نقش چیدمان تیم‌های کاری در توسعه سازمان
محورهای موضوعی : رویکرد ها ومدل های ظرفیت سازی منابع انسانیمحدثه استادباقر 1 , محمود ابوالقاسمی 2 , اباصلت خراسانی 3
1 - دانشجوی دکتری رشته مدیریت آموزش عالی دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی تهران، تهران، ایران
2 - دانشگاه شهید بهشتی
3 - دانشگاه شهید بهشتی
کلید واژه: مدل بلبین, تیم کاری, توسعه سازمان,
چکیده مقاله :
مقاله پیش رو، با هدف بررسی نقش چیدمان تیم‌های کاری در توسعه سازمان نگارش شده‌است. این پژوهش که از نظر هدف، کاربردی می‌باشد، به روش مطالعه موردی در یک شرکت مهندسی مشاور انجام گشته‌است. شرکت مذکور، دارای گروه‌های مختلفی می‌باشد که این تحقیق، با استفاده از نظریه نقش‌های تیمی بلبین و توزیع پرسش‌نامه آن در میان اعضای گروه «حمل و نقل و ترافیک»، چیدمان این گروه را به طور دقیق واکاوی کرده‌است. با توجه به شرح کلی وظایف تیم‌ها (که زیرمجموعه گروه حمل و نقل و ترافیک هستند)، برای هر یک، نقش‌های تیمی خاصی تعیین شد که می‌بایست هر تیم دارای نقطه قوت در نقش‌های مذکور باشد. پس از بررسی‌های صورت‌گرفته، مشخص شد که کل این گروه در نقش‌های مجری، تیم‌کار، تمام‌کننده و متخصص امتیاز بالایی دارد و در نقش‌های ایده‌گر و ناظر ارزیاب امتیاز پایینی را کسب کرده‌است. همچنین می‌توان گفت تیم‌ها دارای تعادل نبوده و برای ایجاد تعادل نسبی– که موجب توسعه گروه و در نهایت سازمان می‌شود-، لازم است مجموعه‌ای از اقدامات در مورد هر یک از آن‌ها اجرا شود. از دیگر یافته‌های این پژوهش، بررسی رابطه ویژگی‌های جمعیت‌شناختی (اعم از جنسیت، رشته تحصیلی، سطح تحصیلات و سابقه کار) با نقش‌های تیمی است که در ادامه به تفصیل بیان شده است.
This study was aimed at exploring permutation of employees within teamworks based on the Belbin model in a consulting firm. Case study method was used in this research. To collect data Belbin questionnaire was administered to the members of the "Transport and Traffic" group. Findings showed that the group had a high score in the roles of Implementer, Teamworker, Completer Finisher and Specialist, and had a low score in Plant and Monitor Evaluator. It was also found that the teams were not balanced and necessary actions should be taken to create a relative balance in the group. Another finding of this study revealed the relationship between demographic characteristics (including gender, field of study, level of education and work experience) with team roles. Women score high in Implementer, specialist and Teamworker roles , whereas men score high in Implementer, Completer Finisher and Teamworker. Implementer, Completer Finisher and Teamworker in technical fields and Implementer, specialist and Teamworker in non-technical fields had a high score. Implementer, Shaper and Teamworker with the associate degree, Implementer, specialist and Completer Finisher with the bachelor's degree, Implementer, Teamworker, resource explorer and specialist with the master's degree, and Completer Finisher with the doctoral degree are highly rated. Teamworker, Implementer and specialist with the work experience of less than 10 years, the Implementer, specialist and Completer Finisher with the work experience of 10-20 years, the Implementer and Completer Finisher and Resource Investigator with the work experience of 20-30 years had a higher score compared to their counterparts.
1. Hojabrian S. standardization and validation of Belbin Team Role Self-Perception Inventory Employees of National Iranian Oil Refining and Distribution Company [dissertation]. [Tehran]: Islamic Azad University; 2010. 125P.
2. Senaratne S, Gunawardane S. Application of team role theory to construction design teams. Architectural Engineering and Design Management. 2015 Jan 2; 11(1):1-20.
3. Fisher SG, Hunter TA, Macrosson WD. The structure of Belbin's team roles. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology. 1998 Sep; 71(3):283-8.
4. Hojabrian S, Farzad VA, Jafari Roshan M. standardization and validation of Belbin Team Role Self-Perception Inventory Employees of national Iranian Oil Refining and Distribution Company. Journal of Industrial and Organizational. 2016; 3(1): 92-71.
