Improving Working Relationships: Group Effectiveness
Training

Lusher, Brian

doi:10.1108/03090599010001562

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This deficiency is also apparent in much of the published material to date on experiential or team training. Appelbaum [28], Bailey [29], Berger [30,31], Barner [32], Brauchle and Wright [33], Fulmer [12], Holden [34], Huszczo [35], Lusher [36], all cite cases of a particular training programme or suggest "to do" lists to ensure success or minimize failure but none suggest any objective measures of effectiveness. Some others, including Akande [37], Bradford [38], Kazemek [39], Kirkpatrick and Smith [40], go part of the way to suggesting methods to measure effectiveness.…”

Section: Critiques Of Outdoor Trainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the effectiveness of an outdoor workshop for team building in an MBA programme

Mazany

Francis

Sumich

1995

Journal of Management Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The importance of team building in different contexts "Teamwork" is one of the buzzwords for which the early 1990s will be remembered. It was cited in a Massachusetts Institute of Technology study as one of the three reasons why Japanese car manufacturers out-perform United States companies [1]. Indeed, the Japanese methods of consensus decision making, quality teams, and nemawashi have generated many lessons for Western managers over the last decade. This article examines the effectiveness of an outdoor workshop for building study teams (here called "learning teams") in the MBA programme at the University of Auckland, New Zealand.First, it is important to distinguish the difference between a team and a group. For team members to interact co-operatively, there first must be a network of personal relationships linking them. In groups, there is little such bonding. Effective teams have a clear, worthwhile and challenging mission to which all members are committed. Teams are purpose-driven. Groups lack a common purpose with the result that members work towards different goals, often competing with each other [1]. Effective teams should demonstrate synergy, i.e. the team is greater than the sum of the parts.Different authors prescribe many anecdotal recipes for creating successful teams, and almost as many suggest similar "what-not-to-dos". Steinburg[2] reports on a survey conducted with almost 4,500 teams in more than 500 organizations by Wilson Learning Corporation in the United States. He summarizes a list of organizational barriers to team performance. These barriers occur because:q Most rewards and compensation systems focus on individual, and not team, performance.q Most performance appraisal systems do not even consider team issues. q Information is often not readily available and teams spend valuable time searching for the necessary information.q Senior managers fail to support team endeavours fully. Senior managers fear that staff are not able to handle team management responsibilities.q Many organizational structures foster internal competition, thereby limiting team effectiveness. Team building is also an essential component in the more recent concept of "selfmanaging" or "self-directing" teams [3][4][5]. Salem et al.[3] distinguish self-managing

show abstract

Section: Critiques Of Outdoor Trainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the effectiveness of an outdoor workshop for team building in an MBA programme

Mazany

Francis

Sumich

1995

Journal of Management Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Originality/value -Very few studies have quantitatively confirmed its effectiveness, which is difficult, given the subjective nature of evaluation (Padilla-Mel e ndez et al, 2014). Authors such as Barner (1989), Huszczo (1990), Lusher (1990), Bailey (1990), Fulmer (1992, Irvine and Wilson (1994) and Wagner and Campbell (1994) mention studies which implemented an outdoor training programme, but few studies attempt an objective evaluation. This study uses these tools in the Asian environment, after their application and confirmation of their measurability in Europe.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Promoting management skills: an intercultural comparative analysis

Aránega

Sánchez²

2022

IJEBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeSince the COVID-19 pandemic, young people have found their development obstructed and in some cases paralysed. Young professionals have had to learn to adapt to this new environment, and they have also lost opportunities to enter the labour market. The main objective of this study is to measure the effectiveness of tools based on experiential learning, such as outdoor training accompanied by mindfulness, in improving the emotional skills of young Asian professionals and, potentially, help them break down the barriers of their environment. It also compares the findings with the young Asian professionals with young European professionals.Design/methodology/approachThis study replicates the one used in the first study, in which the data were first compiled using a closed-ended questionnaire during an outdoor training and mindfulness. A sample of 46 Asian and 49 young European professionals completed a series of outdoor training sessions. The participants provided their self-assessments of their own emotional competencies. Pre- and post-sessions questionnaires were used to measure competencies of emotional intelligence among young professionals who have just finished their studies, as the current educational system was found to require young people to develop professional skills that they will need in employment in the near future.FindingsThe results show that outdoor training had a greater effect on the young Asian professionals than on their European counterparts, overall, and particularly in Teamwork competence. Finally, this tool was positively received in both segments.Research limitations/implicationsOne limitation of this study is that the Asian participants felt reserved when participating. Their cultural model includes a vision, education and politics that differ so much from European culture that it could have led to difficulties. They are not used to close contact with others or working as a team, and their character is more individualistic and independent (Hu, 2002). A second limitation is that (apart from the pre-activity questionnaire) the degree of cultural difference is not measured quantitatively but is based on a review of the literature and previous findings.Practical implicationsThe research provides an underlying finding that addresses how the emotional competencies in demand could be developed at a more globalised level after a post-pandemic environment.Originality/valueVery few studies have quantitatively confirmed its effectiveness, which is difficult, given the subjective nature of evaluation (Padilla-Melé ndez et al., 2014). Authors such as Barner (1989), Huszczo (1990), Lusher (1990), Bailey (1990), Fulmer (1992), Irvine and Wilson (1994) and Wagner and Campbell (1994) mention studies which implemented an outdoor training programme, but few studies attempt an objective evaluation. This study uses these tools in the Asian environment, after their application and confirmation of their measurability in Europe.

show abstract

Erratum

1997

Team Performance Management: An International Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Improving Working Relationships: Group Effectiveness Training

Cited by 5 publications

References 1 publication

Evaluating the effectiveness of an outdoor workshop for team building in an MBA programme

Evaluating the effectiveness of an outdoor workshop for team building in an MBA programme

Promoting management skills: an intercultural comparative analysis

Erratum

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About