The relationship between an employee and his or her respective organization can reflect parallel behaviors between them. According to Amos and Weathington (2008) “ When an employee’s values match those of an organization-and those of their colleagues in the organization-the values are said to be congruent. Therefore, it is important that teammates have similar values when working together to complete an objective. When values are not congruent within a team, the team will benefit from assessing individual attitudes and values, and develop a plan to help facilitate constructive influence. Upon developing a plan to improve employee performance, it is important to assess the work environment’s ability to provide sufficient tools, materials, supplies, and equipment (Robbins & Judge, 2007).
As previously mentioned, assessing an individual’s attitude and values will help foster positive behavior.
Six assessment tools have been formed to help with this process. The first assessment tool is (WHAT’S MY EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE SCORE? ), which measures an individual’s ability to manage his or her emotions under environmental strains and demands. The assessment covers five standard dimensions in emotional intelligence (EI), which includes; self-management, self-awareness, self-motivation, social skills, and empathy.
Individuals with elevated levels of (EI) can easily work within a team structure, and successfully manage others; whereas, individuals with lower levels of (EI) have difficulty managing others, and do not work well within a team environment. The second assessment tool is (WHAT DO I VALUE? ), which measures an individual’s value structure. Determining an individual’s value structure will enable the individual to align his or her aspirations and goals to someone else who has similar values.
This will be a key component in improving the harmony of a team.
The third assessment, (HOW INVOLVED AM I IN MY JOB? ) measures the extent of an individual’s job involvement e. g. , job perception, active participation, and job performance. Individuals with high levels of job involvement are satisfied with his or her jobs; however, high involvement may make it difficult for him or her to adapt to job loss.
In addition, there may be an imbalance between an individual’s personal and professional lives. The fourth assessment (HOW SATISFIED AM I WITH MY JOB? ) measures an individual’s job satisfaction.
Higher levels of job satisfaction have a direct relationship to lower turnover and absenteeism rates. The fifth assessment (WHAT ARE MY ATTITUDES TOWARD WORKPLACE DIVERSITY? ) measures an individual’s reaction to diversity in the workplace. This assessment focuses on a list of specific words in which the individual selects applicable words based on an emotional response.
The words chosen will determine if the individual falls into one of three categories, diversity pessimists, diversity realists, or diversity optimists.
The sixth assessment (DiSC), is a four style model that examines the individual’s four primary behavioral styles, dominance, interactive, steadiness, and cautious, see Fig. 1. 3. Individuals with a dominant behavioral style are control enthusiasts and goal oriented.
Fig. 1. 3 (Tension Among Styles, para. 70) Individuals with an interactive behavioral style are friendly and outgoing, and excel when accepted and recognized for his or her accomplishments.
Individuals with a steadiness behavioral style are slow paced, receptive to others, good listeners, compassionate, and dedicated employees. These types of individuals are balanced, and require concrete information and data.
Individuals with a cautious behavioral style are methodical in his or her problem-solving techniques. These individuals prefer to analyze information, and aim for perfection when achieving an objective (Alessandra, n. d. ). Using the information from the six assessments can help provide a solid foundation for creating a plan for positive influence.
Knowing the values and behaviors of each team member can greatly enhance a team’s capabilities; therefore, enabling the manager, and the team to work effectively together.
For example is if employee (A),(B), and (C) were on a team that worked within a business unit for a major oil company. The team’s objective was to locate a new oil well, calculate projected costs for the project, and create a presentation explaining the results. Employee (A) had low job involvement, employee (B) exhibited a steadiness behavior style, and employee (C) had low emotional intelligence.
After observing employee (A)’s assessment, management could develop a plan that involves participative management (Robbins & Judge, 2007). Management can include employee (A) in the team’s major decisions for example; amount of well drilling, or oil rig placement. If employee (A) feels as if he or she is a vital part of the team, this will improve self-worth and motivation.
In the case of employee (B), management can focus on keeping the workplace calm and free of conflict to maximize employee (B)’s effectiveness.
Management can also insure employee (B) that the oil company’s financial results in Q3 are substantiated by statistical data. Employee (B) would have confidence using the data within a financial report; therefore, satisfied with the results. Regarding employee (C), management can design an employee assistance program, which will help him or her deal with job related stress. Management can also provide employee (C) with sales and marketing education in order to enhance his or her proficiency in creating company presentations.
Implementing the aforementioned suggestions into the team’s positive influence plan will significantly improve the team’s performance and guarantee the completion of the company’s project. A team that can work together and feel comfortable in their work environment will boost team morale, and maintain team cohesion. Using the knowledge gained from the assessment tools will influence each team member in a positive way; therefore, enabling each team member to work together harmoniously despite attitude and behavior differences.
