Team Development - Revision history

Sarantis at 12:47, 4 March 2019

2019-03-04T12:47:59Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:47, 4 March 2019
Line 1:		Line 1:
	''Developed by Sarantis Pavlidis''		''Developed by Sarantis Pavlidis - s172559''

Sarantis: /* Annotated Bibliography */

2019-03-04T12:47:32Z

Annotated Bibliography

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:47, 4 March 2019
Line 135:		Line 135:

	*Patrick Lencioni - The Five Dysfunctions of a Team_ A Leadership Fable (J-B Lencioni Series) -Jossey-Bass (2002)		*Patrick Lencioni - The Five Dysfunctions of a Team_ A Leadership Fable (J-B Lencioni Series) -Jossey-Bass (2002)
			*Overcoming the Five Dysfunctions of a Team_ A Field Guide for Leaders, Managers, and Facilitators -Jossey-Bass (2005)
			*Team Development for High Tech Project Managers (2002)
			*Jon R. Katzenbach, Douglas K. Smith - The Wisdom of Teams_ Creating the High-Performance Organization-Harvard Business Press (1992)
			*J. Richard Hackman - Leading Teams_ Setting the Stage for Great Performances-Harvard Business Review Press (2002)
			*Glenn M. Parker - Team Players and Teamwork, Completely Updated and Revised_ New Strategies for Developing Successful Collaboration-Jossey-Bass (2008)
			*David Sibbet - Visual Teams_ Graphic Tools for Commitment, Innovation, and High Performance -Wiley (2011)
			*Olivier L. de Weck, Daniel Roos, Christopher L. Magee, Charles M. Vest - Engineering Systems_ Meeting Human Needs in a Complex Technological World-The MIT Press (2011)

	==References==		==References==

	<references />		<references />

Sarantis at 12:44, 4 March 2019

2019-03-04T12:44:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:44, 4 March 2019
Line 131:		Line 131:
	*Group meeting: If cooperation and mediation fail, it is the whole group's turn to help with the problem.		*Group meeting: If cooperation and mediation fail, it is the whole group's turn to help with the problem.
	At a meeting where all members are present, an analysis of the situation and the arguments of the two sides is made, while efforts are made to link the problem to the requirements of the business or customers. In such meetings, it is advisable to strictly observe the rules of the team and under the guidance of the Chief to have full feedback from all members on the subject. The leader is generally considered to be primarily responsible for keeping calm within the team and is required to regulate his intervention according to the problem from nothing in negligible circumstances to catalyzing by removing a member from the group, but only in extreme cases.		At a meeting where all members are present, an analysis of the situation and the arguments of the two sides is made, while efforts are made to link the problem to the requirements of the business or customers. In such meetings, it is advisable to strictly observe the rules of the team and under the guidance of the Chief to have full feedback from all members on the subject. The leader is generally considered to be primarily responsible for keeping calm within the team and is required to regulate his intervention according to the problem from nothing in negligible circumstances to catalyzing by removing a member from the group, but only in extreme cases.
			==Annotated Bibliography==


			*Patrick Lencioni - The Five Dysfunctions of a Team_ A Leadership Fable (J-B Lencioni Series) -Jossey-Bass (2002)

	==References==		==References==

	<references />		<references />

Sarantis: /* Managing Conflicts */

2019-03-04T12:38:11Z

Managing Conflicts

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:38, 4 March 2019
Line 127:		Line 127:
	*Ability to rejoin with new alternatives and corresponding arguments in a way that does not offend the rest horses		*Ability to rejoin with new alternatives and corresponding arguments in a way that does not offend the rest horses
	*Ability to resolve differences by analyzing their underlying causes and choosing the most reasonable and acceptable solution Based on Rayeski and Bryant's <ref name="Mairi">Rayeski E. – Bryant J. D., “Team resolution process: A guideline for teams to manage conflict, performance, and discipline” , in M. Beyerlein & M. Bullock (Eds.), The International Conference on Work Teams Proceedings: Anniversary Collection. The Best of 1990 – 1994, Denton: University of North Texas, Center for the Study of Work Teams, 1994</ref> analysis of the escalation of group tensions, three stages can be followed:		*Ability to resolve differences by analyzing their underlying causes and choosing the most reasonable and acceptable solution Based on Rayeski and Bryant's <ref name="Mairi">Rayeski E. – Bryant J. D., “Team resolution process: A guideline for teams to manage conflict, performance, and discipline” , in M. Beyerlein & M. Bullock (Eds.), The International Conference on Work Teams Proceedings: Anniversary Collection. The Best of 1990 – 1994, Denton: University of North Texas, Center for the Study of Work Teams, 1994</ref> analysis of the escalation of group tensions, three stages can be followed:
			*Collaboration: As soon as a problem occurs, efforts should be made to resolve informally among the members concerned, with open, sincere discussion and avoiding excessive reactions.
			*Mediation: If the situation grows, a third person with more experience and ability to handle tensions, such as the animator, is called to mediate to reach agreement between the conflicting sides. The effectiveness of mediation depends to a large extent on the mediator's neutrality and the trust that the two sides have.
			*Group meeting: If cooperation and mediation fail, it is the whole group's turn to help with the problem.
			At a meeting where all members are present, an analysis of the situation and the arguments of the two sides is made, while efforts are made to link the problem to the requirements of the business or customers. In such meetings, it is advisable to strictly observe the rules of the team and under the guidance of the Chief to have full feedback from all members on the subject. The leader is generally considered to be primarily responsible for keeping calm within the team and is required to regulate his intervention according to the problem from nothing in negligible circumstances to catalyzing by removing a member from the group, but only in extreme cases.

