TEAMBUILDING PROPOSAL

LDR 8565, Research Activities in Leading a Learning Organization Avi Marcovitz LDR

Marian Gibney, EdD Course Instructor

A course paper presented to the Organizational Leadership Program in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education

Nova Southeastern University December 2002

TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................4 NATURE OF THE PROBLEM...........................................................................................4 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY...............................................................................................5 SIGNIFICACE OF THE INSTITUTION............................................................................5 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE...........................................................................6 RELATIONSHIP TO ORGANIZATIONAL LEADERSHIP............................................6 RESEARCH QUESTIONS.................................................................................................8 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS...............................................................................................9 DEFINITION OF TERMS..................................................................................................9 METHODOLOGIES AND PROCEDURES.......................................................................9 Research Methodology...........................................................................................9 DATA COLLECTION......................................................................................................10 Population and Sample........................................................................................10 Instrument...........................................................................................................10 Experimental and Control Group..........................................................................10 Scoring..................................................................................................................10 DATA ANALYSIS............................................................................................................11 Null Hypothesis....................................................................................................11 Alternative Hypothesis..........................................................................................11 Statistical Test.......................................................................................................11 ASSUMPTIONS................................................................................................................11

3 LIMITATIONS..................................................................................................................11 REFERENCES..................................................................................................................12

4 INTRODUCTION Hillel Community Day School encompasses an early childhood program, elementary school, middle school and high school. Each school has its own employees and administration. Recently, Hillel has not been renewing administrator and heads of department contracts. The problem that exists at Hillel is the overall lack of leadership as well as the lack of leadership within some of the divisions. As four separate divisions, each school maintains its own mission and vision as opposed to one unified sense of purpose. Nature of the Problem For the last four years at Hillel Community Day School, the administration has had difficulty recruiting students and retaining enrolled students. The administration has also had a problem maintaining a consistent faculty. Members of the faculty feel that they are viewed as incompetent professionals. The administration never includes them in the decision making process; as a result, they are never empowered and never feel a sense of ownership for their department. This attitude has destroyed morale, causing the school to earn a negative reputation. In the future, for the school to succeed, the administration must recognize the value of the staff. The administration needs to incorporate teambuilding/teamwork training into work day. The teachers must feel comfortable communicating with their administrator, and the administrator must facilitate two-way communication with the staff. There is no quick fix to this problem; however, once teambuilding/teamwork training is incorporated, a solution can exist. It will be a slow process--a single teambuilding event will not even make a dent--but it is a beginning.

5 Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study is to determine whether or not the administration that receives the teambuilding/teamwork training will have any significant difference on the relationship with the teachers as opposed to the administration that does not receiving the training. The study will measure if the group of administrators that receives teambuilding/teamwork training be more be more effective with the present faculty than the group of administrators that do not receive the training. The study will show if there is any significance in teambuilding training. Significance of the Institution To make effective teams, one must have a certain criteria in which behavioral science principles play an important role (Hersey, Blanchard, & Johnson, 2001). Teambuilding for the sake of teambuilding is a waste of time. The establishment of goaldriven teams in organizations, however, can be quite beneficial: individuals receive better job satisfaction and collaboration working in teams (Hersey, Blanchard, & Johnson, 2001); teamwork leads to better production; and morale increases (Davis, 2000). Another aspect for successful teambuilding is team learning. Team learning creates a shared vision, a necessary component for clarifying team goals, establishing effective communication, and boosting morale (Senge,1990). Senge also suggests that team accomplishments set standards of excellence in organizations (2000): The IQ of a team can potentially be much greater than the IQ of an individual(Senge, 1990,p.239). In short, teamwork leads to more accomplishments within the organization (Hersey, Blanchard, & Johnson, 2001).