5. Derakhshanian H, Soleimani Farokhzade H. Team leadership. Tehran: Mehrban Nashr; 2009.
6. Khorasani A, Alemorad A, Ebrahimi Z. A new approach to teamwork. Tehran: Iran Industrial Training and Research Center Publications; 2012.
7. Isaac M, Carson K. A guide to Belbin team roles. United States: Bridge Publishing; 2016.
8. Belbin R M. Team roles at work. Routledge; 2010.
9. Fisher SG, Hunter TA, Macrosson WD. The distribution of Belbin team roles among UK managers. Personnel Review. 2000 Apr 1.
10. Anderson N, Sleap S. An evaluation of gender differences on the Belbin team role self‐perception inventory. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 2004 Sep; 77(3):429-37.
11. Lupuleac S, Lupuleac ZL, Rusu C. Problems of assessing team roles balance-Team design. Procedia Economics and Finance. 2012 Jan 1; 3:935-40.
12. Batenburg R, van Walbeek W. Belbin role diversity and team performance: is there a relationship? Journal of Management Development. 2013 Aug 9.
13. Smith M, Polglase G, and Parry C. Construction of student groups using Belbin: Supporting group work in environmental management. Journal of Geography in Higher Education. 2012 Nov 1; 36(4):585-601.
14. Meslec N, Curşeu PL. Are balanced groups better? Belbin roles in collaborative learning groups. Learning and Individual Differences. 2015 Apr 1; 39:81-8.
15. Gutiérrez L, Flores V, Keith B, Quelopana A. Using the Belbin method and models for predicting the academic performance of engineering students. Computer Applications in Engineering Education. 2019 Mar; 27(2):500-9.
16. Fatahi S, Lorestani AR. Design and Implementation of the Expert System for Balancing Team Formation on the Basis of Belbin Team Role. People. 2010; 3:5.
17. Abdulrahman BH. An automated software team formation based Belbin team role using fuzzy technique (Doctoral dissertation, Universiti Utara Malaysia).
18. Driskell T, Driskell JE, Burke CS, Salas E. Team roles: A review and integration. Small Group Research. 2017 Aug; 48(4):482-511.
19. Ansari ME, Ghazanfari A, Ansari S. Employee's Views About The Influential Factors On Surgical Work Teams Efficacy In Teaching Hospitals Affiliated Isfahan University Of Medical Sciences. JOURNAL OF HEALTH ADMINISTRATION. 2009; 11: 42- 30.
20. Maayer Haghighi Fard A, Moradi M, Khalil Zade M, Nobakhte Sahroode Kalaee J. Investigating the performance of work teams in the organization and the factors affecting it. Journal of Police Organizational Development. 2008; 5(20): 44- 23.
21. Kazemi M, Kermanshah A, Karbasforooshan E. Investigating the quality structure of teamwork and modifying tools for measuring team interactions: Conceptual and experimental analysis. Journal of Iranian Management Sciences. 2011; 6: 46- 19.
22. Nadimi B, Gholi Poor A, Ebneyamini S. Investigating the effect of team reflection on team performance in project teams. Organizational culture management. 2013; 11(4): 84- 63.
23. Gholi Poor A, Amiri B. The Impact of Information Technology on Organizational Behavior: Investigating Identity Challenges in Virtual Teams and Its Impact on Team Members' Behavior. Journal of Information Technology Management. 2009; 1(2): 118- 103.
24. Gholi Poor A, seif A, Yoosofi Amiri M. Investigating the effects of team diversity on team commitment and identity the importance of moderating team size. Governmental management. 2015; 7(3): 572- 547.
25. Lajevardi SJ, Hoseini M. Strategies for forming knowledge facilitation teams. Strategic management studies. 2010; 2: 144- 127.
26. Mahmoodi Nejad E, Azar A, Rajab Zade A, Rezaei Pandari A. Designing a multi-objective mathematical model Selecting members of multidisciplinary work teams. Production and Operations Management. 2018; 9(2): 113- 99.
27. Rezaeian A, Ashoori J. The effect of personality type and type of environment on mutual decision making of team members. Public Management Perspectives. 2013; 15: 37- 15.
28. Nohas K, Karami G, Hejazi R, Khajavi S. Investigating the impact of team-based learning (TBL) on accounting learning. Accounting and auditing research. 2020; 45: 70- 55.