team

A Place and Time for Sharing

March 20, 2016 by Matthew

Did you know there is a difference between a team and group? The difference might be greater than you expected. I believe it is safe to say that mostly all individuals have been a part of some sort of team or group at a point in their life. I was talking to my wife the other day to see if she could guess the difference. Her response to the question was, “Um, I don’t know. I’d guess that a group is less personal and a team works better together doing the same task.” She was surprised when I told her the real differences, those that I learned in my #PSYCH485 course commentary this week.

A group involves a strong influence that is passed back and forth between two or more people that are working towards the same goal by completing the same task. It is possible for a person to be in multiple groups at a given time. A team is interdependent, and involves multiple people working towards one goal by each individual contributing in their own way. Although each member of a team is working on their own personal task, they still need one another to accomplish the main mission. (Lesson 9, p. 3). I was under the impression that I worked within a group at my workplace, but the understanding and knowledge I gained from my college course has made me aware that I work in a team because each of us have our own tasks that in the end complete a project.

Fun fact: it is possible for group and team members to share the role of leadership. This unique way of sharing leadership has a name that suits it better than any name could…Shared Leadership. As it might have become evident at this point, shared leadership involves all team members having equal say and contribution to ideas and final decisions. Research has found that shared leadership is more effective because each member has their own strengths to offer to the rest of the group. (Lesson 9, p. 10). In traditional leadership, there is one leader who directs the rest of the team. Traditional leadership shows a top-down model, where the leader tells his or her peers where to start and guides the process. At times there are leaders who are such by name only, and have their peers bring the ideas to them. This is referred to as the bottom-up model. The shared-leadership model creates equality in the organization, as each person brings their own influence to others.

I have not yet worked in an organization that offers shared leadership. It could be difficult having a management team sharing responsibility with a lower level employee within the company, but is that not the point of shared leadership – to have individuals from all walks of life to add value and new perspectives to accomplish the goal? Management that is willing to establish shared leadership would show they value their employees, as they would work together and build relationships rather than one person commanding and controlling their way through the project.

It seems that there is a place and time for shared leadership. For instance, when I was in the United States Marine Corps, we did not share leadership to advance in our missions. With the nature of our work, it was always time sensitive. Sitting down and collaborating and sharing thoughts, ideas and opinions would jeopardize mission success and who would be coming home safe or not. Sometimes, (in this particular situation) it is best to make a decision without hesitation and run with it. In this environment any decision is better than no decision. So case in point, uniformity was key for this employer. If there was any deviation there could be severe consequences. Now, there are R&D teams and course developers for schools within the Marine Corps that does take the collaborative approach to hear input from each field practitioner but that was the proper time and place. Overall, I believe shared leadership is beneficial to an organization since each member of the team can contribute their ideas and skills, but I do not think that every organization should adopt the concept of shared leadership for the business they are running.

References:

Farag, Walid (2014). Boost Potential with Shared Authority and Lean Management. Retrieved on March 20, 2016 from: http://www.infoq.com/articles/shared- leadership

Pennsylvania State University (2016). Leadership in Work Settings—PSYCH 485. Online course lesson. Penn State World Campus. The Pennsylvania State University. Retrieved March 20, 2016 from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp16/psych485/002/content/09_lesson/10_page.html

Transitioning from an Assigned Leader to Emergent Leader

September 6, 2014 by Josue David Vargas

I currently work as a manager for hardwood flooring company. I am 22 years old and started this job at the age of 20. My responsibilities range from keeping client accounts, maintaining the books, managing projects, and client relations. Being a young manager it was hard work earning the respect of the work force. I overlook 2 crews each containing 3 employees. Most of the individuals in the team are almost twice my age. My skills at first were mainly in the business aspect of the field. I only knew the actual labor in theory, not practice. Since I was unable to spend much time on the field, I did not have much of a relationship with the team out on the job site. There was a gap between management and the labor force. At this point I was an assigned leader. They had to listen to me because I had the position power associated with being a manager. Northouse breaks down position powers into legitimate, reward, and coercive powers (Northouse, p. 10). I knew that in order to be a better, more effective leader I would need to transition from an assigned leader to an emergent leader.

