Marissa Mallahan

January 19, 2018

BIS 343
Professor Wishart
Module 2 Essay

Prompt #1 (10 points):

 What three key elements form the internal dynamics of a team?

 Why do you think managers often tend to overlook internal dynamics when team-building?
 What are some of the consequences of neglecting internal dynamics in a team?

Suzy Wetlaufer in her story “The Team That Wasn’t” states that, “successful groups are

part art, part science” (1994, p.17). Understanding the science behind team design can save

leaders unnecessary headache, while creating teams that are both effective and efficient. One of

the responsibilities in managing an effective team is managing the team’s internal dynamics. The

internal dynamics of teams compose of three key elements, specifying the task, selecting the

members, and facilitating the team process, or simply tasks, people and processes (Thompson,

2014). The task of the answers the question of what work needs to be done. Per Thompson

(2014) “teams are goal-directed entities,” and can be assess to fall into three categories, tactical,

problem solving, or creative (p.77). The second key element, people evaluate the caliber of

individuals suited to do the work. The balance of skills needed on a team depends largely on the

team’s task. Thompson (2014) identifies three important skills managers must think about when

forming team, technical or functional expertise, task-management, and interpersonal. Apart from

these critical skills, managers should also look at diversity within the team. Team diversity is

important because it improves team performance, expands the talent pool, and provides multiple

viewpoints (Thompson, 2014). However, diversity with a team also brings several set of

challenges, such as unconscious homogeneity, choosing fellow team member who are the race,

or those have a reputation for being competent, hardworking, and they have a strong working
Module 2 Essay 2

relationship (Thompson, 2014). Lastly, the process examines how well the team works together.

Process, doesn’t actually address workflow, however, it looks at team structure and norms.

Understanding the internal dynamics of the teams in very important. Furthermore, “it is

more important to have a well-designed team than a team with a good leader” (Thompson, 2014,

p.76). However, most managers often overlook the internal dynamics of team-building.

Managers often focus on one or two aspects to team dynamics, ignoring a particular component.

My opinion is that more than often managers are task-oriented. Therefore, they focus the

process, task, or both. Suzy Wetlaufer story serves a great example in when it comes to

overlooking the people component.

Neglecting the internal dynamics of a team poses consequences to the team. The most

serious consequence is failure, as in Wetlaufer’s story. Another consequence is a non-cohesive

team, which will affect productivity and performance. Simply as neglecting the size of team has

consequences. Thompson (2014) in addressing team scaling fallacy, states that “as team size

increase, people increasingly underestimate the number of labor house required to complete

projects” (p.85).

Prompt #2 (10 points):

 Contrast the concepts of "multidisciplinary" and "interdisciplinary" based on the changes that
went on at Boeing Aircraft. What degree of task interdependence do you believe best represents
the Boeing 777 development team? Why?
 What are the various effects of different levels of interdependence on teamwork and team
design?
Whether in professional or personal setting, problem solving skills are important.

Problem solving within the professional environment are mostly accomplished in teams, across

all disciplines. The cross-function teams wok in an interdisciplinarity fashion. Two concept

associate with interdiscipliarity are multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary. Multidisciplinary can

be defined as “several disciplines focused on one problem or issue - each discipline offers a
Module 2 Essay 3

unique perspective or contribution with respect to the problem or issue at hand” (Thomas, 2011).

Interdisciplinary can be define as “Several disciplines collaborating around one problem or issue

– contributors work together to arrive at an optimum solution to the problem or issue” (Thomas,

2011). The changes under taken at Boeing Aircraft in the 1990s can be examined more from an

interdisciplinary viewpoint than multidisciplinary. Both disciplines involves contributions from a

different disciplinary around a specific goal. As Phil Condit pointed out that with Boeing’s 777

program the biggest emphasis was on teaming, and crossing function boundaries and getting

groups together that provide a better product (Thomas, Clip 1). Interdisciplinary serves as better

concept at categorizing Boeing model, because they used integration. The company’s prior

model as describe by Condit would be multidisciplinary, as it focued on group effort, rather than

teamwork. Condit highlighted within the video that the issue with that was front end teams had

no knowledge of back end teams. However, under the new models inputs were driven from all

teams, working in an integrated manner. Interdisciplinary focuses on integration in contrast to

multidisciplinary. The interdependence model that best represent Boeing’s 777 program is pool

interdependence. Pool interdependence involves member working independently and combine

their work (Thompson, 2014). On Boeing’s 777 members was independent and their inputs

combine to create a finishing product. In the video, Condit gave the example of how customers

input was influential in the designing the Boeing 777 engine cowl.

Each level of interdependence has its own unique set of effects on teamwork. Pool

interdependence works best with groups rather that teams, because of the specialization of tasks

and division of labor required (Thompson, 2014). The effect of reciprocal interdependence on

teams is that it has a long start-up time. However, an advantage of reciprocal interdependence is

that “team members know the overall objectives of the team, and may feel more accountable”
Module 2 Essay 4

(Thompson, 2014, p.84). Both sequential and reciprocal interdependence are ideal for teams that

require specialization and division of labor (Thompson, 2014).

Prompt #3 (10 points):

 How does each of the five types of teams listed in Chapter 10 (Exhibit 10-1) manage their
team boundaries?
 What are the trade-offs between internal cohesion and external ties within each type of team?
 Which type do you believe best describes Boeing’s 777 design / build team? Why?

Team boundary is defined as “differentiate one work group form another and affect

knowledge transfer and the distribution of resources” (Thompson, 2014, p.248). The five teams

identified in MMT (Exhibit 10-1) are insulation teams. Insulation teams by definition are for the

most part sequestered from their environment (Thompson, 2014). Insulation teams manage their

boundaries by sequestering themselves from others within the company, as well as from

outsiders (Thompson, 2014). Broadcasting teams focus on their internal processes and notify

others after they have already made their decision (Thompson, 2014). Marketing teams “tailor

their communication to suit the needs, interest, and object of the organization” (Thompson, 2014,

p.251). Surveying teams spends a large among of their focusing on customers and clients instead

of work task. X-Teams in managing team boundaries often select team members base on their

networks, prioritize external communication, and utilize established internal process to facilitate

external work (Thompson, 2014).

Trade-off between internal cohesion and external ties see that “more cohesive teams are

less likely to engage in external initiatives” (Thompson2014, p.248). A trade-off for a

broadcasting team would be that it has little external contact. A trade-off for a marketing team is

that they might be more cohesive than other teams. Surveying teams trade-off is that the large

amount of time spend surveying others prevents them from forming economic, social, or political

support from external ties. Group cohesion might be a trade-off for X-Teams as they are
Module 2 Essay 5

externally oriented. A trade-off for insulating team is creating meaning external ties with both

the organization and external entities.

The Boeing Aircraft 777 team would be considered a surveying team. The surveying

team is concentrated on “diagnosing needs of the customer, experimenting with solutions,

revising their knowledge, initiating programs, and collecting data” (Thompson, 2014, p.250).

Boeing during their 777 program focuses on how to create a product that wis customer friendly,

and seek advice from both internal and external entities.

Prompt #4 (10 points):

 After reviewing this week’s readings in your MTT text (Chapters 4, 5, and 10), select /
discuss two concepts from each chapter that you can relate to the Manhattan Project team. Given
the three types of teams described in Chapter 4 (tactical, problem-solving, and creative), what
sets or blends of skills do you think would be most effective for each type of team task?

Two concepts within chapter 4 of MTT I can relate are high-learning orientation and

backing-up behavior. High-learning orientation as defined within text is “reflects the desire to

understand something novel or to increase competence in a task” (Thompson, 2014, p.78).

Whenever a new process is rolled out at my job, I would rather work with the system, and

learning its functionality before asking any question or providing my input. Backing-up behavior

is defined by Thompson (2014) as “the discretionary provision of resources and task-related

effort to another member of one’s team that is intended to help that team member obtain the

goals as defined by his or her role “(p.82). I am guilty of this in my current job, as I often offer

my assistance to other team member in accomplishing their assigned goals. I would agree with

Thompson that it leads to decrease in task work of the member’s task. Two concept of chapter 5

I can relate to are, collective efficacy and group cohesion. Collective efficacy is the “individual’s

belief that a team can perform successfully” (Thompson, 2014, p.109). My current director has

this belief, and yes as a group we do perform at a high rate. Thompson (2014) defines group
Module 2 Essay 6

cohesion as the “emotional attraction among group members” (p.115). In chapter 5 two concepts

that stick out are human capital and social capital. Human capital per the text is “inequalities

result from differences in individual abilities” (Thompson 2014, p56). While social capital is

“the value managers add to their teams and organization through their ties to other people”

(Thompson, 2014, p.256). These two concept do not relate on a personal level, however, on a

organization level. There have been several individuals within the organization who were

promote not because of their human capital, however, due to their individual social capital.

The blend of skills that would more benefit a tactical team would be task-management

and technical or functional expertise. Tactical teams’ process focus on role clarity, accuracy,

well-defined operation and directive. Therefore, individuals on these teams most like need posse

qualities that fall within the same spectrum. Problem solving teams, just as will tactical need a

blend of individuals who are technical or functional expertise, and task-management. However,

interpersonal skill is also needed on a problem-solving team. As one of the focuses is separating

people from problems. Creative teams required individuals who have a blend of task-manage

and interpersonal skills.

Prompt #5 (5 points):

 What are the behavioral differences between cohesive teams and teams that are not cohesive?
What are some of the ways that leaders can help teams build cohesion within their work groups?

There are several behavioral differences between cohesive teams and teams that are not

cohesive. Thompson (2014) notes that cohesive tams members who have a close relationship are

more likely to give due credit to their partners. Another behavior difference is that “members of

cohesive teams are more likely to participate in team activities, stay on the team and convince

other to joint, and resist attempts to disrupt the team” (Thompson, 2014, p.1160). However, all is

not lost for cohesive teams as Thompson (2014) offers several ways in which manager/leaders
Module 2 Essay 7

can build cohesion. Team cohesion can be build by, (1) helping the team to build an identity, (2)

make it easy for the team to be close together, (3) focus on similarities among team members,

and (4) challenge the team.

Prompt #6 (10 points):

 Drawing on Condit’s comments and the MMT text (ch 10) content regarding cross-team
integration, discuss multiteam opportunities, challenges and possible solutions. Also comment on
the idea of boundary spanning. Now consider the entire list of common roles for team members
(in Exhibit 10-2). Which of these roles are you most comfortable with, given your own team
experiences? Why?

Multiteam systems (MTS) per Thompson is defined as “two or more teams that interface

directly and interdependently in response to environment contingencies toward the

accomplishment of shared goals” (Thompson, 2014, p.269). While each individual team might

pursue different proximal goals, there exist a least one share goal (Thompson, 2014). An

important component of this process is the utilization of cross-team. Cross-team integration team

are “composed of several members from other teams with integration needs, responsibilities for

documenting and communication changes in a timely manner” (Thompson, 2014, p.270). These

kind of team collaboration provides an organization with several beneficial opportunities. One

opportunity is that they can introduce structural strategies for integration among other teams.

These teams also increase cognitive growth. Phil Condit in his comments talks about the

difficulties associated with multi-teams, in his example provided the company did not want

customer walking around their plant, however, once they got overcame this hurdle the company

realized the value of the customer’s feedback. The value found by Boeing is an example of

opportunities of cross-team integration.

Boundary spanning address individual or teams “span organizational divides and

integrate the knowledge and best practices from different areas of the organization” (Thompson,

2014, p.258). Boundary spanning is an effective tool of bridge functional gaps or structural holes
Module 2 Essay 8

within an organization. The advantage of boundary spanning network includes, leveraging

diversity, capitalizing on opportunities, and greater innovation. However, some of the downsides

are that it creates greater conflict in both task and relationship and can result in power struggles.

The role that I am most comfortable with in MTT (Exhibit 10-2) is negotiator or

mediator. However, based on past experiences within my organization I play the role of the

mediator. Whenever conflictual situations arise with a candidate, manager, or within the

department, management heavily relies on my knowledge, and resources in finding a resolution

to the problem on the organization’s behalf.

Module 2 Essay 9

Reference
Thompson, L. (2014). Making the Team: A Guide for Managers, 5th edition. Pearson. ISBN-13:

978-0132968089

Wetlaufer, S. (1994). The team that wasn’t. Retrieved from

https://myasucourses.asu.edu/bbcswebdav/courses/2016SpringA-X-BIS343-22984-

31333/The%20Team%20That%20Wasn%27t.pdf

Thomas, D.A., PhD (2011). BIS 343 Supplementary Reading.