Self-directed work teams are
gaining popularity as an alternative to traditional work designs. This study
attempts to address what is the "driving force" behind the
installation of self-directed work teams. What stage have self-directed work teams
developed within the various organizations?
How is the self-directed work teams "governed"? What are the steps
followed in installing self-directed work teams? What problems are encountered
at each step of the installation? What solutions are used to solve the problems
encountered, and what would be the results (effects on performance impact on
supervisors, productivity, costs, absenteeism, and job satisfaction) from
implementing self-directed work teams?
The study used an organizational
guiding behavior survey. The survey was administered to workers on December 16,
1998, at Becton-Dickinson when 56 surveys documents were distributed to each
department #242 work cells and #272 non-work cells in Columbus, Nebraska, and
all returned completed.
This project incorporate, a study
of current trends in self-directed work teams programs, as they apply to the
management-associates relations process.
This study shows how managers are becoming more involved with their work
force, to empower associates to make their own decisions, decrease associates
job dissatisfaction, and allow for flatter organizational charts.style="mso-spacerun: yes">
In today's work environment,
there is a need to change the way management and the associates
communicate. The traditional way that
management communicates with the associates is by telling them what to do, and
how to do their job. In years past the traditional democratic style of
management was effective, but in today's work environment requires a flatter
coaching style of management.
Based on the project study one
objective was established, to flattening management hierarchy and create a
coaching atmosphere instead of telling.
The self-directed work team transformation in today's workplace is in
the form of how managers are becoming more like mentors and coaches when
communicating with associates.
Tom H. Washington
Summer 2000