	==References==		==References==

	<references />		<references />

Sarantis: /* Conflicts within the Group */

2019-03-04T12:36:34Z

Conflicts within the Group

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:36, 4 March 2019
Line 120:		Line 120:
	Even when the environment is particularly conducive to the functioning of the teams, problems that arise through them are encountered. The collaboration of individuals, each of which has a different personality, ideology, views, experiences and knowledge is the basis of the strengths of the groups but can also create tensions and conflicts between them. Several researchers note two kinds of such conflicts. The first type meets cognitive conflict, task-focused conflict and refers to member disputes that focus on common goals. This kind should be treated with discussion and further analysis rather than being avoided or ignored, because it can prove highly constructive and help increase the effectiveness, quality of decision making, creativity, compassion and team performance <ref name="Kostas"> Amason A. C. – Thompson K. R. – Hochwarter W. A. – Harrison, A. W., 1995, Conflict: An important dimension in successful management teams, Organizational Dynamics</ref> , <ref name="Mitsos"> Capozzoli T. K., Conflict resolution: A key ingredient in successful teams, Supervision, 56(12), 1995 </ref>, <ref name="Vaggos">Amason A. C., Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams, Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 1996 </ref>, <ref name="Kitsos"> Jennsen O. – Van De Vliert E. – Veenstra C., How task and person conflict shape the role of positive interdependence in management teams, Journal of Management, 25(2), 1999 </ref>. The second type meets with the terms affect conflict, relationship conflict, and interpersonal conflict and refers to disagreements arising from personality conflicts or emotional interactions between members, often perceived as personal attacks. Unlike the former, this type is considered to be detrimental because it can lead to increased mistrust, hostility, cynicity and apathy of members, while reducing team cohesion and the likelihood of unanimity <ref name="Vragkas">Amason et al, 1995, ο.π./ Amason, 1996, ο.π. / Eisenhardt K. M.- Kahwajy J. L. - Bourgeois L. J., Conflict and strategic choice: How top management teams disagree, California Management Review, 39(2), 1997 </ref> . Such conflicts must be recognized and reduced through discussion before they are out of control <ref name="Irene"> 19Fisher K. – Rayner S. – Belgard W., Tips for teams : A ready reference for solving common team problems, NY, McGraw-Hill Inc., 1995 </ref>, <ref name="Dimitra">Bens I., “Keeping your teams out of trouble” , Journal of Quality and Participation, 22(4), 1999</ref>.		Even when the environment is particularly conducive to the functioning of the teams, problems that arise through them are encountered. The collaboration of individuals, each of which has a different personality, ideology, views, experiences and knowledge is the basis of the strengths of the groups but can also create tensions and conflicts between them. Several researchers note two kinds of such conflicts. The first type meets cognitive conflict, task-focused conflict and refers to member disputes that focus on common goals. This kind should be treated with discussion and further analysis rather than being avoided or ignored, because it can prove highly constructive and help increase the effectiveness, quality of decision making, creativity, compassion and team performance <ref name="Kostas"> Amason A. C. – Thompson K. R. – Hochwarter W. A. – Harrison, A. W., 1995, Conflict: An important dimension in successful management teams, Organizational Dynamics</ref> , <ref name="Mitsos"> Capozzoli T. K., Conflict resolution: A key ingredient in successful teams, Supervision, 56(12), 1995 </ref>, <ref name="Vaggos">Amason A. C., Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams, Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 1996 </ref>, <ref name="Kitsos"> Jennsen O. – Van De Vliert E. – Veenstra C., How task and person conflict shape the role of positive interdependence in management teams, Journal of Management, 25(2), 1999 </ref>. The second type meets with the terms affect conflict, relationship conflict, and interpersonal conflict and refers to disagreements arising from personality conflicts or emotional interactions between members, often perceived as personal attacks. Unlike the former, this type is considered to be detrimental because it can lead to increased mistrust, hostility, cynicity and apathy of members, while reducing team cohesion and the likelihood of unanimity <ref name="Vragkas">Amason et al, 1995, ο.π./ Amason, 1996, ο.π. / Eisenhardt K. M.- Kahwajy J. L. - Bourgeois L. J., Conflict and strategic choice: How top management teams disagree, California Management Review, 39(2), 1997 </ref> . Such conflicts must be recognized and reduced through discussion before they are out of control <ref name="Irene"> 19Fisher K. – Rayner S. – Belgard W., Tips for teams : A ready reference for solving common team problems, NY, McGraw-Hill Inc., 1995 </ref>, <ref name="Dimitra">Bens I., “Keeping your teams out of trouble” , Journal of Quality and Participation, 22(4), 1999</ref>.
	Conflicts are often caused by individuals incompatible with mavericks. These people are only interested in themselves and not for the team, and they are not cooperating and helping the other members <ref name="Zisis"> Summers L. – Rosen B., 1994, Mavericks ride again, Training and Development </ref>. Negative behavior can be the result of fear (for example, from executives who consider groups threatening their position) or refusal to take up further duties, so appropriate training of attitude change and encouraging treatment with comprehension and pressure is needed. But if it is due to a problematic personality with hardships and vices, it is advisable for the individual to move away from the function of groups and to deal individually with the subject of his / her specialty.		Conflicts are often caused by individuals incompatible with mavericks. These people are only interested in themselves and not for the team, and they are not cooperating and helping the other members <ref name="Zisis"> Summers L. – Rosen B., 1994, Mavericks ride again, Training and Development </ref>. Negative behavior can be the result of fear (for example, from executives who consider groups threatening their position) or refusal to take up further duties, so appropriate training of attitude change and encouraging treatment with comprehension and pressure is needed. But if it is due to a problematic personality with hardships and vices, it is advisable for the individual to move away from the function of groups and to deal individually with the subject of his / her specialty.