I learned a lot about being a leader during my first year. I made many mistakes but was able to learn from them. There was an instance where the owner had gone on vacation for a couple of weeks. During that time my authority as a leader was tested. The biggest lesson I have learned so far was with an employee who was slacking off. Several employees had come to me and brought it to my attention. At first I did not react. I was letting it go until I saw him go outside and use the phone multiple times. When he came back, without thinking, I reprimanded him in front of everyone. My actions caused tension for the remainder of the day. The employee told me he would not be working again until the owner returned from vacation. After that event I sat down and began evaluating my leadership skills. I realized that I needed to form a relationship with my crew and have better communication. This is the “process” in the definition of leadership. With out this aspect I am only someone who they have to listen to in order to get paid. From that moment on I decided to integrate myself into the work force and learn from them. I started spending more time doing the actual labor and thus gaining their respect. Once I became part of the team I bridged the gap between management and the workforce.

Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Leadership and “Criminal Minds”

June 4, 2014 by Carol A. Dannenberg

“Criminal Minds’ is a procedural show on CBS and depicts the FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit (BAU). The head of the BAU is Aaron Hotchner (Hotch) whose leadership style, at first glance, appears to be authoritarian style which is defined as “expecting or requiring people to obey rules and not allowing personal freedom.” Yet, underneath Hotch’s cold exterior, he deeply cares and respects his team because he is willing to adapt and change his different leadership styles for each team member.

Spencer Reid is the youngest and the smartest member of the team who did have the abilities or knowledge to be an FBI agent when the show first premiered. Hotch took the time to teach Reid how to pass the field requirements, although Hotch was busy with other aspects of the job. Hotch’s leadership style towards Reid is the paternalism style of leadership. Northouse defined paternalism as one “that regards the team as family, rewards loyalty, and punishes non-compliance” (p. 81). When Reid stepped out of bounds during a case, Hotch informed Reid that if the incident happened again, Reid would be dismissed from the FBI. However, Hotch also told Reid that he should go back to his support group meeting. The specific incident is one that shows how much Hotch cares about the welfare of the team. As a result of Hotch’s time to teach Reid, he as grown to be an excellent FBI agent.

Hotch are uses socialized power to “empower” some of the team members. When “Criminal Minds” premiered, Garcia was the team’s computer analyst and never went into the field. However, Hotch needed her on a case and asked Garcia to come along. Since that case, Garcia has become an invaluable asset to the team and has increased her self-confidence.

As Hotch as taught me, there is not one specific way to lead. Each member has different needs and abilities that must be addressed so the team members can learn and grow to be successful in work and life.

Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Retrieved from: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/authoritarian.

Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2014). PSYCH 485 Lesson 7: Power and Influence. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/su14/psych485/001/content/07_lesson.

Why are Navy SEALs a Team as Opposed to a Group?

April 26, 2014 by Christopher Matthew Boyne

By: Christopher Boyne

Team leadership is an important leadership approach in that it is one of the fastest growing and widely studied areas of leadership within organizational work teams (Northouse, 2013, p. 287). This approach “…looks at how different group characteristics can affect relationships both with the leader and among followers” (PSU WC Lesson 9, 2014, p. 3). There is a significant distinction between a team and a group, and each operates much differently in order to achieve organizational goals. A group includes two or more people interacting and influencing each other, and groups can vary in size (PSU WC Lesson 9, 2014, p. 3). In contrast, a team is much more interdependent compared to a group. Individuals have to rely on others within their team, and everyone is mutually accountable. A team cannot operate efficiently without the members interacting with each other (PSU WC Lesson 9, 2014, p. 3).

An example of a group is a collection of congenial golfers on the PGA tour. A professional golfer can achieve their goal, regardless of what other golfers do during the tournament (Dufour, 2009). An example of a team on the other hand is the United States Navy Special Forces known as Navy SEALs. A team has a clear goal and team members must rely on other people to accomplish their goals. An individual can excel at what they do, but that does not mean that the individual is part of a good team (Dufour, 2009). The word “team” is always associated with Navy SEALs, and SEALs are never thought of as being a group. Though a group and a team are extremely similar and often used interchangeably, there is a set of unique distinctions that make a collection of Navy SEALs a successful model of a team.

There are eight Navy Seal Teams and each has eight operational 16-man SEAL platoons. These platoons can be structured into eight-man, four-man, or even two-man teams depending on the task (“Navy seals structure,”). No matter the size of the SEAL Team, they all have the same components. Each team has a clear and elevating goal, where the performance objective is understood by every team member (PSU WC Lesson 9, 2014, p. 7). Depending on the size of a SEAL Team, the goals vary, but each has its own results-driven structure, which is designed to accomplish certain goals (PSU WC Lesson 9, 2014, p. 7). Retired Navy Commander Matthew Boyne is a formal Naval aviator who worked closely with SEAL Teams while he served in the military. He is currently a PhD professor in Organizational Leadership at the Air Force Air Staff and Command College. Boyne states that “Every SEAL Team has a clear goal, and each team is structured to accomplish goals” (Boyne, 2014).

Each SEAL team also has competent team members with each individual having a special skill, so they can all interdependently work together. A four-man team for instance will often consist of a team leader, a medic/sniper, a communications specialist, and a sonar technician (Luttrell, 2007). With specialization of skills, a SEAL Team can be prepared for a multitude of obstacles (Boyne, 2014). Trust is also an important aspect of a successful team. This includes having a collaborative climate (PSU WC Lesson 9, 2014, p. 7). Marcus Luttrell writes about a collaborative climate and trusting his fellow SEALs in his book Lone Survivor (2007), which details how his four-man SEAL Team got into a firefight with over 100 Taliban fighters, and all three of his team members died heroically. He states that he thinks of his fellow SEALs as brothers, and the bonds that they form working together in SEAL training and in combat missions makes their relationship exclusive (Luttrell, 2007).

A good team also holds all of its members to a high standard of excellence. The dropout rate of Navy SEAL candidates is extremely high, often over 80%, and SEAL training is considered one of the most difficult Special Forces training programs in the world (Luttrell, 2007). Even after SEAL Basic Underwater Demolition training is completed, candidates must go through months and often years of weapons training and skill specialization training (Luttrell, 2007). In addition to high standards of excellence, every SEAL Team also has a high level of external support and recognition. “Team members need money, equipment, or supplies to accomplish their goals” (PSU WC Lesson 9, 2014, p. 7). Navy SEALs get their resources from the United States military forces, and through United States Special Operations Command (Luttrell, 2007). A successful team should also have principled leadership, where the team leaders serve as coaches. Most SEAL Teams have junior officers as their leaders, who are required to go through all the same training as the enlisted SEALs, and also pass Officer Candidate School, where Navy officer candidates prepare to become military leaders (Boyne, 2014).

Every aspect of a Navy SEAL Team exemplifies what makes a successful team, and precisely distinguishes the difference between a team and a group. These two nouns are often used interchangeably, but as shown through the Navy SEALs, a team is a much more specific type of group. Through analysis of the Navy SEAL Teams using team leadership approaches, the characteristics of a successful team are evident.

References

Dufour, R. (2009). Solution tree: Rick dufour on groups vs. teams [Web]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hV65KIItlE

Luttrell, M. (2007). Lone survivor: The eyewitness account of operation redwing and the lost heroes of seal team 10. Little, Brown and Company.

M. Boyne, personal communication, April 20, 2014

Navy seals structure. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://navyseals.com/nsw/structure/

Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: theory and practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications

Teamwork on 9/11

March 16, 2014 by Susan Hicks

by Susan Hicks

Belonging to a volunteer fire department for over 15 years, I have to wonder why when we talk about teamwork, we don’t discuss the team dynamics and team leadership theory blatantly seen through the everyday actions of firemen. Firefighters all over the world have been implementing team structure and leadership into every aspect of their profession and on every incident they are called. From the vehicle accident to the major terrorist attack, they seem to perfect their integration of goals, skills, and leadership within seconds of their arrival. We could learn a great deal about the efficiency of teamwork if we just delve deeper into the professional lives of career and volunteer firemen.

