Executive Summary

In today’s workplace, most workers, as discussed by McCauley and Fick-Cooper (2020) are focused on accomplishing goals as individuals, and not as members of workplace teams. Teamwork at the workplace remains an integral factor in achieving success. This research paper will focus on the impacts of teamwork, on the general outcomes of an organization, with emphasis on employee performance. There are various factors associated with a positive intake of teamwork, such as motivation and apt leadership in workplaces (Blanchard, 2018). This paper will, therefore, analyze the factors that affect teamwork and translate the impact of teamwork on organizations’ achievement of their goals, missions, and objectives. Some variables, which will be cross-assessed, are leadership structures, evaluation of performance, and workers’ performance in the modern workplace.

Teamwork, as the collective effort of individuals to deliver a specific outcome, deviates from individuals working as single entities, as it focuses on delivering results from the cumulative efforts of all members. The 21st-century organization has developed various strategies to heighten productivity, appreciate employees, and evolve the workplace into a hub for creativity. There are two broad categories of teams in organizations. The first category involves functional teams, which exist despite being less visible in organizations. For instance, finance and marketing departments are functional teams whose activities affect the firms but cannot be easily noted to be teams. The second category comprises project teams, which are more definite and established to pursue specific objectives over a set period. Teamwork is requisite in the delivery of projects since projects in firms are founded on the three-constraint model—that is, scope, schedule, and costs—in which one variable affects the others (Klanšek, 2019). This paper will focus on the impact of teamwork on an organization’s project outcomes, emphasizing employee performance.

How Projects are Evaluated in the Modern Workplace

To understand how project teams operate in an organization, it is first crucial to be aware of the results of projects. Understanding the measures used in evaluating projects will educate the research users on the essence of teamwork. The first measure of a projects’ success is schedule. As defined by Larsen, Shen, Lindhard, and Brunoe (2016), the schedule is the predetermined time for the completion of a project. Organizations often start projects with specific targets. For instance, a tours and recreational travel company could initiate a project before a festival season. The team would be expected to have gone through the critical phases to the actualization of the project in a specific timeframe, a failure to which the firm could be unsuccessful in achieving its targets. Second, projects are evaluated on the basis of quality, which refers to whether the set expectations were achieved and how well the completed project will affect the company’s revenues, production capacity, or other expectations (Baykasoğlu et al., 2020). Third, projects are assessed on costs. At the start of a project, a firm estimates the costs that are likely to be incurred across the phases toward project actualization. Successful projects either depict falling below the costs estimated or showing insignificant deviations, with a high matched value of the quality expected (Steinmo & Rasmussen, 2016). The fourth measure of project success is stakeholder satisfaction. Numerous stakeholders, such as project sponsors, employees, and support industries, are involved in the actualization of any process. For that reason, it is vital that a project optimally addresses all stakeholders’ needs for it to be deemed successful. As is the case, successful teams are likely to cooperate on the four parameters indicated and deliver desired outcomes.

Role of Leadership Structures in Affecting Project Teams’ Performance

Choi, Chatfield, and Chatfield (2018) observed that the leadership structure in any organization is a central point in determining how operations run. Leadership structures are definitive, as they influence aspects, such as organizational culture, employee perceptions, and stakeholder engagement (Calabrò, Minichilli, Amore, & Brogi, 2018). Some leadership structures are more supportive of teamwork. For instance, participative and transformational leadership, as discussed by Hoch, Bommer, Dulebohn, and Wu (2018), are the commanding leadership structures in enabling teamwork. Laissez-faire Leadership inspires confidence in employees, as it supports the leadership style in cases where leadership is minimally involved in teams or employee activities (Wong & Giessner, 2018). While the three leadership structures foster teamwork and performance among employees, others, such as autocratic and dictatorial leadership structures, limit teams’ operability adversely, as they isolate the scope of teamwork.

Parameters of Team Operations and Performance

Parameters of team operations and performance are the various factors associated with how team players’ efficiency can be affected, either positively or negatively (Sangeetha & Kumaran, 2018). Team trust, as the first parameter, refers to cohesion among team members. As Breuer, Hüffmeier, and Hertel (2016) showed, team members, are easily influenced by what other members do or say within the scope of the project. Team trust is vitally important, as its presence makes the team members cooperative and renders the project’s delivery easily achievable. The absence of team trust may affect the delivery of a project adversely. Team trust is majorly derailed by factors such as individual animosity between team members and the loss of focus on the project’s outcome. The second parameter is organizational goals and culture integration, which relates to how organizational culture affects the delivery of a project. For instance, some firms have autocratic leadership, which makes it hard for teams to gain independence and subsequently deliver on their mandate as expected. However, some organizations render appropriate top management support to the project teams, which significantly makes projects successful (Lee, 2009). The vice versa is also true.

The third parameter relates to recognition and rewards. The parameter relates to whether it associates members with their teams’ success in projects assigned as either as individuals or teams (Blanchard, 2018). For instance, teams could evaluate if they are preferred to take on future projects of the same status as those they could have achieved earlier. When teams are assigned projects that resonate with their earlier delivered projects, they are likely to feel appreciated compared to situations where similar projects are assigned to other teams. Rewards are also crucial in boosting performance among project teams. Herhausen, De Luca, and Weibel (2018), in their study, illustrated how employees among firms perceive rewards. The researchers noted that employees are more likely to adopt practices that adhere to optimal output when they are expectant of rewards. The interaction between the recognition of success versus actions on failures is also a crucial part of understanding how organizations affect teamwork. In that regard, project delivery teams are likely to focus on the management’s approach to varied project outputs. As is typical of most projects, some delays, inconsistencies, and errors could occur across various phases. Whether the management only takes credit for successes and teams are blamed for any failures is, therefore, a defining parameter that could affect how employees approach projects in organizations (McCauley & Fick-Cooper, 2020).

Effects of Teamwork on Employee Performance

When employed in projects, teamwork boosts productivity among the employees. Blanchard (2018) pointed out that effective teamwork is essential in increasing productivity among employees. There are several factors noted in boosting productivity in teams, therefore, the team leaders or management ought to have measures in place and avoid limiting the intrusion of undesired characteristics among the team members.

First, teams challenge individuals to be better employees. One of the core roles of team leaders is to ensure that all team members work toward the set goals and objectives in the projects they are allocated in organizations. Besides the correction of mistakes logically, and presenting all team members to be partners in solving problems is a crucial element of a team, as was discussed by Lee (2018). Such activities improve team members’ performance significantly, as they are likely to gain problem-solving strategies not only as part of teams but as individual employees. Besides, teamwork improves employee performance due to the fact that it rids off unnecessary competition elements in projects’ operations. While competition is necessary for progress, it is worth noting that there exists a lot of unhealthy competition across organizations. For that reason, sometimes employees fail to address mistakes that their colleagues make unknowingly. Individual mistakes or failures contribute to cumulative flaws in the operations of a company. By working as teams in projects, it improves performance, as all team members work collaboratively, especially toward reducing systemic flaws. Even if that is the case, teams present each member with various competitive situations, such as assigning individual responsibilities. The approach boosts creativity among members and, therefore, contributes to the optimization of performance in an organization. Besides, the approach helps teams eliminate stress in organizations and promote synergy, as the team members cooperate on various aspects or activities.

Good decision-making and implementation are also some positive effects of teamwork in actualizing projects in an organization. First, team leaders offer direction in teams, and critically review the team members’ thoughts, ideas, and actions. As Bens (2017) noted, team leaders are often highly experienced and specialized individuals whose expertise in their areas makes them knowledgeable about various aspects of the assigned projects. Good decision making and implementation also trickle from the diversity in passing decisions. Teams comprise individuals from various backgrounds who depict unique personalities. Therefore, teams pass decisions that are the most appropriate, especially since the team members are likely to evaluate the effects of various situations, not only on the project but also on the organization. Diversity in teams, as discussed by Aggarwal, Schilpzand, Martins, and Molinaro (2019), also provides for the easier identification of mistakes. It encourages team members to highlight any flaws in time. The result of such teams’ focus on inconsistencies builds efficiency among the team members and also optimizes their performance in the organization.

Commitment to organizational goals is of key importance in the actualization of any team’s plans, and in improving employee performance. Smith, Ghosh, and Kanatas (2017) observed that organizations set goals and missions on managerial jurisprudence. For that reason, the elements are reached after special considerations, especially at the inception of organizations, businesses, and institutions alike. Projects are supposed to adhere to organizational goals, mission, and objectives and align with the culture of the organization. In addition, it requires employees to adhere to all provisions of their employers, since it only employs them upon accepting employment conditions, which, in this case, entail the organizations’ mission, goals, and objectives. Based on that premise, firms have different assessment metrics even when they could operate in the same industry. For instance, a company’s aims could achieve consumer satisfaction and have its focus on product quality. Also, another firm in the same industry as the first could focus highly on making profits and is, therefore, likely to focus on the massive production of goods or services with minimal costs. A firm’s goodwill is attained through adherence to the set goals and missions, particularly because observing the elements stated above render teams successful in depicting optimized performance.

It is also worth highlighting that there are many activities that occur in projects. For instance, teams involved communicate on various elements, particularly on the progress of the project. Arnold, Hannan, and Tafkov (2019) pointed out that effective communication in teams paves the way for the building of trust. Trust in projects is of critical importance as it affects the cohesion of the team members. Besides, trust is correlational, since the increase of trust in the team also relates to trust at the organizational level. Trust is crucial among employees since they feel more confident and consider themselves active participants in the organization as they gain a sense of belonging and security, and develop the ability to communicate more effectively toward the performance of the firm. Employees who feel confident in their places of work can deliver optimally, as was discussed by Tsui (2017) and, therefore, contribute to the success of the organization.

