Laird Mealiea Ramcvn Baltazar Managers must reccvgnize that they play a central rcvle in effective team buildi ng. Hcvwever, tcv be successful, managers require a framewcvrk tcv guide their activ ities. The purpcvse cvf this paper is tcv prcvvide such a framewcvrk in the fcvrm cvf a sevenstep prcvcess that can guide managers in their team-building effcvrts. The mcvdel itself is built upcvn the assumpticvn that there are identifiable team character istics that, if present, will help ensure team success. The mcvdel presents a set cvf decisicvn strategies fcvr the selecticvn and sequencing cvf team-building effcvr ts and interventicvns. The mcvdel is an iterative, multi-staged effcvrt that requir es ccvnsiderable planning and envircvnmental kncvwledge tcv successfully implement. In respcvnse tcv glcvbalizaticvn, rapid changes in external envircvnments, and a desire by cvrganizaticvns tcv remain ccvmpetitive, cvrganizaticvns have ccvntinued tcv flatten, decentralize, re-engineer their business prcvcesses, dcvwnsize, and empcvwer the ir emplcvyees.' Tcv facilitate these changes and gain a ccvmpetitive edge, managers are increasingly turning tcv team structures." The actual team design used tcv suppc vrt cvrganizaticvnal gcvals may include such structures as crcvss functicvnal teams, functicvnal wcvr k teams, prcvject teams, self-managed teams, intact wcvrk teams, emplcvyee partici paticvn teams, prcvblem-scvlving teams, maintenance cvr suppcvrt teams, and management teams. Ccvhen and Baily^ indicate that in the United States, 82 percent cvf ccvm panies emplcvying mcvre than 100 emplcvyees have turned tcv the use cvf grcvups tcv sup pcvrt cvrganizaticvnal gcvals. We must therefcvre draw the ccvnclusicvn that "Eurcvpea n and Ncvrth American emplcvyees cvften dcv ncvt v^cvrk in iscvlaticvn frcvm each cvth er but vt'cvrk in team.""* Unfcvrtunately, the typical team-building effcvrt prcvves ineffective, fcvr thre e reascvns.^ First, it relies cvn the services cvf an external ccvnsultant, whcv i s cvften unfamiliar with the particular characteristics cvf the business, the cvrganizaticvn, and it s pecvple. Seccvnd, it invcvlves cvff-site activities in artificial settings that fail tcv adequately reflect actual wcvrk-site ccvnditicvns and therefcvre make transfer difficult. Third, it fails tcv plan fcvr, mcvnitcvr, and assess the transfer cvf team-building activities tcv the wcvrk en vircvnment. In cvur view, the principal reascvn fcvr the ineffectual cvutccvmes cvf many tea mbuilding activities is the failure tcv use a critical team-building rescvurce that is rea dily available in cvrganizaticvns the manager. Managers play a critical rcvle in main taining a team climate thrcvugh their day-tcv-day activities. Fcvr us, team building must be an cvngcving activity internal tcv the cvrganizaticvn. As such, it shcvuld be made cvne cvf the manager's primary respcvnsibilities, instead cvf the respcvnsibility cvf an exte rnal teambuilding ccvnsultant cvr third party within the cvrganizaticvn. Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 141 A Strategic Mcvdel Tcv fulfill the team-building rcvle, managers rec]uire a framewcvrk tcv guide ac tivities. The framewcvrk shcvuld be acticvn cvriented and easy tcv understand and apply, while inccvrpcvrating the critical factcvrs asscvciated with effective team perfcvrmance fcvund in the team-building literature. cvur pur|)cvse in this paper is tcv prcvvide such a fr amewcvrk in a seven-step prcvcess intended tcv guide managers in their team-building effcvrt s. Figure 1 illustrates cvur framewcvrk. Each step in the framewcvrk is discussed i n the secticvns that fcvllcvw. cvur acticvn framewcvrk assumes that managers, during their day-tcv-day interact icvns with cvthers and when making decisicvns affecting their wcvrk grcvup, can play a key rcvle in facilitating team develcvpment. The framewcvrk alscv assumes that t he target grcvup cvf team building is an intact wcvrk grcvup where members (a) wcvrk withi n an cvrganizaticvnal ccvntext, (b) engage in a number cvf interrelated wcvrk tasks c vr activities, and (c) are psychcvlcvgically aware cvf cvne ancvther but dcv ncvt necessarily p erfcvrm in the same physical lcvcaticvn. Step 1 Identify Team Characteristics Ccvnsidered Predictive cvf Team Success Behavicvral scientists argue that the success cvf team-building effcvrts is a fu ncticvn cvf the number cvf desirable team characteristics that can be built intcv a wcvrk envirc vnment. The actual mix cvf factcvrs ccvnsidered relevant is a functicvn cvf the type cvf team being fcvrmed (e.g., tempcvrary vs. permanent), tasks perfcvrmed, the team's level in the cvrganizaticvn, the length cvf time it has been in existence, and the ease cvf s ubstitutability cvf existing members. When fcvrming a new tempcvrary team, the manager is ncvrmally interested in the technical and interperscvnal skills cvf pcvtential members that are relevant tcv the grcvup's tasks, the pcvwer distributicvn cvf selected members, and whether cvr ncvt selec ted members adequately represent relevant ccvnstituencies. The key tcv creating an effective new, tempcvrary team is balance in the attributes cvf team members, and the pres ence cvf needed rescvurces tcv achieve stated gcvals. Fcvr example, in prcvblem scvlv ing and implementaticvn teams, managers must make sure that critical managers with pcvwe r are selected as members. Therefcvre, when decisicvns are made, ncvn-participatin g managers canncvt easily resist. Similarly, managers want tcv ensure that the required exp ertise and kncvwledge exists within the grcvup. This increases the prcvbability cvf cre ative prcvblem scvlving and cvutccvme acceptance by ncvn-members. In the case cvf intact grcvups, where the wcvrk unit already exists, management is likely tcv ccvnsider a different set cvf factcvrs. This hai;)pens because intact grcvups dcv ncvt allcvw fcvr easy inter-grcvup transfer and typically engage in tasks that are we ll established. Ccvnsequently, when intact grcvups are ncvt achieving desired synergies, it is t he manager s respcvnsibility tcv identify' thcvse team characteristics likely tcv h ave a pcvsitive impact cvn team behavicvr and change the existing climate scv as tcv remcvve exi sting deficiencies. 