A Proposed Model for Enhancing the Performance and Learning ina Managerial Team
Ravee Phoewhawm and Mahmoud Moussa
Abstract
One of the greatest challenges of being competitive in the long
run that any company faces is in sustaining the morale of a managerial team to produce
the desired outcomes. There will be times when members of the team have to be confronted
with challenging issues such as holding each other accountable or painstakingly
keeping anxiety at a moderate level during a heated debate. This study proposes
a model for forming and learning as a managerial team by pinpointing the issues
of upholding morale, coordinating the capabilities of team members and being equipped
to deal with the changes in the work process. However, with so many uncontrolled
dynamics in the working environment, the proposed model is effective when members
are truly focused on obtaining results.
Keywords: Communication, consensus, experimentation, execution,
learning.
Authors:
Dr. Ravee Phoewhawm is a lecturer at the International Business
Management program at Rajamangala University of Technology Lanna, Thailand. Email:
Rtcm999@yahoo. Com.
Mahmoud Moussa is a lecturer at the International Business Management
programme at Rajamangala University of Technology Lanna, Thailand. Email: Rmutlhrd@gmail.
Com.
Introduction
For a team of managers working in a company where it has to adapt
constantly in a changing business environment, continual change is necessary to
prevent atrophy in learning and effective performance as a group (Marcus, 2011).
A managerial team is formed to be entrusted with its organization’s purpose of upholding
the values as well as leveraging the resources to ensure competitiveness, resiliency
and longevity for the future (Schilling, 2010). Consequently, such a team has to
execute with a collective state of mind situations where individual members form
and learn by being firmly aligned, questioning their methods and using analysis
to attain the desired outcome (Kinicki & Williams, 2011).
Forming and Learning as a Managerial Team in a Changing Business
Environment
One of the greatest challenges of being competitive in the long
run that any company faces is in sustaining the morale of a managerial team to produce
the desired outcome (Divakaran, Mani & Post, 2012). The focus is on coordinating
the diverse knowledge, skills, abilities and perspectives of team members to keep
pace with abrupt changes and interacting with others to develop group proficiencies
(Hackman, 2011). Simultaneously, the working conditions must support collaboration,
being aware of the actions taken and solving problems in a more creative manner
(Wang, 2006). There will be times when members of the team have to be confronted
with challenging issues such as holding each other accountable or painstakingly
keeping anxiety at a moderate level during a heated debate (Levin, 2011). However,
a collective effort is strongly urged in converting this situation into a productive
experience that helps the team to become fully equipped in managing the changes
involved (Marquardt, 2011).
Research Questions
The authors of this work attempt to address the following questions
concerning enhancing performance and learning in a managerial team:
How should morale be upheld?
What is the proper design for coordinating the capabilities of
team members?
What should be the outlook design for people to be equipped to
deal with the changes involved?
Research Objective
The aim of this research is to construct a model for enhancing
performance and learning in a managerial team by upholding morale, designing a work
flow for coordinating the capabilities of team members and providing an outlook
for people to be equipped to deal with the changes involved.
Literature Review
Establishing a Sound Flow of Communication
A sound flow of communication involves the idea of making it
safe for team members to admit to their shortcomings while other members are taking
the initiative to learn about the event and search for the next steps of action
to rectify the matter (Edmondson, 2011). Individual members of the team are asked
to reflect on the obstacles they faced and make a concerted effort to think of possibilities
(Biloslavo, 2005) For attaining the objectives. Communication becomes a sound flow
when team members are encouraged to reflect on what, where, when and how (Yeo, 2008)
Rather than spending time on thinking about what caused the problem in the first
place.
Providing Reasons
According to Schilling (2010: 252), “… the great strength of the house of quality is that it provides a
common language and framework within which the members of a project team may
interact. The house of quality makes the relationship between product
attributes and customer requirements very clear, it focuses on design
trade-offs, it highlights the competitive shortcomings of the company’s
existing products, and it helps in identifying what steps need to be taken to
improve them.”
Experimenting with the Decisions Made
The aim of conducting trials and tests is to evaluate the decisions
that were made and to seek for further improvement (West & Bamford, 2010). Teams
may have to take on a deliberately experimental approach to clarify the key processes
that have led to their decisions while at the same time anticipating and removing
barriers that can disrupt the effort to learn from their failures and treat them
as the subject of ongoing research (Edmondson & Cannon, 2004).
