I uploaded two files of Chapter 13 Textbook and Discussion Questions and Rubric. Please let me know if you have any questions and need more informations.

Chapter 13: Managing Work Groups and Teams
Chapter Introduction
Learning Outcomes
After studying this chapter, you should be able to:
1. Define and identify types of groups and teams in organizations,
discuss reasons people join groups and teams, and list the
stages of group and team development.
2. Identify and discuss four essential characteristics of groups and
teams.
3. Discuss interpersonal and intergroup conflict in organizations.
4. Describe how organizations manage conflict.
5. Describe the negotiation process.
Management in Action
Managing by Clowning
Around
“It’s difficult to be creative in isolation.”
—Lyn Heward, former president of Cirque du Soleil’s Creative Content Division
Cirque du Soleil makes extensive use of teams to plan, design, and
execute its elaborate shows such as Varekai, shown here being
performed in Moscow.
ITAR-TASS Photo Agency/Alamy
Fourteen-year-old Guy Laliberté dropped out
of high school in Québec, Canada, because he
wanted to see the world. “I decided to go into
street performing because it was a traveling
job,” he recalls, and although his skills were
limited to playing the accordion and telling
stories, they were enough to get him to London
by the time he was 18. From there, he not only
extended his travels to Europe but also
broadened his repertoire to include fire
breathing, juggling, magic, and stilt walking. “It
was just an adventure,” he admits, “and I was
planning to go back to school and have a
regular life,” but his nearly decade-long
adventure had only deepened his passion for
street performing. When he returned to
Canada, he joined a stilt-walking troupe, and in
1984, when he was 23 years old, Laliberté
partnered with another high school dropout to
form their own street-performance company.
Today, he still runs that company, and as 80
percent owner of Cirque du Soleil, he’s one of
the richest people in Canada.
Cirque du Soleil, which is French for circus of
the sun (“The sun,” explains Laliberté, “stands
for energy and youth, which is what I thought
the circus should be about”), has completely
transformed the traditional three-ring
spectacle with trapeze artists, clowns, and lion
tamers. Laliberté calls Cirque a
“transdiciplinary experience”—an amalgam of
breathtaking stunt work, dazzling stagecraft,
surreal costumes, and pulsing music. There are
currently 20 different Cirque shows, each
developed around a distinctive theme and
story arc, such as“the urban experience in all
its myriad forms” (Saltimbanco) and “a tribute
to the nomadic soul” (Varekai). Headquartered
in Montreal, Canada, the company now
employs 5,000 people, including more than
1,300 artists, and its shows have been seen by
100 million spectators. Profits for 2012 were
$250 million on revenues of $1 billion.
The key to this success, according to Laliberté,
is creativity: “I believe that the profits will
come from the quality of your creative
products,” he says. “Since the beginning, I’ve
always wanted to develop a self-feeding circle
of creative productions: The positive financial
returns from one show would be used to
develop and create a new show, and so on.”
He’s also convinced that his job is to provide a
working environment that fosters collective
creativity: “I believe in nurturing creativity and
offering a haven for creators, enabling them to
develop their ideas to the fullest. With more
and more talented creators being drawn to
Cirque in an environment that fulfills them,
these [conditions] are ideal to continue
developing great new shows.”
Lyn Heward, former president of Cirque’s
Creative Content Division, calls the company’s
process of training and integrating talented
people “creative transformation.” “Everyone,”
she says, “when they come to Cirque as an
employee, even an accountant, comes there
because it’s a creative and admired company,
and they want to be able to contribute
something creatively.” From her experience at
Cirque, Heward drew up a nine-point guide to
“creative transformation,” and at the heart of
her list is a commitment to the value of
teamwork. In fact, the fifth item on her list
says, “Practice teamwork. True creativity
requires stimulation and collaboration. It’s
difficult to be creative in isolation.” Item 6
picks up the same theme: “Keep creativity
fresh with hard-working bosses who
constantly encourage and receive employees’
ideas and feedback and accept that there are
often different ways of getting the same end
result.”
