It goes without saying that the efficiency of the present-day companies depends considerably on whether teamwork is established in these companies and how well it is integrated within the corporate structure.
It seems that teamwork and its enhancement among the staff is an original and ingenious solution of the problem of the staff’s work coordination; in addition, the aspect of competition among the staff is considerably decreased, which creates rather cozy atmosphere.
However, without a proper coordination of the teamwork, the team efficiency is highly likely to drop, which means that the quality of the team’s performance depends on the monitoring of the staff’s work.
There are various means to improve the team efficiency with the help of a monitoring strategy; according to Losada and Heapy, one of the most promising ideas is to offer the team the corresponding feedback in response to its every single action: “Teams in particular and organizations in general are nonlinear feedback networks that are continuously involved in ongoing processes of positive and negative feedback” (741).
Indeed, with the given strategy, one can rest assured that the team will make only the required steps and avoid most mistakes in the process.
Another successful idea that can be used to enhance the connectivity within the team and at the same time monitor the working process in the most efficient way possible, the method offered by Snowden and Boone can be considered.
According to the authors, another good method that can be used to observe the work of a team and check its quality is the nonlinear dynamic model which is supposed to outline the optimum team dynamics for the given group and help choose the most appropriate team strategy.
It is essential that the given model presupposes dealing with three different types of dynamics. As authors portray them, “The most rigid is the fixed-point attractor, followed by the limit cycle or periodic attractor, the torus or quasi-periodic attractor, and finally, the most flexible is the chaotic attractor” (Snowden and Boone 750).
Applying the given strategies of team monitoring to my team, I have to admit that these strategies can possibly prove positive, yet they need considerable changes to fit the given group of people.
To start with, the model offered by Snowden and Boone might fail because it works “only within a system where positive feedback is stronger than negative feedback” (Snowden and Boone 754), while in my team, the number of negative feedbacks can sometimes exceed the number of positive ones.
As for the idea suggested by Losada and Heapy, I suppose that it can be extremely useful, since it allows to adapt a specific approach to each of the participants. However, the given model requires constant supervision of the process, which is practically impossible.
Therefore, it will be necessary that each of the team members should be responsible enough to report about every single change within his field of work, which will demand certain changes of the leadership tactics.
Thus, it is clear that with efficient team monitoring, numerous problems can be avoided. However, it is also important to keep in mind that the strategy of team monitoring must change according to the environment in which the monitoring is carried out.
Mainly because of various factors which affect the team’s productivity, starting with the quality of the equipment and up to the atmosphere within the team, as well as the specifics of the team members’ temperaments, monitoring must be adjusted in accordance with the team and environment specifics; otherwise, the process of controlling is likely to fail.
Works Cited
Losada, Marcial and Emily Heapy. “The Role of Positivity and Connectivity in the Performance of Business Teams: A Nonlinear Dynamics Model.” American Behavioral Scientist 47(2004): 740. Print.
Snowden, David and Mary Boone. “A leader’s Framework for Decision Making.”Harvard Business Review 85.11(2007): 68-76. Print.