A group of firefighters (“a number of persons gather or classified together”) are sitting in the firehouse (Agnes, 1998). They share a common goal of making it through another 12 hour shift.

Although they share this goal, each of them will eventually get there without the help of the others, however, this is no ordinary day and not an ordinary shift. This day is September 11, 2011 in New York City. The tones go off loudly on the overhead speaker, there is a structure fire in the city and someone needs their help immediately.

A plane has flown into one of the twin towers and in this critical instance, this fraction of a second, they instantly become a team. The goal, to get the truck out and get to the fire as soon as possible with the manpower of experience and training to get the people out of the building and get the fire under control. This team (“to join in cooperative activity”) cannot function as an individual (Agnes, 1998). Although one man can get the truck out, one cannot solely save the people and one cannot solely put the fire out. They immediately start to interact in the setting of the goals, roles, and functions of the team long before the truck ever leaves the station.

The performance of this team starts with the Chief making a “mental model of the situation” by assessing the information coming in with what he sees on-scene (Northouse, 2013). He must foresee the problems that will arise for the team (floors too high for the tower and ladder trucks to reach), the environmental constraints that define the context of the situation (an airplane full of fuel struck the building and there is a great deal of fire and smoke), and find all possible solutions to aid the team with organizational and environmental resources (climb the stairs with hose lines and utilize helicopters for rescue if possible). He must continue to monitor the team and provide intervention (task or relational aid) interiorly within the group functions or exteriorly from resources available outside the team. This completely being done as the group moves through 4 stages of team development that occur on every single incident they face.

As soon as the firefighters reach the scene, it is chaos as goal focusing, structuring, and facilitation decisions takes place. Within seconds, the firemen start working as a well-oiled machine toward reaching their mutual goals of live safety and the protection of property (putting the fire out).Since firefighters do not always work on every incident with the same firemen (varying battalions, engine companies (pipe men), truck companies (truckies), rescue companies, etc… as they respond depending on the location and severity of the incident), they progress through four stages of development. This occurs immediately and rapidly for the firemen in relation to other teams primarily due to the extreme emergency nature of the situation. They first go through forming – finding out about the abilities of the others (find out if he is a truckie or a pipe man), through storming – decide the best course of action for their team (climb the stairs?), to norming – a team leader develops and takes the initiative to start the task (takes the first step), to finally progress through the stage of performing – the team starts to perform their duty (PSU, 2013).

They start to carry their hand lines, high-rise packs, axes, haligan bars, and breathing apparatus up the seventy plus flights of stairs to reach the fire while sending the remaining occupants down the stairs behind them.

Then it happens….

The building collapses.

The scene immediately reverts back to chaos. New teams re-form. The situation has dramatically changed.

New teams are forming to find the rest of the occupants and the numerous firefighters trapped inside. They must act fast if they want to increase the chances of survival for the victims. Should the Chief have monitored the events and foreseen that the building was going to collapse – intervening into the firefighter’s task and gotten them out of there? No one can answer that for sure. One could argue either of the two schools of ‘Monday-night-quarterbacking’ that occurred after the event. The building was designed not to collapse but the fuel from the plane was too hot and lasted too long to prevent the collapse.

What this unfortunate tragedy reminds us is that teamwork is essential and leadership must monitor team effectiveness and performance in all instances. Albeit this was the worst case event that could ever happen within humanity and for the fire service, teamwork is not only the first avenue of defense for the proper functioning of the fire service, but it is what creates the ‘brotherhood’ among firemen that not only gives them the courage to run into a burning building when sane people are running out, but why firemen risk their lives for each other and for people whom they don’t even know. Teamwork is much greater than efficiency and productivity for the fireman – teamwork is about each other and it is essential for their survival.

References:

Agnes, Michael (ed). (1998). Webster’s New World Compact Desk Dictionary and Style Guide. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Northouse, P. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. (6^th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Pennsylvania State University. (2014). PSYCH-485: Leadership in work settings Lesson 9 – Team Leadership. Retrieved March 16, 2014 from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp14/psych485/001/content/09_lesson/01_page.html