I.

Introduction to Synergy

A. Definition of Synergy

Synergy, also known as synergism, refers to the combined effects produced by two or more
parts, elements, or individuals.
Synergy results when the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.
According to the American Heritage Dictionary, the term "synergy" is derived from the
Greek word sunergos, meaning "working together."
Synergy is the concept that the value and performance of two companies combined
will be greater than the sum of the separate individual parts. If two companies can merge to
create greater efficiency or scale, the result is what is sometimes referred to as
a synergy merge.
For example, two people can move a heavy load more easily than the two working individually
can each move their half of the load.

B. History of Synergy

Synergy has origins as a theological term describing the cooperation of human effort
with divine will. In recent years the term has most often been used in association with
systems theory. Systems theory, as applied to biology and the physical sciences, describes
the interdependence of various parts of an organism, such as the human body.
The human body, as a system, is comprised of a set of interrelated subsystems,
including the brain, skeleton, muscles, and others. To fully understand the larger system,
one must examine the subsystems and the interrelationships.
Systems theory was one of the first management theories to explicitly state that
changing one of the subsystems could have an impact on the total system. Synergy was
developed as a measure of the effectiveness of the joint efforts of various subsystems.
Discussions of synergy also figure in medical literature, such as in research that
addresses how the effects of medication on individuals are magnified when combined with
a special diet or exercise.
C. The Importance of Synergy
Synergy is defined by Harris and Moran as a cooperative or combined action, and
occurs when diverse or disparate individuals or groups collaborate for a common cause.
The objective is to increase effectiveness by sharing perceptions and experiences,
insights, and knowledge. (Harris, & Moran, 2011, p.233).
People think of synergy as something within an organization. It is usually when two
parties collaborate and create a culture of excellence that is mutually beneficial. This can be
broadened outside of an organization.
An example of synergy can be illustrated by a car wash. Let’s suppose you own a car
wash. You have been ordering soap from a manufacture that is based far away from you
and is charging you a premium for their soap. This is a major expense for you as you are
obviously looking to lower your expenses. Now let’s say another distributor moves into
town and offers you a 25% discount if you put a sigh out front advertising the product you
use. This is a mutually beneficial situation because you save 25% your major expense of
soap and they receive advertising at a minimal cost (Hoback, R. (n.d.).

You can see that synergy can happen at a macro level. Businesses making decisions
that help promote each other. But synergy goes way beyond the macro level. It can happen
between two individuals within an organization.
When two people begin functioning at a new level because of the support and
collaboration they are sharing with each other, synergy is present. With good synergy
comes an effective team. Even if the team doesn’t have the brightest or most talented
people, they will be able to work as a team to accomplish things beyond their individual
skills.
This is a major reason why synergy is so important and critical to the success of a
team. If people are functioning as one cohesive team, they will be able to move an objective
forward.
Synergy makes a team stronger. It makes them more effective. When everyone is
benefiting from a relationship it is healthy and prosperous. That should be the goal of any
individual, organization, or team. Synergy is the goal and achieving it is critical to success.
 
D. Positive Synergy vs. Negative Synergy

Positive Synergy

A positive synergy describes how the combined organization is more than

the sum of its parts due to the parts working together constructively. Indeed, the
term synergy can be defined as a measure of the effectiveness of the joint efforts of
various subsystems acting in coordination.
Positive synergies are a product of the elements effectively achieving both
differentiation and integration.
For example, in the process of brainstorming to come up with new ideas, the
process will be most successful if given a wide diversity of ideas and the capacity to
synthesis those different ideas into a finished outcome. Positive synergies in group
decisions may well include the generation of more ideas, more creative solutions, a
greater acceptance of diversity, increased acceptance of the decision by team
members and a greater capacity to work together towards delivering a finished
solution.
The degree of positive synergy in a group can be understood as a function of
the level of both differentiation and integration added to how balanced these two
are. The more specialized the parts, the greater their integration and the greater the
balance between these the more functional the overall system will be.
The human body can perform the many functions that it can because of both
the extremely high level of differentiation between its parts – creating
interdependency – and its capacity to integrate those. Simpler organisms lack this
high degree of differentiation and integration and thus lack many of the functions of
the human body.
Likewise, the same would apply to a multinational corporation, to a
production process, or a technology. A modern car delivers much greater
functionality than one of fifty years ago; but to do this, a car today has about 30,000
parts, which are all well integrated.
A computer can perform many more functions than a calculator because it
has many more specialized subsystems that are coordinated. Thus, it is this
combination of differentiation and integration that creates positive synergies and
creates the functionality that adds value to the whole organization.