			===Managing Conflicts===
			Conflict Keys to confront the internal conflicts of groups is prevention and training. Disagreements over regulatory, organizational and operational issues can be avoided or solved directly with appropriate preparation and briefing of members from their first gathering. But in order to smooth out any conflict, they need interpersonal skills - skills taught, developed and improved through ongoing training and teamwork.Weiss <ref name="Atsalos"> Weiss D. H., 1997, “Four steps for managing team storms” , Getting Results For the Hands-On Manager</ref> mentions four abilities that group members must have to be able to disagree without hindering the smooth operation of the team:
			*Ability to listen to their interlocutors by concentrating their attention in addition to so-called elements such as gestures, body postures, voice tones giving extra information
			*Ability to understand the position and feelings of others (understanding does not necessarily mean agreement, but perception of the different view of the argumentation and avoiding misinterpretations and misunderstandings)
			*Ability to rejoin with new alternatives and corresponding arguments in a way that does not offend the rest horses
			*Ability to resolve differences by analyzing their underlying causes and choosing the most reasonable and acceptable solution Based on Rayeski and Bryant's <ref name="Mairi">Rayeski E. – Bryant J. D., “Team resolution process: A guideline for teams to manage conflict, performance, and discipline” , in M. Beyerlein & M. Bullock (Eds.), The International Conference on Work Teams Proceedings: Anniversary Collection. The Best of 1990 – 1994, Denton: University of North Texas, Center for the Study of Work Teams, 1994</ref> analysis of the escalation of group tensions, three stages can be followed:

	==References==		==References==

	<references />		<references />

Sarantis: /* Conflicts within the Group */

2019-03-04T12:30:08Z

Conflicts within the Group

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:30, 4 March 2019
Line 119:		Line 119:
	===Conflicts within the Group===		===Conflicts within the Group===
	Even when the environment is particularly conducive to the functioning of the teams, problems that arise through them are encountered. The collaboration of individuals, each of which has a different personality, ideology, views, experiences and knowledge is the basis of the strengths of the groups but can also create tensions and conflicts between them. Several researchers note two kinds of such conflicts. The first type meets cognitive conflict, task-focused conflict and refers to member disputes that focus on common goals. This kind should be treated with discussion and further analysis rather than being avoided or ignored, because it can prove highly constructive and help increase the effectiveness, quality of decision making, creativity, compassion and team performance <ref name="Kostas"> Amason A. C. – Thompson K. R. – Hochwarter W. A. – Harrison, A. W., 1995, Conflict: An important dimension in successful management teams, Organizational Dynamics</ref> , <ref name="Mitsos"> Capozzoli T. K., Conflict resolution: A key ingredient in successful teams, Supervision, 56(12), 1995 </ref>, <ref name="Vaggos">Amason A. C., Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams, Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 1996 </ref>, <ref name="Kitsos"> Jennsen O. – Van De Vliert E. – Veenstra C., How task and person conflict shape the role of positive interdependence in management teams, Journal of Management, 25(2), 1999 </ref>. The second type meets with the terms affect conflict, relationship conflict, and interpersonal conflict and refers to disagreements arising from personality conflicts or emotional interactions between members, often perceived as personal attacks. Unlike the former, this type is considered to be detrimental because it can lead to increased mistrust, hostility, cynicity and apathy of members, while reducing team cohesion and the likelihood of unanimity <ref name="Vragkas">Amason et al, 1995, ο.π./ Amason, 1996, ο.π. / Eisenhardt K. M.- Kahwajy J. L. - Bourgeois L. J., Conflict and strategic choice: How top management teams disagree, California Management Review, 39(2), 1997 </ref> . Such conflicts must be recognized and reduced through discussion before they are out of control <ref name="Irene"> 19Fisher K. – Rayner S. – Belgard W., Tips for teams : A ready reference for solving common team problems, NY, McGraw-Hill Inc., 1995 </ref>, <ref name="Dimitra">Bens I., “Keeping your teams out of trouble” , Journal of Quality and Participation, 22(4), 1999</ref>.		Even when the environment is particularly conducive to the functioning of the teams, problems that arise through them are encountered. The collaboration of individuals, each of which has a different personality, ideology, views, experiences and knowledge is the basis of the strengths of the groups but can also create tensions and conflicts between them. Several researchers note two kinds of such conflicts. The first type meets cognitive conflict, task-focused conflict and refers to member disputes that focus on common goals. This kind should be treated with discussion and further analysis rather than being avoided or ignored, because it can prove highly constructive and help increase the effectiveness, quality of decision making, creativity, compassion and team performance <ref name="Kostas"> Amason A. C. – Thompson K. R. – Hochwarter W. A. – Harrison, A. W., 1995, Conflict: An important dimension in successful management teams, Organizational Dynamics</ref> , <ref name="Mitsos"> Capozzoli T. K., Conflict resolution: A key ingredient in successful teams, Supervision, 56(12), 1995 </ref>, <ref name="Vaggos">Amason A. C., Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams, Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 1996 </ref>, <ref name="Kitsos"> Jennsen O. – Van De Vliert E. – Veenstra C., How task and person conflict shape the role of positive interdependence in management teams, Journal of Management, 25(2), 1999 </ref>. The second type meets with the terms affect conflict, relationship conflict, and interpersonal conflict and refers to disagreements arising from personality conflicts or emotional interactions between members, often perceived as personal attacks. Unlike the former, this type is considered to be detrimental because it can lead to increased mistrust, hostility, cynicity and apathy of members, while reducing team cohesion and the likelihood of unanimity <ref name="Vragkas">Amason et al, 1995, ο.π./ Amason, 1996, ο.π. / Eisenhardt K. M.- Kahwajy J. L. - Bourgeois L. J., Conflict and strategic choice: How top management teams disagree, California Management Review, 39(2), 1997 </ref> . Such conflicts must be recognized and reduced through discussion before they are out of control <ref name="Irene"> 19Fisher K. – Rayner S. – Belgard W., Tips for teams : A ready reference for solving common team problems, NY, McGraw-Hill Inc., 1995 </ref>, <ref name="Dimitra">Bens I., “Keeping your teams out of trouble” , Journal of Quality and Participation, 22(4), 1999</ref>.
	Conflicts are often caused by individuals incompatible with mavericks.		Conflicts are often caused by individuals incompatible with mavericks. These people are only interested in themselves and not for the team, and they are not cooperating and helping the other members <ref name="Zisis"> Summers L. – Rosen B., 1994, Mavericks ride again, Training and Development </ref>. Negative behavior can be the result of fear (for example, from executives who consider groups threatening their position) or refusal to take up further duties, so appropriate training of attitude change and encouraging treatment with comprehension and pressure is needed. But if it is due to a problematic personality with hardships and vices, it is advisable for the individual to move away from the function of groups and to deal individually with the subject of his / her specialty.

