In LO4139 Michael@kbddean.demon.co.uk (Michael McMaster) wrote:
>"Team" is not a particular organisation but a quality of working
>together or a phenomenon of relationship in my (operational)
>definition.
>
>"Organisation" includes the structure (or design principles) of the
>particular team. Clyde's example from Drucker of different "teams"
>for different sports is an example of different organisation rather
>than differences in "team", at least as I've defined it above.
What Michael is describing as "team" is what is more appropriately called
"teamwork." a team is, in fact, an organization. It is impossible to
separate the two. A team is an organization built along specific lines to
achieve a specific purpose.
Teamwork, on the other hand, transcends any organizational structure. It
can exist in groups of 2 or 3 and it can exist just as well in a group of
100. The latter, though, is not in any way a team ... it is simply too
large to function effectively as a team.
When most organizations start "teambuilding" efforts they have no clue
whatsoever what a team actually is or how to use such an organization.
What they are really after is building a level of teamwork. Once this is
done, teams may be formed on an ad hoc basis. To form a team and plan on
it existing and functioning for an extended (indefinite) period of time
means that what has really been formed is a high performing (hopefully)
work group. But it is not a team.
Teams have definite criteria inherent in the definition of a team.
-- OrgPsych@aol.com