Case Analysis
A case analysis was applied on an event at a manufacturing company
where the managerial team was struggling to regain its level of performance in complying
with the organization’s philosophy and mission statement. This is, therefore, a
case of a managerial team’s effort in forming and learning together.
Background of the Study
To protect the integrity of all stakeholders and the company’s
reputation for quality in what is a very competitive industry, the company will
be referred to as the ”Megatronics
Company.“
Based in the Lamphun province of northern Thailand, Megatronics
is a manufacturing company that specializes in producing electrical components.
The company relies on its departmental managers to work as a team in order to fulfill
two objectives – “… the company’s
philosophy of delivering quality and the mission statement of attaining the
highest benefit for the customers.” Established in 1999, the company set the
standard for work practice and customer service in its early years.
A Team Lacking Teamwork
As 2010 approached, the team studied started to experience some
problems in functioning as a team. While the problems were mounting, the motivation
to work as a truly defined team started to wane. All the while, the company’s managing
director and human resources manager claimed that the philosophy and mission of
the corporation could be attained if the managers were able to work as a complete
team. However, rather than standing as a strong unit, some team members opted not
to fully get involved for fear of the possible repercussions; That is, there was
a lack of support for the concept. Some of the members stood by the sidelines and
abandoned hope for change while leaving the more vocal team members to make spontaneous
contributions. The human resources manager had to arrange a special meeting to help
the managerial team gather its thoughts and realign its behaviour with the company’s
philosophy and mission.
Defining the Root Cause
In an interview with the managing director of Megatronics, he
perceived that there were many problems among the departmental managers in trying
to work as a team. He felt that there were dysfunctional working relationships as
individual team members focused more on who was at fault rather than finding a solution.
He also perceived that they were not complying with the company’s
foundations by being careless
in delivering finished goods that did not match customer orders. In addition, the
managing director stated that the team was lacking in collaborative behaviour in
developing a better method for problem-solving. Furthermore, the managing director
sensed that the team was not willing to share ideas, information or knowledge with
each other despite asking each of them to do so when he had a meeting with them.
The next interviews were conducted with managerial team members
to obtain their version of the problems being experienced directly. They provided
further information by presenting workplace issues that they had to overcome. First,
they mentioned that they were unable to obtain accurate and confirmed information
due to fellow team members not wanting to be held responsible for negative outcomes
caused by the product. Second, they had experience in not having enough time to
agree on an exact schedule for finishing a project because of hidden tasks that
required prompt completion. Third, they sometimes had to compromise the quality
of work in order to meet with the pressures of demands from their customers who
were urging quick delivery.
Based on observation of one of the managerial team’s meetings,
the issue of rushing to get things done forced the managers to get their assignments
finished as soon as possible because of the hectic schedule. By rushing the process,
the products manufactured were often returned as below quality and were heavily
criticized by the receiving customers.
The staff did have a team but they were lacking in teamwork.
Members were not able to come together and exchange ideas and probe for solutions
due to being bombarded with problems that hindered their ability to meet the schedule.
Some members stayed silent about problems and hoped that the matters would be resolved
by somebody else. Challenges and problems were sometimes abandoned when people did
not wish to exhibit the strong will and effort
necessary to manage the
situation. It was somewhat ironic to see the managerial team working effectively
when it was conditions of fear and anger that forced them to work together. The
former made people scared of losing their job or being reprimanded, while the latter
was a cause of emotional frustration for top management. Not only was there a sense
of being intimidated for rapidly providing information but people also had to endure
being chastised for not giving accurate information. While the problems continued
to mount, it resulted in mental strain and physical anguish for some of the managerial
team members who wanted to improve their team’s performance. As a result, teamwork
and morale could not flourish.
Change of Outlook and Approach towards Working and Learning Together
At a managerial team meeting focusing on achieving high quality,
members of the team were asked to reflect on the current operational system. A roundtable
discussion was established to obtain their insights on what was working and what
was not working, as well as the reasons for this. Each team member was given a chance
to express a personal view of the operational system. Since there was evidence that
people were not able to obtain accurate and confirmed information, which led to
some mistakes and errors, the aim was to get the managerial team thinking about
how to serve internal customers (i. E. Fellow departmental colleagues) Better so
that everybody can work with a sense of professional dignity. It was proposed to
the managers that they come up with an improved work design model that incorporates
the Megatronic company’s philosophy and mission.
