Management Paper: Self-Managing Work Teams 1

Management Paper:

Self-Managing Work Teams

Betty Thomas

LIS 650

Dr. Richard Moniz

Spring 2010

Management Paper: Self-Managing Work Teams 2

Introduction

Interest in self-managing work teams (SMWTs) has increased in the last couple of decades. In the early

80s, there was little published research done on this topic. However, since the work environment of

both businesses and libraries has changed, there is now more interest in this subject and many more

research studies evaluating self-managing work teams.

Several environmental changes have affected management practices, especially for libraries. First, with

current economic conditions, managers are operating with budget constraints and face competition for

funding. They have to do more with less. Second, the rapid and continuous advances in technology

have forced managers to develop new services and change the way they operate. Last, competition

with other organizations that offer similar services has increased.

Thus, managers especially in business and industry have been implementing different forms of

participative management by increasing employee involvement and decreasing reliance on command

and control practices. In the literature, self-managing teams are referred to as autonomous work

groups, leaderless groups, self-regulated groups, and self-directed work teams. At Philip Morris USA’s

Cabarrus plant, SMWTs were called organizational work units or problem solving units. The former

groups were the natural groupings of workers in a department; the latter were cross departmental

groups that formed to address particular issues.

Castiglione (2007) defines SMWTs as “relatively independent and empowered clusters of employees

possessing the required skills and decisional independence to efficiently accomplish a well-defined

project or task” (p. 380). Salem and Lazarus (1992) explained that in SMWTs employees are trained to

“use their skills daily to schedule, assign tasks, co-ordinate with other groups, set goals, interface with

suppliers, evaluate performance, handle customers, hire new members and deal with discipline

Management Paper: Self-Managing Work Teams 3 problems” (p.25). A fundamental premise behind SMWTs is that the team as a whole can outperform

the sum of its members.

Druskat and Wheeler (2004) point to the prevalence of SMWTs. They found “79% of companies in the

Fortune 1000 and 81% of manufacturing organizations” currently used some form of SMWTs (p.65).

While SMWTs have been “well established in European countries”, the management practice is a more

recent development in the United States (Stewart & Manz, 1995, p. 747). However, based on his

literature review, Castiglione (2007) concludes that SMWTs are an “underutilized tool” in libraries.

Effectiveness

SMWTs have met with success in business. In his book, Leading Self-Directed Work Teams: A Guide to

Developing New Team Leadership Skill, Kimball Fisher lists twenty separate university studies that show

a positive correlation between effective team practices and organization performance. In Table 3.1, he

charts the organization studied, the results obtained such as lowering manufacturing costs by 50% or

improving productivity by 250%, and the source of the research study (pages 31-33).

Cohen and Ledford (1994) studied self-managing teams at a telecommunications company and found

that SMWTs were more effective than comparable traditionally managed groups that performed the

same type of work. Overall performance, productivity, and quality, which were the main goals of the

intervention, showed significant effects. They also found that members of SMWTs had higher levels of

job satisfaction, growth needs satisfaction, and group satisfaction. The study leaders recommended to

top management that SMWTs should be encouraged but cautioned that they not be used as a cost

cutting method; that local design was critical; and that certain aspects of the company’s infrastructure

such as measurement systems needed to be changed to remove obstacles to implementation.

Interestingly, in another study of SMWTs entitled, The Downside of Self-Management: A Longitudinal

Study of the Effects of Conflict on Trust, Autonomy, and Task Interdependence in Self-Managing Teams,

Management Paper: Self-Managing Work Teams 4 Claus Langfred (2007) seemed to discredit the effectiveness of SMWTs. He found that high conflict in

teams correlated with lower autonomy and interdependence which could cause self-managing team

dysfunction. However, upon closer examination, his study focused on 35 SMWTs of MBA graduate

students, not employees in the work world, who were assigned to teams for four months. In addition,

they were not given any training, especially in conflict resolution or group skills. The ultimate conclusion

from this study was not that SMWTs were ineffective, but that there was a potential for ineffectiveness

if the teams were not properly prepared for working as SMWTs.

Implementation

The concerns raised in these studies of the effectiveness of SMWTs are valid. Implementation is a

complex process involving organizational culture change. It may take up to two years and effect many

different areas of an organization. Investment has to be made well before results begin to appear.

There are several books about SMWT implementation in the Further Reading section of this paper.

Several key considerations in implementing SMWTs follow:

Top management support. Success of SMWTs depends on top management buying into the change.

Both upper and middle management support must be firmly established from the beginning. In fact,

since SMWTs are created to help the organization meet its goals, SMWT activities should mesh with the

organization’s mission, strategy and operating philosophy (Salem & Lazarus, 1992).

