Reviewing the Conditions for Team Performance and Effectiveness

Angelina Spaulding
BIS 343: Social Processes In Organizations
College of Letters and Sciences
Arizona State University

Reviewing the Conditions for Team Performance and Effectiveness

Prompt One:
Essential Conditions for Successful Team Performance, Threats to those Conditions, and the
Underlying Psychological Factors Associated to Those Threats
Thompson (2014) argues that three main avenues exist that can facilitate successful
team performance: Expertise, Engagement and Execution. Each of these cross sections has
various underlying internal and external factors that influence a team's potential success.
Teams need to be able to possess the knowledge to complete a task. Team members need to
be engaged in the processes that are required to perform a task. As well, the team should be
able to perform as an interdisciplinary group so as to complete the task as required. The
opportunity for success is diminished when psychological factors become involved which may
have the potential to interfere with positive forward team progression. As this discussion
continues please be aware of the many different connections that need to be identified when
facilitating successful team performance.
For a team to be able to perform a required task, the group must be able to have the
skills to complete the task. These, ...knowledge, skills and ability (Thompson, 2014, p. 26)
that the team must possess should come from the capability of a manager to design a team that
meets the needed task requirements. However regardless of these three factors, all team
members must possess the following five critical skills: positive conflict resolution
understanding, ...collaborative problem solving ability, communication strengths, and
understanding of the importance of goal setting and performance management, as well as,
planning and task coordination within a group environment (p. 26). Regardless of the
knowledge that a team member may have to complete a task, it is the five crucial skills that the
team member must have present for a team to have strong sense of expertise.
Consider an advertising team. Individually each team member may have been part of
past campaigns that could have qualified him or her as strong candidate for a new high profile
campaign. However, despite the strong knowledge team members may have in the field, the
group may lack the skills to work as a cohesive team within the new group environment. For
example, if team members do not recognize the importance of effectively creating constructive
conflict that is related to problem solving, that lack of ability can interfere with a team's potential
optimal performance flow (Thompson, 2014). If the advertising team does not have effective
decision-making skills or effective problem-solving skills, or the various other skills required to

facilitate partnership and collaboration, than a teams success will likely suffer (Thompson,
2014).
Teams that are designed with proficiently skilled members in addition to the crucial
teamwork skills can create a sense of pressure that can only be present when in a team
environment. This pressure can sometimes cause anxiety for individual team members to
perform an expected task when with the team. When the anxiety is so high due to the pressure
of a team's expectations on an individual to perform at an optimal level within any given
moment, that can create the circumstance of choking under pressure (Thompson, 2014, p.
27).
Consider the game of baseball. A game that is in the bottom of the ninth inning, the
bases are loaded, with two outs, and the game is tied; whichever team wins the game is going
to the season's championship game. The hitting teams number one batter comes to the plate at
a crucial moment. The team and the fans are expecting the best hitter to perform, but the batter
strikes out in a one, two, three called count. The game is over and the other team ends up
winning the ball game. In this case, people may likely believe that the hitter choked under
pressure due to the expectations to perform within that moment.
Another psychological inhibitor that can interfere with the expertise of a teams
performance is a group's learning curves (Thompson, 2014, pp. 27 - 28). When people are in a
group setting the performance level of individuals in the group are enhanced based on the skill
level in regards to a task that is being completed within the moment. It is like being in a gym
class and watching the performance level of the other participants in the group, and then
enhancing personal performance to match the perceptions of others output. Thompson (2014)
argues that the presence of other group members creates a push for individuals to perform up
to, or down to, others performance levels when in a group environment.
Another factor that may hinder team performance based on expertise is social
facilitation versus social inhabitation (Thompson, 2014, pp. 28 - 29). Social facilitation is
concerned with actions that are believed will occur; whereas social inhibition is when people
choose to force attention towards themselves and are more concerned with how individual
performance reflects expectations (Thompson, 2014). To help facilitate predictable behavior
activities such as team practices and drills helps to fine tune a team's skills, while
simultaneously enhancing expertise. Social inhibition can cause other team members to look
inward when the pressures of team performance are present, and can impede future learning if
others are pressured to perform who are not yet ready to be considered experts (Thomas,
2014).

The final consideration that expertise may be threatened with is stress versus
challenge (Thompson, 2014, p. 30). When the pressure to perform becomes too overwhelming
it may become stressful. However, if a person feels the same pressure but views the pressure
as a moment of potential growth and development opportunity the same situation may be
considered a challenge (Thompson, 2014). Regardless of the amount of expertise an individual
may have, it is the individual's interpretation of the moment that determines the potential threat
of stress. Even thought of becoming a new rock climber may be stressful for some, others may
view the opportunity of rock climbing as a challenge to help improve one's self.
Thompson (2014) considers engagement another essential condition for successful
team performance. This focuses on the idea that team members must be motivated to be
involved in the processes required to complete group tasks. Sometimes group members may
feel highly engaged in the success of the team's performance, and other times team members
do not feel engaged in any successes or processes regarding the group. The level of
engagement in the team's thinking helps to determine the performance levels of a team, or this
can be referred to as group potency (Thompson, 2014, p. 30). Basically, groupthink helps to
determine the level of engagement that team members have on the overall potential
performance outcome of the group.
The potency of the group can be viewed in the sense of motivation gains, which refers,
...to circumstances that increase the effort expended by group members in a collective task
(Thompson, 2014, p. 30). This can be viewed in the concept of the Khler effect, which can
be seen when the motivational gains of the weakest member of a team is enhanced by overall
output due to the individual's beliefs of the importance one has on the overall outcome of the
team's performance as a whole (Thompson, 2014). Other team members through the actions of
social loafing and free riding can counter this positive aspect of motivation gains.
Social loafing is when, ...people in groups ...do not work as hard as they do when alone
(Thompson, 2014, 31). Essentially, a person that practices social loafing feels that they are in a
situation that enough people on the team can handle the workload and does not perform up to
full capabilities. Free riders are people that do not work hard on a team, because the individual
believes that others will work hard enough to get the work done for the team (Thompson, 2014).
One of the three main reasons for free riding is diffusion of responsibility (p. 33). This
can lead to the psychological state known as deindividuation (p. 33), which is a psychological
state where an individual feels no responsibility at all. Another psychological cause for free
riding is a reduced sense of self-efficacy (pp. 33 - 34). This is a state when a team member

feels that any contribution will not add value to the overall team's performance. A final
psychological cause of free riding is the sucker aversion (p. 34), which is the idea that only one
person in the team will contribute and other team members sit back to wait and see the
contribution levels of others. This then can cause no contribution to be made by any team
members, which will eventually lead to the failed performance of a team (Thompson, 2014).
The final condition that Thompson (2014) discusses as being a required for successful
team performance is execution. A team needs to be able to execute by coordinating skills,
efforts, and actions for its members (p. 37). If new teams learn how to coordinate activities and
interact with each other as a group this helps to diminish future execution concerns. Dance
teams need to be able to follow routines as a single unit, diving teams need to ensure the
adherence of steps when going underwater, and even rock bands need to be able to perform a
music set by coordinating efforts on stage. Generally, the larger the team the more difficult it is
to coordinate group efforts (Thompson, 2014). Other threats to proper team execution can
come from lack of organization or lack of communication amongst group members.
A team's potential performance successes are based on a team's expertise,
engagement and execution. Each of these essential conditions can be threatened by
underlying psychological issues; such as, choking under pressure, the pressure of group
learning curves, free riding, social loafing and other factors. The pressures and anxieties that
can be found while working in a team environment impact potential performance conditions. If
team members have a strong knowledge of how to complete a required task, coupled with the
teamwork skills that are required to have healthy interactions within the team, it is likely to
believe that the potential performance for a team can be high.
The Performance Criteria to Measure Team Effectives, and How Productivity is Not the Only
Marker for Overall Team Effectiveness
Thompsons (2014) discuss four performance criteria that teams effectiveness should be
measured against. Team effectiveness criteria considers a teams, ...productivity,
cohesion...learning [and] integration (p. 39). Each of these performance criteria considers
different factors to determine team effectiveness.
The most important performance criterion is productivity, which considers if a team has
met the shared goals of the group (Thompson, 2014). Productivity is determined based on the
ability to identify the goals of the team, the efficiency in which the team achieved those goals,
and the observed measurable outputs of the team. Team performance can not only be seen in
the perspective of the team, but also in the perspective of the end user of the team's overall

output. If a customer receives a product, and the product is faulty or does not meet the
standards of the customer, then the team's productivity cannot be considered strong. Being
aware of the internal and external measures of team productivity can help determine if a team
has met production standards.
The second aspect of performance criteria used to determine a teams effectiveness is
cohesion (Thompson, 2014, p. 40). This, ...refers to the processes that keep members of a
team...united (p. 40). Did the team work well together? Did the team use collaborative tactics?
Did the team have a positive experience that may lead to future teamwork? These are
questions that can be used to evaluate team cohesion. Not having cohesion does not mean
that a team will not necessarily meet shared goals, but it does help create a productive
environment that can lead to future successful performance (Thompson, 2014).
Another criteria measure is the ability for the team to learn as a whole (Thompson,
2014). Team members need to be aware of the learning strengths and weaknesses of fellow
members. Team members that have growth and development hindered by others inability to
handle deficiencies can create a toxic environment. Having a team that embraces the lack of
knowledge of others as an opportunity to teach others or help enhance the learning of someone
else are more likely to be an effective team (Thompson, 2014)
The final criteria point to consider team effectiveness is integration of the team
(Thompson, 2014). This questions if the single team can be considered part of the overall
organizational structure. Do the goals of the team align with the goals of the organization? Can
the team interact with other teams throughout the organization to help facilitate the completion
of tasks? The integration of teams with the rest of the organization take a large amount of
coordination and planning that should be orchestrated by the organization (Thompson, 2014).
It is important to evaluate a teams effectiveness by other performance criteria besides
team productivity, because the other three criteria measures, cohesion, learning and integration,
all influence the overall effectiveness potential of a team. As stated earlier, even if a team is
able to be productive that does not mean that the group is cohesive. While working on a kitchen
line not all of the cooks may get along, but when it is time to conduct a dinner service that lack
of cohesion needs to be ignored to focus on the task at hand. Learning is another aspect that is
important to consider, because it is facilitated by team cohesion and the ability and willingness
for other team members to support the group's success as a whole. If one person on the
hockey team does not know how to skate, that can impact the effectiveness of the overall team.
If fellow teammates help to teach the non-skater how to skate, that can help improve the entire
group's effectiveness. If team members do not help develop the deficient member the overall

performance of the team will remain low. Finally consider integration. As Thompson (2014) has
discussed teams are not single units, but rather part of a ...social system context (p. 5) of an
organization. Teams that have synchronized goals with the organization and can have the
ability to collaborate with other teams throughout the organization are likely to be more effective
than teams that remain recluse.
Four criteria markers can measure team effectiveness: productivity, cohesion, learning
and integration. Out of all four measures the most important determiner of team effectiveness is
productivity. Even though a team may be productive other determining factors can influence the
effectiveness of a team. If a team is not cohesive it can still be productive, but it does not mean
it is the most effective at being a team. The ability for others in a team to help grow and develop
each other determines team effectiveness. As well, the ability for the team to integrate into the
overall infrastructure of an organization is important to determine team effectiveness. These
four criteria points help to determine the overall effectiveness of a team's performance.
Prompt Two:
Personal Considerations, Personal Proficiency, and Personal Deficiencies When Considering
the Foundation for a Strong Team
When building a strong foundation for a team some of the more important skills to
consider when forming the team are conflict resolution, collaborative problem solving and
communication (Thompson, 2014, p. 26). These three skills help to facilitate team productivity,
cohesion, learning and organizational integration. By having team members that possess these
three skills it is likely to believe that the framework for a strong team can be developed.
First, consider conflict resolution. Conflicts are not necessarily a bad thing to have
happen within a team. Conflict helps to expose team members concerns, expose potential
functional or technical problems, or expose other deficiency that can influence a team. When
team members can focus on conflicts that are geared towards group tasks and goals it is likely
to believe that problems may be circumvented. If a team member questions the use of one
material over another during a manufacturing process, because that individual believes a better
solution may exists it promotes potential innovation. It presents an opportunity to be aware of
possible new experience that may not have occurred if the team member did not feel
comfortable enough to interject an opposing view to the group.
Collaborative problem solving is another aspect that should be considered a base for a
strong team. Teams that are able to partner together to work through a problem are likely to be
more successful (Thompson, 2014). If a group can analyze a potential threat as a whole, and

work together to brainstorm options to mitigate the threat it is more likely to believe the group
will be able to succeed. The group will have the ability to work cohesively to overcome
adversity and reach the shared goals.
Finally, proper conflict resolution and collaborative problem solving could not occur
without positive communication flow. Communication helps to facilitate growth and
development, cohesiveness, learning, productivity, and organizational integration; which can all
be used as factors to determine an overall teams effectiveness (Thompson, 2014). A team that
established processes to communicate, and understands the importance of maintaining those
processes is more likely to develop into a strong collective group. Formal and informal
communication amongst group members helps to bring topics to the forefront that may be
ignored when team members do not implement the processes used to inform others of the
happenings of the team. Communication is a critical aspect to team effectiveness and
performance, and considered one of the most important factors required to build structure for a
strong team.
It would be lovely to say that personal strengths in all of these areas are great. Out of
three mentioned aspects considered for a strong team, communication is likely the strongest
personal strength. It is not difficult to speak to others through face-to-face communication or
through computer-media connections. Being open to give and receive communication is
something that is important, and an important aspect that is emphasized when building a team.
Collaborative problem solving is another aspect that can be considered moderately
strong. There is a tendency to some times to push other team members to the side when the
perceived cognitive capacity of the other team member is not considered strong. For that
reason it would likely be wise to take a more learned role when part of the team environment.
Be willing to help others that may be lacking in certain skills, which could translate as a
personal positive experience as other tactics or skills may be learned when connecting with
team members.
When considering the aspect of conflict resolution that is considered so important, it is
also an aspect of personal teamwork that needs to be greatly refined. A personal difficulty of
confronting others in a constructive manner is very difficult. There seems to be only two
response when dealing with conflict resolution: (1) going overboard in defining the problem by
becoming too emotional or (2) shutting down and not creating any conflict that will bring about
change. Neither of these reactions is productive. One of the largest aspects as a team member
that needs to be greatly focused on is the ability to bring about conflict that facilitates positive
transformation that will help the overall success of the team.

Conclusion
The dynamics of a team are very complex. The expertise, the engagement and the
execution of teams are major conditions that need to be considered when working with a team.
The various threats and psychological conditions that can arise when analyzing the conditions
for successful team performance can help to understand the dynamics that occur within a team
environment. Recognizing those threats can help create better opportunities for a successful
team outcome. The team's effectiveness can be measured by the criteria performance of
productivity, cohesion, learning and infrastructure. Even though productivity may be considered
the strongest maker for team effectiveness, all four of these markers are important in
determining the overall effectiveness of a team's performance.
As knowledge continues to grow when considering team dynamics, it is just as important
to reflect on this new knowledge in a retrospective manner. Being aware of personal strengths
and deficiencies can help prepare for future team interactions. Awareness of one's own ability
can help set a team up for success by being aware of areas of strength that can help enhance a
team, or areas of weakness that may require more team support.

References

Thompson, L.L. (2014). Teams in organizations. In Making the team: A guide for managers
(5th ed.) [Ebook] (pp. 3-21). Retrieved from
https://reader.brytewave.com/app/index.html#/book/Mjk5NTAy/Mw==
Thompson, L.L. (2014). Performance and productivity. In Making the team: A guide for
managers (5th ed.) [Ebook] (pp. 22-44). Retrieved from
https://reader.brytewave.com/app/index.html#/book/Mk5 STAy/Mw==