To Team or Not To Team

One defining aspect of contemporary organizations is teamwork. Whenever I hear about a team being formed, whether it is at school or at work, the first thing I listen for is wheter the teams will be self-constituted, or by assignment. Teams that emerge because members have a desire to work together can function extremely well - you can almost feel the excitement and energy of a group that's really "working" together. New ideas are generated spontaneously because everyone has a desire to contribute. Conversley, you know the group will not work well if your first thought is about how you are going to do the extra work to cover for the slacker s. Soon everyone in the group begins to feel resentful and begins to take a prioritary stance toward their "own" ideas. I think managers should take more than a passing interes in how assigned groups function, to head off any surprises for projects on a tight deadline.

Spin(ing) Out Of Control

The importance of organizational communication has grown over the years, and it is easy to see why, in and out of this election season. While political speech is often inflammatory to the point of being tuned out by many constituents, subtle strategies require more careful analysis. One humorous radio ad a few years illustrated the point by "deconstructing" celebrity infomercials. While a prototypical ad played in the background, the announcer/narrator provided an alternative interpretation for the hype; "media personality" became "has-been out of work actor" and the "miracle" product became "left over seconds from the Home Shopping Network." A careful reading of today's most common buzzwords: opportunity, choice, challenge, responsibility, to name a few, can provide surprising alternative meanings in alternate contexts.

ID In and Out

In the course of my readings on organizational identity, I noticed a theme: the idea that organizational identities emerge as a result of interaction between internal and external constituents. I agree with this perspective, but not to the degree hypothesized by organizational scholars. At the risk of taking an essentialist stance, I thought about my current work situation. Employees at my facility are anxiously awaiting news about its imminent take over by another company, while management's lack of communication has added fuel to the fire. Many customers have asked questions that employees cannot answer leading to vague speculation on the part of internal and external constituents. These "doubtful" interactions however are limited to personal contact and go unacknowledged on the facility website or external publications. By virtue of the fact the official versions of identity are more widely disseminated, I feel the effect of personal interaction is limited.

Communicating Change

Larkin and Larkins advice about communicating change (p. 331) made alot of sense to me. I thought about a customer service initiative carried out by my company several years ago. I remember the roll out was scheduled in a large hotel banquet room at the Los Angeles airport, 35 miles from where I worked. The room was crowded with about 200 other managers and employees, there to see a pesentation by a motivational speaker who was to change the "culture" of the organization. The long afternoon featured story telling (by th speaker), videos, and a give-away of trinkets with slogans. The roll out was followed by strongly encouraged participation in commitees at each facility, tasked with coming up with ways to incentivize participation. As you can tell by now, implementation was top-down, and enthusiasm was "mandatory." Soon thereafter, the company encountered legal and ethical problems that created large gaps between espoused values and vision. The message of the change initiative was undermined. About a year ago, the division news letter contained an article by the CEO that was prompted by an employee asking: "Are we still doing that?(initiative)." Although he assured everyne that "we never stopped," it was a defense that fell on deaf ears.

Same Old Change

I am an antique car buff and have serveral cars from the 1950's. The section on the dialectic of change and stability reminded me of an adevertising slogan used to promote '58 Chevy's, which had been completely redesigned from the previous year: "New All Over - All Over Again." I think the slogan captures the dialectic of change, as well as its institutionalization. Today, I rarely pay attention when I hear the words "new" or "change" because the novelty of change has worn off, and change has become an expectation. Although necessary if an organization is to have a long term future, some referents to existing systems must be maintained so that organizations do not destabilized to the point of ineffectiveness.

Conflict Management Styles

Following an emplyee "satisfaction" survey issues surfaced about percieved favoritism, and unfair promotional practices. The department manager who had an authoritarian, style that was percieved as cold and efficient, convened a "communication team" to address these issues. Employees were informed that they had been designated to participate by email, but had no input about agenda items, team structure or processes. At the first meeting we were presented with a list of agenda items such as improving the department morale, increasing motivation, and resolving any tensions that inhibit the smooth functioning of the department. The group would have 4 one hour sessions to devise solutions to these problems and plans to implement them. After the manager walked out, there was stunned silence. Needless to say, this dominant conflict management style (p. 291) was not conducive to resolving the overarching and fundamental issues we were tasked with. Because the outcome was a forgone conclusion, the group fell apart in a few weeks, as issued continued to simmer under the surface.

Group Conflict

During the course of my college education I have participated in several group project. Statistics for productive cooperation are about 50/50 in my experience. My first time was a very positive experience, with group members working well together. The other extreme took place a few years later, when we were asked to form teams to present a chapter from our textbook. I teamed up with one other person, and we had begun working on our presentation, when the instructor placed a third student in our group. Although we were unhappy about it, we were being graded as a team, therefore felt we could not complain. The fact that our work was already half done and that the new student had missed many classes did not help matters. On the day of our presentation our third team mate did not show up for class, nor did she attempt to contact us. She later claimed she had had a family emergency. My team mate and I felt used and angry at the other student, as well as the professor.