Companies who have employed the use of teams in their organizations have experienced benefits of improved flexibility, cost savings, customer focus, innovation and a more motivated staff force (MacBryde and Mendibil 2001). Because of this mounting reliance on the use of teams, it has become imperative that there should be clear guidance on how to assess what constitutes team performance as well as reliable direction on how to measure the same. The research undertaken by Barbara Senior and Stephen Swailes entitled “The Dimensions of Management Team Performance: A Repertory Grid Study” is therefore timely, as it is significant.
The research paper of Senior and Swailes aims to encapsulate the concept of team performance, concentrating mainly on management teams. The data gathered from study conducted insinuates certain factors that characterize team performance, namely: team purpose, team organization, team leadership, team climate, interpersonal relations, team communication, and team composition. Another factor has been identified with arguments as to their validity in characterizing team performance.
The methodology used was suitable and the results of the research were appropriately derived at. However, the presentation of the different factors identified needs to be more organized. Some of the concepts being presented were well-argued and supported, while there are some which requires more foundation and substance.
The research paper starts with a brief history on the concept of workgroups and teams, illustrating that interest in this topic in social psychology dates back to the early 1920’s. The study then provides a definition of what constitutes groups. The paper adopted Schein’s (1988) definition which considers group as people who have interaction with each other, are “psychologically aware of one another” and who recognize that they belong to a set or a group, regardless of their number. Other factors that could be considered