팀의 특성, 업무 특성과 팀제 조직에서의 팀장의 역할

소개

이 연구는 (1) ‘팀성’이 무엇인가? (2) 팀은 왜 성과를 내는가? (3) 사례에서 팀 효과성의 요소는 얼마나 잘 이용되었나? (4) 팀장들이 이 효과성 요소의 이용하는 데 방해하는 것은 무엇인가? 라는 네 가지 질문을 탐색합니다.

한국의 중앙부처 팀제 사례를 분석하기 위한 분석틀을 만들기 위하여, 이 연구에서는 팀의 특성에 따른 5 단계의 ‘팀성 수준’을 확인하고 그 단계들을 팀 특성과 팀 성과 간의 연결을 시도하였습니다.

그리고, 시너지, 창의성 및 ‘확장된 나’를 팀 효과성 요소로 파악하고, 연구를 위하여 12명의 공무원과 3명의 컨설턴트를 인터뷰하였습니다. 연구자는 팀제에 대한 조직의 의도와 현실 사이에 격차가 있음을 발견하고 변형팀과 유기팀의 존재를 확인하였으며, 이 논문은 팀이 성과를 내게 하기 위해서는 업무 특성을 보다 자세히 살피고, 팀장은 그 업무 특성에 맞는 역할을 수행해야 함을 주장하고 있습니다.

목차

Acknowledgements
Abstract
Abbreviations
List of Figures and Tables

Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Introduction of Team to MOGAHA
1.2 Research Questions

Chapter 2 Methodology
2.1 Literature Review and Phenomenon Analysis
2.2 Interviews

Chapter 3 Theory Review
3.1 Definition of Team
3.2 Typology of Team
3.3 Levels of Teamness
3.4 Review of Research on Performance Determinants
3.5 Task Characteristics

Chapter 4 Analytic Framework
4.1 Key Elements of Team Performance
4.2 Role of Team Leaders
4.3 A Model of Team Performance Improvement
4.4 Government Expectations
4.5 Responses from Academics



Chapter 5 Analysis of Interviews
5.1 Understanding on the Introduction of TBO
5.2 Job Distribution
5.3 Section as a Team
5.4 Role of Team Leaders
5.5 Responsive Tasks
5.6 Information Management

Chapter 6 Findings and Discussion
6.1 Findings
6.2 Discussion

Chapter 7 Conclusion and Recommendations
7.1 Conclusion
7.2 Recommendations

Bibliography

Appendices
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Appendix 3

본문내용

Chapter 1: Introduction
The Team as an organisational form is attractive to managers trying to achieve higher performance, demanding more from their employees in circumstances with higher customer expectations, increased globalisation, and more sophisticated technology (Guzzo, 1995, cited by Gibson and Vermeulen, 2003, p.234; Quinn and Spreitzer, 1997). The attraction seems plausible but teams do not always offer what is expected (Sinclair, 1992; Caldwell, 2003; Allen and Hecht, 2004). The organisations often fail to understand ‘what a team is’ and differentiate a real team from other types of group or organisation. There are also many types of teams and various contexts a team can face (Pugh et al, 1969). Organisations face difficulty to find the right type of team and the right management for a team in a particular context.
This case study looks at an organisation which has adopted team structure as a basis of the organisation (MOGAHA, 2005a) recently and explores what has happened after the introduction. Examining the improvement in performance is important to identify whether the introduction has been successful or not. In order to measure the effectiveness of a new managerial instrument, the longitudinal comparison of the performance before and after the introduction must be carried out. It is, however, costly in resources and methodologically problematic. Therefore the author focuses on the role change of team leaders and the relevance of TBO over tasks, which would have implications for further efforts towards performance improvement.
Since the introduction of TBO, the role of team leaders must have been changed in some ways whether the changes were expected (planned) or unexpected (emerged). The argument whether TBO is relevant to the public sector or not is an issue about whether the tasks in the public sector are relevant to TBO or not. The author introduces an analytical framework of ‘levels of teamness’ for the purpose of relating them with task characteristics and team management.
The task characteristics are analysed through the comparison of traditionally developed teams. The study identifies five different levels of teamness according to team characteristics and they are linked with task characteristics and team performance. Face to face interviews with twelve civil servants and three external consultants were conducted in order to discover team characteristics, task characteristics and the role of team leaders in MOGAHA.
The author finds the gap between the organisation’s intention towards TBO and the reality, and the existence of ‘mutated teams’ and organic teams. The paper concludes that task characteristics need to be looked at more closely and the role of team leader should be secondary to the task characteristics in order to manage team performance.

참고자료

· Abrahamson, M. (1979) A Functional Theory of Organizational Stratification. Social Forces, 58(1), p. 128-145.
· Adler, A. and Brett, C. (1998) Understanding Human Nature. [on line]. Available from: http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=PNNfxBTdTf0C&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=Understanding+Human+Nature&ots=RIztq3XeUj&sig=Y0FpU98naUGITdRNzH1453Hwezo [Accessed 10 September
· Allen, N. J. and Hecht, T. D. (2004) The ‘romance of teams’: Toward an understanding of its psychological underpinnings and implications. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, p. 439–461.
· Amelsvoort, P. V. and Benders, J. (1996) Team Time: a model for developing self-directed work teams. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 16(2), p. 159-170.
· Ancona, D. G. and Caldwell, D. F. (1992) Bridgeing the Boundary: External Activity and Performance in Organizational Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, p. 634-665.
· Barrick, M. R., Bradley, B. H. and Colbert, A. E. (2007) The Moderating Role of Top Management Team Interdependence: Implications for Real Teams and Working Groups. Academy of Management Journal, 50(3), p. 544-557.
· Bass, B. M. (1990) From Transactional to Transformational Leadership: Learning to Share the Vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), p. 19-31.
· Bass, B. M. and Riggio, R. E.. (2006) Transformational Leadership. Second Edition, London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
· Beranek, P. M., Broder, J., Reinig, B. A., Romano, Jr, N. C. and Sump, S. (2005) Management of Virtual Project Teams: Guidelines for Team Leaders. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 16, p. 247-259.
· Boeree, C. G. (2006) Personality Theories: Alfred Adler (1870-1937). [on line] . Available from: http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/adler.html. [Accessed 10 September 2007].
· Brocato, R. (2003) Coaching for Improvement: An Essential Role for Team Leaders and Managers. The Journal for Quality and Participation, Spring 2003, p. 17-22.
· Bolman, L. G. and Deal, T. E. (1993) What Makes Team Work? Organizational Dynamics. Autumn, p. 34-44.
· Byeon, S. W. (2005) 행정자치부 팀제 도입 이후의 성과와 변화상 (Outcome and Change after the Introduction of Team-Based Organisation to MOGAHA). 디지털 행정 (Digital Administration). Summer 2005, p. 25-29
· Caldwell, R. (2003) Models of Change Agency: a Fourfold Clacification. British Journal of Management, 14, p. 131-142.
· Caproni, P. J. (2001) The Practical Coach: Management skills for everyday life. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
· Carrol, B. (1997) The role of management intervention in the development of empowered work teams, National Productivity Review. 16(2), p.25-30.
· 조경호 (Cho, G. H.) (2007) 팀제 도입의 성과 분석과 개선방안 모색 (Research on Improvement Methods to and Performance Analysis on the introduction of TBO). 하계공동학술대회 발표논문집 (Summer Joint Conference Articles) (3), 한국행정학회 (The Korean Association for Public Administration), 한국정책학
· 최무현, 이종수, 송혜경 (Choi, M. H., Lee, J. S. and Song, H. G) (2004) 한국공무원의 보직 및 경력관리 체계 방안 연구 (A Study on Systems of Assignment and Career Management for Korean Civil Servants). 한국행정연구 (Journal of Korean Administration Studies), 13(2), p. 125-153.
· Cohen, S. G. and Bailey, D. E. (1997) What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23(3), p. 239-290.
· Crother-Laurin, C. (2006) A Symptom of Healthy Leadership. The Journal for Quality and Participation, Fall 2006, p. 4-8.
· Ellinger, A. D., Watkins, K. E. and Bostrom, R. P. (1999) Managers as Facilitators of Learning in Learning Organizations. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 10(2), p. 105-124.
· Frahm, J. and Brown, K. (2006) Developing communicative competencies for a learning organization. Journal of Management Development, 25(3), p. 201-212.
· Frankl, V. E. (2004) Man’s Search for Meaning. London: Random House.
· 국정홍보처 (Government Information Agency, GIA) (2004) 혁신 2와 ½ (Innovation 2 and ½). 서울 (Seoul): 평화당 (Pyeonghwadang).
· Gibson, C. B. and Earley, P. C. (2007) Collective Cognition in Action: Accumulation, Interaction, Examination, and Accommodation in the Development and Operation of Group Efficacy Beliefs in the Workplace. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), p. 438-458.
· Gibson, C. and Vermeulen, F. (2003) A Healthy Divide: Subgroups as a Stimulus for Team Learning Behavior. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, p. 202-239.
· Glasser, W. (1984) Control Theory: A New Explanation of How We Control Our Lives. New York: Harper and Row.
· Gordon, J. (1992). Work teams: How far have they come? Training, October, p. 59-65.
· Gorgoglione, M. and Garavelli, A. C. (2006) Supporting Creative Teams in Organizations: An Approach Based on Technology. International Studies of Management and Organisation, 36(1), p. 8-23.
· Greanleaf, R. K. (2002) Servant Leadership: A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness. New York: Paulist Press.
· Guzzo, R. A. (1996). Fundamental considerations about work groups. In M. A. West (Ed.), Handbook of work group psychology (pp. 3–24). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
· Hackman, J. R. and Wageman, R. (2005) A Theory of Team Coaching, Academy of Management Review, 30(2), p. 269-287.
· Hastings, C. (no date) Creating a team-based organization. [on line]. Available from: http://www.gowertraining.co.uk/docs/teambased.pdf [Accessed 15 September 2007].
· Higgs, M. (1996) Building an Effective Team. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 2(4), p. 33-39.
· Hoegl, M. and Gemuenden, H. G. (2001) Teamwork Quanlity and the Success of Innovation Projects: A Theoritical Concept and Empirical Evidence. Organization Science, 12(4), p. 435-449.
· Hoegl, M. and Parboteeah, K. P. (2006) Autonomy and Teamwork in Innovative Project. Human Resource Management, 45(1), p. 67-79.
· Holton, J. A. (2001) Building trust and collaboration in a virtual team. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 7(3/4), p. 36-47.
· Horner, L. Lekhi, R. and Blaug, R. (2006) Deliberative Democracy and the Role of Public Managers. Final Report of The Work Foundation’s Public Value Consotium-November 2006, The Work Foundation. [on line]. Available from: http://www.theworkfoundation.com/
· Hut, J. and Molleman, E. (1998) Empowerment and Team Development. Team Performance Management, 4(2), p. 53-66.
· Innovation Forum on Organisational Management (IFOM) (2005) 정부조직의 팀제(이해와 관리에 관한) 매뉴얼 (Manual for the Team System of Government Organisations: Understanding and Management), 서울대학교 한국행정연구소 (Korea Public Administration Research Institute, Seoul National Uni
· Janz, B. D., Colquitt, J. A. and Noe, R. A. (1997) Knowledge Worker Team Effectiveness: The Role of Autonomy, Interdependence, Team Development, and Contextual Support Variables. Personnel Psychology, 50, p. 877-904.
· Jassawalla, A. R. and Sashittal, H. C. (2000) Strategies of Effective New Product Team Leaders. California Management Review, 42(2), Winter 2000, p. 34-51.
· Kaplan, R. S. & Norton, D. P. (2001). The Strategy-Focused Organization: How Balanced Scorecard Companies Thrive in the New Business Environment. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
· 김병섭, 오시영 (Kim, B. S. and Oh, S. Y.) (2005) 정부조직의 팀제 (Team System in Government Organisations. 행정논총 (Haengjong Nonchong), 43(4). p. 411-436
· Kim, S. S. (2007) A New Wave of Government Innovation in Korea. Presidential Committee on Government Innovation and Decentralisation (PCGID).
· 김태룡, 안희정 (Kim, T. R. and Ahn, H. J.) (2006a) 한국정부의 팀제 도입과 적실성 (Introduction of Team-based Organisation in Korean Government and Its Relevance), 2006 Spring Conference Article, 한국행정학회 (The Korean Association for Public Administration).
· -------------------------------------------------------- (2006b) 팀제가 조직성과에 미치는 영향: 행정자치부에 도입된 팀제를 중심으로 (Team System Influence on Organisational Performance: Focused on the Team System Introduced in MOGAHA). 한국행정학보 (Korean Journal of Policy Studies), 40(4)
· Klein, K. J., Ziegert, J. C., Knight, A. P. and Xiao, Y. (2006) Dynamic Delegation: Shared, Hierarchical, and Deindividualized Leadership in Extreme Action Teams. Administartive Science Quarterly, 51, p. 590-621.
· Kotter, J. P. (1997) Leading Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
· Langfred, C. W. (2007) The Downside of Self Management: A Longitudinal Study of the Effects of Conflict on Trust, Autonomy, and Task Interdependence in Self-Managing Teams. Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), p. 885-900.
· Lee, S. H. (no date) Strategies for Implementing Innovation in the Public Sector: Mastering Public Productivity and Performance Improvement. [on line]. Available from: www.logodi.go.kr/down.asp?code=inter_overclass&unum=1786 [Accessed 15 September 2007].
· Malhotra, A. Majchrzak, A. and Rosen, B. (2007) Leading Virtual Teams. Academy of Management Perspectives, February 2007, p. 60-70.
· Martins, E. G. and Terblanche, F. (2003) Building organisational culture that stimulates creativity and innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 6(1), p. 64-74.
· Maslow, A. H. (1943) A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), p. 370-396.
· Mendibil, K. and Macbryde, J. (2005) Designing effective team-based performance measurement systems: an integrated approach. Production Planning & Control, 16(2), P. 208-225.
· Miles, S. F. and Mangold, G. (2002) The impact of team leader performance on team member satisfaction: the subordinate’s perspective. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 8(5/6), p. 113-121.
· MOGAHA (2005a) 고객과 성과중심의 조직혁신을 위한 팀제 운영 매뉴얼 (Operations Manual for TBO for Customer- and Performance-Centred Organisation and Organisational Innovation).
· MOGAHA (2005b) 행정자치부, 팀제도입에 따른 본부장 및 팀장급 인사 단행 (MOGAHA appoints team leaders following the TBO introduction), press release, 24/03/2005. [on line]. http://www.mogaha.go.kr/gpms/view/jsp/download/userBulletinDownload.jsp?userBtBean.bbsSeq=420162&userBtBean
· MOGAHA (2006) 팀제 운영에 관한 규정 (Provision for Team-based Organisation Management). 행정자치부훈령 제209호 (Ministerial Ordinance No.2004). [on line]. http://www.mogaha.go.kr/gpms/view/jsp/download/userBulletinDownload.jsp?userBtBean.bbsSeq=1011296&userBtBean.ctxCd=103
· Mohrman, S. A., Cohen, S. G. & Morhman, A. M. (1995) Designing team-based organizations: New forms for knowledge work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
· Moore, M. H. (1995) Creating Public Value: Strategic Management in Government. Cambridge: Harvard University Press
· Natale, S. M., Libertella, A. F. and Edwards, B. (1998) Team management: developing concerns. Team Performance Management, 4(8), p. 319-330.
· Nijstad, B. A. and De Dreu, C. K. W. (2002) Creativity and Group Innovation. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51(3), p. 400-406.
· Nonaka, I. (1994) A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation. Organization Science, 5(1), p. 14-37.
· Offermann, L. R. and Spiros, R. K. (2001) The Science and Practice of Team Development: Improving the Link. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), p. 376-392.
· 오시영 (Oh, S. Y.) (2006) 정부조직 팀제의 효과성에 관한 연구 (A Study on the Effectiveness of Team System in Government Organisation). 2006 Autumn Conference Article, The Korean Association for Public Administration.
· 박우순 (Park, U. S.) (2005) 공공조직의 팀제 운용에 있어서 논점과 과제 (Discussions and Remits on Management for Team-Based Organisations in the Public Sector). Materials for National Policy Discussion.
· Presidential Committee on Government Innovation and Decentralisation (PCGID) (2005) Dynamics of Government Innovation and Decentralization in Korea: Competent Government. Seoul: Hyundai Moonwha.
· Pearce, C. L. (2004) The future of leadership: Combining vertical and shared leadership to transform knowledge work. Academy of Management Executive, 18(1), p. 47-57.
· Pugh, D. S., Hickson, D. J., Hinings, C. R. and Turner, C. (1969) The Context of Organization Structures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14(1), p. 91-114.
· Quinn, R. E. and Spreitzer, G. M. (1997) The Road to Empowerment: Seven Questions Every Leader Should Consider. Organizational Dynamics, ….
· Raelin, J. (2006) Does Action Learning Promote Collaborative Leadership? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(2), p. 152-168.
· Robey, D., Bakr, M. M. and Miller, T. S. (1977) Organizational Size and Management Autonomy: Some Structural Discontinuities
· Senge, P. M. (1990) The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of Learning Organisation. London: Century Business.
· Senior, B. (1997) Team roles and team performance: Is there ‘really’ a link? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 70, p. 241-258.`
· Sinclair, A. (1992). The tyranny of a team ideology. Organization Studies, 13, p. 611–626.
· Stoker, J. I., Looise, J. C., Fisscher, O. A. M. and de Jong, R. D. (2001) Leadership and innovation: relations between leadership, individual characteristics and the functioning of R&D teams. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 12(7), p.
· Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T. and Shapiro, D. L. (2004) The Future of Work Motivation Theory. Academy of Management Review, 29(3), p. 379-387.
· West, M. A., Brodbeck, F. C. and Richter, A. W. (2004) Does the ‘romance of teams’ exist? The effectiveness of teams in experimental and field settings. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, p. 467-473.
· West, M. (2001) How to Promote Creativity in a Team. People Management, 7(5), p. 46-48.
· Wheelan, S. A. (2003) An Initial Exploration of the Internal Dynamics of Leadership Teams. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 55(3), p.179-188.
· Yoon, J. I. (2006) Korean Government Innovation: Strategies and Methodologies for Administrative Innovation. [on line] Headquarters for Government Innovation, MOGAHA. For the Fifth Meeting of the committee of Experts on Public Administration, United Natio