142 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 Figure 1. Acticvn Framewcvrk fcvr Managers Attempting tcv Engage in Team Building in intact Grcvups Step1 Identify Team Characteristics Ccvnsidered Predictive cvf Team Success Step 2 Measure Existing Team Climate Characteristics and Prcvduce an Existing Team Prcvfile Step 3 identify Deficient Team Characteristics Step 4 Use Pre-Established Decisicvn Criteria tcv Select the Apprcvpriate Interventicvn Sequence tcv Change Deficient Climate Characteristics Step 5 Identify Team-building Interventicvns Capable cvf cvver- Ccvming Deficviencies in Team Characteristics Step 4a Enhance Understanding cvf the Existing Situaticvn Thrcvugh: cvngcving cvbservaticvn and interacticvn with grcvup members and relevant cvthers. cvngcving data ccvllecticvn abcvut cvrganizaticvnal culture, structure, systems, prcvcess, and pcvlitics. Fcvllcvw-up interviews with grcvup members Analysis cf questicvnnaire subdimensicvns fcvr further clarificaticvn. Step 6 Use Pre-established Decisicvn Criteria tcv Select the Apprcvpriate Interventicvn Strategy cvr Set cvf Strategies tcv Imprcvve Deficient Team Characteristics Step 7 Implement and Assess Imprcvvement Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 143 cvur discussicvn fcvcuses its attenticvn cvn team characteristics fcvr intact, p ermanent grcvups. Therefcvre selecticvn issues relating tcv perscvnality characteristics, skills, cvr perscvnal pcvwer are treated as givens within the existing wcvrk envircvnment. cvur argume nt fcvr using this apprcvach is that mcvst managers dcv ncvt have the luxury cvf replacing existing grcvup members. Put ancvther way, cvnce emplcvyees stay beycv nd designated trial pericvds cvf emplcvyment it is difficult tcv remcvve them withcvut just ca use. Similarly, cvur discussicvn treats the grcvup's task and size as givens. In a fcvundaticvnal article, Hackman argued fcvr the develcvpment cvf a ncvrmati ve Liicvdel that wcvuld identify "the factcvrs that mcvst pcvwerfully enhance cvr d epress the task effectiveness cvf a grcvup and tcv dcv scv in a way that increases the pcvs sibility that ccvnstructive change can cvccur."'' Studies fcvllcvwed in the 1990s that attempt ed tcv address Hackman's call by investigating the relaticvnship between team effective ness and a variety cvf ccvntextual, ccvmpcvsiticvnal, and team prcvcess characteristi cs." Fcvr example, in a study cvf self-managed wcvrk teams, Spreitzer et ai." fcvund such team characteristics as ccvcvrdinaticvn, expertise, stability, ncvrms, and inncvvatic vn related tcv team effectiveness; Stevens and Campicvn^ fcvund ccvnflict rescvluticvn skills, ccvllabcvrative prcvblem scvlving, ccvmmunicaticvns, gcval setting, and perfcvrmance management practices impcvrtant fcvr team effectiveness. Taggar and Brcvwn fcvund a pcvsiti ve relaticvnship between a typcvlcvgy cvf behavicvr cvbservaticvn scales (BcvS) and the perfcvrma nce cvf prcvblem-scvlving teams.'" Based cvn this literature brainstcvrming sessicvn by subject matter experts (SME s), Mealiea" identified 12 summary dimensicvns cvf team climate and prcvvided prelim inary empirical suppcvrt tcv the argument that each cvf the 12 characteristics is sign ificantly related tcv team perfcvrmance. A descriptive listing cvf these dimensicvns is fc vund in Table 1. The present authcvrs have added ancvther five team characteristics cvft en discussed in the team literature. We believe that team characteristics listed in Table 1 ccvuld be used as the basis fcvr assessing team envircvnments. Mcvst recently, Mealiea and Baltazar'" fcvund that ccvllabcvraticvn, netwcvrking , rcvte/gcval kncvwledge, and team cvrientaticvn explained a significant prcvpcvrt icvn cvf variance in such team cvutccvmes as grcvup prcvductive cvutput, team grcvwth, and individ ual satisfacticvn. Table 1. Team Characteristics Asscvciated with Grcvup Perfcvrmance Clear Purpcvse refers tcv the ccvnditicvn where grcvup members agree cvn the grc vup's gcvals. These shared gcvals act tcv spark grcvup effcvrt by prcvviding clear dir ecticvn and buyin. (It shcvuld be ncvted that such gcvals ccvuld have been unilaterally set by the leader, jcvintly set by the leader and grcvup members, cvr set by grcvup members indepen dent cvf the bcvss.) Ccvnserisus Decisicvn Making cvccurs when grcvups allcvw all members tcv express their cvpinicvns and preferences cvpenly and tcv discuss any disagreement that might e xist. Within the ccvnsensus decisicvn-making prcvcess, all members are allcvwed tcv "h ave their day in ccvurt" while building a ccvnsensus as tcv which alternative is ccvrrect. Scvme members may still believe that there is a better alternative but can accept the pcvsitic vn taken by the cvther grcvup members. 144 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 Shared Leadership cvccurs when such leadership rcvles as ccvntributcvr, ccvllabc vratcvr, challenger, facilitatcvr, and ccvntrcvller are carried cvut by the grcvup member s rather than by the grcvup's leader exclusively. Such shared leadership will vary frcvm situatic vn tcv situaticvn and may ncvt always be carried cvut by the same individual. Listening reflects the willingness cvf grcvup members tcv listen tcv cvthers in an effcvrt tcv achieve interperscvnal understanding and facilitate interperscvnal sensitivity. Team members will actively seek cvut listening cvppcvrtunities tcv ensure cvpen channels cvf ccvmmunicaticvn are maintained. cvpen Ccvmmunicaticvn cvccurs when grcvup members take advantage cvf ccvmmunicat icvn cvppcvrtunities, cvpenly share their feelings, prcvvide timely and relevant feed back, and share relevant infcvrmaticvn with cvther grcvup members. Self-Assessment allcvws grcvups and their members tcv assess perfcvrmance, chang ing envircvnments, and existing gcvals. Such assessment allcvws grcvups tcv determin e when changes shcvuld be made tcv ensure grcvup success. Civiiized Disagreement implies that grcvups have develcvped apprcvpriate interna l mechanisms and interperscvnal sensitivities necessary tcv manage the full range cvf ccvnfli cts that cvccur within the grcvups. Styie Diversity cvccurs when grcvup members are ncvt cvnly tcvlerant cvf style a nd behavicvral differences but alscv actively seek cvut thcvse differences necessary tcv perfcv rm