In addition, teams encourage team members to be accountable for their actions. For instance, teams often assess the performance of individual team members across various phases. The assessment is undertaken particularly when the members are supposed to work on specific aspects and thereafter report to the team. Through the development of accountability across the levels of a team, Martin (2016) observed that increased accountability promotes employee performance. Accountability is also essential in helping employees know how to determine problem-solving approaches, right communication practices, among other elements that boost the performance of employees in an organization.

In conclusion, having looked at the operation of project teams in organizations, a few aspects are notable. First, teamwork fosters cooperation among employees. It makes teams of diverse individuals who work toward the achievement of goals collectively. It is also worth noting that teamwork essentially aids firms in mutual understanding and movement toward common goals, as the employees involved are united harmoniously. Through easier identification of mistakes and ways of handling them, teams also significantly contribute to high performance in institutions and firms. Good decision making and implementation, and reduction of work-related stress and strains, are also notable benefits of teamwork in organizations. In the end, all the factors stated above collectively contribute to elevated performance and optimal output in organizations.

Biography:

Thomas Hudson is the CEO of Scary Good Productions based in Lancaster, PA. He received his B.A. from The College of New Jersey in Communication Studies specializing in Radio, Television and Film. He served as Master Electrician at American Music Theatre and as Purchasing Agent at 4Wall Entertainment Pennsylvania. To know more about the author, click here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/thomas-hudson-744b36a7/

References:

Aggarwal, I., Schilpzand, M. C., Martins, L. L., & Molinaro, M. (2019). Team Cognitive Versatility: Managing Cognitive Diversity in Teams. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2019, No. 1, p. 16111). Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510: Academy of Management.

Arnold, M. C., Hannan, R. L., & Tafkov, I. D. (2019). Mutual Monitoring and Team Member Communication in Teams. The Accounting Review, 0000-0000.

Baykasoğlu, A., Subulan, K., Güçdemir, H., Dudaklı, N., & Eren Akyol, D. (2020). Revenue management for make-to-order manufacturing systems with a real-life application. The Engineering Economist, 65(1), 27-65.

Bens, I. (2017). Facilitating with Ease!: core skills for facilitators, team leaders and members, managers, consultants, and trainers. John Wiley & Sons.

Blanchard, K. (2018). Leading at a higher level: Blanchard on leadership and creating high performing organizations. FT Press. McCauley, C., & Fick-Cooper, L. (2020). Direction, Alignment, Commitment: Achieving Better Results Through Leadership. Center for Creative Leadership

Breuer, C., Hüffmeier, J., & Hertel, G. (2016). Does trust matter more in virtual teams? A meta-analysis of trust and team effectiveness considering virtuality and documentation as moderators. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(8), 1151.

Calabrò, A., Minichilli, A., Amore, M. D., & Brogi, M. (2018). The courage to choose! Primogeniture and leadership succession in family firms. Strategic Management Journal, 39(7), 2014-2035.

Choi, W., Chatfield, H. K., & Chatfield, R. E. (2018). Agency or stewardship?: the impact of leadership structure on the debt financing of lodging firms (leadership structure on debt financing). International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30(3), 1352-1373.

Herhausen, D., De Luca, L. M., & Weibel, M. (2018). The interplay between employee and firm customer orientation: Substitution effect and the contingency role of performance‐related rewards. British journal of management, 29(3), 534-553.

Hoch, J. E., Bommer, W. H., Dulebohn, J. H., & Wu, D. (2018). Do ethical, authentic, and servant leadership explain variance above and beyond transformational leadership? A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 44(2), 501-529.

Klanšek, U. (2019). Cost optimization of project schedules under constrained resources and alternative production processes by mixed-integer nonlinear programming. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management.

Larsen, J. K., Shen, G. Q., Lindhard, S. M., & Brunoe, T. D. (2016). Factors affecting schedule delay, cost overrun, and quality level in public construction projects. Journal of Management in Engineering, 32(1), 04015032.

Lee, A. (2018). The Case for Mindful Leadership. People & Strategy, 41(4), 7-9.

Martin, A. D. (2016). Accountability in mixed-generation teams.

McCauley, C., & Fick-Cooper, L. (2020). Direction, Alignment, Commitment: Achieving Better Results Through Leadership. Center for Creative Leadership.

Sangeetha, P., & Kumaran, S. (2018). Impact of shared leadership on cross functional team effectiveness and performance with respect to manufacturing companies. Journal of Management research, 18(1), 44-55.

Smith, M. C., Ghosh, A., & Kanatas, C. E. (2017). Death v. Taxes: Agency Approaches to Setting Safety Goals Using Risk Management in an Evolving Legal Environment. NYU Envtl. LJ, 26, 41.

Steinmo, M., & Rasmussen, E. (2016). How firms collaborate with public research organizations: The evolution of proximity dimensions in successful innovation projects. Journal of Business Research, 69(3), 1250-1259.

Tsui, A. (2017). How do Companies Communicate with Nonexempt/Offline/Non-Desk Employees and Keep Them Confident and Engaged During Times of Organizational Change?.

Wong, S. I., & Giessner, S. R. (2018). The thin line between empowering and laissez-faire leadership: An expectancy-match perspective. Journal of Management, 44(2), 757-783.