The issue of concern for some team members was having enough
time to ensure that the project could be completed on schedule. In general, there
needs to be a session where everyone can come together and provide valuable inputs
in ensuring that the project will be done with appropriate quality and on time.
The managerial team felt that there
should be a pre-assessment
meeting to address the following questions: What are the technical issues? What
are the procurement issues? What are the production issues? And what are the profit-
margin issues?
The team had to come up with an ideal working system or model
that will allow all of them to obtain accurate information so they can perform to
the best of their abilities to achieve the stated objective, for example: Delivering
on-time, with suitable levels of quality or enhanced satisfaction for the (internal/external)
Customers. It was agreed among the managerial team members that this working system
should uphold the values of people being in high spirits, being challenged, honest,
responsible, aware of the need for self- improvement and respect, experiencing job-satisfaction
and maintaining teamwork. In order for them to achieve the outcome of quality, they
all agreed that they want to work in an environment where the original working model
produces a positive currency of working relationship values. This model is presented
below:
Sales
& Order
|
Availability Check & Material
|
Order Confirmation
|
C
u s t o m e
r
|
automatically
|
Release Prod. Order
|
Plant Production Order
|
Invoice
|
Avail. Check
|
Avail. Check
|
Quality Assurance
|
Run
Production
|
Production Order
|
Purchase Request
|
Deliver Sales Order
|
Purchase Order
|
Incoming Material
|
Sourcing
|
Packing
|
Request for BOM update
BOM Change Management
|
Figure 1: The Original Working Model; Source: Original Research
Working and Learning Together in a Modified Direction
Upon review and reflection as a group, the managerial team discovered
that the problem was not so much a question based on resources or policies but rather
the way that the work flow was designed. According to the members, it seems that
the original working design was completely outmoded and could not reinvented according
to the demands from customers for high quality. Worse, the old work design did not
provide the mental infrastructure for the team to enhance their teamwork or allow
time to examine the root causes of the problems being experienced. The team believed
that it was time to take control of the situation before the situation starts to
control the team’s performance. A working model was put forward so as to try to
achieve consensus and then determine if this project could be managed accordingly
and then an execution stage to come to an understanding and, hence, demonstrate
commitment to the project.
There is, therefore, first a consensus stage and, second, an
execution stage.
The purpose of the consensus stage was to:
Obtain information that is accurate and confirmed;
Identify issues that are of concern and rectify them as soon
as possible;
Set an agreed plan for action.
In this stage, quality is defined and drawn so that team members
know the appropriate action to be taken. This would be the mission that is upheld
from the very beginning. The execution stage ensures that all involved members have
made a commitment to finishing the project. This stage also allows the staff to
address any arising and/or existing problems that must be taken care of so that
the project will be completed on schedule.
The newly designed working model was not intended just for the
configuration of the duties and roles of those involved but was also built for the
purpose of integrating the positive elements of the working relationship into daily
procedures. In reality, this work design model was made for the managerial team
to continue to move forward and provide the capacity to overcome difficult and challenging
situations. At the same time, the model is for sustaining teamwork and having the
different forms of behaviour aligned for producing an outcome with the company’s
mission embedded into every piece of the finished products. The managerial team
agreed that the work being done, from start to finish, must meet with requisite
quality standards otherwise the product will be rejected.
With the new approach, before any production can be fully completed,
the team should get together to create a covenant; That is, an
agreement to which everyone
agrees and means they are fully aware of what is occurring and what are the right
actions to take to complete the project with the necessary level of quality. Consequently,
the administration of the consensus stage will enable the team to discuss any matters
that are of concern or issues to be resolved before operation is fully implemented.
The consensus stage is a philosophy in itself which brings the knowledge and skills
of others to be in unison in directing the project, along with meeting the quality
and standards that the company wishes to uphold.
Sales
& Order
|
Availability
Check & Material
|
Order Confirmation
|
C
u s t o m e r
|
automatically
|
Release Prod. Order
|
Plant Production Order
|
Invoice
|
Avail. Check
|
Avail. Check
|
Run Production
|
Quality Assurance
|
Production Order
|
Purchase Request
|
Purchase Order
|
Incoming Material
|
Deliver Sales Order
|
Sourcing
|
Packing
|
Request for BOM update
BOM Change Management
|
Figure 2: Adapted Working Model; Source: Original Research
Figure 2 above depicts the consensus stage commencing at the
point of sales and ordering. This stage gathers the managerial team for a series
of meetings to discuss the selection, initiation, planning and execution of research
and development projects, as well as devising a plan based on information gathered
about relevant problems and the master data process for new projects, in addition
to pointing out issues of concern in completing the old projects that were analyzed
from the individual, production, procurement and resources perspectives. The consensus
stage scans for any problems that are either about to occur, have been occurring
or are occurring asymmetrically. This stage allows the managerial team to take the
initiative in managing the
problems so that they
will be contained and/or eliminated from the operation. Team members are free not
only to discuss the issues at hand but are also encouraged to offer an investigative
report on why these problems are happening. In addition, the individual members
of the team are asked to provide some sort of solution for resolving the matter.
This gives a chance for the team to stride forward in improving the procurement
operation and to have the opportunity to unite as a team to complete standard quality
work.
The consensus stage is a philosophical approach to team learning
that is conducive to their working environment. Hence, it creates the conditions
for team members to acquire the ability to learn together to accomplish a goal,
to be responsible for making a contribution to achieving goals, to reflect on collaborative
efforts and to decide on ways to improve effectiveness and develop interpersonal
skills. This operational framework is composed of three integrative phases which
then change to final confirmation of the process before entering the execution stage.
Results: A Meltdown in Learning as a Managerial Team
Despite efforts to create an effective approach to working and
learning together, the new work design model was abandoned after a couple of months
and reconstructed in a way that enabled higher authorities to oversee all operations.
Upon obtaining feedback from one of the managerial team members, it was stated that:
“There was not much of a sense of connection
among team members as they tried to fix their own problems that were occurring
in their task assignments. With problems present in the workplace, each
individual team member adapted themselves to the situation by treating the
problems on their own so as to sustain what they felt were their working
responsibilities”. Upon further elaboration, the respondent observed that the
members were mostly “… dealing with the
problems on their
own rather as a team, which made the team
members deviate from taking accountability to apply their talent, skills and
ability in strengthening the existing teamwork.“ It was revealed, in other words,
that the team had resorted back to its previous working behaviour and this was detrimental
to the team’s performance as a whole.
Discussion and Implications
The style of communication should set the level of expectation
for members of the managerial team so that they can reflect, analyze or discuss
events which will challenge the conventional paradigm of working as a team without
being pressured to produce. It would have been useful for members to draw out their
mental ideas by performing a vivid demonstration of what is deemed acceptable performance
while requesting improvement on the least desirable performance within the operational
framework.
If quality is the main reason for working in such a formation
then it would have been helpful for the managerial team to ensure that they are
functioning in an operational system that makes everyone accountable to others and
to have direct access to accurate and confirmed information, while having enough
time to agree on an exact schedule in finishing the project and not having to compromise
on quality so that the team as a whole can learn how to stay strongly focused on
delivering high levels of quality on a consistent basis.
Experimenting with the decisions made was a good way for the
managerial team to reassess their performance as well as acquiring the facts and
figures to determine where the next steps can be taken for general improvement.
However, this concept requires strong commitment and support from all colleagues
within the team. In this case, the focus and energy became diluted in the working
environment, which kept the pressure on to produce swiftly. With the lack of behavioural
maintenance to fulfill this experimental approach, it appears that it becomes just
another task assignment that nobody
wants to take because
it is perceived to be an inconvenience that will occupy too much time and preventing
the completion of work.
Recommendations
There was a team but there was a lack of teamwork in the effort
to adapt to a new challenge. The proposed model for forming and learning as a managerial
team is one in keeping with the mental behaviour of the team firmly aligned so that
they are able to concentrate their efforts in following through both consensus and
execution. In the case of this manufacturing company, for example, the affirmation
would be that the team has collectively brought about an agreement (i. E. Consensus)
To be highly focused on the company’s philosophy of delivering high quality and
the mission statement of attaining the highest benefit for the customers before
carrying out all orders, while preventing work disruptions from affecting their
working performance. First and foremost, the managerial team stays committed to
the philosophy and mission by fostering a mental code for team performance behaviour.
Even with a revised working design model, the team would have to ask themselves
about the issue of “delivering quality and attaining the highest benefit for the
customers. ’ The questions involved are as follows: ”How can we get a sound flow of communication established in the
working process? How can reason be applied at the moment of pressure? How can
we be strongly committed to experimenting with our decisions?” Figure 3 below
indicates the model for forming and learning as a managerial team for the sake of
being aligned to complete the execution of the consensus.
