Key Factors for Forming Successful Business Teams
Discuss about the Effectivity of Teamwork in Business Ventures for Production.
There are certain key determining factors that goes in to the formation of any business. Likewise, when four different individuals come together to form a restaurant which serves a variety of food items, also require a set of work ethics and which follows a particular structure for effective service. In the 21st century joint business ventures and team working has its own benefits and bears better result than individual projects. The coming together of different minds with different ideas, enhances creativity through brain-storming and extension of individual roles, thereby leading to quality production. It encourages flexibility and offers a dynamic approach with necessary importance to a constantly evolving market. Any team-work helps in keeping a constant critical check on the working procedures, whereby the decisions are made by a consent of all the members working towards a common goal (Robbins et al., 2016). Accordingly, the strategies are built which leads to better results.
In order to successfully start a joint venture, every team must form a strategy based on four major areas – Context, Composition, Work Design, and the Process of work. However, these are just umbrella terms, which involves multi-faceted elements, based on the types of business, to create a proper business model canvas.
Every team must be aware of the adequate resources that is required to provide the facilities they offer. Without this, the effectiveness of any business is bound to fail. When individuals come together as a group, they come with various resources, the amalgamation of which makes the availability of these resources easier (Grille, Schulte and Kauffeld 2015). This gives team business an upper hand over individual projects. Similar is the case with the intended restaurant business of the four respective individuals. It opens up a prospect of a wide range of food items, as well as labour resource, proper equipment and administrative assistance. The four-partied administrative body must categorize the various avenues in their business into four different parts and ensure effective leadership from each of the members based on their area of skill and expertise. This divided supervision makes the work more organized and efficient than one single sovereign body bearing the burden of supervising all the spheres of his/her business. Unlike the strict linear hierarchy of a single-owned business, the divided hierarchical structure makes work more comfortable for everyone (Joshi and Knight 2015). As a result, teamwork demands immense trust over each other, for those in the governing bodies to work in an organized manner (De Jong, Dirks and Gillespie 2016). For this, the four parties must remain in constant touch with each other and talk about the progress of each of their specific avenues as well as that of the restaurant as a whole. Lack of proper trust and understanding may lead to disorganized workflow, wherein the restaurant’s profits would be severely hampered. Another important contextual factor is the evaluation of performance and respective reward systems for both the directors of a company, as well as the employees. Similarly, in this case, the team members must be accountable for their individual work, as well as that of the team as a whole (Dong et al., 2017). The profit sharing should be equally distributed among the four members. There should be appraisals and rewards, as well as constructive criticisms, to reinforce effort and commitment.
Importance of Adequate Resources
A huge part of the team’s effective working depends on the acknowledgement of individual skills and abilities, including technical and interpersonal skills along with decision-making abilities, and allocating the roles accordingly (Katzenbach and Smith 2015). Only the proper distribution of a diversified skill-set can lead to a positive outcome. This diversity is its core strength, which is lacking in individual projects. Although there are instances where individuals play different roles at the same time, individual projects at large lack the diversity and the provision of proper guidance, especially in areas which are out of the director’s expertise (Shemla et al., 2016). Team performance is also largely dependent on the right kind of personality and attitude required to work in a team, as this directly influences the building of trust (Colbert, Barrick and Bradley 2014). The size of a team is also immensely important, depending on the kind of work. In case of a restaurant or a food-chain, a three to four member administration is perfect. Lesser than that would lead to a lack of a third pacifying member in case of misunderstanding. Conversely, a larger group would lead to lack of adequate communication among the team-members, which would result in confusion. The various preferences of the team members must also be addressed properly. In case of conflicting ideas, an understanding must be reached, and in the end it must be ensured that nobody felt insulted or left out. The satisfaction of the members is a crucial element. If any member is unsatisfied with an issue, he/she should immediately discuss that with the others. Every individual do not possess the right kind of attitude to work in a group. Therefore, it is better to clarify beforehand, and not enter a group venture if need be, than creating misunderstandings after the business has started (Mitchell et al., 2015).
Proper trust between team members give way to a certain amount of autonomy of work, where members do not encroach into each other’s work all the time (Gonzalez-Mulé et al., 2016). However they are accountable to the team as a whole. The absence of this balance and concentration of power in the hands of a single entity often proves to be detrimental to the healthy workflow of a company. The members work towards a common goal. This amalgamation of autonomy and commonality of work ensures proper direction, momentum as well as commitment of the team members (Chen et al., 2015). Individuals identify with their respective works, and the significance of the same. In case of the restaurant, these can be categorized as – managing the internal workflow (from getting the right kind of raw materials to the delivery of food on the dishes), marketing and distribution, managing and handling of customers, maintaining of accounts and financial affairs. Each of these aspects must be addressed with equal amount of importance, based on the skill-set of the team members. This would reduce hierarchical tension, thereby ensuring effectiveness of work. As opposed to this, individual projects put too much pressure over the single owner resulting in strategic errors. Certain small yet important executional errors, or negligence of issues by the workers are often left unattended, because it is not humanly possible for a single owner to provide adequate amendments. In the long run, these put the reputation of the business at stake.
