To date, the collective achievement of goals is becoming more prevalent in organizations (Northouse, 2016). This has occurred due to a shift in current organizational structuring to team-based structures (Northouse, 2016). Organizations are flattening their organizational structure and applying less authoritative structures. Thus, traditional vertical decision making is replaced with lateral decision making (Aime, Humphrey, DeRue, & Paul, 2014). Organizations are implementing heterarchy structures instead of the traditional hierarchy structure. A team-based heterarchy structure consists of the dynamic sharing or shifting of leadership or power that occurs between team members based on the relevant resources of an individual to a given situation or goal accomplishment (Aime et al., 2014). Thus an individual exerts leadership influence when their specific skills and knowledge are best suited for goal accomplishment. This does not imply that teams strictly function autonomously, many teams have formal leaders. Simply, that when a heterarchy structure is present or flattening has occurred in an organization, team members can also demonstrate leadership behaviors that influence other team members toward effective goal accomplishment (Northouse, 2016).
Current team-based leadership research has determined six factors or conditions that contribute to team effectiveness in organizations that allow team-based heterarchy structures. The six contributing factors to team effectiveness are, compelling purpose, right people, real team, clear norms of conduct, supportive organizational context, and team-focused coaching (Hackman, 2012). These six contributing factors to team effectiveness were a refining and extension of previous team-based research on team effectiveness, which determined eight contributing factors, Larson & LaFasto (1989) (as cited in Northouse, 2016). Current team-based research found similarities in two sets of two criteria, thus refined four original criteria into two contributing factors. In my experience leading teams, the greater prevalence of these six conditions contributes to greater team effectiveness in a heterarchy structure. Given the focus of this blog, I will compare and contrast the organizational teams I currently lead as a construction project manager, all of which share leadership. To demonstrate support for current research on team effectiveness and support for the idea that the prevalence of a heterarchy system alone is not adequate to make beneficial the implementation of a heterarchy structure (Northouse, 2016). As stated, in my current profession, teams and a heterarchy structure are the norm. However not all teams are effective in this structure, my roofing team lacks three factors for team effectiveness and do not perform as effectively as the other teams I lead.
A compelling purpose represents clear and energizing objectives that orient teams toward the collective achievement of goals, making full use of individual talent (Hackman, 2012). All of the teams I manage have a clear understanding of their responsibilities and are motivated toward organizational goal achievement. The right people involve the variety of skills, knowledge, and interpersonal skills prevalent in individual members of a team necessary for the accomplishment of goals (Hackman, 2012). All of the teams I lead except for the roofers possess the variety of skills necessary for team effectiveness. The roofers do have the skills and knowledge necessary to accomplish organizational goals; however they lack the interpersonal skills necessary for effective teams, the ability to work with others within reasonable emotional and moral parameters. A real team consists of a sense of unity or identification (Hackman, 2012). Larson and LaFasto (1989) compare this team effectiveness factor to team spirit. Again, all of the teams I lead demonstrate a sort of brotherhood amongst the members of their team, accept for the roofers. The roofers reflect an uneasy sense of unity, individuality is cornerstone. Clear norms of conduct involve defined norms for conduct and excellence (Hackman, 2012). There are clear organizational codes of conduct in place, and all persons adhere to these conduct norms. However, at a team level, the roofers do not have defined conduct norms. Within their team, the roofers do not regulate interpersonal behaviors. Supportive organizational context represents the support, resources, rewards, and necessary training for goal accomplishment (Hackman, 2012). Equal and adequate support, resources and monetary compensation and bonuses are prevalent in all of the organizational teams I manage. However, the organization that I work for does not offer training for teams, teams are expected to be proficient in accomplishing organizational goals. Team-focused coaching consists of the implementation of the most effective leadership, based on team needs and specific goal accomplishment (Hackman, 2012). All of the teams I lead are provided situational based leadership, as the needs of teams differ because each team’s goal accomplishment varies.
Organizations which implement heterarchy structures and provide teams with the aforementioned relevant factors to team effectiveness benefit greatly. These benefits include, increased productivity, effective use of resources, better decision making and problem solving, more quality outcomes or services, and greater innovation and creativity (Northouse, 2016). The team-based leadership research described in this blog provides supportive evidence for the benefits provided to organizations that implement heterarchy structures that assist teams with the necessary contributing factors for team effectiveness. Perhaps more organizations should consider losing traditional authority structures and allow teams the ability to exert leadership in the accomplishment of organizational goals. The personal example described in this blog serves as a reminder to organizations that do implement heterarchy structures. The simple implementation of a heterarchy structure is not enough for organizational teams to be effective. The previously described six contributing factors to team effectiveness in heterarchy structures must also be prevalent for teams to be effective in a heterarchy structure.
References:
Aime, F., Humphrey, S., DeRue, D. S., & Paul, J. B. (2014). The riddle of heterarchy: Power transitions in cross-functional teams. Academy of Management Journal, 57(2), 327-352. Online. Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=a69ac930-9ed9-49ac-aab7-02a88787fe55%40sessionmgr4010&vid=1&hid=4209
Hackman, J. R. (2012). From causes to conditions in group research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(3), 428-444. Online. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/job.1774/epdf
Larson, C. E., & LaFasto, F. M. (1989). Teamwork: What must go right/what can go wrong (Vol. 10). Sage.
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
axt5233 says
Hi Carl,
I definitely agree that organizations are now moving towards a more team-based leadership model than a typical hierarchy model. For example, in my current job as a scribes we do have a traditional leader, called the project manager. However, we all work together as a team with some sense of autonomy to complete the required tasks. This has proven to be very effective since it has allowed each person to become a leader within the organization and rise up to solve issues in the absence of the project manager.
Thank you for your post!
-Aruba
Emilee Knott says
Hi Carl!
I just wanted to say that I really enjoyed your blog post! I found it very interesting and you used a lot of information to thoroughly explain your passage. While our posts are not identical, we both discuss the effectiveness of teams and strong leadership. The article I found, while written for sports, can be relevant for all forms of group organizations. It is not uncommon for teams, of any kind, to have opposing opinions and habits. Having a strong leader who is able to adapt to all situations is important for success. You recommended that groups get rid of traditional authority structures to focus improve effectiveness and strengthen organizational goals. I think this would be a great idea. It would allow each group to form their own goals and standards so they do not have a discrepancy between what should be and what is actually happening. I think you would notice an increase in motivation and group morale. Good job!