Any organization globally strives to meet its strategic goals. Although it sounds straightforward, in practice, this effort is complicated. The increasing market rivalry driving the industries leads to decreasing product life cycles. Moreover, the threat of new entrants and of substitute products is more present than ever, while at the same time the bargaining power of buyers and of suppliers define the products introduced in the market, i.e. the strategic moves of organizations. Consequently, a successful strategy implementation requires primarily constant innovation, but most importantly people, who would be willing to follow this demanding course of action and who would be willing to follow this demanding course of action and who would be intrinsically motivated to perform any task required as to ensure corporate and individual prosperousness.
[...] H2: Team interactions affect strategy implementation Let's consider the organization as an open system, in which interactions are allowed and human behaviors are not confined in the black box. This practically means that the way an individual behaves affects other individuals. By broadening this concept in a team-based organization we understand that the way a business unit team interacts affects the behavior of other teams belonging to different business units. Also, considering that in large organizations each business unit has separate budget requirements, it is expected that different teams belonging to different business units will try to meet their budget regardless of the consequences on other teams' potential. [...]
[...] Team conflicts can be productive if team members do not delay decision making for engaging in interpersonal conflicts. Although conflict is considered negative, lack of conflict implies apathy (Eisenhardt, Kahwajy & Bourgeois, 1997), which leads to inertia. Again, integration is the key to successful strategy implementation because it provides organizational flexibility reflected on the environmental sensitivity of corporate teams. Organizations perform more effective environmental scanning when using teams than when using individuals because synergy coordinates the efforts and contributes to teamwork and strategy implementation. [...]
[...] Group learning includes information sharing as well, but it mainly reinforces the focus on the methods used to achieve cognitive team consensus Conclusions Teams are added value for the organization provided they follow the ground rules of common mission, clearly defined roles, skill complementarity and equal responsibility for each team member. Given the increasing diversity in modern workplaces we assume that integration of diverse elements within teams is the key to successful strategy implementation. Team diversity produces innovation if the organization promotes synergistic behavior in teams, which enables overcoming dysfunctions deriving from multicultural structures. Team interactions are equally important in successful strategy implementation. [...]
[...] But in any corporate team at any level of workforce we may encounter incompatibility of characters, own interests, and excessive interpersonal conflict Hypothesis test A hypothesis test facilitates the effort to conclude if team structures in modern organizations are important in regards to strategy implementation. The hypotheses tested are the following: H1: Team diversity produces innovation Real life examples show that people with the same background and experiences generate a familiarity in their interactions and they communicate more comfortably. Moreover, they gradually acquire the same way of thinking and they use the same methods to overcome difficult situations. [...]
using our reader.