ASelf-managed work teamis a group of employees (typically 10 to 15) who perform highly related or interdependent jobs and take on many of the responsibilities of their former supervisors. In a traditional work structure, a supervisor would handle tasks such as planning and scheduling work, assigning tasks to members, making operating decisions, and taking action on problems. In a self-managed environment, the team collectively takes over these managerial duties.
These teams may even select their own members and evaluate each other's performance. The goal of organizing into self-managed teams is to increase employee involvement and empowerment, theoretically leading to higher job satisfaction and productivity through synergy and collective control. Unlike "problem- solving teams," which only make recommendations, self-managed teams have the authority to implement solutions and take full responsibility for outcomes. While this can be highly effective, the success of self- managed teams depends heavily on the organizational culture and the level of training provided to employees.
If members are not prepared for the interpersonal demands of self-management-such as resolving internal conflicts or managing the pace of work-the team can struggle. However, when properly implemented, self- managed teams represent the highest level of team autonomy in organizational design.

Cross-functional teams are composed of employees from about the same hierarchical level but from different work areas-such as marketing, finance, and production-who come together to accomplish a task. While these teams are highly effective for coordinating complex projects and solving problems that require diverse perspectives, they are notoriously difficult to manage in the early stages.
The primary challenge is thatit takes time to build trust and teamworkamong people with different backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives. Each member comes from a different functional "culture" with its own jargon, priorities, and ways of looking at a problem. For example, a member from the engineering department might prioritize technical perfection, while a member from the marketing department might prioritize speed to market. These differing perspectives can lead to conflict and misunderstandings during the initial stages of group development. Furthermore, because members have primary loyalties to their home departments, creating a sense of "team identity" takes significant effort from the leader. Leaders of cross- functional teams must spend considerable time facilitating communication, resolving interpersonal conflicts, and aligning the various functional goals into a single project vision. Until a baseline of mutual trust is established, the team may struggle with "silo" thinking, where members protect their own department's interests rather than working toward the team's collective goal. Only after the team moves through the
"storming" phase of development and builds trust can it begin to leverage its diverse skills for high performance.

Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs is perhaps the best-known theory of motivation. Maslow hypothesized that within every human being, there exists a hierarchy of five needs:Physiological(hunger, thirst, shelter),Safety(security and protection),Social(affection, belongingness),Esteem(self-respect, autonomy), andSelf-actualization(achieving one's potential).
Image of Maslow's hierarchy of needs

Shutterstock
Explore
The core premise of this theory is the "progression principle," which states that as each of these needs becomes substantially satisfied, the next need in the hierarchy becomes dominant as a motivator. The question highlights that once physiological desires (the lowest level) are met, the individual moves to the next level. In Maslow's original model, the level immediately following physiological needs isSafety and Security. This level involves seeking a predictable environment free from physical and emotional harm. In an organizational context, this translates to job security, health benefits, and a safe working environment. According to Maslow, once an employee feels physically safe and secure, they will no longer be motivated by these factors and will instead seek to satisfy "social" or "belonging" needs. While contemporary research suggests that people don't always follow this rigid linear progression, Maslow's model remains a foundational tool for managers to understand that an employee's needs change as their circumstances improve.

Designing an effective reward system for teams requires a delicate balance between individual and collective incentives. If the reward system focuses solely on individual achievement, it can foster internal competition and discourage the very collaboration the team is lacking. Conversely, if it focuses only on the group, "social loafing" may occur where some members coast on the efforts of others.
To improve effectiveness and collaboration, the organization should implementa system that emphasizes rewards for individual contributions as well as for selfless contributions. This means that while members are recognized for their technical proficiency, they are also evaluated and rewarded for being "good team players"-sharing information, helping colleagues, and resolving conflicts. Rewarding "selfless contributions" directly addresses the concern that members need to be more collaborative. This dual-focus approach ensures that individuals are motivated to perform their specific tasks at a high level while simultaneously being incentivized to support the team's overall synergy.

The interaction between cohesiveness and performance norms is a critical concept in Organizational Behavior. As shown in the research regarding group dynamics,the productivity of the team will improve significantlywhen both cohesiveness and performance norms are high. Cohesiveness provides the social
"glue" that keeps the team together, while performance norms provide the "direction" by establishing clear expectations for effort, output, and quality.
When these two factors coincide, the group becomes a powerful force; members motivate one another to meet the high standards they have collectively accepted. This is the "ideal" state for any work team. If cohesiveness is high but performance norms are low, the group is unified but unproductive. If cohesiveness is low but norms are high, productivity improves only slightly because members lack the social bond to sustain high- level collaboration. Therefore, the combination of a strong bond and high standards yields the most significant productivity gains.