Category: Teams

This is how its done today, sharing vision, power, and knowledge.

Community-Based Action Research

Organization Development (OD), Teams, Training and Development

What is Community-Based Action Research?

Stringer (2007) describes Community-Based Action Research (CBAR) as one model of Action Research (AR) that subscribes to a more democratic, empowering, and humanizing approach to inquiry as compared to its predecessor, AR.  CBAR embraces the assumption that the participation of stakeholders – those who are affected by the identified problem under study – should be active participants in the inquiry process.  For any solution to be fully successful, it is imperative that stakeholders themselves understand the nature of their problem, and that their understandings become inclusive in the active plans to resolve the problem (Stringer, 2007).  Since AR is foundational to CBAR, we begin by defining AR primarily as it differs from the more traditional scientific research.  We then follow with an explanation of how CBAR is an extension of AR, followed by a discourse of the advantages and disadvantages of CBAR.

Distinguishing Action Research (AR) from Traditional Research

Traditional scientific research is portrayed by Stringer as an inanimate fact-finding expedition that generates generalized hypotheses that may or may not be a correct basis for taking action.  In stark contrast, AR is a focused systematic approach to inquiry that is used as a means to produce localized solutions for specific problems encountered by individuals participating in any type of organized social setting.  The popularity of AR has increased today because of the excessive complexities and conflicts that have invaded the lives of employees and other organizational constituents.  The reality of modern complexity is its adverse effect upon the functional ability of organizational members, and in this way, impacting the effectiveness of the overall organization in achieving its goals.  It is in this vein that AR is used to systematically approach inquiry with the goal of formulating effective and permanent solutions (Stringer, 2007).

Community-Based Action Research (CBAR)

            As one model of AR, CBAR contains the basic framework of AR which consists of look, think, and act.  Look represents the gathering of information and building a visual from that information.  Think represents analyzing and interpreting what the visual implies; e.g., what is occurring and why is it occurring.  Act, is the implementation of the action plan and evaluation that results from look and think.  The cycle of observation, reflection, and action repeats itself, with each repetitive cycle revealing new revelation upon which the community builds, making changes when and where necessary (Stringer, 2007).   Gauld, Smith and Kendall (2010) suggest that adding an element of community participation to action research is more likely to produce what they characterize as an outcome that not only reflects the community involved, but one that the community accepts ownership of, thereby increasing its sustainability and success (Gauld, et al., 2010).

Advantages and disadvantages of CBAR

As community members collaborate with researchers, Gauld et al., (2010) describes a partnership between community and researchers that facilitates a process whereby the community proactively participates in identifying and solving its own problems.  Other benefits include the development and utilization of local resources, increased knowledge sharing, and a more empowered community (Gauld et al., 2010).  Estacio (2012) describes a self-liberating process that culminates in a new social reality that can be used to mobilize action.  Despite numerous advantages, there are also disadvantages that Estacio (2012) describes such as the prevalence for inter-organizational conflict often caused by different goals and objectives, cultural differences and misunderstandings,  lack of trust, and conflict of interest that results from the various roles undertaken by the researcher/facilitator (Estacio, 2012).


Conclusion

Community-based action research is a collaborative method for solving specific and targeted organizational problems. Researchers act as facilitators, empowering stakeholders to identify their own problems, generate knowledge through reflection about those problems, and follow through by developing their own action plans based upon the knowledge they have gathered.  The community is empowered as it learns to identify and solve its own problems, and the organization as a whole benefits as a result of a more functional community.


References

Estacio, E. (2012). ‘Playing with Fire and Getting Burned’: The Case of the Naïve Action

Researcher. Journal Of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 22(5), 439-451. doi:10.1002/casp.2106

Gauld, S., Smith, S., & Kendall, M. (2011). Using participatory action research in community-

     based rehabilitation for people with acquired brain injury: from service provision to  

     partnership with Aboriginal communities. Disability & Rehabilitation, 33(19/20), 1901-1911.

     doi:10.3109/09638288.2010.550382

Stringer, E.T. (2007). Action research third edition.  Sage Publications, Inc.  Thousand Oaks,

     CA.

Please follow and like us:

Group Development Interventions

Meat Eaters, Teams

Intergroup development interventions

Organization Synergist (OS)

 OD change is not only about altering what organizations are culturally, but it specifically focuses on how organizations do whatever  it is  they do.  The focus that in times past was on the skills of the individual leader or employee, has now shifted to group functionality.  The diversity of different perspectives of group members, makes groups an ideal tool for accomplishing goals in a consistently changing environment.  Instead of depending on one person for a particular solution, a group offers many solutions for the same problem, from which the best can be selected.  Unfortunately, groups also create a perfect scenario for conflict among its members because of different perspectives, experiences, and backgrounds joining together.  Conflict within organizational divisions and departments not only impedes how the group functions among itself, but it also causes dysfunction among the groups they must coordinate with in order to accomplish the goals of their organizations.  Intergroup development is a confrontational OD intervention technique that reduces misunderstandings, open communications, and develops mechanisms for greater collaboration between organizational groups.  Techniques used in intergroup development are role play, opening communications, balancing power, and shifting unhealthy hostility to problem-solving confrontation (Brown, 2011).