Role Allocation based on Individual Skills
As mentioned earlier, specific goals of the team members aimed towards a common goal, that of the greater good of the company, the restaurant in this case, proves to be extremely effective for the maintenance of quality, productivity and profitability of the company on a long-term basis (Rapp et. al., 2014). Thus the efficacy of the team is improved and their self-confidence enhanced, both as an individual entity as well as a group. In a teamwork, conflict is unavoidable. Rather, a little conflict is, at times, healthy for the effective working of a business. But the conflicts should not be based on personal grounds, rather on disagreements related to tasks. The conflicts should not be driven by personal accusations and lambasting statements, but with an aim of resolution. Conflicting ideas give way to discussions, promotes critical and analytical abilities by addressing problematic areas, which, when resolved, leads to the betterment of the company. Such analytical task-based conflict of ideas and consequent discussions are absent in individual projects.
Team projects run the risk of social loafing, which the members should try to avoid as much as possible. The members should be both individually and jointly responsible for the greater good of the team. Their approach, purpose and goals should not be individualistic, but team-oriented. The four-person team of the restaurant, although dealing with specific areas, should point out errors of others if and when they come across. They should also try to suggest solutions from the same. The food items should be carefully determined so as to maintain an amalgamation of both local as well as global taste, which would cater to a wide array of visitors, both local and tourists. Local customers would get to have their preferred food, at the same time, getting a taste of the foreign food. The other person should also be open to such suggestions. This strengthens the bond between the members. Ideas of all-round enhancement of the restaurant should come from various avenues. The four-partied ownership would allow the company to expand business and form a chain of restaurants, once its business flourishes. They should make the best use of this opportunity and man-power.
Conclusion
Therefore, it may be concluded by saying that the multi-faceted concerns that are required for establishing any business, especially that of a team venture, if carefully looked after, leads to success. If the restaurant business intended to be opened by the four follows all the criteria mentioned above and work as a unified team, it is bound to make more success than any such business that is administrated by a single owner. Moreover, the team-ownership would allow them to address the problems from a more critical perspective, which would bring more efficiency in their service. Thus it is clear that team work projects, especially business projects, if done strategically and with unity, would bear more fruit than individual projects.
Reference List
Robbins, S., Judge, T., Millett, B. and Boyle, M. 2016. Organisational behaviour. 8th ed. Melbourne: Pearson.
Grille, A., Schulte, E.M. and Kauffeld, S., 2015. Promoting shared leadership: A multilevel analysis investigating the role of prototypical team leader behavior, psychological empowerment, and fair rewards. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 22(3), pp.324-339.
Dong, Y., Bartol, K.M., Zhang, Z.X. and Li, C., 2017. Enhancing employee creativity via individual skill development and team knowledge sharing: Influences of dual?focused transformational leadership. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(3), pp.439-458.
De Jong, B.A., Dirks, K.T. and Gillespie, N., 2016. Trust and team performance: A meta-analysis of main effects, moderators, and covariates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(8), p.1134.
Joshi, A. and Knight, A.P., 2015. Who defers to whom and why? Dual pathways linking demographic differences and dyadic deference to team effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 58(1), pp.59-84.
Katzenbach, J.R. and Smith, D.K., 2015. The wisdom of teams: Creating the high-performance organization. Harvard Business Review Press.
Shemla, M., Meyer, B., Greer, L. and Jehn, K.A., 2016. A review of perceived diversity in teams: Does how members perceive their team’s composition affect team processes and outcomes?. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37, pp.S89-S106.
Colbert, A.E., Barrick, M.R. and Bradley, B.H., 2014. Personality and leadership composition in top management teams: Implications for organizational effectiveness. Personnel Psychology, 67(2), pp.351-387.
Mitchell, R., Boyle, B., Parker, V., Giles, M., Chiang, V. and Joyce, P., 2015. Managing inclusiveness and diversity in teams: How leader inclusiveness affects performance through status and team identity. Human Resource Management, 54(2), pp.217-239.
Gonzalez-Mulé, E., Courtright, S.H., DeGeest, D., Seong, J.Y. and Hong, D.S., 2016. Channeled autonomy: The joint effects of autonomy and feedback on team performance through organizational goal clarity. Journal of Management, 42(7), pp.2018-2033.
Chen, J., Neubaum, D.O., Reilly, R.R. and Lynn, G.S., 2015. The relationship between team autonomy and new product development performance under different levels of technological turbulence. Journal of Operations Management, 33, pp.83-96.
Rapp, T.L., Bachrach, D.G., Rapp, A.A. and Mullins, R., 2014. The role of team goal monitoring in the curvilinear relationship between team efficacy and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(5), p.976.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
