Team Dynamics are the unseen forces that operate in a team ...

Team Dynamics are the unseen forces that operate in a team between
different groups of people.

For example, in a small team of six people working in one office, there may be
two people who have a particularly strong friendship. This friendship is a "natural
force" that may have an influence on the rest of the team, and can be manifest in
various ways, either positively or negatively.

The positive effect of a strong friendship in a team might be:

• the friends communicate a lot together...
• ...which naturally results in other members being drawn into the discussion
• ...which results in a good 'social' feel to the group
• ...which makes people enjoy being in the group
• ...which improves motivation and commitment

The negative effect of a strong friendship might be:

• to cause the other four people to feel excluded...
• ...which means they are less likely to include the two friends in decision making
• ...which means that there are likely to be two sub-groups
• ...which means that information may not flow across the whole group, but only

within the subgroups
• ...which means that miscommunication may lead to misunderstanding and poor

collective performance

This friendship has an impact on the group's performance, and is therefore a
team dynamic. Whether it is good or bad depends on other factors. In the first,
positive, example, there is a natural force of "inclusion" which results in people
being drawn into productive discussions. In the second, negative example, there
is a natural force of "exclusion" which results in communication between groups
being stifled.
Other factors can also play an influence. For example, if a wall of cupboards
were to be placed across the middle of the office, this would also form a 'natural
force' that influences the communication flow and may separate the group into
two further sub-groups.
Sometimes, an "absence" of a natural force can also be a team dynamic. For
example, if the leader or manager is permanently removed from the office, the
group may be drawn into a change of behaviour.

How do you recognise team dynamics?

You can recognise team dynamics by looking for the forces that influence team
behaviour. These forces might include:

• Personality styles (eg: including or excluding people)
• Team Roles (eg: see MTR-i team dynamics)
• Office layout (eg: cupboards dividing teams into two)
• Tools and technology (eg: email, bulletin board, information pool enabling hidden

communication).
• Organisational culture (eg: company cars acting as status symbols to separate

groups of employees)
• Processes/methodologies/procedures (eg: problem-solving methodology)
• etc.

How can team dynamics be managed constructively?

You need to

a. look for the team dynamics - the 'natural forces' at play
b. determine whether they are acting for good or ill,
c. make interventions to make the effect of those dynamics more positive.

For example, if a wall of cupboards is inhibiting communication within a group,
that wall can be repositioned and the room layout designed to encourage
communication (without making the environment too uncomfortable for those
who value their privacy when working on individual tasks).

-------------------------------

Defining Goals

First, teams need well-defined goals in order for them to
succeed. If the assignment goals and deadlines are well-
defined, it will be easier for student teams to formulate their goals
and plans.

This is a crucial element that you as instructors can contribute to
the success of student teams.

Top of Page

Team Dynamics

Although team dynamics can differ from team to team, functional
teams share these characteristics (Bodwell 1996, 1999):

A. Full Participation - All team members contribute their time
and energy to the project. More importantly, all team
members participate in the decision making process.
Having a dominant leader may work for the very short term,
but will eventually lead to morale problems later on.

B. Trust - Members trust that each member will add value to
the project, and members work to ensure that everybody
does contribute and that appreciation is expressed for
different contributions.

C. Open Communication - The main glue that holds a team
together. Communication is effective when all members:
o Contribute ideas
o Provide feedback constructively
o Ask for clarification on anything that might be
confusing
o Provide frequent updates
o Listen to each other carefully

D. Clear Roles - Teams tend to function better if member roles
are defined. There are several ways "roles" can be defined,
and they need not be mutually exclusive.

1. By work function - Most corporate teams assign
roles by work function. For instance, an online
newsletter may require an editor, a reporter/writer, a
graphic artist and a Web master.

2. By meeting function - Many sources also suggest
assigning some or all the following roles for projects
which require significant brainstorming:
! Initiator - Puts ideas on the table.
! Facilitator/Leader - Defines problem and sets
agenda.
! Recorder/"Secretary"- Records all ideas with
no other comment. Can also act as a
timekeeper.
! Devil's Advocate/Skeptic- Reviews ideas for
potential problems.

! Optimist - Person who keeps a positive frame
of mind and facilitates search for solutions.

! Summarizer/Clarifier - Summarizes and
clarifies results. Is often the same as the
facilitator.

! Liaison/Spokesperson - Maintains contact
with the instructor on behalf of the group.
Could be the same as the recorder or the
facilitator.

! Reflector - Does not participate in the group
activities, but observes process and reports
results to the group.

Roles can be assigned by instructors or within the
team. One warning is that members should not
become "stuck" in their roles. For instance, a
"graphics" person should be able to accept
constructive feedback from a "writer," and vice-versa.

You can require teams to rotate roles throughout
the semester, so each member can experience all
functions of the team.

E. Quality Control - Successful teams are willing to collectively
review their output and processes to ensure that the final
product or solution meets or exceeds the team goal.

F. Risk-taking - A successful team will also be willing to take
creative chances or experiment. That could mean that a
team may do something not within the stated project
guidelines.

G. Social/Business Balance - Although teams shouldn't
socialize 100% of the time, it shouldn't be all business either.
A dose of chit-chat allows members to know each other
better, leading to better working relations.

Top of Page

Stages of Team Development

Teams are not instantly functional. Team members need time to get
acquainted and to become familiar with each others strengths and
weaknesses. The following stages have been identified in team
building (Tuckman, 1965):

A. FORMING - The "honeymoon" stage where team members
are just becoming acquainted. Typically there is harmony at
this time, but too much harmony too soon may mean that the
team may not accomplish much later.

B. STORMING - This is when conflicts begin as team
members negotiate work assignments and express
disagreement on what to do. Frustratingly, this process can
take some time, but it is vital for the team to learn to function.
Of course, it can escalate to the point where teams become
dysfunctional, so it is important to give students guidance on
conflict resolution.

C. NORMING - After a period of negotiation and discussion,
the team reaches a stage where ground rules of conduct are
established and members learn to work together. This is
when teams begin to be productive, and a sense of team
pride develops.

D. PERFORMING - The group has settled down into a
functional team and most of the work gets done. This stage
can actually be relatively short in terms of a project life cycle
- as little as 25% of the total time.

References

Bodwell, Donald J. (1996, 1999) "High Performance Team
Essential Elements"
http://rampages.onramp.net/~bodwell/hpt_eelm.htm

Tuckman, B.W. (1965) "Developmental Sequence in Small
Groups," Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 63, pp. 384-399.

Decker, Philip, J. (1996) "Characteristics of an Effective Team,"
(PowerPoint Presentation)
http://www.cl.uh.edu/bpa/hadm/HADM_5731/ppt_present
ations/29teams/sld006.htm