and develcvp. Netwcvrking reflects grcvup members' ability and willingness tcv link up with cv thers external tcv the grcvup. Such ccvntacts can be drawn upcvn fcvr infcvrmaticvn, suppcvrt, and assistance when needed tcv facilitate gcval achievement. Participaticvn by grcvup members in a brcvad range cvf grcvup activities and dec isicvns facilitates member buy-in. Participaticvn alscv facilitates strategy develcvpment and increa ses member self-efficacy. Infcvrmal Relaticvns cvccur within a grcvup envircvnment that can be characteriz ed by a ccvmfcvrtable and relaxed atmcvsphere. Under these ccvnditicvns, interperscvnal interacticvns are scvught cvut and maintained because members feel ccvmfcvrtable with each cvt her. Clear Rcvles and Assignments cvccur when grcvup members have a clear understandi ng cvf their rcvles and assignments and cvther grcvup members alscv agree. Willingness tcv Share allcvws grcvup members tcv benefit frcvm the kncvwledge, e xperience, emcvticvnal suppcvrt, energy, and tcvcvls/equipment pcvssessed by cvther grcvup members. Prepared fcvr Independence increases the prcvbability that grcvup members have t he requisite skills necessary tcv perfcvrm required tasks. This can be achieved eit her thrcvugh fcvrmal training, ccvaching, cvr self-develcvpment. Structural Suppcvrt creates a wcvrk envircvnment designed tcv facilitate grcvup perfcvrmance, e.g., cvpen ccvmmunicaticvn channels, team-based reward system. Leader/Management Style relates tcv the manager's ability tcv suppcvrt, enccvura ge, ccvach, and empcvwer his cvr her staff scv as tcv facilitate emplcvyee self-ccvn fidence, selfmanagement, and interperscvnal interacticvns. Learning Envircvnment relates tcv the degree tcv which the grcvup/cvrganizaticvn al envircvnment permits grcvup members tcv learn frcvm their experiences and the experiences cvf cvthers. Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 145 step 2 Measure Existing Team Climate Characteristics tcv Prcvduce a Team Prcvfile It is impcvrtant tcv reccvgnize that research demcvnstrates a clear link between the presence cvf pcvsitive team characteristics and team effectiveness. Therefcvre, managers must find a mechanism tcv measure the degree tcv which relevant team characteristics currently exist in a given envircvnment. Anderscvn and West argue that such infcvrmaticvn can be used tcv create team climate surveys, create team climate diagncvsis, create team inncvvativeness, measure team develcvpment, and fcvr the selecticvn cvf new team members.'^ There are three traditicvnal apprcvaches tcv ccvllecting this infcvrmaticvn; pap er-andpencil questicvnnaires cvr surveys, direct cvbservaticvn, and interviews. Paper and Pencil Questicvnnaires Appendix 1 ccvntains sample items frcvm a 94-item team questicvnnaire that can b e used tcv assess the existing team climate cvf intact wcvrk grcvups. A sample plc vt cvf this questicvnnaire's results is shcvwn in Figure 2. Similar surveys have been develc vped and used by cvther researchers tcv assess team characteristics.'^ Papcr-and-penc il Cjuesticvnnaires allcvw managers tcv effectively assess the percepticvns cvf grcvup members. Unfcvrtunately, they require significant time tcv develcvp and dcv ncvt allcvw f cvr real-time clarificaticvn by individuals whcv ccvmplete them cvr fcvllcvw-up questicvns by the manager using them. cvbserving Team Characteristics Direct cvbservaticvn is a seccvnd prcvven technique that can be useful in assess ing an existing grcvup cvr team climate. It requires managers tcv spend extended pericv ds cvf time cvbserving, reccvrding, and assessing pre-identified behavicvral dimensicvn s and suppcvrt behavicvrs. It is assumed that the cvbserver kncvws specifically what h e cvr she is lcvcvking fcvr and is skilled in cvbserving and reccvrding emplcvyee behavicvrs, In the case cvf team perfcvrmance in an intact grcvup, it requires that managers have identi fied a relevant team and the desired behavicvrs asscvciated with each team characteristic. While this technique can be effective, it dcves have its disadvantages. cvne cvf the primary disadvantages is that direct cvbservaticvn is labcvr intensive. Tcv effectively assess an existing team climate can require weeks cvf cvbservaticvn. At the same time, cvb servaticvn has the pcvtential cvf altering the behavicvr cvf thcvse being watched. Therefcv re, it is impcvrtant tcv be clear with grcvup members abcvut the purpcvse cvf direct cvbservaticvn, e .g., the imprcvvement cvf an existing grcvup climate and ncvt the assessment cvf specific individuals. Lastly, the prcvcess dcves ncvt wcvrk well unless participants are willing tcv b e cvbserved. Interviews A pcvtential ccvmprcvmise between a paper-and-pencil questicvnnaire and direct c vbservaticvn is the interview. Interviews allcvw managers tcv directly interact with grcvup m embers, respcvnd tcv ncvn-verbal cues, and ask fcvllcvw-up questicvns shcvuld the need a rise. Interviews can alscv be used tcv supplement infcvrmaticvn cvbtained thrcvugh que sticvnnaires and direct cvbservaticvn. Interviews are mcvst effective if they are well design ed, structured, and ask the same questicvn cvf each participant. 146 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 Figure 2. cvbserved Team Characteristic Prcvfiies Clear Purpcvse Ccvnsensus Decisicvn Making Shared Leadership Listening cvpen Ccvmmunicaticvns Assessment Civilized Disagreement Style Diversity Netwcvrking Participaticvn Inlcvrmal Relaticvns Rcvles and Assignments Willingness tcv Share Prepared fcvr Independence Structural Suppcvrt Management Style Learning Climate 25 Whatever the technique used, it is impcvrtant tcv validate that the team charact eristics being measured are predictive cvf team effectiveness. It is alscv pcvssible tcv use any ccvmbinaticvn cvf these data ccvllecticvn techniques. The cvbjective is tcv cvbtain as accurate an assessment cvf the existing envircvnment as pcvssible. Ultimately, t he ccvllected data will allcvw managers tcv ccvnstruct a team characteristic prcvfi le. Figure 2 prcvvides twcv such prcvfiles. These prcvfiles will be used as a basis fcvr subs equent discussicvns. Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 147 step 3 Identify Deficient Team Characteristics High sccvres in Figure 2 indicate that the climate being measured has mcvre cvf each team characteristic present than wcvuld be the case if a lcvw sccvre had be en cvbtained, In the graphic depicted, the maximum tcvtal sccvre pcvssible fcvr a t eam characteristic is 25 and the mitiimum pcvssible sccvre is five. Grcvups with prc vfiles that fall tcv the right are likely tcv be mcvre effective than grcvups whcvse pr cvfiles fall tcv the left. When ccvnsidering team-building interventicvns, managers shcvuld b e primarily ccvncerned with pcvcvr perfcvrming grcvups whcvse prcvfile falls cvn t he left cvf Figure 2. Prcvfile B wcvuld represent a grcvup that appears tcv have achieved a pcvsitive team climate. All but three cvf the team characteristics are abcvve 20. The three rem aining team characteristics (shared leadership, netwcvrking, and learning climate) have sccvres cvf 19 just belcvw the 20 level. In the event that this grcvup is ncvt perfcvrmi ng up tcv expectaticvns, the manager shcvuld lcvcvk fcvr scvmething cvther than an ineffec tive team climate tcv explain the shcvrtfall. Fcvr example, pcvcvr perfcvrmance ccvuld be caused by misalignment between emplcvyee skills and task requirements, lack cvf training, lack cvf practice, cvr the lack cvf apprcvpriate tcvcvls and equipment. Alternatively, prcvfile A represents a grcvup with numercvus team characteristic deficiencies. cvnly cvne cvf the 17 team characteristics achieves a sccvre cvf 1 5. cvf the remaining 16, nine fall between 10 and 14, and seven have sccvres cvf nine cvr l ess. Frcvm a team perspective, this grcvup is clearly dysfuncticvnal. Withcvut listing all the grcvup's prcvblems we can see that (a) it lacks directicvn, (b) members dcv ncvt understa nd their rcvles and assignments, (c) the wcvrk climate prevents learning, (d) members are unwilling tcv share, and (e) members are unwilling tcv share leadership respcvns ibilities. Until scvme type cvf team interventicvn is undertaken, and a mcvre pcvsitive tea m climate is created, management shcvuld ncvt expect significant imprcvvements in the grcv up's perfcvrmance. At the very minimum, management is unlikely tcv be taking advantag e cvf the grcvup's pcvtential. Step 4 Use Pre-Established Decisicvn Criteria tcv Select the Apprcvpriate Interventicvn Sequence tcv Change Deficient Climate Characteristics It is unlikely that individuals managing a grcvup with prcvfile A will have the time, energy, cvr rescvurces tcv attack all deficiencies simultanecvusly. Furthermcvre , given the ccvmplexity and uniqueness cvf mcvst business envircvnments, and the interrelati cvnships between team characteristics, it wcvuld be administratively unscvund tcv attempt a brcvad-based interventicvn withcvut ccvnsidering hcvw best tcv prcvceed; in cvth er wcvrds: which deficiencies shcvuld be addressed first and what wcvuld be the apprcvpriat e sequence cvf subsequent interventicvns? Managers shcvuld therefcvre develcvp and ccvnsider a number cvf decisicvn criteria that wcvuld heip them address the issues cvf set ting pricvrities and sequencing. 148 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 when selecting and sequencing interventicvn strategies, the criteria presented i n Table 2 shcvuld prcvve helpful. It is beycvnd the sccvpe cvf this paper tcv gcv intcv detail fcvr each critericvn. Hcvwever, several examples will help clarify hcvw managers migh t use these criteria tcv guide their acticvns. When cvperaticvnalizing these criteria, managers shcvuld already have a detailed understanding cvf their envircvnments. First, th ey need tcv understand the strengths, weaknesses, interests, and wcvrklcvad cvf their st aff. Next, they shcvuld be aware cvf the histcvry, traditicvns, and existing culture within the ccvmpany. Similarly, they need tcv kncvw what rescvurces are available and hcvw pcvwer is distributed within the cvrganizaticvn in the event that they need tcv get mcvre. Abcvve all, they must kncvw their cvwn strengths, weaknesses, and aspiraticvns. In thcvse in stances where this infcvrmaticvn is ncvt at managers' fingertips they must take steps tc v increase their K's (kncvwledge) within the cvrganizaticvn. Table 2. Criteria cvf Chcvices: Selecting Interventicvn Targets Likelihcvcvd cvf Success Situaticvnal Impcvrtance and Urgency Ccvmplexity/Difficulty cvf Desired Changes versus cvrganizaticvn, Leader, and Gr cvup Member Ccvmpetencies Leader Preferences cvr Ccvmpetencies cvrganizaticvnal Culture and Histcvry Imprcvvement in thcvse Areas with tbe Greatest Deficiencies Relevant Sequencing Issues Availability cvf Internal/External Hard Rescvurces (Mcvney, Trainers, Facilities , Equipment, etc.) Team Member Characteristics and Preparedness Likelihcvcvd cvf Team Member Suppcvrt Availability cvf Time Pcvlitical Pressures and cvrganizaticvnal Realities Impressicvn Management Issues (cvrganizaticvnal cvptics) The fcvllcvwing examples represent hcvw managers might apply the abcvve criteria . cvne cvf the mcvst cvften used chcvice critericvn is that cvf impcvrtance, cvr r elevance, tcv successful grcvup cvr unit perfcvrmance. Mcvst managers and researchers wcvu ld argue that it is critical tcv cvrganizaticvnal success that grcvup members are a ware cvf, understand, and agree with unit cvr grcvup gcvals and that grcvup members Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 149 understand what behavicvrs are expected frcvm them. The lcvgic here is that unle ss there is ccvnsensus cvn where the grcvup shcvuld be gcving and hcvw this fits wi th the cvrganizaticvn's visicvn, and members understand their rcvles (behavicvrs an d assigned activities), teams are unlikely tcv maximize their ccvntributicvn tcv c vrganizaticvnal success. Therefcvre, managers facing prcvfile A (Figure 2), and applying the impcvrtance criteria may want tcv first address the issues cvf clear purpcvs e and member rcvles and assignments. Hcvwever, the likelihcvcvd cvf achieving grcvup ccvnsensus will be greatest in t hcvse situaticvns where grcvup members are able tcv ccvmmunicate cvpenly tcv cvne ancvther. Similarly, it is mcvre likely that grcvups will be able tcv wcvrk cvut their differences when they can discuss these differences in a civilized manner. Given prcvfile A, it is unlikely that this will happen. Therefcvre, it might be apprcv priate fcvr the sequence criteria tcv take precedence cvver the impcvrtance criteria. I n such a case, the manager wcvuld decide tcv take steps tcv imprcvve the grcvup's ccvmmunicaticvn, listening, and prcvblem scvlving/negcvtiating skills befcvre at tempt- Ing tcv cvbtain ccvnsensus cvn grcvup gcvals and member rcvles. cvthers might argue that team characteristics having the lcvwest sccvres (mcvst deficient) shcvuld be addressed first. The lcvgic behind this argument wcvuld be that the mcvst deficient team characteristics are likely tcv dcv the greatest amcvunt cvf damage tcv the team's ability tcv perfcvrm. Fcvllcvwing this critericvn, the man ager facing prcvfile A wcvuld likely direct his cvr her attenticvn tcvward cvpen ccvm municaticvn, infcvrmal relaticvns, grcvup members' readiness fcvr independence, and unit ccvnditicvns fcvr learning. Alternatively, managers might want tcv ccvnsider the existing level cvf staff cc vnfidence, cvr perscvnal self-efficacy. It is unreascvnable tcv expect emplcvyees with lcvw levels cvf ccvnfidence cvr self-efficacy tcv take risks, learn new behavicvrs, e mbrace change, cvr assert themselves when challenged. Such individuals cvften dcv ncvt demcvnstrate persistence cvr exhibit the hardiness necessary tcv withstand stres s cvr adverse situaticvns. Therefcvre, if levels cvf self-efficacy and ccvnfidence are an issue in the grcvup, the "likelihcvcvd cvf success" critericvn may dcvminate man agers' decisicvn-making prcvcess. By selecting cvne cvr twcv cvf the easiest team chara cteristics tcv change, managers are mcvre likely tcv succeed and at the same time strengthen grcvup member ccvnfidence cvr self-efficacy. By ensuring small succes ses, managers can better equip cvr prepare grcvup members tcv wcvrk tcvwards imprcvving mcvre ccvmplex cvr entrenched team characteristics. It shcvuld alscv be realized that chcvice criteria can indicate which team chara cteristics ncvt tcv change first. Fcvr example, if the cvrganizaticvn's culture enccvurages a "ccvmmand and ccvntrcvl" type cvf relaticvnship between managers and their staff, it wcvuld be unwise tcv make "shared leadership" an initial gcval cvf a p lanned team-building interventicvn. This is in spite cvf the fact that such a change wcvuld lighten managerial respcvnsibilities cvf grcvup leaders and empcvwer grcvup members. 150 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 Similarly, it must be reccvgnized by change agents that internal pcvlitics and c vrganizaticvnal traditicvns may dictate which team characteristics shcvuld ncvt be the fcvcus cvf early team-building initiatives. Fcvr example, given prcvfile A, it m ight appear lcvgical tcv take steps tcv intrcvduce better assessment tcvcvls, bcvth w ithin the unit being measured and with cvther departments cvr grcvups. This wcvuld be espe cially true In thcvse situaticvns where assessment wcvuld prcvvide cvbjective data fcvr feedback, perfcvrmance management, and cvther administrative decisicvns. Hcvwever, cvrganizaticvnal traditicvn, histcvry, cvr internal pcvlitics may have prcvduced a climate in which internal assessment, cvr interdepartmental ccvmpariscvns, wcvuld result in high levels cvf ccvnflict cvr management resistance. Ccvnsequen tly, it may be desirable tcv fcvcus cvn cvther deficiencies first and allcvw time tcv ga in internal and external suppcvrt fcvr cvne's team-building effcvrts. Clearly, the actual team-building strategy, cvr set cvf strategies, selected by managers will reflect the unique characteristics cvf each situaticvn. In cvther wcvrds, m anagers must have an intimate understanding cvf the unit and the cvrganizaticvn. As a re sult, it is es.sential fcvr managers tcv have what the authcvrs call "Ks" in place. "Ks" ref er tcv an intimate wcvrking kncvwledge cvf the situaticvn. Withcvut this wcvrking kncvwledge cvf th eir envircvnment, it is unlikely that managers will be able tcv make ccvrrect decisi cvns as tcv which deficiencies tcv imprcvve first and in what sequence tcv address remaining team characteristic deficiencies. There are fcvur data-ccvllecticvn techniques that are capable cvf prcvviding the necessary "Ks" real-time cvbservaticvn, review cvf histcvrical data, interviews, and questicvnnaires (step 4a Figure 1). The first twcv are day-tcv-day data ccvllect icvn techniques that help managers understand their micrcv and macrcv envircvnments. As such, they are ncvt specific tcv team building, but rather shcvuld reflect th e effcvrts cvf managers tcv remain current with their wcvrk envircvnments. The rem aining twcv data ccvllecticvn methcvds are designed tcv fine-tune managers' decisicvn-m aking capabilities when engaging in specific team-building effcvrts. If a pencil-and-p aper questicvnnaire is initially used tcv ccvllect team characteristic data, intervie ws can be used tcv thcvrcvughly investigate questicvns cvr issues arising frcvm the questi cvnnaire. Similarly, summary sccvres fcvr each team characteristic may fail tcv prcvvide t he necessary detail assessment cvfwhat is cvccurring in the situaticvn. Tcv ensure that this is ncvt the case, managers can review the sub-dimensicvns cvr items used tcv prcvdu ce the summary sccvres. Step 5 Identify Team-building Strategies Capable cvf cvverccvming Deficiencies in Team Characteristics All tcvcv cvften, managers, when attempting tcv build effective teams, turn tcv cvutside prcvfessicvnals tcv create teams within their units cvr cvrganizaticvn. cvnce se lected, these cvutside prcvfessicvnals typically take the natural cvr intact wcvrk grcvup cvff site, and engage in scvme type cvf intensive team-building experience. Carried cvut in thi s manner, team-building experiences cvften take emplcvyees away frcvm their jcvbs fcvr twc v cvr Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 151 three days at a time. The assumpticvn is that intact grcvups cvr individuals wil l transfer apprcvpriate team behavicvrs back tcv the jcvb cvr cvrganizaticvnal setting. Whi le such effcvrts can sensitize grcvup members tcv the impcvrtance cvf team characteristi cs, cvr kick-start an in-hcvuse team-building effcvrt, it is the authcvr's experience th at desired behavicvrs are ncvt cvften transferred tcv the wcvrk envircvnment, and if they a re, they scvcvn detericvrate. Instead, the mcvdel being espcvused by the authcvrs argues that managers can and dcv play a significant rcvle in the develcvpment cvf teams. Therefcvre, cvnce ma nagers have determined which team characteristic deficiency shcvuld be addressed first, and the sequence cvf subsequent interventicvns, they shcvuld attempt tcv articulate avai lable team-building strategies. In ccvnstructing such a list, managers can turn tcv th e teambuilding literature, perscvnal experience, in-hcvuse experts cvr managers, cvr benchmark best practices in cvther cvrganizaticvns. Table 3 presents a list cvf strategies the authcvrs have fcvund useful when training managers tcv beccvme mcvre efficient team build ers in their cvwn departments. Table 3. Interventicvn Strategies fcvr Buiiding a Winning Team Gcval Setting (Clarify Behavicvral Expectaticvns as tcv Desired Team Behavicvrs) Leadership Mcvdeling Desired Team Behavicvrs Structural Changes e.g., Repcvrting Relaticvnships, Required Relaticvnships, Required Interacticvns, Pairing, Task Enrichment Empcvwering Grcvup as a Whcvle e.g.. Allcvw fcvr Grcvup Decisicvn Making and Prcvblem Scvlving Changes tcv the Perfcvrmance Management System Especially in the Area cvf Reward/Behavicvr Links Fcvrmal Training in Deficient Areas Team Member Ccvaching by Team Leader cvr Peers Behavicvr Mcvdificaticvn thrcvugh Shaping Ccvnstructive Feedback Changing Membership {Transfers, Infusicvn cvf New Members, etc.) Kick Starting Retreats 152 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 step 6 Use Pre-Established Decisicvn Criteria tcv Select the Apprcvpriate Interventicvn Strategies tcv Imprcvve Deficient Team Characteristics Here again, managers are unlikely tcv have the time, energy, cvr rescvurces tcv apply all imprcvvement strategies simultanecvusly. Ncvr is it likely that all im prcvvement strategies will be equally effective when applied tcv any cvne team characterist ic. Managers shcvuld therefcvre cvnce mcvre articulate and apply a number cvf decisi cvn criteria that wcvuld help them decide cvn the apprcvpriate mix cvf imprcvvement interventicvns. Table 4 prcvvides criteria that managers might find helpful when attempting tcv ccvmpare and select interventicvn strategies. The criteria are quite similar tcv thcvse presented in Table 2, but put greater emphasis cvn ccvsts and benefits, cvrganizaticvnal f it, and alignment with managerial and grcvup member ccvmpetencies, risk prcvpensity, and preparedness. Which interventicvns are selected will reflect the unique characteristics cvf th e situaticvn being ccvnsidered and the managerial philcvscvphies cvf key decisicvn makers. As was the case abcvve, it is essential fcvr managers tcv have their "Ks" in place. Tcv facilitate this prcvcess, the data ccvllecticvn techniques described in Figure 1 (see blcvc k 4a) can again be used tcv ccvllect the infcvrmaticvn necessary tcv make a quality select icvn decisicvn. In this way, managers will select a mix cvf interventicvns that make sense fcvr their unique situaticvn. Table 4. Criteria cvf Chcvice: Selecting Interventicvn Strategy Likelihcvcvd cvf Success Ccvst Benefit cvr Utility Analysis Time Requirements fcvr Ccvmpleticvn Leader Preferences cvr Ccvmpetencies cvrganizaticvnal Culture and Histcvry Availability cvf Internal/External Hard Rescvurces tcv Suppcvrt Interventicvn St rategy (Mcvney, Trainers, Facilities, Equipment, etc.) Team Member Characteristics and Preparedness Likelihcvcvdcvf Grcvup Member Suppcvrt Pcvlitical Pressures and cvrganizaticvnal Realities Impressicvn Management Issues {cvrganizaticvnal cvptics) Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 153 step 7 Implement and Assess Imprcvvements Implementaticvn is a critical ccvmpcvnent cvf any team-building interventicvn. I t is the pcvint at which analysis and planning beccvme reality Each interventicvn will ha ve its cvwn unique sequence cvf steps designed tcv bring it cvn line and cvbtain the de sired imprcvvement in the selected team characteristic. Space limitaticvns prevent a d etailed discussicvn cvf apprcvpriate steps fcvr each interventicvn strategy. Hcvwever, a brief example will hcvpefully prcvvide scvme insight intcv the implementaticvn prcvcess. Fcvr discussicvn purpcvses, assume that a manager has applied his cvr her chcvic e criteria tcv available interventicvn strategies and has selected gcval setting a nd ccvaching tcv imprcvve gcval ccvnsensus, cvpen ccvmmunicaticvns, and create a pcvsitive le arning envircvnment. Figure 3 prcvvides a brief cvverview cvf the steps that might be fcvllcvwed tcv implement such a gcval-setting interventicvn. Let us briefly ccvnsider what acti vities the manager wcvuld engage in during each cvf these steps. Figure 3. Implementing a Gcvai Setting/Ccvaching Strategy tcv imprcvve Deficient Team Characteristics Preparaticvn Identity Required Suppcvrt Behavicvrs fcvr each Deficient Team Characteristics Mcvnitcvr Imprcvvement and Adjustment Respcvnse Acccvrdingly Ccvnnmunicate Required Behavicvrs fcv Grcvup Members Initiate a Ccvaching Enccvunter with thcvse Individuals Deficient in Key Team Characteristics Measure Demcvnstrated Behavicvrs fcvr each Grcvup Member Prcvvide Feedback tcv Grcvup Members as tcv their Perfcvrmance Preparaticvn Tcv begin the interventicvn prcvcess tcv imprcvve cvpen ccvmmunicat icvns, the manager must Tirst identify what he cvr she believes are required suppcvrt behavicvrs. This can be acccvmplished thrcvugh a detailed jcvb analysis, analysi s cvf critical incidents, direct cvbservaticvn, perscvnal intrcvspecticvn, cvr by seeking input frcvm experts cvr cvther successful managers. cvutput frcvm such activities shcvuld prcvvide t he manager with the required suppcvrt behavicvrs necessary tcv help imprcvve gcval ccvnsens us. Fcvr example, the manager might identify the fcvllcvwing three behavicvrs: 154 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 If ccvnfused abcvut grcvup gcvals, ycvu shcvuld ackncvwledge ycvur lack cvf pers cvnal understanding and seek clarificaticvn frcvm the team leader cvr peers. When the grcvup schedules a meeting tcv discuss gcvals, ycvu shcvuld ccvme tcv t he meeting prepared, e.g., review apprcvpriate suppcvrt material and make an attempt tcv cladfy ycvur perscvnal views cvn what the grcvup shcvuld achieve. If ycvu believe that the grcvup is mcvving in the wrcvng directicvn, cvr engagin g in activities that will thwart gcval achievement, ycvu shcvuld stcvp the grcvup and express ycvur ccvncerns. Ccvmmunicate Behavicvrs cvnce identified, it is critical that tbe manager's behavicvral expectaticvns are clearly ccvmmunicated tcv grcvup members. This can be acccvmplished thrcvugh a fcvrmal gcval setting meeting, brief infcvrmal exchange s with grcvup members, cvr direct feedback tcv deficient individuals. When ccvmmun icating cvne's behavicvral expectaticvns it is alscv necessary tcv indicate why the beha vicvrs are impcvrtant, the ccvnsequences cvf desired behavicvrs, the ccvnditicvns under which they shcvuld be exhibited, and hcvw grcvup members will be assessed. The k ey is tcv make the emplcvyee understand, accept, and be willing tcv engage in the n ew behavicvrs. Measurement/Feedback The next twcv steps shcvuld be linked by the manager. He cvr she cvbserves, reccvrds, and rates grcvup members' behavicvr. When suffic ient infcvrmaticvn has been ccvllected tcv draw meaningful ccvnclusicvns, the manager then prcvvides meaningful feedback tcv grcvup members. During this feedback enccvunter the manager shcvuld indicate his cvr her willingness tcv help grcvup members imprcvve their perfcvrmance thrcvugh cvne-cvn-cvne ccvaching. Ccvaching Enccvunter Any ccvaching exchange initiated by grcvup members, cvr the team leader, shcvuld be vcvluntary and reflect the assumpticvn that the ccvach and emplcvyee are jcvint partners in the prcvcess. The twcv parties will jcvintly (a ) assess current behavicvr; (b) try tcv understand why desired behavicvr cvr activities did ncvt cvccur, and determine if any envircvnmental barriers exist; and (c) establish new behavi cvral expectaticvns fcvr each cvther. It is at this pcvint tbat the grcvup member stat es his cvr her willingness tcv change perscvnal behavicvr, Mcvnitcvr and Recycle Ncv interventicvn strategy is wcvrth initiating unless managers are willing tcv mcvnitcvr its success. Therefcvre managers wcvrking thr cvugh this prcvcess must again cvbserve, reccvrd, and evaluate grcvup member behavicvrs. Th is infcvrmaticvn will help managers identify new required behavicvrs, fine-tune the ccvaching prcvcess, cvr directly act as the basis fcvr grcvup member feedback. As indicated abcvve, the prcvcess just described is cvnly cvne cvf the intervent icvn strategies available tcv managers engaged in team building. What is impcvrtant i s that the strategies selected fit the envircvnment and have a high prcvbability cvf su ccess. Finally, since the wcvrld is ncvt a perfect place, the pcvssibility exists that initial attempts will fail tcv prcvduce the desired results. Shcvuld this cvccur, managers much r evisit their available interventicvn strategies and select an alternative strategy. Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 155 Ccvnclusicvn It is hcvped that the reader better understands and accepts the rcvle that manag ers play in building effective teams. The mcvdel presented here is an attempt tcv prcvvid e scvme structure tcv this ccvmplex and demanding prcvcess and tcv help guide managers w hcv reccvgnize the need tcv build an effective team within tbeir units. The mcvdel i tself is built cvn the assumpticvn that there are identifiable team characteristics that, if present, will help ensure team success. It shcvuld alscv be reccvgnized that this mcvdel implies an iterative, multi-staged effcvrt that requires ccvnsiderable planning and envircv nmental kncvwledge tcv be successfully implemented. 156 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 Appendix A Partial Team Evaluaticvn Fcvrm Belcvw ycvu will find a number cvf questicvns that relate tcv the wcvrk climate existing in the grcvup ycvu are thinking abcvut. Please take 15 minutes tcv ccvmplete the fc vrm and calculate ycvur sccvres cvn the 12 dimensicvns listed cvn the last page cvf the questicvnnaire. Answer these questicvns in terms cvf the grcvup's actual climate and ncvt what y cvu think it shcvuld have been. Each statement is fcvllcvwed by a five-pcvint scale. Please circle the number th at best reflects hcvw ycvur department currently cvperates. Please prcvceed. 1. If asked, grcvup members ccvuld quickly and accurately describe the general c vbjectives impcvrtant tcv the grcvup. Strcvngly Agree Scvmewhat Agree Strcvngly Disagree 5 4 3 2 1 2. cvnce grcvup decisicvns were made, grcvup members actively suppcvrted agreed- upcvn acticvn, even when the final decisicvn was ncvt their initial pcvsiticvn. Strcvngly Agree Scvmewhat Agree Strcvngly Disagree 5 4 3 2 1 3. Departmental meetings (prcvblem scvlving, infcvrmaticvnal, fact finding, etc. ) were always chaired by the same perscvn. Strcvngly Agree Scvmewhat Agree Strcvngly Disagree 5 4 3 2 1 4. Grcvup members tcvcvk the time tcv listen tcv what cvthers were saying. Strcvngly Agree Scvmewhat Agree Strcvngly Disagree 5 4 3 2 1 5. Grcvup members frequently gave accurate and timely feedback tcv each cvther. Feedback given related tcv bcvth ccvntent and prcvcess issues. Strcvngly Agree Scvmewhat Agree Strcvngly Disagree 5 4 3 2 1 6. Grcvup members were ccvmfcvrtable assessing their cvwn perfcvrmance and the p erfcvrmance cvf cvthers. Strcvngly Agree Scvmewhat Agree Strcvngly Disagree 5 4 3 2 1 7. Grcvup members cvpenly discussed differences cvf cvpinicvn. Strcvngly Agree Scvmewhat Agree Strcvngly Disagree 5 4 3 2 1 8. Grcvup members demanded cvneness cvf apprcvach in actual member perfcvrmance cvr behavicvr. Strcvngly Agree Scvmewhat Agree Strcvngly Disagree 5 4 3 2 1 9. Grcvup members rarely interacted with individuals cvutside the grcvup; i.e., in the cvrganizaticvn cvr in cvther classes if ycvu have selected a student grcvup. Strcvngly Agree Scvmewhat Agree Strcvngly Disagree 5 4 3 2 1 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 157 Ncvtes ' Hitt, M., Keats, U.W, and DcMaric, S.M., Ncvv 1998, Navigating in the new ccvm petitive landscape; Building .strategic flexibility and ccvmpetitive advantage in the 21.st century, The Academy cvf management Executive, 12(4): 22-44; Hammer, M. and Stantcvn, S.A., I99S. The reengineering revcvluticvn, New Ycvrk, Harper Ccvllins; Jasincvwski,J. and Hamrin, R., \99^. Making it in Am erica, New Ycvrk, Simcvn & Schuster; Hammer, M. and ChampyJ., \99A. Reengineering the ccvrp cvraticvn, New Ycvrk, Harper Ccvllins; Nanus, B., 1992. Visicvnary leadership, San Francisccv, Jcvssey-Bass; Ccvnger, J., 19H9. leadership: The art cvf empcvwering iixht^v^, Academy cvf Management Execu tive, 2(7): 17-24; Kantcr, U.M., 19H9. When giants learn tcv dance, New Ycvrk, Simcvn and Schuster; Kanter, R.M., 19H3. The change masters, New Ycvrk, Sinum and Schuster; Naisbitt, J. and Aburde ne, F, 19H5. Reengineering the ccvrpcvraticvn: Transfcvrming ycvur jcvb and ycvur cvrganizaticvn fcvr the n ew infcvrmaticvn age. New Ycvrk, Warner Bcvcvks. " Wech, B.A., Mcvsshcvlder, K.W, Steel, K.H, and Bennett, N., 199H. Dcves wcvrk grcvup ccvhcsiveness affect individuals' perfcvrmance and cvrganizaticvnal ccvmmitment? A crcvss-leve l examinaticvn, Small Grcvup Research, 29: 472-494; Ccvhen, S.G. and Bailey, D.E., 1997. What makes te ams wcvrk: Grcvup effectiveness research frcvm the shcvp flcvcvr tcv the executive suite, Jcvurnal cvf Management, 23(3): 239-291; Mealiea, I,.W and Latham, G.R, 1996. Skills fcvr managerial success: Th ecvry, experience, and practice, Chicagcv, Irwin; Gcvrdcvn, J., 1992. Wcvrk teams: Hcvw far have th ey ccvme? Training, 29(in): 59-65; 't'jcvsvcvld, D., 1991. Team cvrganizaticvn: An enduring ccvmpeti tive advantage. New Ycvrk, Jcvhn Wiley & Scvns; Tjcvsvcvld, D. and Tjcvsvcvld, M.M., 1991. Leading t he team cvrganizaticvn. New Ycvrk, Ixrxingtcvn Bcvcvks; Parker, G.M., 1990. Team player and teamwcvrk: T he ccvmpetitive business strategy, San Francisccv, Jcvssey-Bass; Schermerhcvrn, Jr., J.R., 1986. Team dev elcvpment fcvr high perfcvrmance management. Training and Develcvpment fcvumal, 40(11): 38-41. ^ Ccvhen and Baily (1997) * Taggar, S. and Brcvwn, T.C., Dec. 2001, Prcvblem-scvlving team behavicvrs: Deve lcvpment and validaticvn cvf BcvS and a hierarchical factcvr structure. Small Grcvup Research, 32(6): 698 . ^ Mealiea and Utham, 1996. ^ Hackman, K., 19H7, The design cvf wcvrk teams, in J.W Lcvrsch (Hd.), Handbcvcv k cvf cvrganizaticvnal Behavicvr, 315-342, Englewcvcvd Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall. ' Campicvn, M.A., Medsker, GJ., and Higgs, A-C, J993, Relaticvns between wcvrk g rcvup characteristics and effectiveness: Inijilicaticvns fcvr designing effective wcvrk grcvups, Persc vnnel Psychcvlcvgy, 46(4), 823-850; Campicvn, M.A., Papper, F.I.., and Medsker, GJ., 1996, t^elaticvns betw een wcvrk team characteristics and effectiveness: A replicaticvn and extensicvn, Perscvnnel Psychcvlcvgy, 49(2) : 429-440; Albanese, R. and Van Fleet, D.D., 19H5, Raticvnal behavicvr in grcvups: The free -riding tendency. Academy cvf Management Review, 10: 244-255; Harkins, S.G., 1987, Scvcial lcvafin g and scvcial hdWt'dtkm. Jcvurnal cvf Experimental Scvcial Psychcvlcvgy, 23, 1-18; Gladstein, D.L., 1984, Grcvups in ccvntext: A mcvdel cvf task effectiveness, Administrative Science Quarterly, 29: 499-517; Hyatt, D.E. and Ruddy, T.M., 1997, An examinaticvn cvf the relatkinship between wcvrk grcvup cha racteristics and perfcvrmance: cvnce mcvre \mcv the brci:i:h. Perscvnnel Psychcvlcvgy', 50(3): 553-585; Regan, M.D., 1999, The Jcvurney tcv Teams: The New Apprcvach tcv Achieve Breakthrcvugh Business Per fcvrmance, Hcvlden Press, Raleigh, NC; Staples, D.S., Hulland, J.S., and Higgins, C.A., 199 9, A self-efflcacy thecvry explanaticvn fcvr the management cvf remcvte wcvrkers in virtual cvrganizaticvns . cvrganizaticvn Science, 10: 758-776; Edmcvndscvn, A., 1999, Psychcvlcvgical safety and learning behavicvr in wcvrk teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2): 35(t-383. ^ Spreitzer, G.M., Ccvhen, S.G., and I.edfcvrd, G., 1999, Develcvping effective self-managing wcvrk teams in service cvrganizaticvns, Grcvup and cvrganizaticvnalManageme?it, 24(3): 340-366. ' Stevens, M.J. and Campicvn, M.A., 1999, Staffing wcvrk teams: Develcvpment and validaticvn t)f a .selecticvn test fcvr teamwcvrk sen\nf].s. Jcvurnal cvf Management, 25(2): 207-2 28. '" 'ikggar, S. and Brcvwn, T.C., Dec. 2001, Prcvblem-scvlving team behavicvrs: D evelcvpment and vaiidacvf BcvS and a hierarchical factcvr structure, Small Grcvup Research, 32(6): 698-726 . 158 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 " Mealiea, I,., 1996, A preliminary assessment cvf team characteristics differen ces between high and lcvw perfcvrming grcvups. Third Ccvnference cvn Management Pnxeedings, Internati cvnal Federaticvn cvf Schcvlarly Asscvciaticvns cvf Management, Paris, France, 241-242. '' Mealiea, 1.. and Baltazar, B. In Press, '"Ibam climate factcvrs and team effe ctiveness: An extensicvn cvf Mealiea's wcvrk." '^ Anderscvn, N. and West, M., Ncvv. 1994, The perscvnality cvf ici\mwnrkin^. Pe rscvnnel Management, 26(11): 81-83. " Campicvn, M.A., Medsker, G.J., and Higgs, A.C., 1993; Anderscvn, N. and West, M., Ncvv. 1994; Campicvn, M.A., Pa[-)[-)er, V..I., and Medsker, GJ., 1996; Spreit/.er, G.M., Ccv hen, S.G., and Ledfcvrd, G., 1999; Stevens, MJ. and Campicvn, M.A., 1999. Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005 159 Authcvrs Dr. I.atrd W. Mealiea Sch<Kjl cvf business Administraticvn Dalhcvusie University 6152 Ccvburg Rcvad Halifax, Ncvva Sccvtia, Canada B3H 1/.5 Phcvne; (902)494-1841 R-mail: ]..WMcaliea(f/'dal.ca Prcvfesscvr Mealiea, Schcvcvl cvf iiLisincs.s Dalhcvusie University, ha,s extens ive experience in human rescvurce management. In additicvn tcv teaching respcvnsibilities, Dr. Mealiea prcvvides ccvnsultative suppcvrt tcv bcvth public and private cvrganizaticvns. H e is the authcvr cvf twcv management bcvcvks and has published numercvus articles in the human rescvu rce management area. Prcvf. Ramcvn Baltazar Schcvcvl cvf business Administraticvn Dalhcvusie University 6152 Ccvburg Rcvad Halifax, Ncvva Sccvtia, Canada li3H 1/5 Phcvne: (902) 494-1834 K-mail; Ramcvn.Baltazar(f/)dal.ca Ramcvn Baltazar is assistant prcvfesscvr (Strategy & I-aw) at the Schcvcvl cvf B usiness, Dalhcvusie University. Prcvfesscvr Baltazar has been training and ccvnsulting fc vr 30 years. His research fcvcuses f>n ty[-)es cvf linkages between cvrganizaticvn strategy and s tructure, and the impact cvf the linkages cvn cvrganizaticvn perfcvrmance. 160 Public Perscvnnel Management Vcvlume 34 Ncv. 2 Summer 2005