Discussion Question
Read the Chapter 10-12 of the book,I uploaded) Out of all the reading assignments, prepare a Discussion Question (DQ). The DQ should focus on something about the material that you found to be INTERESTING, STIMULATING, IMPORTANT, UNCLEAR, or CONTROVERSIAL. Prepare only one DQ (not one from each reading source or chapter). (I don’t think you should read all of those, just skim it and find a part you are interested in and write the DQ based on that)
The DQ example: — When implementing Management by Walking Around (p. 12), how do you find a balance between being holed up at your desk versus risking your employees feeling that you are micromanaging them? Do you see examples of this happening in your office?
Besides, you should also reply to other two DQs from others. You can comment on others’ DQ once you have submitted yours. So after you deliver the answer of your DQ, I’ll send you two of others’ DQs and please reply to them.
322
Understanding
Work Teams10
10-1 Analyze the continued popularity of
teams in organizations.
10-2 Contrast groups and teams.
10-3 Contrast the five types of team
arrangements.
10-4 Identify the characteristics of
effective teams.
10-5 Explain how organizations can
create team players.
10-6 Decide when to use individuals
instead of teams.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After studying this chapter, you should be able to:
So
ur
ce
: S
ho
ja
L
ac
k/
Al
am
y
S
to
ck
P
ho
to
M10_ROBB9329_18_SE_C10.indd 322 29/09/17 3:22 pm
Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 323
Myth or
Science?
Career
OBjectives
An Ethical
Choice
Point/
Counterpoint
Experiential
Exercise
Ethical
Dilemma
Case
Incident 1
Case
Incident 2
Critical
Thinking
Communication
Collaboration
Knowledge
Application and
Analysis
Social
Responsibility
Employability Skills Matrix (ESM)
A SOLUTION TO GROWING PAINS
In 2015, Aytekin Tank was the CEO of Jotform, a global company that spe-cializes in online form-building tools. After a decade of building his start-
up, the company was expanding rapidly and doing well, in part to Tanks
commitment to hiring talent. Despite a commitment to hiring top talent and
fostering a supportive and innovative work culture, this growth came at a
cost. Tank could see his company losing momentum, and the young entre-
preneur could not put his finger on why. When Jotform began to grow, the
CEO explored ways to recapture the advantages of having a smaller team.
I looked back to the time when we had around five people. I tried to figure
out what had changed: why we moved so fast when we were five people,
why we felt like a family when we were that small.
The solution, Tank found, was to restructure his organization into cross-
functional teams. This approach was pioneered in the twenty-first century
by Jack Welch (shown here), CEO of General Electric (GE), who believed
dividing employees by function led to slower and poorer decisions. Welchs
cross-functional or boundaryless organization created forums where employ-
ees with different roles within the company could meet and coordinate deci-
sion making. Welch found that GE became more efficient when employees
from marketing, finance, engineering, and many other sectors had a chance
to work together. It has been over twenty years since Welch popularized
cross-functional teams, and many organizations have found that adopting
a cross-functional structure gives them a competitive edge over more tradi-
tional companies.
Tank found that, by dividing his company into cross-functional teams,
he was able to re-create the close-knit, efficient structure of the smaller
M10_ROBB9329_18_SE_C10.indd 323 29/09/17 3:22 pm
324 PART 3 The Group
organization that Jotform used to be. In this new structure, team members
came from several different parts of the organization, allowing for better com-
munication across different functions. Teams typically had a web designer, a
programmer, and a marketing analyst (or similar position), all working on solu-
tions to organizational problems. Once these teams were formed, Tank also
made sure that each team had their own meeting space and a budget for fun
activities like weekly lunches. Besides building morale, the Jotform leader
believed that cross-functional teams allowed team members to bond and ulti-
mately begin to trust each other. His goal was to breed cooperation rather
than competition. Tank also made sure to keep Jotforms teams small, allow-
ing employees to feel greater ownership over their successes and failures.
By having team members from several different functions, employees could
see how their work affected other parts of Jotform for betteror worse. The
last ingredient in Tanks cross-functional teams was autonomyfreedom to
make decisions that have an impact on other parts of the organization, tackle
problems the way they want, and work the way they want.
Tanks decision has given his company the same edge it did when it was
smaller. After restructuring the company, Jotform experienced increased pro-
ductivity. By mixing different functions of the company into teams, employees
could make decisions more quickly. Teams had more diverse skill sets, so
they were able to tackle any problems the company faced with greater cre-
ativity by using varied perspectives from different parts of the company.
