[acb-hsp] The Qualities of An Effective Team Leader

[J.Rayl]

The Qualities of an Effective Team Leader
by Peter D. Bachiochi , Steven G. Rogelberg , Matthew S. O'Connor , Allison E. Elder
Introduction
Although the use of teams has become pervasive in all segments of industry (Manz
& Sims, 1993), many team
 efforts have failed (Lawler, 1986, 1988; Saporito, 1986). Often,
team leadership, or lack of it, has been used to explain team
 failure (Klein, 1984; Letize & Donovan, 1990; Manz & Sims, 1987). The
team leader is typically a member of the team
 who provides guidance and support and has ultimate responsibility for the outcomes
of the
team. As such, the success of a team leader is often measured in terms of both the
cohesiveness of the
team
 as well as producing some tangible outcome. Interestingly, little systematic research
has been conducted on the success factors underlying effective
team leadership. Although there have been several articles on the topic of team leaders,
many of them were anecdotal in
 nature rather than based on empirical research. Others focused on a narrow portion
of team
 leadership, without considering the broad spectrum of requirements for effective
team leaders or have developed broad theoretical frameworks that have yet to be tested
in
 the field. To overcome some of the above deficiencies, the following study analyzes
the results of ten focus groups with
team leaders and team
 members across five organizations to determine what is required for effective team
leadership.
Research on Leadership
To provide a context in which to understand the literature on team leadership, it
is important to acknowledge the literature on leadership in
 general. There have been four general approaches to studying leadership in
 the past. Table 1 provides a summary of some of the key contributions of each of
the approaches. This summary is intended to be illustrative, not exhaustive. Behavioral/Functional
approaches (Blake & Mouton, 1964; Fleishman, 1953; McGrath, 1962; Stogdill, 1974;
Yukl, 1998) have discussed leadership
in
 terms of the things leaders do (i.e., behaviors/ skills) or the function they serve
in
 the organization. Trait approaches (Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978; House, 1977) have discussed
leaders
in
 terms of the special characteristics they uniquely possess that enable them to lead.
Charismatic and transformational leadership theories are just two examples. Social
psychological approaches (Dansereau, Graen, & Haga, 1975; French & Raven, 1959; Hackman
& Walton, 1976) have viewed leadership as a relationship or a social influence process.
This approach has been influenced greatly by the work
in
 areas such as social facilitation/loafing (Latane, Williams, & Harkins, 1979), group
cohesiveness (Berkowitz, 1954), group polarization (Pruitt, 1971;Stoner, 1961), and
groupthink (Janis, 1972). Finally, situational leadership approaches (Evans, 1970;
Fiedler, 1967; Hersey & Blanchard, 1969; House, 1971) have viewed leadership as strongly
contingent upon the environment
in
 which leadership is to occur.
In such a case, leadership is viewed as a complex interaction of leader, follower(s),
and context.
Research on Team Leadership
Many of the studies of team leadership have employed a behaviororiented approach,
derived from job analytic methods. In
 some of the earliest research on
team leaders, McGrath (1962) outlined several functions the team
 leader should serve. Leaders perform a diagnostic function by monitoring
team
 performance (and comparing it to accepted standards) and a remedial function by
taking action to improve group performance. Leaders also perform a forecasting function
by watching environmental conditions (and their potential effects on
team
 performance) and a preventive function by attempting to avert the negative effects
of a volatile environment.
Zenger, Musselwhite, Hurson, and Perrin (1994) also took a functional approach to
team
 leadership and used questionnaires, interviews, and focus groups to outline the
practices and skills of successful
team leaders. According to their findings, team leaders must:
(1) build trust and inspire teamwork,
(2) facilitate and support team decisions, and
(3) expand team capabilities.
They must also:
(4) create a team identity,
(5) make the most of team differences, and
(6) foresee and influence change.
Komaki, Desselles, and Bowman (1989) investigated sailing teams in developing an
operant conditioning approach to team
 leadership. They outlined a series of monitoring, feedback, and
team coordination behaviors that the leader must carry out in order to maintain team
 performance.
Stewart and Manz ( 1995) proposed a model of four team
 leader styles: overpowering, powerless, powerbuilding, and empowered leadership.
Overpowering leadership (coercive, punishing, autocratic) and powerless leadership
(intermittent, distant, directionless) were viewed as ineffective styles.
In evaluating the four styles, they posited that power-building
 leaders allowed teams to be selfmanaging by using behaviors such as guidance and
encouragement, delegation, reinforcement, and culture development. Similarly, empowering
leaders used behaviors such as modeling, boundary-spanning (i.e., networking outside
the
team
), and assisting (i.e., coaching and mentoring) that allowed teams to be self-leading.
Other researchers have taken a social psychological approach to the study of team
 leadership, guided by previous work on group processes and dynamics. Expanding on
their earlier work
in
 social psychology, Hackman and Walton (1986) outlined the knowledge and skills required
of leaders to respond appropriately to the
team and the environment. For instance, knowledge of team
 processes, data gathering skill and diagnostic skill were all important.
In order to take action, team
 leaders needed to have knowledge of the change process, creativity, negotiation
skill, and decision-making skill to carry out planned actions. Ultimately, Hackman
and Walton (1986) described
team
 leaders as monitors of and actors within a larger social system.
Morgeson ( 1997) proposed a model of team leadership as event management. Using an
open-systems approach, Morgeson stated that
team leadership revolves around managing events in the team's internal and external
environments. For instance, if a key supplier to the
team fails to fulfill obligations, the team leader's role entails helping the team
 overcome this obstacle (i.e., event). Morgeson outlined various assessment and intervention
activities
team leaders must engage in to maintain a functioning team in
 a demanding environment. Assessment activities included monitoring and diagnosis.
Intervention activities included
team
 establishment (establishing boundaries, providing direction, etc.), developing skills
and competencies, motivation, boundary management, and developing a base of influence.
Some of the team leadership literature focused on the situational requirements created
by specific team
 environments. Kozlowski, Gully, McHugh, Salas, and Cannon-Bowers (1996) studied
the role of
team leaders when the primary role of the team
 was decision making. They stated that the
team
 leader served two primary roles: developmental and task-contingent roles. The developmental
behaviors consisted of creating a cohesive whole, defining social structure, modeling
self-disclosure, coaching, defining
team
 functions, and emphasizing goals and performance objectives. The task-contingent
behaviors consisted of instruction (goalsetting, monitoring, feedback) and intervention
(action to get the
team back on track).
Manz and Sims (1987) studied the behaviors of leaders of self-managing work teams
(SMWTs). Instead of focusing on the behaviors of the leader, they discussed the role
of leader as one who encouraged the
team members to engage in
 certain activities themselves (i.e., manage themselves). They found that
in
 order to promote selfmanagement, leaders must encourage rehearsal, self-goal-setting,
self-criticism, self-reinforcement, self-expectation, and self-observation/evaluation
among the
team members.
The Present Study
The current study arose out of the need to develop training materials for team
 leaders. A common belief existed that manager training would not be entirely appropriate
for
team leaders. There was significant overlap between the two roles (and the skills
required for each), but team
 leaders needed a slightly different set of skills. Prior to the current study, team
leaders in
 several organizations mentioned that although they had much of the accountability
and responsibility of managers, they did not have the same authority as those managers.
The
team
 leaders did not wield the reward and punishment power of managers and as a result
reported needing to rely on interpersonal and persuasive skills to a greater extent.
Although previous research has identified a number of the behaviors and skills needed
by team
 leaders, factors such as responsibility and authority have received little attention.
Studies have also outlined the effects of certain contexts (i.e., decision-making
and selfmanaging teams) on the requisite behaviors and skills. Others have used existing
social psychological theory to develop a theoretical framework for the study of
team
 leadership. However, work is still needed that broadens the context and types of
teams studied. Manz & Sims (1987) studied selfdirected teams and Kozlowski et al.
(1996) studied decision-making teams. Although the specificity of these studies is
informative, it excludes more common
team
 leaders. Therefore the intent of this study was threefold. First, this study broadened
the types of teams investigated to determine if the factors identified
in previous work generalize to other team
 contexts. second, this study determined if the traits studied
in general leadership also apply to team leaders. Third, this study explored if team
 leaders and members identify the accountability/authority dilemma faced by
team leaders.
By analyzing the results often focus groups representing more than 47 work teams
from five organizations, this study attempted to meet some of these research needs.
It developed a comprehensive taxonomy of the qualities required for effective
team
 leadership, which includes the key traits mentioned often by
team
 leaders and members. Also, this study extends previous findings beyond self-directed
teams by studying a broader array of work teams. Given that the systematic development
of the construct of
team leadership is still in
 its early stages, this study also has practical implications. By more clearly delineating
the requirements of effective
team
 leadership, the criteria for recruiting and selecting
team leaders can be enhanced. Also, the training of existing team members to become
team
 leaders is facilitated by clear definitions of the success factors of
team leaders.
Method
Sample
The sample for this study consisted of 10 focus group transcripts collected in five
different organizations. The companies in
 the study all used teams extensively and represented services (banking and insurance),
manufacturing (technology and consumer products), and food-product industries. Two
companies were located
in the northeast, one in the southeast, and two in the southwest. Two sessions were
conducted in
 each organization, one consisting of individuals with team leader responsibilities
and the other with employees who were team
 members. Only one member per
team was allowed to participate in the study, but because separate focus groups were
conducted for team
 leaders and members, it was possible for a member and a leader of the same
team to participate in the study. Focus groups ranged in
 size from 6 to 13 members with two researchers present.
Fifty-three males and 39 females participated in
 the study and ages ranged from early twenties to the sixties. The 92 focus group
participants (47
team leaders and 45 team
 members) were selected by company representatives based on several criteria. Participants
must have had at least six months experience on an active
team (average length of team experience was 7.5 years). The amount of team
 training provided to participants was not assessed. Participants were also selected
to provide representation from all of the major functions and multiple management
levels within each company. Focus group participants represented teams from functions
such as production, shipping, maintenance, human resources, senior administration,
and customer service. As a result, participants represented teams as small as 6 members
and as large as 40 members. Study participants were members of semi-autonomous teams
that were responsible for major processes and made significant decisions internally
but were controlled by an external layer of management. Many of the teams were permanent
cross-functional teams or long-term project-based teams.
Team leaders were members of the team, which they led, and in
 most cases were appointed by management and not nominated or selected by their
team members.
Interview Procedure
A researcher with at least one year of focus group experience moderated the groups
and a second researcher took detailed notes of the sessions. A standard protocol
was used
in
 all of the sessions and each lasted approximately 90 minutes. Following introductions
and a statement of ground rules, a
team leader was defined as a person who was a member of the team
 and yet had leadership responsibility for that
team. The next questions addressed the skills and experiences of good team leaders,
the obstacles or inhibitors to being a good team
 leader (personal as well as environmental), and the training topics/ activities
considered critical to prepare good team
 leaders. Specific and consistent probes were offered if participants did not understand
the questions.
Content Analysis Process
The comprehensive notes taken in
 each session (8-12 pages each) served as the source materials for content analysis.
Consistent with Holsti (1969) and Krippendorf ( 1980), the analysis process began
with coder training, followed by category development, coding, and verification.
Coder Training
In order to get a cursory knowledge of the content of the group sessions and to begin
identifying some of the common themes in
 the transcripts, two coders read through the notes from all of the sessions. Following
this, two of the session records were chosen randomly for training. Each coder read
through the records, first highlighting the comments relevant to the topic of
team
 leadership. Once relevant comments had been highlighted, coders placed each comment
into a self-created category. For instance, if a new comment corresponded to a new
and unique
team leader characteristic, a new category was created. Each comment was categorized
in
 this manner until the first two transcripts had been completed. After coding the
first two training transcripts separately, the trainer and coders discussed their
categories and the rationale for their categories. This preliminary step was taken
to ensure that coders were using similar sorting rationales before moving on to the
remaining transcripts.
Category Development and Coding
The next eight focus group transcripts were analyzed by each coder independently.
Following all coding, approximately 60 detailed categories were established. Each
rater's categories were discussed to create a common set of categories. Disagreements
regarding the categorization of any specific comment were discussed between coders
and the comment was placed into a mutually agreed upon category. Condensing the 60
specific categories yielded twenty core qualities of
team
 leaders. As a final step, the twenty qualities were sorted into broad themes based
on similarity to each other. Two of the authors did a qualitative sort of the qualities
based on their overall purpose
in team
 leadership and qualities that were similar
in leadership function were placed in the same theme.
Verification
A final check of the reliability of the 20 categories was conducted. Three new coders
sorted each of the original comments into the categories developed. Ninety-two percent
of the comments were placed into the same category by at least two of the coders
and 82% of the comments were placed into the same category by all three coders. Following
the initial sorting, comments that were not placed
in
 the same category were discussed and placed into a mutually agreed upon category
or discarded if no agreement was reached (10 of the original 450 comments were discarded,
yielding the final 440).
Results
The 440 comments yielded 20 categories of team leader characteristics. The comments
of team leaders and team members were combined because chi-squared analyses demonstrated
a high degree of similarity
in
 how frequently the qualities were mentioned by each group. This similarity between
leaders and members may develop as a result of the common goals within a team. Perhaps
these common goals create a shared perception of the role of the team leader that
is held by both team leaders and members.
The 20 qualities identified in
 this study were organized into six themes to simplify presentation: Background and
Expertise (10.5% of all comments fell into this category), Task-Oriented Skills (31.1%),
Interpersonal Skills (22.7%), Communication Skills ( 17.5%), Liaison Skills (7%),
and Personal Characteristics/Traits (10.9%). Table 2 provides the name of each quality,
the percentage of all comments that addressed the quality, a working definition (based
on critical incidents or behaviors mentioned by participants), and verbatim comments
to more colorfully illustrate the meaning of the qualities.
Background and Expertise
The first theme contained one team leader quality, Background and Expertise. Although
participants noted that the leader's job knowledge played a role
in team success, knowledge of organizational issues (i.e., politics, etc.) was also
important.
Task-Oriented Skills
The second theme, the task-oriented skills required to get the job done, consisted
of six qualities: Planning/ Organizing, Decision-making, Delegating/Sharing Power,
Problemsolving, Facilitating the Process, and Motivating. Several team members
in
 this study mentioned that at times teams failed to move forward and the leader needed
to step
in with a decision. In
 this study, delegating was the taskoriented skill mentioned most often, thus suggesting
that team leadership is an empowerment-based, "hands-off ' process. Motivating was
discussed almost exclusively as a task-related process rather than an interpersonal
process. That is, motivation was usually discussed
in
 terms of getting the job done rather than feeling good about how things went.
Interpersonal Skills
The third theme, interpersonal skills, consisted of Conflict Management, Persuasion
and Influence, Coaching/ Mentoring, and Understanding/ Supporting. Table 2 provides
more detail.
Communication Skills
The fourth theme, communication skills, consisted of Listening Effectively, Communicating
Information, Providing Feedback, and Communicating a Vision. Although these two skills
were often subsumed under the broader category of interpersonal skills
in
 previous research, participants
in this study emphasized the importance of these two skills to such an extent that
they warranted individual attention.
In fact, Communicating Information was one of the most frequently mentioned qualities
across all categories.
Liaison Skills
The fifth theme, liaison skills, consisted of Networking/Boundary Spanning and Accountability/
Responsibility. Accountability/ Responsibility referred to the fact that the team
leaders shared
in
 the team's successes, but were also the one person most accountable for the team's
failures.
Personal Characteristics/Traits
The last theme consisted of the personal characteristics of effective team leaders
including Self-Confidence/ Emotional Stability, Consistency/Trust, and Flexibility.
These personal characteristics will be discussed
in more detail below.
Discussion
Altogether, one may see that an effective team leader serves several purposes for
the team. Not only is the team leader ultimately responsible for the performance
of the team, but the leader must focus on the interpersonal dynamics of the team
as well.
In
 fact, the taskoriented themes (training/experience and task-oriented skills) and
the relationshiporiented themes (interpersonal and communication skills) account
for nearly equivalent percentages of comments made (41.6% vs. 40.2%). Within team
leadership, there appears to be a balance between what the early leadership theories
termed initiating structure and consideration (Fleishman, 1953) or concern for people
vs. concern for production (Blake & Mouton, 1964).
In
 fact, the results of this study, with the exception of the personal characteristics/traits,
are consistent with much of the previous research on leadership that took a functional
approach (McGrath, 1962; Stogdill, 1962; and Yukl, 1998). The personal characteristics/traits,
however, are also consistent with research on charismatic and transformational leadership
scenarios (Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978; Conger & Kanungo, 1987; House, 1977). The importance
of persuasion and influence among team leaders is consistent with French and Raven's
(1959) concepts of referent and personal power. Team leadership is also a function
of leader-member exchanges (Dansereau, et al., 1975) and other social processes
in
 leadership (Hackman & Walton, 1976; Hughes, et al., 1996). Situational approaches
to leadership (Evans, 1970; Fiedler, 1967; Hersey & Blanchard, 1969; House, 1971)
however, are a ripe area for study
in team leader situations.
The consistencies between the qualities suggested in this study and work in previous
team leader studies are outlined in
 Table 3. Many of the issues raised by study participants are consistent with prior
research. However, this study provides new perspectives on the personal characteristics
of team leaders, the conflict between accountability and responsibility, and the
unique interpersonal nature of team leadership.
New Perspectives
This study verifies many of the team leader skills and behaviors mentioned in
 previous research while also illustrating some of the unique qualities of team leadership.
For example, the personal characteristics of stability, trust, and flexibility that
have received scant attention previously emerged as important qualities of effective
team leaders. General leadership literature had examined such qualities, but team
leadership research had yet to explore this arena
in
 any detail. Although Hackman and Walton (1986) mentioned personal characteristics
of the team leader, the identification of these specific team leader traits
in the present study may be particularly useful in
 the context of team leader selection.
The accountability and responsibility of team leaders also emerged as an important
issue because team leaders are often in
 a position of high accountability with little real authority. They are given a title
and responsibility, but little administrative power to exert. Although this paradox
has received attention
in the popular press (even in the comic strip Dilbert), its salience in
 the results of this study is another indication of why it was mentioned as a significant
stressor by many of the team leaders
in this study.
This study also provides new perspectives on previously studied team leader skills.
For instance, delegating was mentioned in
 most of the previous studies as a means of enhancing efficiency. Participants
in
 this study, however, emphasized that delegating also served as a means of empowerment
and esteem
building. Understanding/ supporting was not mentioned explicitly in
 previous research, yet participants mentioned it often as an important element of
interpersonal skills. Members
in
 each organization consistently emphasized that treating team members as equals and
supporting them
in non task-oriented ways was a critical component of the team leader's responsibilities.
In fact, the highly interpersonal nature of team leadership is very consistent with
the lack of true authority in
 the position. Given that team leaders have significant responsibility and accountability
but little authority, they must be able to achieve compliance among team members
through something other than rewards or punishments. As a result, effective team
leaders use the interpersonal skills mentioned above (conflict management, persuasion/
influence, and understanding/supporting) to help the team achieve its goals. Therefore,
traits such as consistency, emotional stability, and flexibility will also play a
significant role for team leaders.
Implications and Limitations
Employees who work in teams every day provided the rich data in
 this study. As such, our results have implications for both managers and researchers
who deal with selecting or training team leaders. For instance, this taxonomy outlines
many of the criteria that may be used
in
 training programs for team leaders. Skills such as planning/organizing, motivating,
or even conflict management can be trained and many companies offer training programs
to address them. Some of the qualities mentioned most frequently (understanding/support,
communicating information, and coaching/mentoring) emphasize the highly interpersonal
nature of team leadership. If team leadership is somewhat different from classic
leadership, as this study suggests, training must reflect this difference.
However, some would argue that personal characteristics such as emotional stability,
trust, and flexibility would be difficult or impossible to train. Selecting people
who already possess these characteristics may be the most effective approach to staffing
team leader positions. The taxonomy presented
in
 this study could potentially be used to develop team leader selection tools. The
20 categories provide an initial framework for an instrument and the verbatim comments
from the groups provide the critical incidents that could comprise the individual
items. This information could also be used to create questions for structured interviews
or exercises for assessment-center style activities.
There are some limitations that warrant discussion, however. The small number of
focus groups may limit the generalizability of the results. However, participants
represented at least 47 (the number of team leaders
in the study) different teams in multiple functions in
 five different companies, from varied geographic regions. Although the qualitative
and descriptive data collected are an important first step
in
 quantifying the domain of team leadership, more research is needed to test the validity
of this taxonomy and to determine how these qualities are related to team effectiveness.
Future research needs to assess how well each of the 20 qualities predicts overall
team leader performance.
Following validation of the taxonomy, research must address the situations in
 which specific qualities would be needed most and when they would be most effective.
Situational leadership theory suggests that the organizational situation (hierarchy,
technology, etc.) may influence which qualities would be appropriate for the team
leader
in
 a given situation. Similarly, studies are needed to assess whether selection or
training would be the most effective way to fill team leader positions. Also, the
issue of team leader accountability with little authority mentioned earlier makes
team leadership a natural environment
in
 which to study the various bases of power (i.e., legitimate, personal, referent,
etc.).
In conclusion, the disparate pieces of the team leadership puzzle begin to come together
in
 this study. It outlines the type of skills and traits typical of team leaders and
illustrates that the requirements for effective team leadership entail more than
the behaviors or skills previously prescribed. The paradox faced by most team leaders,
significant accountability with little authority, was also a clear message from participants.
The results of this study support the complex nature of the role of team leader:
an employee who must bridge the gap between the roles of team member, leader, and
manager.
-1-
Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Publication Information:
Article Title: The Qualities of an Effective Team Leader. Contributors: Peter D.
Bachiochi - author, Steven G. Rogelberg - author, Matthew S. O'Connor - author, Allison
E. Elder - author. Journal Title: Organization Development Journal. Volume: 18. Issue:
1. Publication Year: 2000. Page Number: 11+. © 2000 O D Institute. Provided by ProQuest
LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Next Page

Jessie Rayl
thedogmom63 at frontier.com
www.facebook.com/Eaglewings10
www.pathtogrowth.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.acb.org/pipermail/acb-hsp/attachments/20120110/c3c02cfd/attachment-0001.html>