“No matter what your product,” Heward
argues, “whether it’s computers, cars, or
anything else, your results [depend on] having
a passionate strong team of people.” In any
workplace, she explains, “our most natural
resource is the people we work with—the
people we build our product with. Unless
there’s a strong commitment to teambuilding,
passionate leadership, and creativity, even at
Cirque it would not happen.” Heward is willing
to admit that “incredible freedom is a problem
for most people because it requires us to think
differently,” but she’s also confident that
getting people committed to teamwork is the
best way to get them to develop their
creativity. Take Igor Jijikine, a Russian-born
acrobat-actor who helped train performers
for Mystère, Cirque’s permanent show at Las
Vegas’s Treasure Island Hotel and Casino.
“[T]he really challenging thing,” he says,
is to change the mentality of the performers I work with. Many of our performers
are former competitive gymnasts. Gymnastics is essentially an individual sport.
Gymnasts never have to think creatively or be a part of a true team. They got here
by being strong individuals. So, right from the start, we really challenge ourselves
to erase the lines between athletics and artistry, between individuals and the group.
We need to transform an individual into a team player everyone else can count on,
literally with their lives.
Finally, Heward acknowledges that you can’t
imbue employees with the Cirque du Soleil
culture and “then tell them to go work in their
cubicles.” The space in which they work, she
says, “has to reflect [Cirque’s] values and
vision.” All Cirque du Soleil productions are
created and developed by teams working at the
Montreal facility, which the company calls “the
Studio” and describes as “a full-fledged
creation, innovation, and training laboratory.”
In addition to administrative space—“eight
floors of uniquely designed office spaces and
relaxation areas conducive to inspiration”—the
complex boasts acrobatic, dance, and theatrical
studios, and the effect of the whole, says
Heward, is that of “a fantastical playground.”
Creativity, she explains,
is fostered in work groups where people first get to know each other and then learn
to trust one another. And in this playground, we recognize that a good idea can
emerge from anywhere in the organization or from within a team. We make our
shows from this collective creativity.
Cirque CEO Daniel Lamarre has a succinct way
of explaining the company’s success: “We let
the creative people run it.” As for Laliberté, he,
too, is content to trust his creative people—an
instinct, he says, that he learned in his days as a
street performer: “In the street, you have to
develop that instinct of trusting people and
reading people because that instinct is your
lifesaver.” He lists himself as “Artistic Guide” in
production notes and tries “not to be too
involved in the beginning and during the
process,” the better to keep his perspective
“fresh” and to “be able to give constructive
recommendation on the final production.” He
also wants to do the same thing that he wanted
to do when he was 14: “I still want to travel, I
still want to entertain, and I most certainly still
want to have fun.”
This chapter is about the processes that lead to
and follow from successes like those enjoyed
by Cirque de Soleil. More important, it’s also
about the processes leading to and following
successful group and team dynamics.
In Chapter 12, we established the
interpersonal nature of organizations. We
extend that discussion here by first introducing
basic concepts of group and team dynamics.
Subsequent sections explain the characteristics
of groups and teams in organizations. We then
describe interpersonal and intergroup conflict
and discuss how conflict can be managed. We
conclude with a brief discussion of negotiation.
13-1Groups
and Teams in
Organizations
Groups are a ubiquitous part of organizational life. They are the
basis for much of the work that gets done, and they evolve both
inside and outside the normal structural boundaries of the
organization. We define a group as two or more people who
interact regularly to accomplish a common purpose or goal.
The purpose of a group or team may range from preparing a
new advertising campaign, to informally sharing information, to
making important decisions, to fulfilling social needs.
13-1aTypes
of Groups and Teams
In general, three basic kinds of groups are found in
organizations—functional groups, informal or interest groups,
and task groups and teams. These are illustrated in Figure
13.1.
Figure 13.1Types of Groups in Organizations
Every organization has many different types of groups. In this
hypothetical organization, a functional group is shown within the purple
area, a cross-functional team within the yellow area, and an informal
group within the green area.
© Cengage Learning
Functional Groups
A functional group is a permanent group created by the
organization to accomplish a number of organizational
purposes with an unspecified time horizon. The advertising
department at Starbucks, the management department at Iowa
State University, and the nursing staff at the M.D. Anderson
Cancer Center. The advertising department at Starbucks, for
example, seeks to plan effective advertising campaigns, increase
sales, run in-store promotions, and develop a unique identity for
the company. It is assumed that the functional group will
remain in existence after it attains its current objectives—those
objectives will be replaced by new ones.
Informal or Interest Groups
An informal or interest group is created by its own members
for purposes that may or may not be relevant to organizational
goals. It also has an unspecified time horizon. A group of
employees who lunch together every day may be discussing
productivity, money embezzling, or local politics and sports. As
long as the group members enjoy eating together, they will
probably continue to do so. When lunches cease to be pleasant,
they will seek other company or a different activity.
Informal groups can be a powerful force that managers cannot
ignore. One writer described how a group of employees at a
furniture factory subverted their boss’s efforts to increase
production. They tacitly agreed to produce a reasonable amount
of work but not to work too hard. One man kept a stockpile of
completed work hidden as a backup in case he got too far
behind. In another example, autoworkers described how they
left out gaskets and seals and put soft-drink bottles inside doors.
Of course, informal groups can also be a positive force, such
as when people work together to help out a colleague who has
suffered a personal tragedy. For example, during and in the
aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, the superstorm that devastated
the northeast United States in 2012, literally dozens of incidents
were reported portraying how informal groups emerged to help
those in distress.
In recent years, the Internet has served as a platform for the
emergence of more and different kinds of informal or interest
groups. As one example, Google includes a wide array of interest
groups that bring together people with common interests. And
increasingly,workers who lose their jobs as a result of layoffs
are banding together electronically to offer moral support to
one another and to facilitate networking as they all look for new
jobs. The “At Your Service” feature illustrates other new types
of groups.
At Your Service
Using Customer-Created Groups for Competitive
Advantage
Some organizations creatively use customer-created groups to function
more effectively. These people are gathered to watch a street
performance in Los Angeles. Performers will gauge the audience
response to their early performances and then tailor their later
performances to best match what the audience wants.
David Livingston/Getty Images
Today’s customers know a great deal and are not reluctant to tell organizations
what they know. In fact, many now expect not only to participate in the shopping
and buying experience in ways the organization does not expect and for which in
many cases is unprepared, but customers also expect to participate in the
creation of the experience itself as part of the organization’s creative team.
Service organizations have long asked customers their opinions to learn what
customers want from them. Many use focus groups to solicit information about
the services they provide or should provide in the future. Today’s well-informed,
web-enabled customers want and expect far greater involvement in their buying
experience and find ways to get it. Two current trends are examples of this.
The first trend is customer management of a networked team, which is
increasingly found in health care. The availability of the Internet and the interest
of people in their own health mean that many patients arrive at their doctor’s
office not only with a lot of information about their ailment but also with an
ability to identify and assemble their own support group of doctors, family and
friends, and health-care professionals. These people want to be actively engaged
in managing their own health care and they enter the doctor’s office expecting to
involve members of their existing wellness group. They help integrate their
primary care physician with any referred specialists and freely add in other
specialists they learn about via chat rooms, public rankings of doctors, and
disease-specific websites. While the historic model in health care had the family
physician assembling a treatment and care team, the modern model is a
proactive patient who assembles and actively manages a group of health-care
providers.
The second example of customer groups collaborating with an organization can
be seen in the phenomena of crowdsourcing. Although the practice of asking a
crowd for help is as old as the wanted posters on post office walls, the web has
expanded this concept greatly because it can connect people anywhere in the
world who want to be involved. Many newer business models are built on their
ability to provide platforms for participation. Many people use crowdsourced
Wikipedia as their only encyclopedia and the customer recommendations
provided by Amazon, TripAdvisor, OpenTable, and Yelp as their guide for what to
read and where to go, eat, or shop.
In the simplest form of crowdsourcing, a group is assembled, usually online, to
solve a problem or engineer a solution. One classic illustration is described by
Tapscott and Williams in their book Wikinomics. They write of a struggling
Canadian gold mining firm, Goldcorp, that decided to release all its proprietary
geological data about its property to the public and offered a $575,000 prize for
anyone who could develop a better way to locate gold on that property. The
winning team from Australia gave them an answer that enabled them to increase
their production of gold from just over 50,000 ounces annually at a cost of $360
an ounce to over a half million ounces annually at a cost of only $59 an ounce.
Successful examples of crowdsourcing like this one have generated much
interest among others seeking solutions to problems that traditional methods
don’t seem to solve well. By building a web platform and posing a problem in a
way that will interest potential participants, a crowd can be attracted. For
example, Threadless uses its website to engage anyone wishing to participate in
creating new shirt designs. The U.S. Department of Defense offers people an
opportunity to help test its software, the Library of Congress asked Flickr users
to help identify people in its photo collection, and Walmart asks customers to
vote on which new products it should stock.
In all these cases, the organization is creating a nonemployee group that it must
manage sometimes without even knowing who the members are. The company
generally pays little or nothing for participation. The individuals participating
often interact with each other to argue the merits of proposed solutions. IKEA
manages a website where it not only solicits new ideas for its stores but also
where customers can share solutions to each other’s problems. Organizations
using crowdsourcing must provide a problem in a manner that can be
comprehended by potential participants, an interactive web platform that can be
found by those knowledgeable and interested in the topic, and some process for
identifying success and recognition of contribution when the problem is
resolved. The point is that organizations increasingly must manage groups that
they don’t employ or groups of people who they don’t even know. These groups
are often customers involved in product innovation or their own health care but
can also be computer gamers testing software or suggesting new code or anyone
with an expertise and willingness to participate in the problem the organization
wishes to solve. Crowd management will require learning new skills beyond
those used for managing employees.
Task Groups
A task group is a group created by the organization to
accomplish a relatively narrow range of purposes within a
stated or implied time horizon. Most committees and task forces
are task groups. The organization specifies group membership
and assigns a relatively narrow set of goals, such as developing
a new product or evaluating a proposed grievance procedure.
The time horizon for accomplishing these purposes is either
specified (a committee may be asked to make a
recommendation within 30 days) or implied (the project team
will disband when the new product is developed).
Teams are a special form of task group that have become
increasingly popular. In the sense used here, a team is a
group of workers that functions as a unit, often with little or no
supervision, to carry out work-related tasks, functions, and
activities. Table 13.1 lists and defines some of the various types
of teams that are being used today. Earlier forms of teams
included autonomous work groups and quality circles. Today,
teams are also sometimes called self-managed teams, crossfunctional teams, or high-performance teams. Many firms today
are routinely using teams to carry out most of their daily
operations. Further, virtual teams—teams composed of
people from remote work sites who work together online—are
also becoming more and more common.
Table 13.1
Types of Teams
Problemsolving team
Most popular type of team; comprises knowledge
workers who gather to solve a specific problem and
then disband.
Management
team
Consists mainly of managers from various functions like
sales and production; coordinates work among other
teams.
Work team
An increasingly popular type of team; work teams are
responsible for the daily work of the organization; when
empowered, they are self-managed teams.
Virtual team
A new type of work team that interacts digitally;
members enter and leave the network as needed and
may take turns serving as leader.
Quality circle
Declining in popularity; quality circles, comprising
workers and supervisors who meet intermittently to
discuss workplace problems.
Source: From Fortune, September 5, 1994. © 1994 Time Inc. All rights reserved.
Organizations create teams for a variety of reasons. For one
thing, they give more responsibility for task perfo …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment