The Rational Use of Team Resources

Introduction

The rational use of team resources as tools to achieve the assigned tasks is an essential criterion for effective leadership. The adequate organization of the operating regime contributes to the achievement of the assigned tasks and strengthens group productivity. However, in the process of teamwork, due to individual constraints, the final results may differ from those planned. In my professional practice, I once encountered a situation when my decision, previously discussed with my colleagues, did not come true. This, in turn, led to concomitant operational issues and required additional efforts to close gaps. The competent implementation of power and politics in the workplace is the key to the sustainability and efficiency of the activities of all parties involved due to effective strategies for monitoring and managing current tasks.

Situation Description

The situation from which I learned a lesson happened at my current place of work some time ago. Despite being the manager of my organization, I am constantly involved in the operational process since our team is small and colleagues need help on a regular basis. Faced with the need to solve multiple objectives simultaneously, I realized that I could not control each problem individually and equally thoroughly. I decided to split the team into several groups, and each of them received individual goals to achieve. Leadership positions were also assigned to these groups to oversee the work process. I decided to resort to the idea of ​​shared leadership, which implied the delegation of authority. According to Han et al. (2017),¹ this approach “can affect team effectiveness, especially as teams become more complex” (p. 151). I hoped that such a solution could make it possible to realize all the planned objectives effectively due to particular attention paid to each of the tasks individually.

I planned that each group with an individual leader could pay attention to each specific task, thereby increasing the chances of effectively solving a number of operational tasks. I myself could not be involved in all activities due to their large number. My initial goal was to ensure that, based on the results of joint work, each group would present its vision of solving the set goals and the necessary steps to take. This would allow me, as a manager, to review the reports of the groups and make appropriate instructions based on the results of the work done, which would reduce the overall time to achieve the goals and, in addition, would bring colleagues together. Nevertheless, based on the results of group activities, my plans were not destined to come true.

After reviewing the results of the work done by each of the groups, I noticed that they all used distinctive approaches to achieve their goals. Leaders also controlled the operational process distinctively, and some were directly involved in brainstorming and other decision-making strategies while others were not. In addition, I saw that the performance metrics varied across the groups, and by the deadline, the leaders had submitted reports that varied in the depth of the operational process. As a result, my idea to introduce the shared leadership principle did not bring the desired results, primarily due to the fact that the group members followed different approaches to achieving their goals. As Müller et al. (2018)² remark, if participants perceive assigned tasks as highly complex, this correlates with their performance positively. Thus, I did not get what I hoped for, and I had to delve deeper into the operational activities on my own to understand how the full range of current work could be performed.

Situation Analysis from the Perspectives of Power and Politics

When analyzing the aforementioned situation, I can draw attention to some of its aspects from the perspectives of power and politics in the workplace. Firstly, relational work that involves building alliances and groups can be viewed as a challenging leadership task. Allen et al. (2018)³ argue that reflexive attention should be given to situations in which stakeholder interaction is a key prerequisite for performance. In other words, to achieve the goals set successfully, the leader should analyze different nuances of team practices while taking into account many factors that can affect the bottom line. Secondly, when considering the delegation of leadership from the psychological standpoint, I can stress my desire to create a sustainable interaction process in the groups, thereby stimulating the participants’ responsibility for the activities performed. Zhang et al. (2017)⁴ confirm the value of this approach, but they note that feedback is an important component of successful delegation. Failure to provide continuous communication reduces the value of teamwork, degrades operational performance, and reduces the productivity of the participants involved. As a result, the delegation tool is ineffective in poorly interacted environments.

I suppose that based on the current situation, I made an adequate decision to delegate authority and appoint group leaders. I sought to centralize authority, which, as Ugoani (2020)⁵ notes, is one of the constructive principles for the rational distribution of the workforce. While taking into account the small number of employees, I organized group activities based on team responsibility, thereby stimulating interaction among the participants. In addition, I set clear objectives, which is also an important factor in achieving productivity and avoiding incompetent activities caused by the misunderstanding of the assigned tasks. By trusting my subordinates, I allowed them to work independently and described all the objectives in detail. However, given the results of the work done, I did not take into account some crucial aspects.

One of my main omissions was the lack of a preliminary assessment of the interaction level among the employees united in groups. Although we all worked in the same organization, the colleagues’ communication skills were distinctive, along with their professional qualifications. In addition, when appointing responsible leaders, I did not consider that their skills in personnel control could be weak, which, in turn, would lead to low performance and resilience to change. This may have been due to my loyalty because I knew that abusive leadership behavior associated with harsh methods of influence could not drive staff productivity (Farmanara, 2021).⁶ I did not indicate what results I expected from my subordinates since I only explained the tasks and gave orders but did not convey to them the principles of effective implementation. As a result, the groups demonstrated distinctive results due to different levels of peer involvement, knowledge, motivation, and other individual criteria. Therefore, in view of these gaps in my plan, I did not manage to achieve the outcomes I expected.

Plan of Action

The analysis of the situation under consideration demonstrates a number of gaps in the organization of my subordinates’ work. When going back to those events, I can develop a new work plan that might have allowed me to achieve better results and increase the productivity of group activities. As the objectives that I would set for the team, I would designate the following ones: setting the tasks clearly from the perspective of the final outcomes to be achieved, distributing responsibilities in the groups based on the employees’ individual characteristics, and establishing a horizontal rather than vertical system of leadership through empowerment. The effective implementation of these steps could have helped me avoid my colleagues’ weak productivity and their distinctive performance indicators.

Setting Clear Tasks

My task, as a manager, is to set operational goals and monitor the progress of their implementation. In that situation, I should have used my functions to the proper extent so as not only to convey the tasks to my subordinates but to emphasize the desired results of the work to eliminate divergences in views. My initiative to restructure the team into individual units was related to an organizational change. According to Stouten et al. (2018),⁷ to avoid resistance to change and different perceptions of goals, “evidence of progress should be clearly communicated and visible” (p. 766). Although I identified specific objectives, which was correct on my part, I did not include intermediate evaluations of the work performed in the plan of activities, which was an oversight. Setting clear tasks could have helped unify the perception of work goals among my colleagues.

Distributing Responsibilities

Since I am responsible for the overall results of the organization’s work, I should have approached the distribution of responsibilities in groups more carefully. Exercising power through the appointment of competent leaders who were aware of the requirements would lead to better outcomes. As Sloof and von Siemens (2019)⁸ state, this initiative correlates directly with operational success. I should have done some preliminary analytical activities to create groups with equally qualified employees, thereby eliminating potential biases. Shared leadership was the correct concept to use, but I did not attach sufficient importance to the selection criteria, which negatively affected the results of the work performed.

Maintaining Horizontal Leadership

This was a reasonable decision on my part to delegate some of the powers to specific employees to establish a more productive control process. Nevertheless, I did not take into account that the vertical leadership system required constant oversight and reporting of interim results. Thus, as a significant component of the plan of action, I should have considered horizontal leadership as a practice that would have helped strengthen decision-making in groups. Yu et al. (2018)⁹ highlight the value of this strategy and stress not only operational but also psychological advantages of utilizing such a practice due to maintaining closer ties among team members. Therefore, I should have created a regime in which each designated leader could show sufficient initiative to participate in the decision-making process and, at the same time, promote accountability, which would have increased the chances of implementing the operational objectives successfully.

Conclusion

Managing current tasks successfully is largely achieved due to the implementation of adequate power and politics in the workplace. The considered situation from my past confirms the need to allocate resources reasonably, including the workforce, and use relevant skills and knowledge to maintain sustainable team performance. By analyzing my gaps and mistakes, I have compiled the plan of action that could have been of good use if realized timely. Setting clear goals, distributing responsibilities based on employees’ qualifications, and creating an environment with horizontal leadership contribute to delegating powers successfully and help empower subordinates.

References

Allen, S., Brigham, M., & Marshall, J. (2018). Lost in delegation? (Dis)organizing for sustainability. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 34(1), 29-39.

Farmanara, P. (2021). Abusive supervisory behavior aimed at raising work group performance. Journal of Management Inquiry, 30(1), 40-58.

Han, S. J., Lee, Y., Beyerlein, M., & Kolb, J. (2017). Shared leadership in teams: The role of coordination, goal commitment, and knowledge sharing on perceived team performance. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 24(3/4), 150-168.

Müller, E., Pintor, S., & Wegge, J. (2018). Shared leadership effectiveness: Perceived task complexity as moderator. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 24(5/6), 298-315.

Sloof, R., & von Siemens, F. A. (2019). Effective leadership and the allocation and exercise of power in organizations. The Leadership Quarterly, 32(4), 101277.

Stouten, J., Rousseau, D. M., & De Cremer, D. (2018). Successful organizational change: Integrating the management practice and scholarly literatures. Academy of Management Annals, 12(2), 752-788.

Ugoani, J. (2020). Effective delegation and its impact on employee performance. International Journal of Economics and Business Administration, 6(3), 78-87.

Yu, M., Vaagaasar, A. L., Müller, R., Wang, L., & Zhu, F. (2018). Empowerment: The key to horizontal leadership in projects. International Journal of Project Management, 36(7), 992-1006.

Zhang, X., Qian, J., Wang, B., Jin, Z., Wang, J., & Wang, Y. (2017). Leaders’ behaviors matter: The role of delegation in promoting employees’ feedback-seeking behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1-10.

Footnotes

1. Han, S. J., Lee, Y., Beyerlein, M., & Kolb, J. (2017). Shared leadership in teams: The role of coordination, goal commitment, and knowledge sharing on perceived team performance. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 24(3/4), 150-168. Web.
2. Müller, E., Pintor, S., & Wegge, J. (2018). Shared leadership effectiveness: Perceived task complexity as moderator. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 24(5/6), 298-315. Web.
3. Allen, S., Brigham, M., & Marshall, J. (2018). Lost in delegation? (Dis)organizing for sustainability. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 34(1), 29-39. Web.
4. Zhang, X., Qian, J., Wang, B., Jin, Z., Wang, J., & Wang, Y. (2017). Leaders’ behaviors matter: The role of delegation in promoting employees’ feedback-seeking behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1-10. Web.
5. Ugoani, J. (2020). Effective delegation and its impact on employee performance. International Journal of Economics and Business Administration, 6(3), 78-87.
6. Farmanara, P. (2021). Abusive supervisory behavior aimed at raising work group performance. Journal of Management Inquiry, 30(1), 40-58. Web.
7. Stouten, J., Rousseau, D. M., & De Cremer, D. (2018). Successful organizational change: Integrating the management practice and scholarly literatures. Academy of Management Annals, 12(2), 752-788. Web.
8. Sloof, R., & von Siemens, F. A. (2019). Effective leadership and the allocation and exercise of power in organizations. The Leadership Quarterly, 32(4), 101277. Web.
9. Yu, M., Vaagaasar, A. L., Müller, R., Wang, L., & Zhu, F. (2018). Empowerment: The key to horizontal leadership in projects. International Journal of Project Management, 36(7), 992-1006. Web.