Negative Synergy

A negative synergy is a nonlinear interaction where the combined

outcome is less than the sum of the parts effects taken in isolation.
A good example of a negative synergy is competition, such as an arms
race, it is the specific way the two parties interact that we get the overall
outcome that is counter-productive and detrimental to all.
 Another example of a negative synergy would be two creatures fighting
over the same territory. 
Negative synergies can be understood as the failure of the parts
engendered in the relation to differentiate or integrate. Either the parts become
too different without integrating – meaning they are doing very different things
and can find no way to interoperate – or vice versa they become too integrated
and similar.
An example of the former might be a body of knowledge becoming too
specialized without finding ways to interrelate the different domains, the result
being fragmentation.
The same could be true of a family as the members grow-up and become
focused on their particular lives without being able to find common ground
between them. Worse than fragmentation the parts can end up pulling in
different counteractive directions, such as in a meeting where the members have
different ideas while needing to find a common outcome thus leading to
deadlock and potential conflict.
Too much integration between the parts can likewise create a negative
synergy as all the parts come to occupy the same state, the full set of possibilities
are not explored, there is a lack of specialization and diversity, and there can be
crowding out as all the parts try to occupy the same state or function.
A good analogy for the negative synergies of both over integration and
over differentiation would be the example of free market capitalism and
communism. Free market capitalism often overemphasizes competition
resulting in a lack of integration, ending up with millions of products on the
market, all competing as they assert their difference and merits while many of
them are the same, resulting in an excess of economic activity going into
differentiation and a loss of overall productivity.
Likewise, communism worked in the opposite direction with an over
emphasis on the commonality between people and their economic activities,
with the result being a lack of capacity to harness the individuals’ diverse
motives.

II. Individual, Team, and Manager

A. Individual and Synergy

One way to observe synergy in an organization is to observe the combined

efforts of individuals working together. Synergy can result from the efforts of people
serving on committees or teams.
By combining their knowledge, insights, and ideas, groups often make better
decisions than would have been made by the group members acting independently.
Positive synergy resulting from group decisions may well include the generation of
more ideas, more creative solutions, increased acceptance of the decision by group
members, and increased opportunity for the expression of diverse opinions.
 Much of the current interest in teams and team building is an effort to achieve
positive synergy through the combined efforts of team members.
Negative synergy occurs in groups, committees, and other joint efforts for a number
of reasons. Groups commonly experience negative synergy because group decisions are
often reached more slowly, and thus may be more expensive to make than individual
decisions.
The opportunity costs for having a group of high-paid executives spend an
afternoon in a meeting rather than in more productive endeavors can be quite high.
Negative synergy can also occur in group decisions if an individual is allowed to dominate
and control the group decision.
Also, groupthink—the pressure to conform—may cause the group to strive for
harmony instead of evaluating information and alternative courses of action honestly and
objectively.

B. Synergy at the Organizational Level

Organizations strive to achieve positive synergy or strategic fit by combining

multiple products, business lines, or markets. One way to achieve positive synergy is by
acquiring related products, so that sales representatives can sell numerous products during
one sales call. Rather than having two representatives make two sales calls to a potential
customer, one sales representative can offer the broader mix of products.

Negative synergy is also possible at the corporate level. Downsizing and the
divestiture of businesses is in part the result of negative synergy. For instance, Kimberly-
Clark Corporation set out to sharpen its emphasis on consumer and health care products by
divesting its tiny interests in business paper and pulp production. According to the
company, the removal of the pulp mill will enhance operational flexibility and eliminate
distraction on periphery units, thus allowing the corporation to concentrate on a single,
core business activity.
The intended result of many business decisions is positive synergy. Managers expect
that combining employees into teams or broadening the firm's product or market mix will
result in a higher level of performance. However, the mere combination of people or
business elements does not necessarily lead to better outcomes, and the resulting lack of
harmony or coordination can lead to negative synergy.
 Organizational people require a strategic direction (or vision) and focus to channel
their positive energies together to realize common vision and goals.
 
However, this can be difficult to attain if there are conflicts of interest, lack of
diversity, low employee morale and satisfaction, counterproductive relationships, loss of
energy and negative effects on organizational bottom line.
 
With synergy, it’s much easier to increase employee motivation and satisfaction. It
fosters coordination between managers and employees and between managers or
employees themselves. In addition, synergy cultivates a sense of place and belonging by
organizational people.

How do Organizations Benefit from Adoption of Synergy?

Synergy depends on the quality of interactions between diverse

organizational elements-people-managers and employees. The higher the quality,
the higher the organizational outputs.
Synergy works best if organization’s workforce’s diverse, because that’d
essentially mean utilizing unique strengths and abilities.

There are three perspectives from which to approach organizational synergy:

 Individual
 Unit
 Organization

Adopting synergy approach provides the following benefits:

 It weakens destructive relationships while strengthens

productive ones
 It helps to avoid conflicts of interest
 It minimizes energy losses
 It helps to retain employees and clients
 It helps to speed up product development
 It increases organization’s output — higher employee
morale and job satisfaction, higher profitability, etc.

C. Team and Team Work

A team is a group of people who work together toward a common goal. Teams
have defined membership (which can be either large or small) and a set of activities to
take part in. People on a team collaborate on sets of related tasks that are required to
achieve an objective. Each member is responsible for contributing to the team, but the
group as a whole is responsible for the team’s success.
A team is a group of people who work together toward a common goal.
Teams in the Workplace

Sports teams are a good example of how teams work. For instance, a
basketball team has individual players who each contribute toward the goal of
winning a game. Similarly, in business settings most work is accomplished by teams
of individuals who collaborate on activities with defined outcomes. Because teams
are so prevalent in business organizations, it is important for employees to have the
skills necessary to work effectively with others.
Organizations typically have many teams, and an individual is frequently a
member of more than one team. Some teams are permanent and are responsible for
ongoing activities. For instance, a team of nurses in a maternity ward provides
medical services to new mothers. While patients come and go, the tasks involved in
providing care remain stable. In other cases, a team is formed for a temporary
purpose: these are called project teams and have a defined beginning and end point
linked to achieving a particular one-time goal.

The Purpose of Teams

Organizations form teams to accomplish tasks that are too large or complex
for an individual to complete. Teams are also effective for work that requires
different types of skills and expertise. For example, the development of new
products involves understanding customer needs as well as how to design and build
a product that will meet these needs. Accordingly, a new product-development team
would include people with customer knowledge as well as designers and engineers.

Defining Teamwork

Teamwork involves a set of interdependent activities performed by

individuals who collaborate toward a common goal.
Teamwork involves a set of tasks and activities performed by individuals
who collaborate with each other to achieve a common objective. That objective can
be creating a product, delivering a service, writing a report, or making a decision.
Teamwork differs from individual work in that it involves shared responsibility for a
final outcome.
Teamwork Processes

While the substance of the tasks involved in teamwork may vary from team
to team, there are three processes that are common to how teamwork gets done: the
transition process, action processes, and interpersonal processes. During each of
these processes, specific sets of activities occur.

1. The transition process is the phase during which a team is formed.

Activities include:
Mission analysis: establishing an understanding of the overall
objective
Goal specification: identifying and prioritizing the tasks and activities
needed to achieve the mission
Strategy formulation: developing a course of action to reach the goals
and achieve the mission

2. Action processes comprise the phase during which a team performs its

work. Activities include:

Monitoring milestones and goals: tracking progress toward completion

of tasks and activities
Monitoring systems: tracking the use of resources such as people,
technology, and information
Coordination: organizing and managing the flow of team activities and
tasks
Team monitoring and support: assisting individuals with their tasks
by, for example, providing feedback and coaching

3. Interpersonal processes include activities that occur during both the

transition and action processes. These include:

Conflict management: establishing conditions to avoid disagreement

and resolving conflict when it occurs
Motivation and confidence building: generating the willingness and
ability of individuals to work together to achieve the mission
Affect management: helping team members to regulate their emotions
as they work together

Characteristics of Effective Teamwork

An effective team accomplishes its goals in a way that meets the standards
set by those who evaluate its performance.
For instance, a team may have a goal of delivering a new product within six
months on a budget of P100,000. Even if the team finishes the project on time, it can be
considered effective only if it stayed within its expected budget.
 Effective teamwork requires certain conditions to be in place that will
increase the likelihood that each member’s contributions and the effort of the group
as a whole will lead to success.

Effective teams share five characteristics:

Shared values: a common set of beliefs and principles about how and
why the team members will work together
Mutual trust: confidence between team members that each puts the
best interest of the team ahead of individual priorities
Inspiring vision: a clear direction that motivates commitment to a
collective effort
Skill/talent: the combined abilities and expertise to accomplish the
required tasks and work productively with others
Rewards: recognition of achievement toward objectives and
reinforcement of behavior that supports the team’s work

Effective teamwork requires that people work as a cohesive unit. These five
characteristics can help individuals collaborate with others by focusing their efforts
in a common direction and achieving an outcome that can only be reached by
working together.

D. Different Kinds of Teams

Teams may be permanent or temporary, and team members may come from the
same department or different ones.
Common types of teams found in organizations include project teams, virtual teams,
and cross-functional teams.

Project teams are created for a defined period of time to achieve a specific

goal. Members of a project team often belong to different functional groups and are
chosen to participate in the team based on specific skills they can contribute to the
project. Software development is most commonly done by project teams.
Virtual teams have members located in different places, often
geographically dispersed, who come together to achieve a specific purpose.
Academic researchers often work on virtual teams with colleagues at other
institutions.
Cross-functional teams combine people from different areas, such as
marketing and engineering, to solve a problem or achieve a goal. Healthcare services
are frequently delivered by interdisciplinary teams of nurses, doctors, and other
medical specialists.

It is common for an organization to have many teams, including teams of several

types. Effective teamwork depends on choosing the type of team best suited to the work
that needs to be accomplished.
 E. Advantages of Teamwork

The primary benefit of teamwork is that it allows an organization to achieve

something that an individual working alone cannot. This advantage arises from several
factors, each of which accounts for a different aspect of the overall benefit of teams.

Higher Quality Outcomes

Teamwork creates outcomes that make better use of resources and produce
richer ideas.

 Higher efficiency: Since teams combine the efforts of individuals, they can
accomplish more than an individual working alone.
 Faster speed: Because teams draw on the efforts of many contributors, they
can often complete tasks and activities in less time.
 More thoughtful ideas: Each person who works on a problem or set of tasks
may bring different information and knowledge to bear, which can result in
solutions and approaches an individual would not have identified.
 Greater effectiveness: When people coordinate their efforts, they can divide up
roles and tasks to more thoroughly address an issue. For example, in hospital
settings teamwork has been found to increase patient safety more than when
only individual efforts are made to avoid mishaps.

Better Context for Individuals

The social aspect of teamwork provides a superior work experience for team
members, which can motivate higher performance.

 Mutual support: Because team members can rely on other people with shared goals,
they can receive assistance and encouragement as they work on tasks. Such support
can encourage people to achieve goals they may not have had the confidence to have
reached on their own.
 Greater sense of accomplishment: When members of a team collaborate and take
collective responsibility for outcomes, they can feel a greater sense of
accomplishment when they achieve a goal they could not have achieved if they had
worked by themselves.

The total value created by teamwork depends on the overall effectiveness of the
team effort. While we might consider simply achieving a goal a benefit of teamwork, by
taking advantage of what teamwork has to offer, an organization can gain a broader set of
benefits.
 F. Hazards of Teamwork

Teams face challenges to effective collaboration and achieving their goals. The
collaborative nature of teams means they are subject to pitfalls that individuals working
alone do not face.
Team members may not always work well together, and focusing the efforts of
individuals on shared goals presents challenges to completing tasks as efficiently and
effectively as possible.

The following pitfalls can lead to team dysfunction and failure to achieve important
organizational objectives.

Individuals Shirking Their Duties

Since team members share responsibility for outcomes, some

individuals may need to do additional work to make up for those not
contributing their share of effort. This can breed resentment and foster other
negative feelings that can make the team less effective. One cause of this is
the failure of the team to establish clear norms of accountability for
individual contributions to the group effort.

Skewed Influence over Decisions

Sometimes an individual or small number of team members can come

to dominate the rest of the group. This could be due to strong personalities,
greater abilities, or differences in status among members. When individuals
either do not feel listened to or believe their ideas are not welcome, they may
reduce their efforts.

Lack of Trust

Effective collaboration requires team members to have confidence

that everyone shares a set of goals. When that belief is missing, some
individuals may not feel comfortable sharing their ideas with the group. Lack
of trust can also lead to miscommunication and misunderstandings, which
can undermine the group’s efforts.

Conflicts Hamper Progress

While conflicts are a common aspect of working together and can

even be beneficial to a team, they can also negatively affect team
performance. For instance, conflict can delay progress on tasks or create
other inefficiencies in getting work done.
 Lack of Teaming Skills

When team members do not have the collaboration skills needed to

work well with others, the overall ability of the team to function can be
limited. As a result, conflicts may be more likely to arise and more difficult to
resolve.

Missing Task Skills

A team that does not have the expertise and knowledge needed to
complete all its tasks and activities will have trouble achieving its goals. Poor
team composition can lead to delays, higher costs, and increased risk.

Stuck in Formation

Sometimes the group cannot move from defining goals and outlining
tasks to executing its work plan. This may be due to poor specification of
roles, tasks, and priorities.

Too Many Members

The size of the team can sometimes affect its ability to function
effectively. Coordination and communication are more complex in a larger
team than in a smaller one. This complexity can mean that decisions must
take into account greater amounts of information, meetings are more
challenging to schedule, and tasks can take longer to complete.

Groupthink

Outcomes can suffer if team members value conflict avoidance and

consensus over making the best decisions. People can feel uncomfortable
challenging the group’s direction or otherwise speaking up for fear of
breaking a team norm. This phenomenon is known as “groupthink.”
Groupthink can limit creativity, lead to poor choices, or result in mistakes
that might otherwise have been avoidable.

While teams offer many benefits, their effectiveness rests on how well members can
avoid common pitfalls or minimize their negative consequences when they occur.
G. Differences Between Groups and Teams

All teams are groups of individuals, but not all groups are teams.
While all teams are groups of individuals, not all groups are teams. Team
members work together toward a common goal and share responsibility for the
team’s success. A group is comprised of two or more individuals that share common
interests or characteristics, and its members identify with each other due to similar
traits. Groups can range greatly in size and scope.
For example, members of the millennial generation are a group, but so is a
small book club formed by neighbors who enjoy reading.

Groups differ from teams in several ways:

 Task orientation: Teams require coordination of tasks and activities to achieve

a shared aim. Groups do not need to focus on specific outcomes or a common
purpose.
 Degree of interdependence: Team members are interdependent since they
bring to bear a set of resources to produce a common outcome. Individuals in
a group can be entirely disconnected from one another and not rely on fellow
members at all.
 Purpose: Teams are formed for a particular reason and can be short- or long-
lived. Groups can exist as a matter of fact; for example, a group can be
comprised of people of the same race or ethnic background.
 Degree of formal structure: Team members’ individual roles and duties are
specified and their ways of working together are defined. Groups are generally
much more informal; roles do not need to be assigned and norms of behavior
do not need to develop.
 Familiarity among members: Team members are aware of the set of people
they collaborate with, since they interact to complete tasks and activities.
Members of a group may have personal relationships or they may have little
knowledge of each other and no interactions whatsoever.

Sometimes it is difficult to draw a distinction between a team and a group.

For instance, a set of coworkers might meet on occasion to discuss an issue or
provide input on a decision. While such meetings typically have an agenda and thus
a purpose and some structure, we would not necessarily think of those in
attendance as a team. The activity scope and duration is just too small to involve the
amount of coordination of resources and effort that teamwork requires.
 H. The Five Stages of Team Development

For teams to be effective, the people in the team must be able to work together
to contribute collectively to team outcomes. But this does not happen automatically: it
develops as the team works together. You have probably had an experience when you
have been put on a team to work on a school assignment or project.
When your team first gets together, you likely sit around and look at each other,
not knowing how to begin. Initially you are not a team; you are just individuals assigned
to work together. Over time you get to know each other, to know what to expect from
each other, to know how to divide the labor and assign tasks, and to know how you will
coordinate your work. Through this process, you begin to operate as a team instead of a
collection of individuals.

Stages of Team Development

This process of learning to work together effectively is known as team

development. Research has shown that teams go through definitive stages during
development. Bruce Tuckman, an educational psychologist, identified a five-stage
development process that most teams follow to become high performing. He called the
stages: forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning. Team progress
through the stages is shown in the following diagram.

Forming stage

The forming stage involves a period of orientation and getting acquainted. Uncertainty is
high during this stage, and people are looking for leadership and authority. A member who
asserts authority or is knowledgeable may be looked to take control. Team members are
asking such questions as “What does the team offer me?” “What is expected of me?” “Will I
fit in?” Most interactions are social as members get to know each other.

Storming stage

The storming stage is the most difficult and critical stage to pass through. It is a period
marked by conflict and competition as individual personalities emerge. Team
performance may actually decrease in this stage because energy is put into
unproductive activities. Members may disagree on team goals, and subgroups and
cliques may form around strong personalities or areas of agreement. To get through this
stage, members must work to overcome obstacles, to accept individual differences, and
to work through conflicting ideas on team tasks and goals. Teams can get bogged down
in this stage. Failure to address conflicts may result in long-term problems.

Norming stage

If teams get through the storming stage, conflict is resolved and some degree of unity
emerges. In the norming stage, consensus develops around who the leader or leaders
are, and individual member’s roles. Interpersonal differences begin to be resolved, and
a sense of cohesion and unity emerges. Team performance increases during this stage
as members learn to cooperate and begin to focus on team goals. However, the
harmony is precarious, and if disagreements re-emerge the team can slide back into
storming.

Performing stage

In the performing stage, consensus and cooperation have been well-established and
the team is mature, organized, and well-functioning. There is a clear and stable
structure, and members are committed to the team’s mission. Problems and conflicts
still emerge, but they are dealt with constructively. (We will discuss the role of conflict
and conflict resolution in the next section). The team is focused on problem solving and
meeting team goals.

Adjourning stage

In the adjourning stage, most of the team’s goals have been accomplished. The
emphasis is on wrapping up final tasks and documenting the effort and results. As the
work load is diminished, individual members may be reassigned to other teams, and the
team disbands. There may be regret as the team ends, so a ceremonial
acknowledgement of the work and success of the team can be helpful. If the team is a
standing committee with ongoing responsibility, members may be replaced by new
people and the team can go back to a forming or storming stage and repeat the
development process.
Common Barriers to Effective Teams

Challenges of Knowing Where to Begin

At the start of a project, team members may be at a loss as to how to begin. Also,
they may have reached the end of a task but are unable to move on to the next step
or put the task to rest.

Floundering often results from a lack of clear goals, so the remedy is to go back to
the team’s mission or plan and make sure that it is clear to everyone. Team leaders
can help move the team past floundering by asking, “What is holding us up? Do
we need more data? Do we need assurances or support? Does anyone feel that
we’ve missed something important?”

Dominating Team Members

Some team members may have a dominating personality that encroaches on the
participation or airtime of others. This overbearing behavior may hurt the team
morale or the momentum of the team.