Even though the move was successful, Tank admits that he was afraid of
trying something new in the beginning. Still, he realizes that in order to con-
tinue to grow the company, he had to take a risk. Change can be difficult
for people and for companies, Tank has said when discussing the move to
cross-functional teams. However, if your current system is not effective and
you dont take the initiative to improve via change, staying the course can be
disastrous.
Sources: Based on J. Boss, 5 Reasons Why This CEO Leverages Cross Functional Teams
for Better Business Performance, Forbes, February 13, 2017, https://www.forbes.com/
sites/deniserestauri/2017/07/19/how-this-woman-made-the-jump-and-beat-impostor-
syndrome/#377b26a46460, accessed April 9, 2017; R. Ashkenas, Jack Welchs Approach
to Breaking Down Silos Still Works, Harvard Business Review, September 9, 2015, www.hbr
.com/2015/09/jack-welchs-approach-to-breaking-down-silos-still-works, accessed April 9,
2017; and A. Tank, How to Scale Your Company with Small Teams, Entrepreneur, Decem-
ber 9, 2016, www.entrepreneur.com/article/285917, accessed April 9, 2017.
Are cross-functional teams the best, as Aytekin Tanks story suggests? There are many different ways to build a successful team. In this chapter, we will
consider different types of teams and how a teams composition, context, and
team processes lead to success or failure.
M10_ROBB9329_18_SE_C10.indd 324 29/09/17 3:22 pm
Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 325
Why Have Teams Become So Popular?
Why are teams popular? In short, because we believe they are effective. A team
of people happily committed to the project and to one another will outperform
a brilliant individual every time, writes Forbes publisher Rich Karlgaard.1 In
some ways, hes right. Teams can sometimes achieve feats an individual could
never accomplish.2 Teams are more flexible and responsive to changing events
than traditional departments or other forms of permanent groupings. They can
quickly assemble, deploy, refocus, and disband. They are an effective means to
democratize organizations and increase employee involvement. And research
indicates that our involvement in teams positively shapes the way we think as
individuals, introducing a collaborative mindset about even our personal deci-
sion making.3
The fact that organizations have embraced teamwork doesnt necessarily
mean teams are always effective. Team members, as humans, can be swayed by
fads and herd mentality that can lead them astray from the best decisions. What
conditions affect their potential? How do members work together? Do we even
like teams? Maybe not, according to the OB Poll. To answer these questions,
lets first distinguish between groups and teams.
Differences Between Groups and Teams
Groups and teams are not the same thing. In Chapter 9, we defined a group as
two or more individuals, interacting and interdependent, who work together to
achieve particular objectives. A work group is a group that interacts primarily
to share information, make decisions, and help each group member perform
within his or her area of responsibility.
Work groups have no need or opportunity to engage in collective work with
joint effort, so the groups performance is merely the summation of each members
individual contribution. There is no positive synergy that would create an overall
level of performance greater than the sum of the inputs. A work group is a collec-
tion of individuals doing their work, albeit with interaction and/or dependency.
A work team, on the other hand, generates positive synergy through coordi-
nation. The individual efforts result in a level of performance greater than the
sum of the individual inputs.
In both work groups and work teams, there are often behavioral expecta-
tions of members, collective normalization efforts, active group dynamics, and
some level of decision making (even if just informally about the scope of mem-
bership). Both may generate ideas, pool resources, or coordinate logistics such
as work schedules; for the work group, however, this effort is limited to informa-
tion gathering for decision makers outside the group.
Whereas we can think of a work team as a subset of a work group, the team
is constructed to be purposeful (symbiotic) in its member interaction. The dis-
tinction between a work group and a work team should be kept even when the
terms are mentioned interchangeably in different contexts. Exhibit 10-1 high-
lights the differences between them.
10-1 Analyze the continued popularity of teams in
organizations.
10-2 Contrast groups and teams.
work group A group that interacts primarily
to share information, make decisions, and
help each group member perform within his
or her area of responsibility.
work team A group whose individual efforts
result in performance that is greater than the
sum of the individual inputs.
MyLab Management Chapter Warm Up
If your professor has assigned this activity, go to www.pearson.com/mylab/management to complete the
chapter warm up.
