Introduction
Companies are structured today so that to have more profits. In this respect one of the main fallacies is that most of the corporations do not pay much attention to their skeleton, meaning employees. As a result, the personnel is motivated solely by financial stimuli. However, it would be better to make more glimpses at those companies where the code and the principles of team building are strictly followed.
One of the pivotal points in the development of the internal relationships
Cohesiveness inside the company should, first of all, touch upon the idea of a win-win approach. This strategy can be realized through the intention of sharing some ideas of one employee with another one(s) to inherit them. This prospect sounds like: “I want to win and I want you to win too” (Ritchie, 2010, p.1)! It is up to the company whether to square up or to neglect such a principle. Though, it should be done voluntarily. It should be one of the pivotal points to the internal code of relationships development.
A winning approach
The problem is that members of the staff are more directed to solve more personal problems than the problem of a company. As ridiculous as it may seem, problem-aimed strategy should grab employees’ attention. Team building requires a set of sequential steps in organizing a team to do its best afterwards. Further still, one should pay special attention to four steps design for developing beneficial traits of a cohesive team, namely:
- Forming (making team together on its initial stage);
- Storming (getting the team through the professional trials);
- Norming (generalizing lessons on how it is better to achieve goals);
- Performing (combining efforts for the next cases) (Team Building & Team Cohesion, 2009).
Throughout all four stages in attaining cohesiveness in a team it is better to maintain open and straightforward communication. This component helps in understanding the flow of things going on in the workspace. Moreover, it makes employees up-and-coming in their efforts and their use for a company. It is also the way to constructive development inside a company or even to some changes in it. One should also bear in mind that the traditional viewpoint on how it is better to achieve results (team composition – team process – team results) is no longer useful (Chung, 2009). Contemporary trends in management urge more for suchlike schemes in completing the industrial process with more synergy between process and personal contributions of a team (Chung, 2009).
One more tip to make efficiency inside a company is concerned with the ability of the administration to state clear goals. It means that an employee may just get bewildered about what to do at the moment. He/she can also guess how it can be done to meet deadlines. It is not that easy to make it clear when one does not want to interrupt a chief by frequent requests for repetition. Thus, dominants at work should highlight clear goals primordially by further remarks on how (and why) to make it faster.
Conclusion
At last, crossing of roles because there is interdependence should be taken into consideration inside a team. The question is that each member of the staff should provide positive development at his/her place. It is no need to think of personal superiority while the rest of the team is struggling in vain. The relationships should follow the rules of subordination along with points on cohesive partnership as related to each department and each person working in it.
Reference
Chung, S. E. (2009). Supporting Creativity in Interdisciplinary Teamwork: Examining Relationships among Individual Traits, Group Characteristics, Team Process, and Creative Performance in an Applied Setting. Gainesville: University of Florida.
Ritchie, B. (2010). Win Win Approach. Web.
Team Building & Team Cohesion. (2009). Web.