6 Review of Related Literature All teams consist of members who play roles to benefit the team (Hersey, Blanchard, & Johnson, 2001). These members must mold their personalities into the teams personality (Leland, 1998). They must not only participate in the decisionmaking process (Davis, 2000), but they must also work together with other teams to improve the organization (Rothwell, Hohne, 2000). According to Hersey, Blanchard, & Johnson, teamwork is like a salad (2001). Each vegetable has its own flavor, but when mixed together, these flavors create a meal: a salad. This mirrors the role that team members play on teams. One way to recognize team member potential is through collective learning (Senge,1990). A method that can be used to check the efficiency of teamwork is the organizational convergence and commitment checklist (Davis). This checklist will help assess teamwork issues. Teamwork means having all members aligned with the goals and values of their institution. According to Davis, effective teamwork includes members in the decision making process (2000). They must assist in determining how to assess team accomplishments and become adept at trusting and recognizing the talents of each individual within the team (Davis, 2000). Daviss teamwork credo states the idea more simply: there must be trust and open dialogue between the members (2000). In sum, teamwork provides many benefits: more muscle, perspectives, ideas, eyes, and time for more commitment and implementation (Davis, 2000). Relationship to Organizational Leadership A major aspect for successful work teams is the leadership. According to ONeil, there must be a partnership between the leader and his or her team (2000). The leader

7 must know when to micro-manage or macro-manage (ONeil, 2000). Lack of leadership can destroy a team (Hersey, Blanchard, & Johnson, 2001). Good team leadership dynamics constantly change (Hersey, Blanchard, & Johnson, 2001), and a leader must be able to adapt to the situation. Situational leadership contributes to the effectiveness of the team to carry out its goals (Hersey, Blanchard, & Johnson, 2001). According to the president of Boeing, competitiveness depends on the team (Hersey, Blanchard, & Johnson, 2001). A team adds structure and productivity to an organization (Hersey, Blanchard, & Johnson, 2001). Leaders of a team must be the cheerleaders that motivate its members (Kouzes, Posner, 1997). Based on research, without an effective leader, teambuilding and teamwork may not be the solution to improving an organization. The primary reason for the lack of working in teams can be contributed to the leadership, both overall leadership and that within some divisions. As four separate parts of the whole, each school maintains its own mission and vision; consequently, a unified sense of purpose between the schools does not exist. Leadership must be more than a title; in fact, it is Hillels disregard for leadership that contributes to inconsistencies within the whole school and its parts. Without leaders, accountability within each school does not exist; the human resource capital gets neglected; and clear, specific goals are not articulated. These things lead to conflicting missions, which may contribute to weakening a students education. There are no clearly delineated goals for faculty. Although most teachers at Hillel are fully prepared and well credentialed, they never receive a clear message as to their job expectations, for the administrative structure is blurred. Such conditions perhaps disable

8 self- actualization and weaken initiative. In terms of curriculum, the cart has been put before the horse: the elementary school has focused on more thought provoking coursework, and the high school has focused on more mechanical coursework. In addition to formal neglect, the teachers create their own negative morale. During the day teachers from the different schools communicate and compare their responsibilities and even salaries. Once the faculty members become cognizant of the differences, apathy abounds: Why do we have to do all these extra things when the other school does not? many shout. This attitude floods the air and drowns the whole school, leaving the survivors wading in a sea stuffed with apathetic, vindictive people. Further more, there is a dearth of organization in the administration. The weekly administration meetings do not have a set itinerary and, therefore, no focus. A similar flaw is the lack of a mission statement that governs each school. This lack of mission causes considerable confusion within the school. For example, individual school faculty meetings may deal with values and/or other curricular issues that may contradict those of one of the other schools. This poor planning leads to other problems. Whenever pressured, Hillel seeks immediate solutions without analysis. This has caused many problems at Hillel, some which will plague its future. Problems arise because of the inevitable result of Hillels quick fix mentality. Research Questions The research question that will be responded to is, Will the administrators that receive teambuilding/teamwork training be more effective with the faculty which end result will enhance school productivity as opposed to the group of administrators that received no training.

9 Research Hypothesis The research hypothesis states that the group of administrators that will be incorporating the characteristics of teambuilding after being trained will become a more effective and efficient organization, as opposed to the group of administrators who did not institute the teambuilding criteria.

Definition of Terms The following terms need clarification: Weekly staff training. This middle school administration will be attending only the traditional weekly staff training sessions. The weekly staff training sessions will be the independent variable. Administrations that participate in the regular weekly training will be one level and the teambuilding training will be the other level. Teambuilding/Teamwork Training. The highs school administration will participate in the teambuilding/teamwork training. This training will be the dependant variable. METHODOLGIES AND PROCEDURES Research Methodology This research project will use a quasi-experimental research methodology. The first part of the procedure would be to research obtain to literature reviews. The independent variable will participate in the traditional staff training. The staff that participates instead in the teambuilding/teamwork training is the dependant variable. The administrations that participate in the trainings make up the two levels.

10 DATA COLLECTION Population and Sample The group that will be used will be the present day high school and middle school administration. The sample will be the high school and middle school administration of the Hillel Community Day School of the 2002-3 academic year. Instrument Based on the literature review the participants in the teambuilding training will need to come up with specific criteria on how to assess effective teambuilding. After the criteria have been obtained the participants will need to practice giving assessments for a period of time. The participants need to be trained with clear performance standards and to be objective in data collection (Isenberg, 1990). After a confidence level has been attained on how to give an effective evaluation, the assessment process if teambuilding is effective to enhance a schools productivity can begin. This instrument will be a similar tool that other teambuilding consultants use through the country (companies like Ourtwardbound and Covey Institute). Experimental and Control Group The experimental group will be the high school faculty and administration who have completed the teambuilding training. The controlled group will be the middle school faculty and administration who did not participate in any sort of teambuilding training. Scoring A group of experts will be contracted to analyze the data. The participants will fill out an evaluation form rating if they felt the teambuilding/teamwork training was

11 effective. The scoring will be a range from one to five, one being most effective and five being ineffective. A form will be given to the participant consecutively at the beginning of the month for six months. Both groups will take a survey to see if there has been any difference in how they communicate with their staff. The significance levels will then be charted. The scores will be separated into two groups: one group who had teambuilding/teamwork training and one group who did not receive this training. The average of each group of scores will be calculated. After the average (mean) will be calculated a standard deviation will be measured. DATA ANALYSIS Null Hypothesis The null hypothesis will be that there will be no difference between the high school group who participated in the teambuilding training and the middle school group who did not participate in any teambuilding training. Alternative Hypothesis The alternative hypothesis will be that there will be a significant difference between the high school group who participated in the teambuilding training than the middle school group who had no team building training. Statistical Test The statistical test used in this project will be the t test. This test will extrapolate if there are any significances between the two means. (Test from the Covey Company

and or the Outwardbound company have created these tests where the means can be extracted from).

12 Assumptions The trainers need to be knowledgeable and understand the challenges of principals and the technical competence of teambuilding training. There are individuals who have the leadership potential to carry out the teambuilding training. Finally, everybody buys into the teambuilding process. Limitations Many team building instruments can not pass a test of validity because there are no standards on how to observe. The strong possibility of incompetent leaders in the organization can occur. The lack of participation from the faculty is a strong possibility.

13 REFERENCES Crofts, P. (2002). The great debate. People Management, 8 no1 p.47. Davis, L. (2000). Pioneering Organizations. Provo, UT: Executive Excellence Publishing Hersey, P., Blanchard, K.H., & Johnson, D.E. (2001). Management Of Organizational Behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Knowles, M.S., Holton III, E.F., & Swanson, R.A. (1998). The Adult Learner. Woburn, MA: Butterworth - Heinemann. Kouzes, J.M., Posner, B.,Z. (1997). The Leadership Challenge. San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass. Leland, L. (1998). Improving Internal Interaction, American Printer,222, no.1, p.78-80. ONeil, M. (2000). Leading the Team. Supervision, 61, no.5, p. 5-9. OShea, M.R. (2002). Teaching to standards. Leadership, 31 no3 p. 22-23. Rothwell, W.,J., Hohne, C.,K. (2000). Human Performance Improvement. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing Company. Senge, P.M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline. New York, NY: Doubleday.

14