Cross-training. If an organization is able to consolidate several job categories into a smaller number of

classifications, it simplifies implementation. Otherwise, SMWT members need to be cross trained so that

they can rotate between different assignments. In this way too, the members develop new skills and

better understand the objectives of the organization. Rotation of leadership is also a form of cross

training.

Management Paper: Self-Managing Work Teams 5 Organizational structure. The number of people in a particular SMWT is small, generally ranging

between three to 20 people (Salem and Lazarus, 1992). Most SMWTs tend to flatten the organizational

structure. Span of control is increased where a manager would “supervise” more than one group. In his

article about SMWTs for academic libraries, Castiglione (2007) provides a good graphic of how the

organizational structure differs. The two types of organizational structure can be seen below. Figure 1 is

a hierarchical organizational chart, and Figure 2 is a SMWT structure (p. 384-385). Prior to

implementation, a plan needs to be in place for restructuring the middle level. Whether it is to retrain

these employees and move them to other positions, eliminate positions, or revamp the jobs and

communicate changes in expectations, a lot of thought needs to be given to this component.

Figure 1: A Typical Hierarchical Structure

Management Paper: Self-Managing Work Teams 6

Training and development. One approach to implementation begins with assessing professional

development needs and providing training. Most likely those needs will include requests in areas such

as conflict management and supervisory skills. The next stage would be to provide technical training

needed for employees to be cross trained within their teams. Just as teams are formed and ready to

begin, training in basic group skills such as group problem solving techniques and effective meetings is

critical. Having employees role play group norms and practices is beneficial at this stage too. The

SMWTs can then immediately put their skills into practice. As the teams develop and gain more

experience, training and development will be more self-directed in that the teams will request training

for the group in such subjects as advanced problem solving, brainstorming techniques, team building,

group decision making, conflict management, budgeting, and presentation skills (Von Dran, 1988).

Figure 2: Self Managing Work Team Structure

Management Paper: Self-Managing Work Teams 7

Leadership

Of all the subjects related to SMWTs, there appears to be more research on leadership. It might seem

odd to focus on the role of external leader for a self-managing work team. Autonomous teams are

supposed to be independent to make their own decisions. However, successful teams require

leadership. That person might be referred to as a coordinator, facilitator, or consultant. There still

needs to be someone who receives direction and information from the upper parts of the organization

and who is held accountable for the team.

In a frequently cited study of SMWTs, Manz and Sims (1987) explored this paradoxical role of external

leader in a medium sized manufacturing plant. They identified six behaviors that a leader of a SMWT

should perform to help the team lead itself effectively. External leaders should…

1. Encourage self-reinforcement.

2. Encourage self-criticism.

3. Encourage self-goal setting.

4. Encourage self-observation/evaluation.

5. Encourage self-expectation.

6. Encourage rehearsal. (p. 114).

In 2004, Druskat and Wheeler published their study on the role of the external leader. They conducted

a study of 300 self-managing teams at a large durable consumer goods manufacturing plant. The plant

had transitioned to self-managing teams five years prior to the study. They investigated average- and

superior-performing leaders to determine the behaviors that made superior-performing leaders.

While one might think that successful external leaders would either have a “hands off” approach or be

concerned primarily with encouraging the team as in the Manz and Sims (1987) study, Druskat and

Wheeler found that high performing leaders shared one key skill: “managing the boundary between the

team and the larger organization” (p. 65). “The superior leaders were able to develop strong

relationships with both those in the team and across the organization.” (p. 71). Their model helps to

visualize the leadership skills needed to lead self-managing teams.

Management Paper: Self-Managing Work Teams 8

Source: How to Lead a Self-Managing Team by Druskat and Wheeler (2004) (p. 69).

In The Soul of a New Machine (1981), Tracy Kidder gives an interesting account of Data General’s Eagle

Group leader, Tom West (as cited by Bolman and Deal, 2008). West epitomizes the external leader as

characterized by Druskat and Wheeler (2003, 2004).

West, the group’s official leader, rarely interfered with the actual work, nor was he particularly visible in the laboratory….West contributed primarily by causing problems for the engineers to solve and making mundane events and issues appear special….West also had the skills of a good politician. He knew how to develop agendas, build alliances, and negotiate…. When he had a particular objective in mind, he would first go upstairs to sign up senior executives. (p. 283-285)

In a third research study on leadership, Stoker (2008) looked at the relationship between leadership

style and SMWT effectiveness. Stoker used a questionnaire with 154 SMWT members of 21 SMWTs.

What she found was that member tenure (an objective measure used as a proxy for experience) and

leadership style affected SMWT performance (group level measure) and well being (individual level

measure). She concluded the following:

1. Short tenured members had higher performance with a team leader who used directed rather than coaching behavior.

2. New team members reported lower performance and higher emotional exhaustion with a team leader who used coaching behavior.