A good way to overcome this barrier is to design a team evaluation to include a

“balance of participation” in meetings. Knowing that fair and equitable
participation by all will affect the team’s performance evaluation will help team
members limit domination by one member and encourage participation from all
members, even shy or reluctant ones. Team members can say, “We’ve heard from
Mary on this issue, so let’s hear from others about their ideas.”

Poor Performance of Some Team Members

Research shows that teams deal with poor performers in different ways, depending
on members’ perceptions of the reasons for poor performance (Jackson & LePine,
2003). In situations in which the poor performer is perceived as lacking in ability,
teams are more likely to train the member. In situations in which members
perceive the individual as simply being low on motivation, they are more likely to
try to motivate or reject the poor performer.
Keep in mind that justice is an important part of keeping individuals working hard
for the team (Colquitt, 2004). Be sure that poor performers are dealt with in a way
that is deemed fair by all the team members.

Poorly Managed Team Conflict

Disagreements among team members are normal and should be expected. Healthy
teams raise issues and discuss differing points of view because that will ultimately
help the team reach stronger, more well-reasoned decisions. Unfortunately,
sometimes disagreements arise because of personality issues or feuds that predated
the teams’ formation.

Ideally, teams should be designed to avoid bringing adversaries together on the

same team. If that is not possible, the next best solution is to have adversaries
discuss their issues privately, so the team’s progress is not disrupted. The team
leader or other team member can offer to facilitate the discussion. One way to
make a discussion between conflicting parties meaningful is to form a behavioral
contract between the two parties. That is, if one party agrees to do X, the other will
agree to do Y (Scholtes, 1988).

Dealing with Barriers to Effective Teamwork

The collaborative nature of teams means

they are subject to pitfalls that individuals working alone do not face. Team members
may not always work well together, and focusing the efforts of individuals on shared
goals presents challenges to completing tasks as efficiently and effectively as possible.

The following pitfalls can lead to team dysfunction and failure to achieve important
organizational objectives.
Individuals Shirking Their Duties

Since team members share responsibility for outcomes, some individuals may need to
do additional work to make up for those not contributing their share of effort. This can
breed resentment and foster other negative feelings that can make the team less
effective. One cause of this is the failure of the team to establish clear norms of
accountability for individual contributions to the group effort.

Skewed Influence over Decisions

Sometimes an individual or small number of team members can come to dominate the
rest of the group. This could be due to strong personalities, greater abilities, or
differences in status among members. When individuals either do not feel listened to or
believe their ideas are not welcome, they may reduce their efforts.

Lack of Trust

Effective collaboration requires team members to have confidence that everyone shares
a set of goals. When that belief is missing, some individuals may not feel comfortable
sharing their ideas with the group. Lack of trust can also lead to miscommunication and
misunderstandings, which can undermine the group’s efforts.

Conflicts Hamper Progress

While conflicts are a common aspect of working together and can even be beneficial to
a team, they can also negatively affect team performance. For instance, conflict can
delay progress on tasks or create other inefficiencies in getting work done.

Lack of Team and/or Task Skills

When team members do not have the collaboration skills needed to work well with
others, the overall ability of the team to function can be limited. As a result, conflicts
may be more likely to arise and more difficult to resolve.  A team that does not have the
expertise and knowledge needed to complete all its tasks and activities will have trouble
achieving its goals. Poor team composition can lead to delays, higher costs, and
increased risk.

Stuck in Formation

Sometimes the group cannot move from defining goals and outlining tasks to executing
its work plan. This may be due to poor specification of roles, tasks, and priorities.
Too Many Members/Groupthink

The size of the team can sometimes affect its ability to function effectively. Coordination
and communication are more complex in a larger team than in a smaller one. This
complexity can mean that decisions must take into account greater amounts of
information, meetings are more challenging to schedule, and tasks can take longer to
complete. Both large and small groups can fall prey to groupthink. Outcomes can suffer
if team members value conflict avoidance and consensus over making the best
decisions. People can feel uncomfortable challenging the group’s direction or otherwise
speaking up for fear of breaking a team norm. This phenomenon is known as
“groupthink.” Groupthink can limit creativity, lead to poor choices, or result in mistakes
that might otherwise have been avoidable.