Self-Directed work teams and power

Concepts that include the participation and empowerment of workers are becoming increasingly important nowadays. In many of these concepts, the formal responsibility is delegated to teams. Does this imply that the normative responsibility for the actions of teams is also delegated? In this article we will reflect on the difference between holding a person accountable and bearing responsibility. A framework is elaborated in order to analyse the accountability and responsibility of teams. In this framework, the emergence of a collective mind, and the organisational factors that influence the extent to which teams have the possibility of acting in a responsible way play an important role. It shows that teams can bear responsibilities that could never be carried by a group of individuals. The framework is used to analyse two sample cases with self-managing teams in production facilities. The authors discuss the implications for the theory and practice of self-managing teams and the allocation of responsibility between individuals, teams and the organisation.

Journal of Management Studies, 1982

C. A. CARNALL which will account for these problems whilst still taking account of the potential benefits of group working, Having done so we will examine aspects of this theoretical sketch through an analysis of case study evidence. Birchall ( I 976) asserts that various benefits can result from group working. For the ivdividual there will be opportunities to make decisions, increased variety and task complexity, and challenge. Further, group working reduces the extent to which jobs are specified by outsiders. Thus opportunities may exist for individuals to work in ways which better match their own preferences. The problem of individual differences is accounted for by the use of group working as an enabling device in work re-structuring. Within such work groups individuals may choose to work in a way which suits their own preferences, this choice limited only to the extent that there exists a need for co-ordination and co-operation within the group to assure task completion. The literature on semi-autonomous work groups suggests that the increased challenge and autonomy can lead to various benefits. Herbst (1974) argues that conflict may be reduced, that individuals are provided with opportunities for learning and participating in problem-solving, and that the conditions for mutual trust and respect are established. Further, a considerable reduction of overhead and management costs may be achieved. This enthusiastic summary of potential benefits is based on the assumption that substantial autonomy has been assigned to the group. However we should not assume that all members of a work group will perceive 'gains' as outweighing the 'costs' of change (Susman, I 976).

Creativity and Innovation Management, 1993

Self-managed work teams (SMWTs) may be an early manifestation of the changing paradigm of organization. A key tenet of transformational theory is that consciousness creates external, structural forms which represent beliefs, values and attitudes inherent in the dominant paradigm. Previous paradigmatic assumptions of the Industrial Era created the bureaucracy; transformational thinking (the new, emerging paradigm) is creating newer organizational structures such as SMWTs.

burchardt.name

This article describes a diagnostic model for empowerment in team- based organizations that portrays four dimensions of the organization's control structure: the level of routine, the nature of expertise, the level of dependence and the line of command. The combined positions of the set of job regulation tasks distinguished for these dimensions express empowerment in terms of a functional balance and a balance of authority. The diagnostic model can be used to measure the control structure in practice and to provide input for a well-founded and managerial debate on empowerment and control. The model is illustrated with quantitative data from a pilot study of 16 semi-autonomous work teams within the manufacturing industry. Considerable differences in the local interpretation of the design of the control structure by team managers were observed. In general, the empowerment of teams is rather limited. The impression given is that there is a temporary `double control structure', meaning simultaneous bottom-up and top-down control of the teams.

West/International, 2003

This is a chapter about power in groups and organizations. In the following pages, we suggest that the analysis and exploration of the complexities of organizational power by managers and workers is both necessary and useful. We begin by discussing three of the prominent theoretical perspectives on power from the literatures of social and organizational psychology and critical management studies. We then outline some of the dilemmas and challenges faced by executives, managers and workers around empowerment, disempowerment and organizational democracy. Then, building on the seminal works of Follet, Deutsch, Tjosvold, Clegg, Mumby and others, we offer a framework of organizational power which views power as a multifaceted phenomenon; as thoughts, words and deeds which are both embedded within and determining of a complex network of relations, structures and meaning-making processes at different levels of organizational and community life. Such a framework enables us to understand the relational aspects of power and authority within the context of the macro structures and ideologies that give them meaning. It can also help identify those domains in organizations where the potential for sharing cooperative power is, in fact, not disempowering, but genuinely empowering for all concerned. The chapter concludes with a set of practical recommendations for managers that emphasize the benefits of multiple emancipatory initiatives within organizations when implemented with respect to the paradoxes of power.

SSRN Electronic Journal, 2001

This study presents nine Italian cases of SMWT adoption. The powerful role of trade unions in Italy has made it difficult to use this practice for increasing pressure on the workers. In only three cases the introduction of SMWT took place simply as a means of broadening, rotating and partially enriching working tasks with the aim of reducing the number of hierarchical levels (without changing the hierarchical character of leadership). The breadth of the objective underlying the introduction of self-managed teams, the breadth of the training provided and the results achieved are inter-related: only a clear organisational strategy accompanied by adequate training could allow significant results. Degree of production variability, objectives of autonomy and their partial achievement, and breadth of training provided were interrelated: firms with the greatest need for flexibility were those that are more actively interested in pursuing the idea of self-management and supporting it with broadly based training. JEL Classification Numbers: M11, M12, L23.

American Psychologist, 1990

groups of interdependent individuals who share responsibility for outcomes for their organizations. Applications include advice and involvement, as in quality control circles and committees; production and service, as in assembly groups and sales teams; projects and development, as in engineering and research groups; and action and negotiation, as in sports teams and combat units. An analytic framework depicts team effectiveness as interdependent with organizational context, boundaries, and team development. Key context factors include (a) organizational culture, (b) technology and task design, (c) mission clarity, (d) autonomy, (e) rewards, (f) performance feedback, (g) training/consultation, and (h) physical environment. Team boundaries may mediate the impact of organizational context on team development. Current research leaves unanswered questions but suggests that effectiveness depends on organizational context and boundaries as much as on internal processes. Issues are raised for research and practice. The terms work team and work group appear often in today's discussions of organizations. Some experts claim that to be effective modern firms need to use small teams for an increasing variety of jobs. For instance, in an article subtitled "The Team as Hero," Reich (1987) wrote, If we are to compete in today's world, we must begin to celebrate collective entrepreneurship, endeavors in which the whole of the effort is greater than the sum of individual contributions. We need to honor our teams more, our aggressive leaders and maverick geniuses less. (p. 78) Work teams occupy a pivotal role in what has been described as a management transformation (Walton, 1985), paradigm shift (Ketehum, 1984), and corporate renaissance (Kanter, 1983). In this management revolution, Peters (1988) advised that organizations use "multi-function teams for all development activities" (p. 210) and "organize every function into ten-to thirty-person, largely self-managing teams" (p. 296). Tornatzky (1986) pointed to new technologies that allow small work groups to take responsibility for whole products. Hackman (1986) predicted that, "organizations in the future will rely heavily on member self-management" (p. 90). Building blocks of such organizations are self-regulating work teams. But

Several theories have been developed that prescribe the team development of self- managing work teams (SMWTs). Some of these have led to models with successive linear developmental phases. However, both the theory and the empirical data show little support for these models. Based on an extensive review of team development literature, we propose, instead of linear phases, describing team development in three general team processes. These processes, internal relations, task management, and external relations and improvement, were empirically explored in a longitudinal field- study of more than 150 blue-collar and white-collar SMWTs in a Volvo plant in Sweden. The three processes were found to be consistent over time and appeared to relate to one-year-later objective SMWT performance measures for product quality, the incidence of sick-leave and long-term sick-leave. Based on these findings, a result- oriented team development approach is proposed, in which the achieved results determine the processes followed to develop SMWTs further. Also, managers and HR practitioners are encouraged to monitor the three ongoing team processes and to relate these to the desired team performance. Such an analysis should be the starting point of a dialogue between manager and team to improve the functioning and performance of SMWTs.

2011

While self-management has emerged as a robust way of getting things done in presentday work life and organizations, it also presents itself as a conception of considerable multivalency and ambiguity. In a broad sense, self-management seems to require that employees think, feel and act in ways that contribute to the realization and improvement of the individual worker, but only insofar as they concomitantly anticipate and contribute to the various needs of the organization (Manz and Sims, 1989; Thomas, 2002; Costea et al, 2008). In addition, self-management does not only show up within greatly diverse contexts but is also utilized by a range of groups and actors holding largely contradictory views on core political and organizational issues. Accordingly, self-management has been called upon both to intensify capitalist work practices and to overturning their exploitation, thus expressing at the very same time our fears of subordination and our hopes for emancipation. Whereas complica...