INTEGRAL MODEL FOR ROLES DISTRIBUTION WITHIN A WORKING TEAM Beti Andonovic 1 , Marina Spasovska 2 , Aleksandar Dimitrov 1 1-Faculty of Technology and Metallurgyз “St. Cyril and Methodius” Universityз Skopje, R. Macedonia 2-“Ljuben Lape” elementary schoolз Skopjeз R. Macedonia e-mail:beti@tmf.ukim.edu.mk Abstract Long-term and short-term efficiency and effectiveness depend on an optimal Roles distribution within a working team. Therefore, having a model which enables such corresponding distribution is of a high interest to any quality manager. Two main concepts, the Roles concept of Adizes and Working styles concept of Kahler, are involved to create an integral model in this article with an original approach to the Roles distribution in any working team. The greatest advantage of this model is that it is predictive instead of experiential: it makes it possible to make a corresponding Roles distribution in advance within the team, without previously monitoring the activities of the potential team members. A discussion to the relation between the possible outcomes and the level of prediction is given. Keywords: manager, successfulness criteria, teamwork REFERENCES [1] Kahler, T.(1988). The Mastery of Management. Kahler Communications Inc: 4th edition, June. [2] ǨȌȐȏȍșз И. (1994). ǶȊȓȈȌțȊȈњȍ șȖ ȗȘȖȔȍȕȐȚȍ: МȖќȚȈ ȕȈ ȊȏȈȍȔȕȐȚȍ ȗȖȟȐȚ Ȑ ȌȖȊȍȘȉȈ ȊȖ ȓȐȟȕȐȖȚ ȎȐȊȖȚз șȍȔȍјȕȐȖȚ ȎȐȊȖȚз ȉȐȏȕȐșȖȚ Ȑ ȖȗȠȚȍșȚȊȖȚȖ. ǹȒȖȗјȍ: ǬǭǺǸА. [3] Kahler, T. (1980). The Too-Eager-To-Please Employee. Boardroom Report: 9:18, September,. [4] Кahler, T. (1980). How To Manage The Try Hard Employee. Boardroom Report: 9:17, August. [5] Kahler, T. (1980) How To Manage The Perfect Employee. Boardroom Reports: 9:7, August. [6] Hay, J. (1995). Transformational Mentoring: Creating Developmental Alliances for Changing Organizational Cultures . Mcgraw Hill Book Co Ltd: October. [7] Hay, J. (2009). Working it Out at Work: Understanding Attitudes and Building Relationships. Sherwood Publishing: August. [8] Kahler, T. (1992). Six Basic Personality Types. Bottom Line Personal: September. [9] Kahler, T. (1999). Addendum to the 1974 article The Miniscript . Transactional Analysis Journal: January. [10] Adizes, I. (2009). Stilovi dobrog i loseg upravljanja. Novi Sad: ASEE. [11] СȚаȕȐșȓав ПȍȚȒȖвșȒȐз ǩȍȚȐ ǨȕȌȖȕȖвȐќ, ǷȖȌȖȉȘțȊȈњȍ ȕȈ ȐȕȚȍȘȗȍȘșȖȕȈȓȕȐȚȍ ȒȖȔțȕȐȒȈȞȐșȒȐ ȊȍȠȚȐȕȐ, ǻȕив. „ǹв. КиȘиȓ и МȍтȖȌиј“, ǹȒȖȗјȍ, 2012 Impact of Working Styles on teamwork • People with similar Working Styles may find it more comfortable to work together. • Individuals with different styles may increase each other’s stress levels. • If individuals can recognize the value each style can bring to the team, tasks can be scoped to allow people to work to their preferred working style. • Provides a useful framework for the team to consider when they are under most stress as a team: what contributes to that, who contributes to that and who is best equipped to move the team on through the stressful situation. 1. Be Perfect Strengths • Produces accurate & reliable work • Well organized, preference for planning ahead, a structured approach • Monitors progress • Likes working with detail • It’s important that things are done right Potential Weaknesses • Uncomfortable with tight deadlines where there hasn’t been the time to produce the “perfect” piece of work • Perfection is not always required, a concept that is difficult to contemplate • May demotivate others with their “nit picking” • May struggle to delegate because of a fear that others won’t produce to their required standard 2. Be Strong Strengths • Stays calm under pressure • Good in a crisis • Thinks logically when others may be panicking • Can stay emotionally detached, make unpleasant decisions or give difficult feedback • Seen as reliable & steady Potential Weaknesses • Finds it difficult to admit to struggling or feeling emotional • Gets overloaded rather than ask for help • Others may find them cold & impersonal • May withdraw rather than ask for help or admit failure 3. Hurry Up Strengths • Works quickly & gets a lot done • Responds well to deadlines – energy peaks under pressure • “If you want something doing give it to a busy person” • Saves time on task to spend with people Potential Weaknesses • Delays until deadline is near. Unable to find that energy burst until the deadline looms. • May come across as impatient to others • Near enough is good enough – it might not be! • May run out of time as they haven’t built in contingency time 5. Try Hard Strengths • Tackles things with great enthusiasm • Great to have around to get projects off the ground • Follows up all possibilities when problem solving • Pays close attention to all aspects of a task, including what others overlook Potential Weaknesses • More committed to the start up than the completion! • Lets tasks get bigger & bigger as they scope all possibilities • Asks more questions than answers are needed • Others may resent them getting the “interesting” bits to do 4. Please Others Strengths • Good team members who enjoy being around others • Show concern for others & encourages harmony between individuals • Wants others to feel included & part of things • Great for raising team morale Potential Weaknesses • Avoid the risk of upsetting others & challenging ideas – even when a challenge is appropriate • Uncomfortable with both giving & receiving criticism, however valid • Tendency to take criticism personally • May appear to lack assertiveness • Have their own view of what would please others which may not actually reflect others desire. Is more about “what I think you’d like” rather than what you actually would like. RESULTS FOR ROLE (I) RELATED TO WORKING STYLES  HU  BP  PO  TH  BS RESULTS FOR ROLE(E) RELATED TO WORKING STYLES  HU  BP  PO  TH  BS RESULTS FOR ROLE (A) RELATED TO WORKING STYLES RESULTS FOR ROLE (P) RELATED TO WORKING STYLES  HU  BP  PO  TH  BS Role (P) Role (Ǩ) Role (Е) Role (I) 1. TH 13 2. HU 11 3. BP 7 4. PO 7 5. BS 3 1. BP 21 2. TH 9 3. BS 7 4. PO 3 5. HU 0 1. BP 18 2. TH 14 3. PO 8 4. HU 8 5. BS 4 1. PO 18 2. BP 14 3. BS 4 4. TH 3 5. HU 2 HU BP PO TH BS I Level (P) (A), (E), (I) (I) (P), (E) / II Level (E) (P) (P), (E) (A) (A) Table 1. Summarized results for Roles according to the involvement of each Working Style Drivers are subconscious attempts by us to behave in ways that will gain us the recognition we need from others. They have simple names that are descriptive of their characteristics. Working Styles are described by Julie Hay [7] as the positive manifestation of unconscious behaviours we learnt in childhood around 5 key areas: • How we should help other people • Good standards to aim for • Ways in which we should be reliable and dependable • The importance of having a go and doing our best • How to make good use of time  HU  BP  PO  TH  BS