Intergroup development begins with a six-step meeting where each group prepares three lists explaining three things:  their perceptions of their own group; how they believe the other group perceives them; and their perception of the other group.  In step two, each group is allowed to ask clarifying questions regarding the prepared lists.  In step three, the groups meet separately to discuss the feedback received in step two.  Groups divide into smaller mixed groups in step four, to diagnose the interface problems and to develop problem-solving alternatives with action plans and follow-up activities.  Step five is a follow-up meeting to evaluate progress (Brown, 2011).

Goal Setting

  Regardless of the type of OD intervention, goal setting will be a part of the process.  Goal setting increases efficiency and effectiveness by providing direction and purpose to individuals in work groups, or the interfaces of work groups, by specifying the desired outcomes of work.  Setting goals has the potential of improving employee performance by amplifying the intensity and persistence of effort, coupled with giving employees clearer role perceptions so that their work effort is focused towards specific behaviors that are likely to improve performance.  Goals should be specific, and capable of being measured for progress.  They should be challenging, but realistic.  Channels should be created through which employees can receive regular feedback regarding their individual progress (McShane, Von Glinow, 2012).

Management by objectives

One very popular goal-setting technique is management by objectives (MBO).  MBO benefits employees by integrating their personal career goals with the goals of the organization.  This allows employees the opportunity to participate in setting the goals they he will be expected to accomplish, which increases their motivation.  MBO also benefits the organization in two ways.  First, it clarifies the goals of the organization at all levels; and second, the organization benefits by having employees that are more motivated as a result of their participation (Brown, 2011).

Specifically, MBO is a four-step process that begins with mutual agreement between manager and employee – or group — of specific goals for a specific period of time.  Action plans are created for both employees and department.   Periodic progress reviews are scheduled to ensure that action plans are working.   Lastly, there is an annual evaluation as to whether or not goals have been achieved.  This evaluation is used for salary increases and other rewards (McShane, Von Glinow, 2012).

References

Brown, D.R.  (2011).  An experiential approach to organization development eighth

     edition.  Prentice Hall.  Upper Saddle River, New Jersey  07458.

McShane, S.L., Von Glinow, M.A.  (2012).  Organizational behavior.  McGraw-Hill

     Irwin.  New York, NY  10020.

Please follow and like us:

How to Structure Your Team for Success

Teams
Leadership Coach

Christian Leadership Coach

Studies show that 80 percent of all U.S. companies are using some form of teamwork to accomplish their objectives.  Teams are being used at all levels of the organization; from the rank and file all the way to the boardroom.  The team approach gives the workgroup a diverse set of skills and creativity to get things done.   The question is, how do you configure your team to be most effective?

The design of the team depends upon the task that is being accomplished.  All teams use some degree of interdependence.  But the degree of interdependence varies from task to task.   If you have a task to accomplish where everyone contributes their individual part, that’s called pooled interdependence, much like the teamwork you see in baseball.  People are all in the same game even though they come and go at different times.  If you have a task that requires functional grouping, where groups are responsible for specific parts of a task, this is called sequential interdependence.  We see sequential interdependence in football where one group is assigned a specific section of a project.   The highest degree of interdependence is when you have a task that requires everyone to work closely together and at the same time to accomplish the task.   Specific functions are less defined, and there is a lot of personal contact between all the participants.  An example of this highest degree of interdependence is seen in basketball (Brown, 2011).

In order to structure your team to be most effective, look at the task you are attempting to accomplish, and then structure your team accordingly.

Brown, D.R.   (2011).   An experiential approach to organization development eighth edition.  Prentice Hall.  Upper Saddle River,

New Jersey.

Please follow and like us:

The First Step in Building an Effective Team

Teams

AIM PHOTO

How to Get Your Team to Commit and Buy-in to Your Vision

One of the first steps a leader does in building an effective team, is to rally employees around a worthwhile meaningful organizational goal.  To do this, the leader uses his or her legitimate power and influence to get a commitment — sometimes called a buy-in — from the members of the team to work toward certain goals.    To get this buy-in, the leader has to clearly articulate the purpose and goals for the team, establish performance standards, and make certain that the goals of the individual teams members are the same as the goals of the team.   This is an important and vital first step in building an effective team because commitment is the fuel that accomplishes goals.   The power of commitment lies in its emotional and psychological attachment and subsequent reward to employees who are committed to the same goals as the organization.

There are three components to organizational commitment:  affective, continuance, and normative commitment.  Affective commitment relates to the emotional attachment an employee has to the values and goals of his organization.   Affective commitment is impacted by job satisfaction and the personal values of the employee.   Continuance commitment is the degree to which an employee is determined to remain with the organization.   In other words, an employee who has plans to leave the organization will not be as committed as one who sees himself as long-term.  Normative commitment is the sense of obligation.  It’s a socialized commitment that is influenced by co-workers.

//

Please follow and like us: