Self-managing Team Organizational Paradigm
University of Phoenix
Self-managing Team Organizational Design Paradigm
The Self-managing Team Organizational Paradigm (SMTOP) is a leadership and organizational structure that embraces emotional intelligence and individuals' work preferences. The model was developed with a combination of several existing models (Compound Model) and is a type of hybrid structure. With guiding principles from the Boundaryless Organizational Design, the Simple Structure Organizational Design, and Congregations model, this model is a Communications Paradigm that serves to bring out the best in the organization by investing time up front in exchange for future efficiencies. The model's design, the basis for the model, implications for leaders and followers, literature review and gaps, and the ethical considerations will be discussed below. Model Design
The SMTOP model is a Compound Communications model that exploits the benefits of several organizational paradigms and theories. The model uses self-managed teams who are comprised of meticulously selected team members. Similar to the fundamentals of the Congregations model, the members are grouped together based upon personality, emotional intelligence, and individual's work preferences. SMTOP teams do not have formal, hierarchical structures but rather share the responsibility for governing the team and managing the work. The organization has a facilitator who is the senior organizational leader but this individual does not directly control the group, nor does he or she rate the members. The team's governance and control remains with the team members, who develop the rules of engagement and rate each other. Employees are motivated to perform in this environment because they have more equity in the processes and outcome. The Business Unit Organizational Design is the base for the SMTOP. This is where subject matter experts (SME) in a particular area are brought together to work in the area of their expertise. The SMEs work in the most productive manner because they are extremely well versed in the work. Little to no on-the-job training is needed for the team members. In addition to having a base that is comprised of subject matter experts, the team contains individuals who have similar personalities and work preferences based upon their Meyers Briggs Personality Assessment results. The assessment examines primary aspects of personality, increases self-understanding and explaining how others differ from oneself (Varvel, Adams, Pridie, & Ruiz, 2004). Understanding an individual's preferences then grouping them together with others who have the same preferences tends to create more effective teams. Existing Paradigms
Business Unit Organizational Design
The Business Unit Organizational Design utilizes SMEs in a particular area to work in the area of their expertise. The work is completed in a highly productive manner because they are experts in their field and require little to no on-the-job training. Boundaryless Organizational Design
The Boundaryless Organizational Design is not defined by, or limited to, the horizontal, vertical, or external boundaries imposed by a predefined, hierarchical structure. It is more flexible in the way work is accomplished and is less rigid than the traditional designs (Hirschhorn, L. and Gilmore, T. (1992). Simple Structure
The Simple Structure Organization is flat. The employees tend to work as a large team any everyone reports to one person. The advantages are efficiency and flexibility, and the job responsibilities are usually clear. The main disadvantage is that this structure can stunt growth when the company gets so big where the senior leader (CEO and so forth) cannot continue to make all the decisions (Mind Tools, 2013). Congregations
Congregations are groups of individuals who have joined together into a flat, non-hierarchical organization. Unlike other paradigms,...
References: Hirschhorn, L. & Gilmore, T. (1992). The New Boundaries of the 'Boundaryless ' Company. Harvard Business Review, 70: 104-115.
Horling, B. and Lessor, V. (2005). A Survey of Multi-Agent Organizational Paradigms. Retrieved from ftp://shelob.cs.umass.edu/pub/bhorling/horling-paradigms.pdf.
Kates, A. (n.d.). Human Resource Planning, 29.2, Designing the HR Organization.
Mind Tools. (2013). Organization Design Aligning Organizational Structure with Business Goals. Retrieved from http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newPPM_95.htm#sthash.NRHvoegY.dpuf
Nikless, R. (2013) Financial Review. Making the most of a bossless office. Retrieved from http://www.afr.com/p/national/work_space/managing_performance_in_the_bossless_BkAyYoJiJdDIVg6lt3aGIP.
Varvel, T., Adams, S. G., Pridie, S. J., & Ruiz Ulloa, B. C. (2004). Team Effectiveness and Individual Myers-Briggs Personality Dimensions. Journal of Management in Engineering, 20(4), 141-146. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(2004)20:4(141).
Please join StudyMode to read the full document