M10_ROBB9329_18_SE_C10.indd 325 29/09/17 3:22 pm
326 PART 3 The Group
The definitions help clarify why organizations structure work processes by
teams. Management is looking for positive synergy that will create increased
performance. The extensive use of teams creates the potential for an organi-
zation to generate greater outputs with no increase in employee head count.
Notice, however, that we said potential. There is nothing magical that ensures
the achievement of positive synergy in the creation of teams. Merely calling a
group a team doesnt automatically improve its performance. As we show later,
effective teams have certain common characteristics. If management hopes to
gain increases in organizational performance through the use of teams, their
teams must possess these characteristics.
Teams serve an
important function
Prefer to work
in teams 25%
95%
0% 25% 50%
The percent who report . . .
75% 100%
OB POLL
Is Teamwork a Good Thing?
Source: Based on University of Phoenix Survey Reveals Nearly Seven in Ten Workers Have Been Part of Dysfunctional Teams, downloaded on June 9, 2013,
from www.prnewswire.com.
Comparing Work Groups and Work TeamsExhibit 10-1
Share information
Neutral (sometimes negative)
Individual
Random and varied
Goal
Synergy
Accountability
Skills
Work Groups Work Teams
Collective performance
Positive
Individual and mutual
Complementary
MyLab Management Try It
If your professor has assigned this activity, go to www.pearson.com/
mylab/management to complete the Mini Sim.
M10_ROBB9329_18_SE_C10.indd 326 29/09/17 3:22 pm
Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 327
Types of Teams
Teams can make products, provide services, negotiate deals, coordinate proj-
ects, offer advice, and make decisions.4 In this section, we first describe four
common types of teams in organizations: problem-solving teams, self-managed work
teams, cross-functional teams, and virtual teams (see Exhibit 10-2). Then we will
discuss multiteam systems, which utilize a team of teams and are becoming
increasingly widespread as work increases in complexity.
Problem-Solving Teams
Quality-control teams have been in use for many years. Originally seen most
often in manufacturing plants, these were permanent teams that generally met
at a regular time, sometimes weekly or daily, to address quality standards and
any problems with the products made. Also, the medical field in particular has
recently implemented quality teams to improve their services in patient care.
Problem-solving teams like these rarely have the authority to implement their
suggestions unilaterally, but if their recommendations are paired with imple-
mentation processes, some significant improvements can be realized.
Self-Managed Work Teams
As we discussed, problem-solving teams only make recommendations. Some
organizations have gone further and created teams that also implement solu-
tions and take responsibility for outcomes.
Self-managed work teams are groups of employees (typically 10 to 15 in
number) who perform highly related or interdependent jobs; these teams take
on some supervisory responsibilities.5 The responsibilities usually include plan-
ning and scheduling work, assigning tasks to members, making operating deci-
sions, taking action on problems, and working with suppliers and customers.
Fully self-managed work teams even select their own members who evaluate
each others performance. When these teams are established, former super-
visory positions take on decreased importance and are sometimes eliminated.
Research results on the effectiveness of self-managed work teams have not
been uniformly positive. Some research indicates that self-managed teams may
be more or less effective based on the degree to which team-promoting behav-
iors are rewarded. For example, one study of 45 self-managing teams found that
when team members perceived that economic rewards such as pay depended
on input from their teammates, performance improved for both individuals
and the team as a whole.6
A second area of research focus has been the impact of conflict on self-
managed work team effectiveness. Some research indicates that self-managed
10-3 Contrast the five types of team arrangements.
problem-solving teams Groups of 5 to
12 employees from the same department
who meet for a few hours each week to
discuss ways of improving quality, efficiency,
and the work environment.
self-managed work teams Groups of 10 to
15 employees who take on responsibilities of
their former supervisors.
Four Types of TeamsExhibit 10-2
Self-managed
?
Cross-functional Virtual
Technology
Problem-solving
M10_ROBB9329_18_SE_C10.indd 327 29/09/17 3:22 pm
328 PART 3 The Group
communication links such as wide-area networks, corporate social media, vid-
eoconferencing, and e-mailwhether members are nearby or continents apart.
Nearly all teams do at least some of their work remotely.
Virtual teams should be managed differently than face-to-face teams in an
office, partially because virtual team members may not interact along tradi-
tional hierarchical patterns. Because of the complexity of interactions, research
indicates that shared leadership of virtual teams may significantly enhance
team performance, although the concept is still in development.14 For virtual
teams to be effective, management should ensure that (1) trust is established
among members (one inflammatory remark in an e-mail can severely under-
mine team trust), (2) progress is monitored closely (so the team doesnt lose
sight of its goals and no team member disappears), and (3) the efforts and
products of the team are publicized throughout the organization (so the team
does not become invisible).15 Managers should also carefully select who will be
a member of a virtual team because working on a virtual team may require dif-
ferent competencies.16
It would be a mistake to think virtual teams are an easy substitute for face-to-
face teams. While the geographical reach and immediacy of online communi-
cation make virtual teams a natural development, managers must make certain
this type of team is the optimal choice for the desired outcome and then main-
tain an oversight role throughout the collaboration.
virtual teams Teams that use computer
technology to tie together physically dispersed
members in order to achieve a common goal.
teams are not effective when there is conflict. When disputes arise, members
often stop cooperating and power struggles ensue, which lead to lower group
performance and learning, though this may depend on the structure of roles
within the team.7 However, other research indicates that when members feel
confident that they can speak up without being embarrassed, rejected, or pun-
ished by other team membersin other words, when they feel psychologically
safeconflict can be beneficial and boost team performance.8
Research has also explored the effect of self-managed work teams on mem-
ber behavior. Here again the findings are mixed. Although individuals on teams
report higher levels of job satisfaction than other individuals, studies indicate they
sometimes have higher absenteeism and turnover rates. One large-scale study of
labor productivity in British establishments found that, although using teams
improved individual (and overall) labor productivity, no evidence supported
the claim that self-managed teams performed better than traditional teams with
less decision-making authority.9 On the whole, it appears that, for self-managing
teams to be advantageous, a number of facilitating factors must be in place.
Cross-Functional Teams
Starbucks created a team of individuals from production, global public rela-
tions (PR), global communications, and U.S. marketing to develop the Via
brand of instant coffee. The teams suggestions resulted in a product that
would be cost-effective to produce and distribute and that was marketed with
a tightly integrated, multifaceted strategy.10 This example illustrates the use of
cross-functional teams, made up of employees from about the same hierarchi-
cal level but different work areas who come together to accomplish a task.
Cross-functional teams are an effective means of allowing people from
diverse areas within or even between organizations to exchange information,
develop new ideas, solve problems, and coordinate complex projects. Due to the
high need for coordination, however, cross-functional teams are not simple to
manage. First, it makes sense for power shifts to occur when different expertise is
needed because the members are at roughly the same level in the organization,
which creates leadership ambiguity. A climate of trust thus needs to be devel-
oped before shifts can happen without undue conflict.11 Second, the early stages
of development are often long because members need to learn to work with
higher levels of diversity and complexity. Third, it takes time to build trust and
teamwork, especially among people with different experiences and perspectives.
Organizations have used horizontal, boundary-spanning teams for decades,
and we would be hard-pressed to find a large organization or product launch
that did not use them. Major automobile manufacturersToyota, Honda,
Nissan, BMW, GM, Ford, and Chryslercurrently use this form of team to
coordinate complex projects, as do other industries. For example, Cisco relies
on specific cross-functional teams to identify and capitalize on new trends
in several areas of the software market. Its teams are the equivalent of social-
networking groups that collaborate in real time to identify new business oppor-
tunities in the field and then implement them from the bottom up.12
In sum, the strength of traditional cross-functional teams is the collabora-
tive effort of individuals with diverse skills from a variety of disciplines. When
the unique perspectives of these members are considered, these teams can be
very effective.
Virtual Teams
The teams described in the preceding section do their work face-to-face,
whereas virtual teams use computer technology to unite physically dispersed
members and achieve a common goal.13 They collaborate onlineusing
cross-functional teams Employees from
about the same hierarchical level but from
different work areas who come together to
accomplish a task.
M10_ROBB9329_18_SE_C10.indd 328 29/09/17 3:22 pm
Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 329
communication links such as wide-area networks, corporate social media, vid-
eoconferencing, and e-mailwhether members are nearby or continents apart.
Nearly all teams do at least some of their work remotely.
