Background

Discuss about the Managing of Groups in an Organization.

This case study is based on Google and the problems that the organization was facing.  Managers adopt the skills that are covered in class set up and apply them in real life situations. In applying these skills there is a link between the experience in class and the real life situation. Julia tends to compare and apply skills that were used in school when working on class assignments and comparing them to how they can be applied in real leadership situations. The organization felt the need to determine how personal productivity of every employee can be improved and how the organization can mentor its employees to grow and work as a team. The nature of the organization and the industry that the organization operates has led to the need to have different projects and different teams within the projects. The teams assigned to particular projects are set with the responsibility of seeing the project to the end. 

Managers in such like organization face the challenge of managing different groups due to the lack of consistency in uniform team membership. Managers are forced to manage teams that are specifically in charge of a particular project and then the team is disbanded after the project (Orla & Richard 2008, p11). Managers that  deal with such teams face the challenge of integrating the team together, Leveraging the potential of the team and at the same time becoming the team leader so as to establish an environment of innovation, creativity and adaptability. The manager is charged with the responsibility of ensuring the success of the team and at the same time the organization.  In managing teams that run different projects within goggle, the manager has the role of giving direction and determining the nature of the group that the team will operate. By this, the manager sets ground rules that guide the team.

Google organization from the case study seems to have several problems that are affecting the organization. The organization seems to be based on a lot of specialization and bureaucracy that makes most operations of the group too formal. This makes the teams to focus so much on tasks rather relations. The relationships are primary based and only relate to the task at hand. Due to this the members have less personal contact to each other which limits new ideas since group members being forced to wear a formal code that is controlled by the team leader who limits the group to the agenda.

Identification of Issues and Problems

The organization also lacks a clear organizational culture that guides the conduct and relationship between members within the organization and in groups. Organization culture is a system of beliefs, values and assumptions that are shared among members by guiding how the organization is governed. These influences dictate how they conduct themselves at work and perform their duties. By the fact that the organization has embarked on project Aristotle to determine the reason why employees perform differently and the results that were found by Matt after the research show that the organization was lacking a clear organizational structure. According to Schein (2011, p9-13; Intagliata, Ulrich & Smallwood 2000, P21), organizational culture has three forms that shape the behaviour of employees in an organization. Structural functionalists suggest that organizations are embedded in values of the society that lead to the achievement gals and activities. Further institutional functionalists argue that the history of an organization and its past leadership shapes an institutional culture that binds the employees.

The organizational groups are not based on fusing of formal, informal, secondary and primary aspects of group characteristics. The groups are based on the task at hand and not building relations for the future (Miller, Mabel & Koncha, 2014, 25-26). Management styles that are adopted by managers determine the effectiveness of a group. Team A within the organization operates on less structure norms within the organization, with the team leader taking the leading role. However the group lacks clear structure and team rules with members changing from one discussion to the other. On the hand team B consists of clearly defined roles with each member sticking to the role that they play within the team. Formal codes within the team hinder group dynamics since members have to stick to the rules of the discussion. Fee discussions within the team open up group dynamics making members to freely express themselves and show their inner qualities that may hinder or improve progress.

 Management theorists argue that there is no best management style and thus the most preferred style will depend on the situation and the people. The best leaders have in the world have been born out of situations since charisma is limited. Therefore competency in management only defines the traditional way of doing things. Matt manages technicians and engineers who carry out tasks that he personally doesn’t understand. This is because he has mastered the art of managing people and supplemented it with the traditional and modern management styles. Contingency theorists argue that management decisions are based on the situation and routine decisions that fit the whole firm (Manoj & Shilpa 2013, p312).The management style adopted will depend on the group being managed and the task at hand. For example when dealing with senior level managers, the moderation style may be different from when dealing with lower level employees. 

Possible Solutions

From the problems identified above, Bureaucracy and specialization seems to be hindering the performance of employees during team tasks. Reducing the bottlenecks by having middle level managers and group leaders who can make decisions directly can improve efficiency. The higher layers of management within the organization affect and delay decision making (Northouse 2007, p27). The best teams that have managed to overcome group dynamics are teams that are less informal and have no set norms. The group members relate casually so long as the objective of the team is met.

Organizational culture proponents argue that the organization needs to have a set of values that determine and shape the business processes within the organization.  It has been argued by scholars that leadership in organizations starts with the formation of an organizational culture that binds all the employees and integrates them to one concept of meeting the business strategy of the organization. Through organizational culture the leader is able to promote ethical culture that is important in organizational growth. This culture differentiates the organization from other organizations. Therefore Google needs to define an organizational culture that represents the business strategy of the organization and connects the employees as a team. This enables the leaders within the organization to grow a dynamic organization.

The need to adopt different types of group leadership styles is a key element in ensuring that the members of different groups are able to perform as a team. Schein (2004) argues that informal management styles bring the manager closer to the employee through coaching and teaching mechanisms. The manager needs to combine both formal and informal management styles in forming of groups in relation to a particular task. According to Thompson, Strickland, Gamble (2005) organizations that have employees bonding beyond the work place form the best teams when team work is needed. As suggested by Julia in her previous groups, socialising outside the normal workplace and running a team on a less formal mode makes the employees comfortable and attached to the group. This is a way of exploring the potential of the lesser members of the team since it makes them comfortable and able to relate well within the group. More formal structures exhibit power and hierarchy elations in group set ups which hinder participation of subordinates. Thus means that the group need to operate on informal basis but have clear structure and team rules. This is important in final decision making and 

The best leaders in the world have been situational leaders and not managers (Orla & Boyle, 2008). Greenberg & Baron (2003, p 125) situational leadership can best be applied within the organization. This will mean that teams or groups within a task do not have specified team leaders but rather leaders are chosen within the members themselves. This gives room to the team to judge the best person to lead the task at hand. However the rules of operation within teams need to be clearly set to enable the teams operate within the requirements of the organization. Matt as an example has mastered situational leadership and known how to manage different teams that are more technical than he understands. This will mean mixing management style to have a hybrid style that meets the needs of the team and the task at hand (Orensen 2002, p 81; Thompson, Strickland & Gambler (2005, p34). 

Leadership in groups depends on the situation that exists. Some situations may call for certain leadership traits that a team leader may lack. Open team leadership where the teams choose leaders depending on the task can be the best strategy in fostering team work and exploring the potential of teams. This means that Google has to develop an open leadership where each employee or member of a team has a chance of participating in group leadership. This gives room for all personality traits to be utilised within the team which is an advantage to the organization. McNaron (2009, p859) further adds that team building strategies can be used to bring together employees in a forum where they are free to interact and propose ideas that may improve the organization. The organization will benefit by having an organizational culture that can be used as a competitive advantage and part of the business strategy. 

References

Greenberg J & Baron A.R, 2003. Behaviour in Organizations. Strategic management Journal, Vol. 8. P121-127. 

Intagliata, J., Ulrich, D. & Smallwood, N., 2000. Leveraging Leadership Competencies to Produce Leadership Brand: Creating Distinctiveness by Focusing on Strategy and Results. Human Resource Planning, 23(3). 

Manoj Kumar Sharma &. Shilpa, 2013. Leadership Management: Principles, Models and Theories. Global Journal of Management and Business Studies.  Volume 3, Number 3, pp. 309-318. 

McNaron M, 2009, Using transformational learning principles to change behaviour in the operating theatre. Aron Journal, vol.89, no. 5, pp.859-860. 

Miller, Rex, Mabel Casey, and Mark Konchar, 2014. Change Your Space, Change Your Culture: How Engaging Workspaces Lead to Transformation and Growth. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 

Northouse, G., 2007. Leadership theory and practice. (3rd ed.) Thousand Oak, London, New Delhe, Sage Publications, Inc. 

Orla O’Donnell & Richard Boyle, 2008. Understanding and Managing Organisational Culture. Dublin Colour Books Ltd. 

Orensen, J.B., 2002. The strength of corporate culture and the reliability of firm performance’. Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol 47, 70-91. 

Schein, E. M., 2004. Organizational culture and leadership. (3rd. ed.). Jossy-Bass. 

Schein, E. H., 2011. Leadership and organizational culture. New York, NY: Wiley. 

Thompson, A. A., Strickland, A. J., & Gamble, J. E., 2005. Crafting and executing strategy: The quest for competitive advantage: Concepts and cases (4thed.). McGraw Hill, Irwin 

Watson, T.J., 2006. Organising and Managing Work, UK: Pearson Education Limited.