1.1 Background
rganizations in our time face an increasingly competitive and rapidly changing environment. In an age of lean organizations, success depends on continually improving performance by reducing costs, improving current products or creating new products and processes, enhancing quality and productivity, and increasing speed to market. As such, all aspects of the organization must demonstrate their ability to meet targets and aspire on high performance (Luthans and Sommer, 1999; 2005). The more complex solutions we develop, the more central high performing teams are to our success going forward.
Research has long shown that when organizations focus on building effective teams, those organizations will reap significant rewards or returns on their investment. Such rewards apply not only to the individual work teams, but also to the organization as a whole. Procter and Burridge (2008) says that redesign of an organization along team-based lines can involve rationalization of the production process. Related operations are grouped together, thus allowing more efficient process flows and a reduction in product or information handling. The implementation of teamwork simplifies the organizational structure and reduces the need for coordination. Decentralizing decision making to self-directed teams can thus reduce the number of supervisors and middle managers (Ichniowski et al. 1996). Delarue, Cappelli and Neumark (2001) concluded in their research that high-performance teams tend to raise productivity. Manz and Sims (1980) argues that there are great benefits to self-directed teams and a self-leadership focus, hands-on decision making, and individual choices. As these are important motivating factors, and these will lead to employees who strive for greater efficiency and effectiveness (Manz and Sims 1980; Sims, 1996). Schneider Electric, switched to self-directed teams and found that overtime on machines dropped with 70 percent. Productivity increased because the setup-operators themselves were able to manipulate the work in much more effective ways than a supervisor could order. In 2001, clothing retailer Chico’s Retailer Services Inc. was looking to grow its business. The company hired a new president, two years later revenues had almost doubled. By 2006, Chico’s had nine years of ‘double-digit same-store’ sales growth. The new president created a horizontal organization with high-performance teams that were empowered with decision making ability and accountability for results (University of Minnesota, 2017).
Scarnati (2001) finds support in his research that within team work there is a synergy, and it is a process of interaction, where 2 plus 2 equals 10. It has a magnifying effect of each component.
Team work makes sense and does have practical application. Scarnati exemplifies team work benefits with the work of a surgical team before, during and after a surgery. He says, “each
O
team member specializes in providing the chief surgeon with the facts and the data necessary to make decisions. Prior to surgery, collaboration among the team is sought and different views or alternatives are examined”. He continues, “however, once the operation has begun, the chief surgeon is the master, and all supporting efforts focus on the patient's (customer's) needs. The anesthetist co-ordinates closely with the surgeon, while the operating room nurses and technicians ensure that proper procedures are followed.” Scarnati (2001) argues that only a well-coordinated team can fulfill the requirements of a complex task. Teamwork is critical for any large organization. Leaders should not only find the right people for the right role, they must also ensure that the right people are working together most effectively. By understanding how teams function and how individuals may work together on tasks, leaders can optimize their teams and how they work within their organization. The use of teams involves a shift in focus from individual methods of performing work to team methods. The rationale for making this shift has previously been described as resulting from "the proposition that a team can more effectively allocate its resources when and where required to deal with its total variance in work conditions, than can an aggregate of individuals each of whom is assigned part of the variance"
(Susman, 1976). By understanding the behavioral distance, i.e. the difference in how we behave towards each other, from one another, covering both current and future team members, leaders may take more accurate decisions about establishing and managing teams (University of Minnesota, 2017). Leaders can contribute to the strengthening of organizational cultures by identifying key attitudes and values and ensuring that team members are aligned around these attitudes and values. Minimizing the behavioral distance within a team, can potentially drive synergy, improve retention, reduce conflict, and contribute to organizational success (University of Minnesota, 2017). Achieving a positive synergy among individuals, making the whole greater than the sum of its parts, is often seen as a complex task for organizations.
Achieving such synergy in a business is so much more than work processes and strategies, it’s about people working well together. According to University of Minnesota (2017) leaders spend 18 to 26 percent of their time dealing with conflict within teams that does not perform at its highest. If these leaders did not have to spend as much time acting as mediators, they would be able to focus more time on the strategic essentials of the organization. There is an importance for all companies to strive towards achieving a high-performance culture. The globalization effects, for most companies, today, in doing business on a wider span is increasing. Companies clawing for a market share, and it then becomes even more important than ever to have a high-performance culture, to achieve competitive advantage. With competition from not only local, but global organizations from around the world, these companies need to have something that
differentiates them from their competitors. With easy access to information, companies can easily imitate other successful companies. However, one thing they cannot easily match is a culture based on performance. Most organizations are followers. Their strategy is to simply copy what is successful in their industry. What a successful organization can do to differentiate themselves is how they execute their strategy by developing a strong performance culture with high performing teams to back their strategic initiatives. Leaders need to recognize that the most important part of any strong organizational culture is its people and more importantly how they work together.
1.2 Research question and purpose
The purpose of this study is to examine what leaders do to influence a composition of people, working together as a team, to become high performers, what identical or similar characteristics are lying beneath these high performing teams, and how does the leader behavior impact a high performing team to become high performers? With this as a background, I focus on the different theories on team development and the ability to maximize team development and learning and try to investigate whether the composition of leadership styles in teams affects performance and achievement. The suitable place for study teams is at organizations that are set up with “a team organization” and the experiences and stories from the real world will contribute in giving a multifaceted view of the reality of the leader/team leader.
1.3 Delimitations
Furthermore, this study will only review how different leaders in one region (Norway) work with creating high performing teams, to find similarities or differences. A more comprehensive study could also include gender diversity, country, or regional differences in terms of business culture, and ethnicity differences and/or difference in terms of leadership styles. Sectioning different industries, educational background or technology areas would also have been interesting to find out more about how leaders work with improving team work to produce outstanding results. However, I see the delimitation I have done as necessary to carry out the research with the time interval available.
1.4 Structure of this study
In chapter 2 of this thesis I present an overview of Wheelan, Larson and LaFasto and Katzenbach and Smith’s theories and empirical research. The section covers an overview of research about elements that are seen as necessary to create high performing teams. The research also contains an overview of what is seen as successful leadership behind these high
performing teams, independent of industry or area. In chapter 3 I present the methodology I have used which is a qualitative research with both a mix of an inductive and deductive approach. Chapter 4 contains the analysis of my findings and the results and in chapter 5 I discuss these findings with the help of the theories and the three models I have used as well as associated previous research. I finally conclude in chapter 6.