Michael McMaster writes in response to an earlier post:
>Dan brings the conversation for "team" into the domain of performance.
He seems to be saying that "high performance work groups" aren't and can't
be teams. Why not?
Michael:
Simple misundertanding, I think. An earlier post made the statement that
"high performance work groups" aren't teams. My response in total was
suggesting that "high performance workgroups" are, in fact teams because
they have the essential characteristics of a team and go on to "perform"
in a way that reflects "teamwork" in the finest sense. Moreover I believe
that the "performance" criteria may be the most accurate test of whether a
group of individuals is a team.
I did recieve the following useful definitions and responses from other
list members that seek to make appropriate distinctions:
This criteria for "working group", "team" and "high performance team" is
from research by Mary Ellen Collins.
>"A working group convenes to share information and make decisions."
"A real team is structured to accomplish a specific task, has complimentary
skills and is committed to a common purpose and performance."
"A high performance team has all the characteristics of a real team and more.
They outperform all reasonable expectations, have a personal commitment to
each other, share roles and leadership and exceed beyond their wildest
dreams."
>Five characteristics of high performance teams:
1. High performance teams demonstrate behaviors similar to that of a religion
or an elite club.
2. High performance teams have significant organizational support and
reciprocate by supporting the organization.
3. High performance teams are agents of change and are continually shifting
the way business is done.
4. High performance teams have tremendous influence within and outside the
organization.
5. High performance teams are a vehicle for involvement and leadership.
-- DanatPDI@aol.com