Virtual teams should be managed differently than face-to-face teams in an
office, partially because virtual team members may not interact along tradi-
tional hierarchical patterns. Because of the complexity of interactions, research
indicates that shared leadership of virtual teams may significantly enhance
team performance, although the concept is still in development.14 For virtual
teams to be effective, management should ensure that (1) trust is established
among members (one inflammatory remark in an e-mail can severely under-
mine team trust), (2) progress is monitored closely (so the team doesnt lose
sight of its goals and no team member disappears), and (3) the efforts and
products of the team are publicized throughout the organization (so the team
does not become invisible).15 Managers should also carefully select who will be
a member of a virtual team because working on a virtual team may require dif-
ferent competencies.16
It would be a mistake to think virtual teams are an easy substitute for face-to-
face teams. While the geographical reach and immediacy of online communi-
cation make virtual teams a natural development, managers must make certain
this type of team is the optimal choice for the desired outcome and then main-
tain an oversight role throughout the collaboration.
virtual teams Teams that use computer
technology to tie together physically dispersed
members in order to achieve a common goal.
Harley-Davidson Motor Company uses
cross-functional teams at all levels
of its organization in creating new
products, such as its first electric
motorcycle, shown here. From product
conception to launch, cross-functional
teams include Harley employees
from product planning, engineering,
design, marketing, manufacturing, and
purchasing.
Source: Lucas Jackson/Reuters/Alamy Stock Photo
Multiteam Systems
The types of teams weve described so far are typically smaller, stand-alone teams,
although their activities relate to the broader objectives of the organization.
MyLab Management Try It
If your professor has assigned this activity, go to www.pearson.com/
mylab/management to complete the Mini Sim.
M10_ROBB9329_18_SE_C10.indd 329 29/09/17 3:22 pm
330 PART 3 The Group
As tasks become more complex, teams often grow in size. Increases in team size
are accompanied by higher coordination demands, creating a tipping point at
which the addition of another member does more harm than good. To solve
this problem, organizations use multiteam systems, collections of two or more
interdependent teams that share a superordinate goal. In other words, multi-
team systems are a team of teams.17
To picture a multiteam system, imagine the coordination of response
needed after a major car accident. There is the emergency medical services
team, which responds first and transports the injured to the hospital. An emer-
gency room team then takes over, providing medical care, followed by a recov-
ery team. Although the emergency services team, emergency room team, and
recovery team are technically independent, their activities are interdependent,
and the success of one depends on the success of the others. Why? Because
they all share the higher goal of saving lives.
Some factors that make smaller, more traditional teams effective do not nec-
essarily apply to multiteam systems and can even hinder their performance.
One study showed that multiteam systems performed better when they had
boundary spanners whose jobs were to coordinate with members of the
other subteams. This reduced the need for some team member communica-
tion, which was helpful because it reduced coordination demands.18 Leader-
ship of multiteam systems is also much different than for stand-alone teams.
While leadership of all teams affects team performance, a multiteam leader
must both facilitate coordination between teams and lead each team. Research
indicated teams that received more attention and engagement from the orga-
nizations leaders felt more empowered, which made them more effective as
they sought to solve their own problems.19 Multiteam systems may have higher
multiteam system A collection of two or
more interdependent teams that share a
superordinate goal; a team of teams.
An Ethical Choice
The Size of Your Meetings Carbon Footprint
Despite being in different countries or even on different continents, many teams in geographically
dispersed locations communicate with-
out regularly meeting face-to-face, and
their members may never meet each
other in person. Although the merits of
face-to-face versus electronic commu-
nication have been debated, there may
be a strong ethical argument for virtual
teams.
Keeping team members where they
are, as opposed to having them travel
every time they need to meet, may be
in line with corporate social responsi-
bility (CSR) initiatives. A very large pro-
portion of airline, rail, and car transport
is for business purposes and contrib-
utes greatly to global carbon dioxide
emissions. When teams are able to
meet virtually rather than face-to-face,
they dramatically reduce their carbon
footprint.
In a globally connected world, how
might you minimize your organizations
environmental impact from business
travel? Several tips might get you
started thinking about ways that virtual
teams can be harnessed for greater
sustainability:
1. Encourage all team members to
think about whether a face-to-face
meeting is really necessary. Try to
utilize alternative communication
methods whenever possible.
2. Communicate as much as pos-
sible through virtual means. This
includes e-mail, telephone calls, and
videoconferencing.
3. When traveling to team meetings,
choose the most environmentally
responsible travel methods possible.
Also, check the environmental pro-
file of hotels before booking rooms.
4. If the environmental savings are
not enough motivation to reduce
travel, consider the financial savings.
