Groups and Teams Name: Course: Institution: Tutor: Date: Groups and Teams Introduction Groups are defined as a people coming together in order to achieve different missions although they have common purpose. In other words, people in a group are not dependent on the performances of the individual. Although the failure or success of an individual may not affect the whole group, the individual performances are significant towards the achievement of the common purpose. On the other hand, a team is defined as people coming together in order to achieve a particular mission through the incorporation of a given authority, progress measurements awareness and the need to work in unison. They are dependent on one another and so the failure or success of a particular individual will affect the whole team. Since groups and teams are formed by individuals, it is necessary to evaluate the individuals so that better and effective teams and groups can be brought forth. Comparing and Contrasting Groups and Teams through Workplace Diversity The values of each individual are very significant.
While understanding the values an individual member, a group helps in making the member perfect his/her skills towards achieving the set purpose. Understanding an individual team member will enable him/her work together with other team members. Individual values may be molded from a person’s background, environment, society, amongst other places (Shermerhorn, Hunt & Osborn, 2011). Understanding the values of the individual members and accepting them brings forth a working environment where the people are willing to work with one another without too much conflict. It is also through learning the values that one identifies the diverse cultures in a workplace. One picks the positive aspects of each culture and molds to the advantage of the set purpose. The personality of an individual is also significant to individual group and team members. People bring their personality to the group or teams.
They bring both their positive and negative aspects of their personality. Heredity and development have roles to play when it comes to people’s personality. Although groups may not be dependent on each other thus the less need of identifying the personalities present, knowing the personality of each group member may allow the individuals to make use of their positive personalities in helping the other members to reach the set purpose as effectively and efficiently as possible. Other group members may also aid the others to develop their personalities to a higher level. For example, a non-corrupt member may aid a corrupt member to stand his/her ground when faced with a compromising situation.
On the other hand, personalities are the core feature in teams. Each team member is significant towards the success of a mission and so understanding the personalities will enable them to take the necessary actions. It also allows people to interrelate with one another. Understanding that a member is the way they are because of their heredity factor and not because of the way they were brought up will enable one to handle the situation differently. Personalities are more crucial to teams than they are to groups because of the relationship between the members. Understanding the values and the personalities of the team members plays similar roles in both groups and teams. They enable one to understand who they are, who they are as a team or group, their reason for coming together, and what actions to take in order to accomplish the goal and how far from reaching the goal they are. The understanding or misunderstanding of the values and personalities leads to the success or failure of a personality.
It is in understanding the diversity of values personalities, cultures, interactions, abilities, talents and skills that allows each individual to know how significant they are in a group or a team Leadership is also significant to groups and teams. Understanding the teams and groups will allow the leadership to facilitate the integrated leadership, the moral leadership or the change leadership (Shermerhorn, Hunt & Osborn, 2011). When dealing with groups the full-range leadership is very effective. On the other hand, he shared leadership is very effective when dealing with teams. Since the full-range leadership is involved with transactional and the transformational leaderships, which are covered by the nine-dimensions, the inputs of the various group members are felt in the group. The various group members develop themselves as they develop the course of the set purpose. When it comes to shared leadership, there is an interactive and dynamic characteristic where members use and aid each other towards reaching the given goals.
These bring dependency, another characteristic that is evident in teams. The team members look out for each other and make use of the positive aspects of the personalities in the team towards the benefit of achieving the set goal. Teams do not have to focus on one individual for assistance or guidance. Additionally, they will be able to avoid mistakes that jeopardize the success of the whole group. The moral leadership and the change leadership are necessary in both teams and groups.
Ethical leadership brings forth the needed morals in the workplace. The authentic, the servant and the spiritual leadership bring forth the positive prevailing characteristics in a workplace that were embedded by past leaders. The change leadership brings froth the necessary changes that enable the groups and the teams to reach the set purpose in the most efficient and effective as the members receive job satisfaction. Conclusion The teams and groups are similar in the majority of the aspects pertaining to the team dynamic in a workplace. Values, personalities and leaderships should be molded towards the advantage of a group or team. However, the appreciation of the diversity in these features should not be taken for granted. It is significant to understand that groups and teams are made up of individuals who have their own personalities and values.
Reference Shermerhorn, J. R., Hunt, J. G., & Osborn, R. (2011). Organizational behaviour. New York: J.