3. For longer tenured members, individual performance was greater and emotional exhaustion was less when the team leader used a coaching style behavior.

Management Paper: Self-Managing Work Teams 9 Contrary to the assumptions of Manz and Sims, some SMWT members evidently do benefit from

directive style leadership. Stoker’s study includes some practical implications for leaders of SMWTs.

First, because the importance of an individual member’s experience (tenure on the team), leaders

should not use the same leadership style for the entire team. Second, both directing and coaching

leadership styles can be effective or ineffective depending on the individual team member. Thus, it

becomes important to have team leaders who can be flexible and use both leadership styles. Third, from

a human resources perspective, hiring and developing leaders with flexible styles is important for SMWT

success .

Application to Libraries

There are some examples of successful, self-managing teams in academic library settings. Poon-

Richards (1996) determined from his literature review that two key elements determined success in

SMWTs: empowerment and shared leadership. He recognized that, “Self-managed teams can promote

job satisfaction while engaging staff members more fully in their library work environment” (p. 82).

Technical Services at Yale’s Sterling Library. Crooker, Killheffer and Mandour (1991) explained that the

introduction of an integrated online system was the impetus for establishing self managing teams at

Sterling. The teams consisted of three to ten members who have a mix of backgrounds, skills, and

expertise from every level of the library. While team leaders were selected from the librarian and

manager ranks, they were expected to coach team members and relinquish authority to the team as it

matured. The greatest challenge for the team members was cross training in every area of technical

services. While implementation of SMWTs was expected to provide better service, improve

productivity, increase flexibility in the changing environment, and foster job satisfaction; additionally,

communication and cooperation across department boundaries improved throughout the library. Team

members gained an understanding of the “big picture.” They took ownership of the process.

Management Paper: Self-Managing Work Teams 10 University of Maryland (UM). Castiglione (2007) highlights the teams established at the University of

Maryland. The library used the services of a management consultant from the School of Business in

implementation. Four teams were created: information and research services, collection management,

information literacy, and access services. They had the support of the library’s administration which

encouraged the staff to acquire new skills and flatten the organizational structure. UM found job

rotation and cross training increased efficiency, enhanced professional development and improved

patron satisfaction. Employees noticed improved communications and felt a re-energized.

RefTeam. Young’s (2004) article details a case history of RefTeam, a self-managing reference team at

the University of Albany. In 1999 the library’s administration decided to try a team based approach

after four department heads left the library. Despite the lack of thorough planning and organizing a self-

managing team within a traditional, hierarchical structure, the RefTeam has been a success. Team

members took on the following managerial roles:

* budgeting * supervising support staff and undergraduate employees * supervision and training of graduate assistants and interns

* assuming responsibility for a very active departmental continuing education program * collecting and analyzing departmental statistics related to reference transactions * taking on committee assignments that would normally fall to a department head * recording and distributing the minutes of the weekly team meetings * ensuring hospitality (p. 186). The team was successful for a number of reasons. At the outset, the first leader, chosen by group

consensus, was well respected and had over 25 years of experience. Additionally, the team members

had worked with each other for a long time, contributed experience gained elsewhere in the library, and

were enthusiastic about the change. Also, the group had substantial management support as

demonstrated by a merit pay raises for team members. Furthermore, team members participated in a

facilitation skills workshop that resulted in RefTeam cohesion, group problem solving skills, and written

group norms. Each June the team has a half-day, off-site retreat to choose the next year’s new leader,

devise strategies for staffing in the fall, and determine initiatives for the team. Three years after

Management Paper: Self-Managing Work Teams 11 formation, they realized they needed to have a clearly written mission, purpose and goals which tied

into the department’s strategic plan.

Conclusion

Managers are realizing the possible benefits of SMWTs. Success depends on the organization. In the

studies above, businesses tend to change the culture as they change the organization. In the few library

examples, SMWTs have only been used on a limited basis within the hierarchical structure. Also, the

cases in the library literature have dealt with academic environments only, even though SMWTs could

be used in public libraries such as a branch, small public libraries or in departments of a large, main

branch.

The successful development of SMWTs does not happen overnight. There needs to be thoughtful,

careful planning done in advance of implementation. Without top management’s understanding and

total commitment, SMWTs just become another fad. Implementation will impact the organizational

culture and structure. Cross training while adding flexibility with a multi-skilled workforce, costs money.

Training and development at the point of need increases the chances of success. External leaders need

support and training. Teams and their leaders develop over time. The entire process takes time.