	==References==		==References==

	<references />		<references />

Sarantis: /* Conflicts within the Group */

2019-03-04T12:23:24Z

Conflicts within the Group

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:23, 4 March 2019
Line 118:		Line 118:

	===Conflicts within the Group===		===Conflicts within the Group===
	Even when the environment is particularly conducive to the functioning of the teams, problems that arise through them are encountered. The collaboration of individuals, each of which has a different personality, ideology, views, experiences and knowledge is the basis of the strengths of the groups but can also create tensions and conflicts between them. Several researchers note two kinds of such conflicts. The first type meets cognitive conflict, task-focused conflict and refers to member disputes that focus on common goals. This kind should be treated with discussion and further analysis rather than being avoided or ignored, because it can prove highly constructive and help increase the effectiveness, quality of decision making, creativity, compassion and team performance <ref name="Kostas"> Amason A. C. – Thompson K. R. – Hochwarter W. A. – Harrison, A. W., 1995, Conflict: An important dimension in successful management teams, Organizational Dynamics</ref> , <ref name="Mitsos"> Capozzoli T. K., Conflict resolution: A key ingredient in successful teams, Supervision, 56(12), 1995 </ref>, ref name="Vaggos">Amason A. C., Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams, Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 1996 </ref>, <ref name="Kitsos"> Jennsen O. – Van De Vliert E. – Veenstra C., How task and person conflict shape the role of positive interdependence in management teams, Journal of Management, 25(2), 1999 </ref>. The second type meets with the terms affect conflict, relationship conflict, and interpersonal conflict and refers to disagreements arising from personality conflicts or emotional interactions between members, often perceived as personal attacks. Unlike the former, this type is considered to be detrimental because it can lead to increased mistrust, hostility, cynicity and apathy of members, while reducing team cohesion and the likelihood of unanimity <ref name="Vragkas">Amason et al, 1995, ο.π./ Amason, 1996, ο.π. / Eisenhardt K. M.- Kahwajy J. L. - Bourgeois L. J., Conflict and strategic choice: How top management teams disagree, California Management Review, 39(2), 1997 </ref> . Such conflicts must be recognized and reduced through discussion before they are out of control ref name="Irene"> 19Fisher K. – Rayner S. – Belgard W., Tips for teams : A ready reference for solving common team problems, NY, McGraw-Hill Inc., 1995 </ref>, <ref name="Dimitra">Bens I., “Keeping your teams out of trouble” , Journal of Quality and Participation, 22(4), 1999</ref>.		Even when the environment is particularly conducive to the functioning of the teams, problems that arise through them are encountered. The collaboration of individuals, each of which has a different personality, ideology, views, experiences and knowledge is the basis of the strengths of the groups but can also create tensions and conflicts between them. Several researchers note two kinds of such conflicts. The first type meets cognitive conflict, task-focused conflict and refers to member disputes that focus on common goals. This kind should be treated with discussion and further analysis rather than being avoided or ignored, because it can prove highly constructive and help increase the effectiveness, quality of decision making, creativity, compassion and team performance <ref name="Kostas"> Amason A. C. – Thompson K. R. – Hochwarter W. A. – Harrison, A. W., 1995, Conflict: An important dimension in successful management teams, Organizational Dynamics</ref> , <ref name="Mitsos"> Capozzoli T. K., Conflict resolution: A key ingredient in successful teams, Supervision, 56(12), 1995 </ref>, <ref name="Vaggos">Amason A. C., Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams, Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 1996 </ref>, <ref name="Kitsos"> Jennsen O. – Van De Vliert E. – Veenstra C., How task and person conflict shape the role of positive interdependence in management teams, Journal of Management, 25(2), 1999 </ref>. The second type meets with the terms affect conflict, relationship conflict, and interpersonal conflict and refers to disagreements arising from personality conflicts or emotional interactions between members, often perceived as personal attacks. Unlike the former, this type is considered to be detrimental because it can lead to increased mistrust, hostility, cynicity and apathy of members, while reducing team cohesion and the likelihood of unanimity <ref name="Vragkas">Amason et al, 1995, ο.π./ Amason, 1996, ο.π. / Eisenhardt K. M.- Kahwajy J. L. - Bourgeois L. J., Conflict and strategic choice: How top management teams disagree, California Management Review, 39(2), 1997 </ref> . Such conflicts must be recognized and reduced through discussion before they are out of control <ref name="Irene"> 19Fisher K. – Rayner S. – Belgard W., Tips for teams : A ready reference for solving common team problems, NY, McGraw-Hill Inc., 1995 </ref>, <ref name="Dimitra">Bens I., “Keeping your teams out of trouble” , Journal of Quality and Participation, 22(4), 1999</ref>.
	Conflicts are often caused by individuals incompatible with mavericks.		Conflicts are often caused by individuals incompatible with mavericks.

Sarantis: /* Conflicts within the Group */

2019-03-04T12:19:40Z

Conflicts within the Group

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:19, 4 March 2019
Line 118:		Line 118:

	===Conflicts within the Group===		===Conflicts within the Group===
	Even when the environment is particularly conducive to the functioning of the teams, problems that arise through them are encountered. The collaboration of individuals, each of which has a different personality, ideology, views, experiences and knowledge is the basis of the strengths of the groups but can also create tensions and conflicts between them. Several researchers note two kinds of such conflicts. The first type meets cognitive conflict, task-focused conflict and refers to member disputes that focus on common goals. This kind should be treated with discussion and further analysis rather than being avoided or ignored, because it can prove highly constructive and help increase the effectiveness, quality of decision making, creativity, compassion and team performance <ref name="Kostas"> Amason A. C. – Thompson K. R. – Hochwarter W. A. – Harrison, A. W., 1995, Conflict: An important dimension in successful management teams, Organizational Dynamics</ref> , <ref name="Mitsos"> Capozzoli T. K., Conflict resolution: A key ingredient in successful teams, Supervision, 56(12), 1995 </ref>, ref name="Vaggos">Amason A. C., Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams, Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 1996 </ref>, <ref name="Kitsos"> Jennsen O. – Van De Vliert E. – Veenstra C., How task and person conflict shape the role of positive interdependence in management teams, Journal of Management, 25(2), 1999 </ref>. The second type meets with the terms affect conflict, relationship conflict, and interpersonal conflict and refers to disagreements arising from personality conflicts or emotional interactions between members, often perceived as personal attacks. Unlike the former, this type is considered to be detrimental because it can lead to increased mistrust, hostility, cynicity and apathy of members, while reducing team cohesion and the likelihood of unanimity <ref name="Vragkas">Amason et al, 1995, ο.π./ Amason, 1996, ο.π. / Eisenhardt K. M.- Kahwajy J. L. - Bourgeois L. J., Conflict and strategic choice: How top management teams disagree, California Management Review, 39(2), 1997 </ref> . Such conflicts must be recognized and reduced through discussion before they are out of control.		Even when the environment is particularly conducive to the functioning of the teams, problems that arise through them are encountered. The collaboration of individuals, each of which has a different personality, ideology, views, experiences and knowledge is the basis of the strengths of the groups but can also create tensions and conflicts between them. Several researchers note two kinds of such conflicts. The first type meets cognitive conflict, task-focused conflict and refers to member disputes that focus on common goals. This kind should be treated with discussion and further analysis rather than being avoided or ignored, because it can prove highly constructive and help increase the effectiveness, quality of decision making, creativity, compassion and team performance <ref name="Kostas"> Amason A. C. – Thompson K. R. – Hochwarter W. A. – Harrison, A. W., 1995, Conflict: An important dimension in successful management teams, Organizational Dynamics</ref> , <ref name="Mitsos"> Capozzoli T. K., Conflict resolution: A key ingredient in successful teams, Supervision, 56(12), 1995 </ref>, ref name="Vaggos">Amason A. C., Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams, Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 1996 </ref>, <ref name="Kitsos"> Jennsen O. – Van De Vliert E. – Veenstra C., How task and person conflict shape the role of positive interdependence in management teams, Journal of Management, 25(2), 1999 </ref>. The second type meets with the terms affect conflict, relationship conflict, and interpersonal conflict and refers to disagreements arising from personality conflicts or emotional interactions between members, often perceived as personal attacks. Unlike the former, this type is considered to be detrimental because it can lead to increased mistrust, hostility, cynicity and apathy of members, while reducing team cohesion and the likelihood of unanimity <ref name="Vragkas">Amason et al, 1995, ο.π./ Amason, 1996, ο.π. / Eisenhardt K. M.- Kahwajy J. L. - Bourgeois L. J., Conflict and strategic choice: How top management teams disagree, California Management Review, 39(2), 1997 </ref> . Such conflicts must be recognized and reduced through discussion before they are out of control ref name="Irene"> 19Fisher K. – Rayner S. – Belgard W., Tips for teams : A ready reference for solving common team problems, NY, McGraw-Hill Inc., 1995 </ref>, <ref name="Dimitra">Bens I., “Keeping your teams out of trouble” , Journal of Quality and Participation, 22(4), 1999</ref>.
			Conflicts are often caused by individuals incompatible with mavericks.

	==References==		==References==

	<references />		<references />

Sarantis: /* Conflicts within the Group */

2019-03-04T12:15:19Z

Conflicts within the Group

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:15, 4 March 2019
Line 118:		Line 118:

	===Conflicts within the Group===		===Conflicts within the Group===
	Even when the environment is particularly conducive to the functioning of the teams, problems that arise through them are encountered. The collaboration of individuals, each of which has a different personality, ideology, views, experiences and knowledge is the basis of the strengths of the groups but can also create tensions and conflicts between them. Several researchers note two kinds of such conflicts. The first type meets cognitive conflict, task-focused conflict and refers to member disputes that focus on common goals. This kind should be treated with discussion and further analysis rather than being avoided or ignored, because it can prove highly constructive and help increase the effectiveness, quality of decision making, creativity, compassion and team performance <ref name="Kostas"> Amason A. C. – Thompson K. R. – Hochwarter W. A. – Harrison, A. W., 1995, Conflict: An important dimension in successful management teams, Organizational Dynamics</ref> , <ref name="Mitsos"> Capozzoli T. K., Conflict resolution: A key ingredient in successful teams, Supervision, 56(12), 1995 </ref>, ref name="Vaggos">Amason A. C., Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams, Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 1996 </ref>, <ref name="Kitsos"> Jennsen O. – Van De Vliert E. – Veenstra C., How task and person conflict shape the role of positive interdependence in management teams, Journal of Management, 25(2), 1999 </ref>.		Even when the environment is particularly conducive to the functioning of the teams, problems that arise through them are encountered. The collaboration of individuals, each of which has a different personality, ideology, views, experiences and knowledge is the basis of the strengths of the groups but can also create tensions and conflicts between them. Several researchers note two kinds of such conflicts. The first type meets cognitive conflict, task-focused conflict and refers to member disputes that focus on common goals. This kind should be treated with discussion and further analysis rather than being avoided or ignored, because it can prove highly constructive and help increase the effectiveness, quality of decision making, creativity, compassion and team performance <ref name="Kostas"> Amason A. C. – Thompson K. R. – Hochwarter W. A. – Harrison, A. W., 1995, Conflict: An important dimension in successful management teams, Organizational Dynamics</ref> , <ref name="Mitsos"> Capozzoli T. K., Conflict resolution: A key ingredient in successful teams, Supervision, 56(12), 1995 </ref>, ref name="Vaggos">Amason A. C., Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams, Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 1996 </ref>, <ref name="Kitsos"> Jennsen O. – Van De Vliert E. – Veenstra C., How task and person conflict shape the role of positive interdependence in management teams, Journal of Management, 25(2), 1999 </ref>. The second type meets with the terms affect conflict, relationship conflict, and interpersonal conflict and refers to disagreements arising from personality conflicts or emotional interactions between members, often perceived as personal attacks. Unlike the former, this type is considered to be detrimental because it can lead to increased mistrust, hostility, cynicity and apathy of members, while reducing team cohesion and the likelihood of unanimity <ref name="Vragkas">Amason et al, 1995, ο.π./ Amason, 1996, ο.π. / Eisenhardt K. M.- Kahwajy J. L. - Bourgeois L. J., Conflict and strategic choice: How top management teams disagree, California Management Review, 39(2), 1997 </ref> . Such conflicts must be recognized and reduced through discussion before they are out of control.

	==References==		==References==

	<references />		<references />

Sarantis: /* Problematic Operational conditions */

2019-03-04T12:10:18Z

Problematic Operational conditions

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:10, 4 March 2019
Line 116:		Line 116:
	===Problematic Operational conditions===		===Problematic Operational conditions===
	Despite the fact that the development and use of working teams has led to impressive results for many companies in various industries, the transition from traditional operating structures to group-based structures is often characterized by problems due to operational conditions. The most common problems of the groups are related to the company's existing structure and hierarchy. The steady form of jobs and responsibilities, strict job descriptions, and the graduation of employees at hierarchy levels based on non-performance and productivity criteria are in contrast to flexibility, increasing obligations but also the rights of the groups. The inhibitory element is also to maintain the old forms of management systems (eg evaluation and remuneration) after team building because it minimizes the motivation of the group members and creates the impression that the teams are not important for the business. Also, another problem, which is often associated with the above-mentioned circumstances, is the indifference and the lack of support for the work of the teams by the senior administration. There are executives who feel that their position is threatened by the changes brought by teams, while others, due to lack of knowledge and experience, can not recognize the ability of the teams to contribute to the progress of the business. The result is particularly negative: the competencies of the teams are limited, the participation of the administration in their activities is minimal and their development efforts are constantly hampered. In terms of administration, it is also also often very impatient and interested only in the short-term results of the groups, which favors the superficial treatment of things and the reduction of long-term improvement efforts by their members. Incomplete training is one of the most common reasons for the failure of the teams <ref name="Nikos"> Harrington Mackin, D., 1994, The Team Building Tool Kit, American Management Association, New York, NY </ref>. The skills and competencies required for the harmonious and effective co-operation of their members are only acquired through continuous training and practice. Running people with tools and strategies that they have not understood and assimilated can lead the team to making mistakes. The lack of appropriate training is also due to a number of problems related to the misguided organization and lack of planning of the group's activities, such as the absence of clear objectives and rules, the allocation of responsibilities depending only on the position of individuals in the company hierarchy, ineffective meetings etc. Several times the group members have not enough time to deal with activities of the teams, as the group's tasks are simply added to their daily program, without providing for a corresponding reduction in their remaining responsibilities. Although the problem is due to incorrect programming, most of the time the underlying causes of the problem are traced to the traditional structure that emphasizes individual tasks and management's reluctance to support the creation of working groups alongside the existing business.		Despite the fact that the development and use of working teams has led to impressive results for many companies in various industries, the transition from traditional operating structures to group-based structures is often characterized by problems due to operational conditions. The most common problems of the groups are related to the company's existing structure and hierarchy. The steady form of jobs and responsibilities, strict job descriptions, and the graduation of employees at hierarchy levels based on non-performance and productivity criteria are in contrast to flexibility, increasing obligations but also the rights of the groups. The inhibitory element is also to maintain the old forms of management systems (eg evaluation and remuneration) after team building because it minimizes the motivation of the group members and creates the impression that the teams are not important for the business. Also, another problem, which is often associated with the above-mentioned circumstances, is the indifference and the lack of support for the work of the teams by the senior administration. There are executives who feel that their position is threatened by the changes brought by teams, while others, due to lack of knowledge and experience, can not recognize the ability of the teams to contribute to the progress of the business. The result is particularly negative: the competencies of the teams are limited, the participation of the administration in their activities is minimal and their development efforts are constantly hampered. In terms of administration, it is also also often very impatient and interested only in the short-term results of the groups, which favors the superficial treatment of things and the reduction of long-term improvement efforts by their members. Incomplete training is one of the most common reasons for the failure of the teams <ref name="Nikos"> Harrington Mackin, D., 1994, The Team Building Tool Kit, American Management Association, New York, NY </ref>. The skills and competencies required for the harmonious and effective co-operation of their members are only acquired through continuous training and practice. Running people with tools and strategies that they have not understood and assimilated can lead the team to making mistakes. The lack of appropriate training is also due to a number of problems related to the misguided organization and lack of planning of the group's activities, such as the absence of clear objectives and rules, the allocation of responsibilities depending only on the position of individuals in the company hierarchy, ineffective meetings etc. Several times the group members have not enough time to deal with activities of the teams, as the group's tasks are simply added to their daily program, without providing for a corresponding reduction in their remaining responsibilities. Although the problem is due to incorrect programming, most of the time the underlying causes of the problem are traced to the traditional structure that emphasizes individual tasks and management's reluctance to support the creation of working groups alongside the existing business.

			===Conflicts within the Group===
			Even when the environment is particularly conducive to the functioning of the teams, problems that arise through them are encountered. The collaboration of individuals, each of which has a different personality, ideology, views, experiences and knowledge is the basis of the strengths of the groups but can also create tensions and conflicts between them. Several researchers note two kinds of such conflicts. The first type meets cognitive conflict, task-focused conflict and refers to member disputes that focus on common goals. This kind should be treated with discussion and further analysis rather than being avoided or ignored, because it can prove highly constructive and help increase the effectiveness, quality of decision making, creativity, compassion and team performance <ref name="Kostas"> Amason A. C. – Thompson K. R. – Hochwarter W. A. – Harrison, A. W., 1995, Conflict: An important dimension in successful management teams, Organizational Dynamics</ref> , <ref name="Mitsos"> Capozzoli T. K., Conflict resolution: A key ingredient in successful teams, Supervision, 56(12), 1995 </ref>, ref name="Vaggos">Amason A. C., Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams, Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 1996 </ref>, <ref name="Kitsos"> Jennsen O. – Van De Vliert E. – Veenstra C., How task and person conflict shape the role of positive interdependence in management teams, Journal of Management, 25(2), 1999 </ref>.

	==References==		==References==

	<references />		<references />