & Ozen, Janset (2003). Cognitive and Affective Dimensions of Trust in Developing Team Performance. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 9(5/6) 131-135. Retrieved November 26, 2004 from http://80-proquest.umi.com.lib.pepperdine.edu Tarricone, Pina & Luca, Joe (2002). Employees, Teamwork, and Social Interdependence – formula for Successful Business? Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 8(3/4) 54-59. Retrieved November 26, 2004 from http://80-proquest.umi.com.lib.pepperdine.edu Thacker, Rebecca A & Yost, Christine A. (2002). Trining Students to Become Effective Workplace Team Leaders. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 8(3/4) 89-94. Retrieved November 26, 2004 from http://80-proquest.umi.com.lib.pepperdine.edu Demarco, T (2001). Slack: Getting Past Burnout, Busywork, and the Myth of Total Efficiency. New York: Broadway Books. Rocco, Elena, Finholt, Thomas A, Hofer, Erik C. & Herbsleb, James D (2000). Designing as if Trust Mattered Retrieved November 26, 2004 from http://www.crew.umich.edu/Technical%20reports/Rocco_Designing_as_if_trust_mattered_04_28_00.pdf Loo, Robert & Loewen, Pamela (2003). The Topology of Self-Managed Teams Based Upon Team Climate: Examining Stability and Change in Typologies. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 9(3/4) 59-68. Retrieved November 26, 2004 from http://80-proquest.umi.com.lib.pepperdine.edu Avery, Christopher M Ph.D. (2000). How Teamwork Can Be Developed as an Individual Skill. The Journal for Quality and Participation, Fall 7-13. Retrieved November 20, 2004 from http://80-proquest.umi.com.lib.pepperdine.edu |
| ©2005 Susan K. Tiss || Back to SKTiss Action Research Home |