Tuesday, November 10, 2015

A631.4.4.RB - INSEAD Reflection

In light of the video and the readings from your textbook;
o   What do you see as some of the major benefits and drawbacks of self-managed teams?
o   Would you like to work within such a team?
o   What competencies would you need to develop to be an effective external manager of a self-managed work team?

Self-managed work teams are becoming a growing trend in companies around the world, as they offer a variety of different benefits to both the performance and success of the company, as well as the ability to solve new problems quickly in order for the companies to grow.  The question becomes, as posed in the INSEAD video, how do you manage a self-managing team and what types of benefits will occur from these types of team?  The role of the external manager within the self-managing team can be crucial to the success of the team, as they are there to help encourage and inspire the members.  I thought Paul Tesluk summed this idea up well by discussing how the external manager needs to be flexible on the means, but specific on the end results (INSEAD (2008, 1:50).  In other words, the self-managing team can make decisions and take formal responsibility for the process of reaching the goal, but the goal should clear and specific for the team.  Having a clear sense of vision for the team and the organization is a valuable characteristic of self-managing work teams (Brown, 2011). 
            Self-managing work teams have the potential to offer excellent benefits to an organization.  When the organization is set to support self-managing work teams, these types of teams can offer a more effective approach to managing than traditional management within an organization (Brown, 2011).  Generally self-managed work teams are comprised of 5-15 members who all offer superior skills set and knowledge base that brings a rich diversity to the team.  I always think about IDEO when discussing effective work teams.  IDEO, as I have mentioned in previous posts, in an organization that thrives off self-managing work teams.  These teams are a perfect example at how bringing together diverse, but knowledge backgrounds can really offer an abundance of new ideas, processes, and execution abilities to the team.  Having these diverse backgrounds encourages each member to participate and offer their own bits of knowledge, while taking in and learning new ideas from the other members.  This also helps to encourage trust and respect between the members, while improving the quality of work because of the diverse perspectives being offered.   These results can be very beneficial and successful for an organization; however, there are always risks and drawbacks to self-managing teams, especially if the organization does not have a favorable environment for these types of work teams. If an organization does not have the proper foundation that would encourage success amongst self-managing work teams, then the odds of success can be substantially lower. It’s important that each member is clear on what their roles are within the team and that they know what their responsibilities are.  If members are confused about their roles and the end goal for the team, then the odds of disagreements and unproductive behavior will most likely increase.  It is important that self-managing work teams are managed very little, as the members of the team will most likely become less productive if a external manager interferes too much. 
            I think self-managing work teams are the essence of a lot of the industries that I have been exposed to.  In creative fields, I’ve always believed that more than anything, having diverse team members with a high level of knowledge and a strong skill set for their background will offer up some tremendous results.  I’ve never been a huge fan of traditional “teams” or “groups”, as I find them to be very dull and lack innovation.  Every traditional group I have been apart of always seems to follow the same rigid structure that always leaves me wanting to add more or explore more ideas and develop more conclusions.  With self-managing work teams, I feel like you have a lot more opportunity to explore and develop new ideas.  They follow a similar idea in that both traditional work teams and self-managing work teams are all working toward reaching a goal; however, with traditional teams, the area I have always struggled in was the lack of innovation due to the constant suggestions and direction given by the leader of the group.  I’ve always felt like I’m the type of person that has so many ideas, but struggles to get them out in a way that makes sense to other people, so when I am in a traditional group, I feel like my abilities, strengths, and opportunities are often suppressed because I do not have the means to express my thoughts.  A self-managing work team on the other hand, offers a lot more opportunity to explore, share, and develop both as a person and as a team. 
            Overall, self-managing work teams, in my opinion, seem like a really beneficial and encouraging approach to the way we work today.  I do think that they need to be carefully implemented, as Brown discussed in this weeks module, but I also think it is important that the external leader understand their role as well.  In several experiences I have had in work groups, the external leader in that situation fails to offer any inspiration or vision for the ‘why’ we are working toward a goal.  When I was in college, I had a professor who really influenced my work and my development both personally and professionally.  She was so encouraging and led her students in a way that was very similar to how an external leader should lead a self-managing team.  I remember she used to show us a slideshow on the very first day of class that really summarized what her role was going to be.  It was just a slideshow with a few pictures and a couple of quotes, but she would always speak to the photos.  Her saying used to always be “I’ll be the monkey on your back and the wind beneath your wings”, which I think was very true of the way she taught and led her students.  The parallels I see between her teaching style and the way an external leader should lead focus mainly around the ability to inspire and encourage each member (or student) to develop a strong vision.  This idea is very motivating for my work.  My professor had the ability to inspire, but with that inspiration and vision she helped us create also came a sense of responsibility to putting forth your best work.  She inspired you in a way that made you feel like you were not only working for the goal, but that you were also working to not let yourself down by not giving it your all. While I can’t speak for everyone’s motivation, for me, this was definitely a reason that I continued to work through problems, seeking out new solutions, because I felt like she really believe in each and everyone of her students and there was no way you were going to let her down by not giving it your all.  To me, an external leader should lead the same way; inspire and encourage a strong vision for the members, but don’t interfere with their process for reaching that goal, unless absolutely necessary.  If the leader can do this well, then the team should function at its peak ability and level because they are encouraged by their own desire to be better.

References

Brown, D. (2011). An experiential approach to organization development (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.


INSEAD. (2008, September 22). Self-managing teams: debunking the leadership paradox [Video file]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/GBnR00qgGgM

No comments:

Post a Comment