However, true SMWTs empower employees. They aren’t just teams. SMWTs have autonomy and

authority to make decisions that contribute to the organization’s effectiveness and help to achieve the

organization’s mission and goals. Conversely, SMWT members experience increased job satisfaction,

morale and team cohesiveness. Library administrators who truly understand self managing teams and

their benefits can successfully implement them within their organization.

Management Paper: Self-Managing Work Teams 12

References

Bolman, L.G. & Deal, T.E. (2008). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice and leadership. San

Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.

Castiglione, J. (2007). Self-managing work teams and their external leadership: A primer for library

administrators. Library Management, 28(6/7), 379-393. Retrieved from Emerald database.

Cohen, S. G. & Ledford, G.E. (1994). The effectiveness of self-managing teams: A quasi-experiment.

Human Relations, 47(1), 13-44. Retrieved from Business Source Premier Database.

Crooker, C., Killheffer, R., & Mandour, C. (1991). The reorganization of technical services at Yale.

Technical Services Quarterly, 9(1), 27-41. Retrieved from Library Literature & Information

Science database.

Druskat, V.U. & Wheeler, J.V. (2003). Managing from the boundary: The effective leadership of self-

managing work teams. Academy of Management Journal, 46(4), 435-457. Retrieved from

Business Source Premier database.

Druskat, V. & Wheeler, J. (2004). How to lead a self-managing team. MIT Sloan Management Review,

45(4), 65-71. Retrieved from Business Source Premier database.

Fisher, K. (2000). Leading self-directed work teams: A guide to developing new team leadership skills.

New York: McGraw-Hill.

Langfred, C. W. (2007). The downside of self-management: A longitudinal study of the effects of

conflict on trust, autonomy, and task interdependence in self-managing teams. Academy of

Management Journal, 50(4), 885-900. Retrieved from Business Source Premier database.

Management Paper: Self-Managing Work Teams 13 Manz, C.C. & Sims, H.P. (1987). Leading workers to lead themselves: The external leadership of self-

managing work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32(1), 106-129. Retrieved from

Business Source Premier database.

Poon-Richards, C. (1996). Self-managed teams for library management. Journal of Library

Administration, 22(1), 67-84. Retrieved from Library Literature & Information Science database.

Salem, M., Lazarus, H., & Cullen, J. (1992). Developing self-managing teams: Structure and

performance. Journal of Management Development, 11(3), 24-32. Retrieved from Emerald

database.

Stewart, G. L. & Manz, C. C. (1995). Leadership for self managing work teams: A typology and

integrative model. Human Relations, 48(7), 747-770. Retrieved from Business Source Premier

database.

Stoker, J. I. (2008). Effects of team tenure and leadership in self-managing teams. Personnel Review,

37(5), 564-582. Retrieved from Emerald database.

Von Dran, G. M. (1988). Preparing staff for participative management. Wilson Library Bulletin 62, 50-2.

Retrieved from Library Literature & Information Science Full Text database.

Young, W. F. (2004). Reference team self-management at the University of Albany. Library

Administration & Management, 18(4), 185-191. Retrieved from Library Literature & Information

Science database.

Management Paper: Self-Managing Work Teams 14

Further Reading

Beyerlein, M. M. & Johnson, D. A. (Eds.). (1994). Advances in interdisciplinary studies of work teams:

Theories of self-managing work teams. Greenwich, CT: Jai Press.

Cloke, K. & Goldsmith, J. (2002). The end of management and the rise of organizational democracy. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Fotilas, P. N. (1981). Semi-autonomous work groups: An alternative in organizing production work?

Management Review, 70(7), 50-54. Retrieved from Business Source Premier database.

Manz, C. C. & Sims, H. P. (1993). Business without bosses: How self-managing teams are building high-

performing companies. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Orsburn, J. D. & Moran, L. (1990). The new self-directed work teams: Mastering the challenge. New

York: McGraw-Hill.

Ray, D. & Bronstein, H. (1995). Teaming up: Making the transition to a self-directed, team-based

organization. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Recardo, R. J., Wade, D., Mention, C.A., & Jolly, J. A. (1996). Teams: Who needs them and why?

Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing.

Spreitzer, G. M., Cohen, S. G., & Ledford, G. E. (1999). Developing effective self-managing work teams

in service organizations. Group Organization Management, 24, 340-366. Retrieved from Sage

Publications database.

Wageman, R. (2001). How leaders foster self-managing team effectiveness: Design choices versus

hands-on coaching. Organization Science, 12(5), 559-577. Retrieved from Business Source

Premier database.

Wellins, R. S., Byham, W. C., & Wilson, J. M. (1991). Empowered teams: Creating self-directed work

groups that improve quality, productivity, and participation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Yeatts,D. E. & Hyten, C. (1998). High performing self-managed work teams: A comparison of theory to

practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.