Analysis of Proper Teamwork

This analysis focuses on the importance of team development in organizations, with a case study of Kmart Australia Limited. It covers Tuckman's stages of team development, decision making in teams, effects of physical structure on teamwork, and ways managers can promote teamwork.

ANALYSIS OF PROPER
TEAMWORK

introduction
Team development is considered to be an important part of operations of
an organization in the modern environment. The teams within an
organization help in the process of decision making and the ways by
which the organization operates in the environment. The analysis is
based on the teams which are operating in a dynamic business
environment. Kmart Australia Limited is a retail organization which is
based in Australia (Kmart.com. 2018). The company mainly operates in
the area of low cost products. The organization was formed as a result of
the joint venture between G.J. Coles and Coy Limited and the S.S.
Kresge Company
(Shockley-Zalabak 2014).

Analysis of Tuckman’s stages in
development of teams
The five stages of team development that have been suggested by
Tuckman are,
• Forming – The process of the formation of the group by the
managers.
• Storming – The stage of the orientation of the group.
• Norming – The stage of achieving the goals of the company.
• Performing – The stage of making decisions in an effective manner.
• Adjourning – The breaking of groups after the completion of tasks
(Shuffler and Carter 2018).

Use of decision making in teams
The identity of the team is important for the benefits that can be
provided to the teams. The teamwork further provides the feel of
belonging to the employees who are a major part of the organizations.
The members of the team are further able to improve the skills that are
already possessed by them. The abilities and the skills of the members
of the teams are important for the effectiveness of the decisions that are
taken by the teams within an organization. The complexity of the tasks
that are undertaken by the teams also affects the effectiveness of the
decision making based process (Warrick 2016).

Effects of physical structure on
teamwork
The structure of the organizations affects the ways by which the various
decisions are taken by the members. The decision making is more
complex in case of organizations which have many hierarchical levels.
The incompetency of organizational management can further have
adverse effects on the successful operations of the organizations. The
issues and flaws in the organizational structure can affect the
organizational processes in a huge manner. The differences in the
structure can also cause huge effects on the ways by which the teams
operate (Shockley-Zalabak 2014).

Ways by which managers
promote teamwork
• The leaders need to be effective and good.
• The levels of communication needs to be high.
• The responsibilities provided to teams need to be fulfilled.
• The conflicts in the companies need to be resolved.
• The leaders need to be positive (Shuffler and Carter 2018).

Conclusion
The decision making process is thereby affected by the teams that are
formed within the organizations. The effectiveness of the teams also
depends on the members. The structure of the modern companies can
also affect the speed of the decision making process. The analysis of
Kmart has thereby depicted that the decisions in the organizations need
to be taken based on the structure of the teams.

REFERENCES
• Driskell, J.E., Salas, E. and Driskell, T., 2018. Foundations of teamwork and
collaboration. American Psychologist, 73(4), p.334.
• Kmart.com. (2018). International landing. [online] Available at:
http://www.kmart.com/ [Accessed 30 May 2018].
• Shockley-Zalabak, P., 2014. Fundamentals of organizational communication.
Pearson.
• Shuffler, M.L. and Carter, D.R., 2018. Teamwork situated in multiteam systems: Key
lessons learned and future opportunities. American Psychologist, 73(4), p.390.
• Warrick, D.D., 2016. What leaders can learn about teamwork and developing high
performance teams from organization development practitioners. Performance
Improvement, 55(3), pp.13-21.