According to one survey, businesses
spend about 8 to 12 percent of their
entire budget on travel. Communicat-
ing electronically can therefore result
in two benefits: (1) its cheaper and
(2) its good for the environment.
Sources: Based on P. Tilstone, Cut Carbon
and Bills, Director, May 2009, 54; L. C. Lat-
imer, 6 Strategies for Sustainable Busi-
ness Travel, Greenbiz, February 11,
2011, www.greenbiz.com; and F. Gebhart,
Travel Takes a Big Bite out of Corporate
Expenses, Travel Market Report, May 30,
2013, downloaded June 9, 2013, from www
.travelmarketreport.com.
M10_ROBB9329_18_SE_C10.indd 330 29/09/17 3:22 pm
Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 331
performance when planning is decentralized, but they may also have more
problems with coordination.20
In general, a multiteam system is the best choice either when a team has
become too large to be effective or when teams with distinct functions need to
be highly coordinated.
Creating Effective Teams
Teams are often created deliberately but sometimes evolve organically. Take
the rise of team hives over the past 5 years for an organic example. Freelanc-
ing is typically the solo work of people who are highly specialized in their fields
and can provide expertise to organizations on a short-term basis. The difficulty
is for the freelancers to market themselves effectively to organizations, and for
organizations to find freelancers who fit their needs. To bridge this gap, free-
lancers form teams with other freelancers from complementary specialties to
present a cohesive working unita hiveto clients. This team-based approach
has proven very successful.21
Many people have tried to identify factors related to team effectiveness. To
help, some studies have organized what was once a large list of characteristics
into a relatively focused model.22 Exhibit 10-3 summarizes what we currently
know about what makes teams effective. As youll see, it builds on many of the
group concepts introduced in Chapter 9.
In considering the team effectiveness model, keep in mind two points. First,
teams differ in form and structure. The model attempts to generalize across
all varieties of teams but avoids rigidly applying its predictions to all teams.23
10-4 Identify the characteris-tics of effective teams.
Team Effectiveness ModelExhibit 10-3
Team effectiveness
Process
Common purpose
Specific goals
Team efficacy
Team identity
Team cohesion
Mental models
Conflict levels
Social loafing
Composition
Abilities of members
Personality
Allocating roles
Diversity
Cultural differences
Size of teams
Member preferences
Context
Adequate resources
Leadership and structure
Climate of trust
Performance evaluation
and reward systems
M10_ROBB9329_18_SE_C10.indd 331 29/09/17 3:22 pm
332 PART 3 The Group
Use it as a guide. Second, the model assumes that teamwork is preferable to
individual work. Creating effective teams when individuals can do the job bet-
ter is like perfectly solving the wrong problem. Third, lets consider what team
effectiveness means in this model. Typically, team effectiveness includes objec-
tive measures of the teams productivity, managers ratings of the teams perfor-
mance, and aggregate measures of member satisfaction.
We can organize the key components of effective teams into three general
categories. First are the resources and other contextual influences that make
teams effective. The second relates to the teams composition. Finally, process vari-
ables are events within the team that influence effectiveness. We will explore
each of these components next.
Team Context: What Factors Determine Whether
Teams Are Successful?
The four contextual factors most significantly related to team performance are
adequate resources, effective leadership, a climate of trust, and a performance
evaluation and reward system that reflects team contributions.
Adequate Resources Teams are part of a larger organization system; every work
team relies on resources outside the group to sustain it. A scarcity of resources
directly reduces the ability of a team to perform its job effectively and achieve
its goals. As one study concluded after looking at 13 factors related to group
performance, perhaps one of the most important characteristics of an effec-
tive work group is the support the group receives from the organization.24
This support includes timely information, proper equipment, adequate staff-
ing, encouragement, and administrative assistance. Racially diverse teams are
less likely to be provided with the resources necessary for team performance.25
Leadership and Structure Teams cant function if they cant agree on who is to
do what and ensure all members share the workload. Agreeing on the specifics
of work and how they fit together to integrate individual skills requires lead-
ership and structure, either from management or from team members them-
selves. In self-managed teams, members absorb many of the duties typically
assumed by managers. A managers job then becomes managing outside (rather
than inside) the team. Leader personality, engagement, and leadership style all
have an impact on team effectiveness.26
As we mentioned before, leadership is especially important in multiteam sys-
tems. Here, leaders need to delegate responsibility to teams and play the role of
facilitator, making sure the teams work together rather than agains