2b. ‘Providing reasons in the moment of pressure’
|
2a. ‘Getting a
sound flow of communication established in the working process’
|
2c. ‘Being strongly committed in experimenting with decisions’
|
1. ‘Delivering quality and attaining the highest benefit for
the customers’
|
Figure 3: Model for Forming and Learning as a Managerial Team;
Source: Original Research
The figure above incorporates the ancient Thai numeral one. The
form represents the origin or the starting point of things that are about to become
and then swirls around that point with questions, practical issues or other topics
in order to allow the users to apply the relevant theory. In this analogy, it is
a model for forming and learning as a managerial team where the point of origin
is an empty hole that represents the ability of members to direct their efforts
to meeting the designated objectives. In this regard, the managerial team is highly
concentrated on ‘delivering quality and attaining the highest benefit for the customers.
’ This is the conviction of the managerial team in what it has set out to do and
then seeing to it that it becomes attained. In order to make it happen, the team
has to set a mental code for team performance behaviour by setting the conditions
that will make fellow colleagues comply in a professional manner. With the focus
intact, members coordinate their capabilities to configure the methods of obtaining
a sound flow of communication which can be embedded in the working process, thereby
providing reasons in the moment of
pressure and being strongly
committed to experimenting with decisions so that the team remains firmly aligned
while at the same time undergoing a process of creating consensus and conducting
the execution of the project. This model is also a process for being equipped in
forming and learning as a managerial team whenever abrupt changes occur in their
current work flow operations. Above all, the model demonstrates that the aim to
be accomplished with the conceptual applications indicated can be achieved without
being overwhelmed by any technical disruptions.
With an attempt to offer a model for enhancing the performance
and learning of a managerial team, the authors of this study have pointed out the
issues of upholding morale, coordinating the capabilities of team members and being
equipped to deal with change. To generate a sense of collective effort in assisting
the managerial team to achieve its objective, the concepts of creating a sound flow
of communication, providing reasons and experimenting with the decisions were provided
to enable the conditions of forming and learning endured within the consensus and
execution processes. However, with so many uncontrolled dynamics in the working
environment, such as working attitudes and behaviour, the model can only bring out
the desired results when the mental fortitude of team members is appropriate. In
other words, the proposed model for enhancing the performance and learning in a
managerial team is effective when individual team members are highly committed to
doing their utmost best to achieve results, even in the face of adversity.
References
Biloslavo, R. (2005). Use of the knowledge management framework
as a tool for innovation capability audit, International Journal of Innovation and
Learning, 2 (4), 402–424.
Divakaran, A., Mani, M. & Post, L. (2012). Building a global
pipeline: Finding, developing, and retaining tomorrow’s
manufacturingworkforce,
Booz&Company, availableat: Http: // booz. Com/global/home/what_we_think/reports_and_white
_papers/ic-display/50643956.
Edmondson, A. (2011). Strategies for learning from failure, Harvard
Business Review, 89 (4), 48–55.
Edmondson, A. & Cannon, M. (2004). Failing to learn and learning
to fail (intelligently): How great organizations put failure to work to improve
and innovate, Harvard Business School Working Papers, available at: Hbswk. Hbs.
Edu/item/5434. Html.
Hackman, R. J. (2011). Collaborative intelligence: Using teams
to solve hard problems, San Francisco, CA: Berret-Koehler Publishers.
Kinicki, A., & Williams, B. K. (2011). Management: A practical
introduction (5th edition.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin, Inc.
Levin, L. (2011). Top teaming: A roadmap for leadership teams,
navigating the now, the new, and the next, Indiana, IN: IUniverse.
Marcus, A. (2011). Management strategy: Achieving sustained competitive
advantage (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin, Inc.
Marquardt, M. (2011). Building the learning organization: Achieving
strategic advantage through a commitment to learning (3rd ed.), Boston, MA: Nicholas
Brealey Publishing.
Schilling, M. A. (2010). Strategic management of technological
innovation (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin, Inc.
Wang, P. (2006). Human resources management plays a new role
in learning organizations, The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, 2
(2), 52-6.
West, G. P., & Bamford, C. E. (2010). Strategy: Sustainable
advantage and performance. Independence, KY: South-Western Cengage Learning.
Yeo, R. (2008). Identifying the competitive sword: Learning to
be cutting-edge for organizational development, Business Strategy Series, 9 (1),
30–36.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét