This research report evaluates the claim that people working in teams always achieve their goals more efficiently and effectively than people working alone. Using a twofold approach — a review of specialized academic literature and a practical case study of working teams at Walmart — the report identifies key internal and external factors that influence team performance. Scholars such as Druskat, Pescosolido, Capozzoli, and others are examined to understand what drives team effectiveness. The Walmart case illustrates how inadequate training, lack of organizational culture, and poor diversity practices can undermine team efficiency. The report concludes that while teams are generally superior to individuals, their success depends heavily on context-specific management decisions.
Modern society is increasingly challenging and dynamic, forcing individuals to adapt in new ways. Among the pressures driving change are the rapid advance of technology, growing workplace demands, mounting stress levels, and intensifying competition. One specific response individuals and organizations have developed is the formation of working groups.
Working in a group reveals a wide array of features, some with positive connotations and others with negative ones. On the benefit side, groups provide increased access to intellectual capital and enable effective collaboration and multitasking. On the limitation side, groups face a higher possibility of conflicts — both in ideas and between personalities — and present challenges when implementing a shared direction among multiple stakeholders.
Despite these limitations, people organized in teams stand a greater chance of attaining their goals than those who work individually. It is assumed, broadly, that people working in teams achieve their goals more efficiently and more effectively than people who work alone. This report assesses that assumption through two sets of lenses: the theoretical, drawn from the specialized literature, and the practical, drawn from a real-life workplace context.
The specialized literature has frequently discussed the effectiveness of teams and their ability to attain goals at levels superior to individually handled processes. While opinions on specific issues may vary and the approaches of various researchers differ, the general conclusion is that teamwork produces superior results compared to individual effort. As Bamber, Sharp, and Belohoubek (2001) conclude: "The evidence of a vast array of research concerning teamwork is conclusive: teams are capable of outstanding performance and are the primary unit of performance for increasing numbers of organizations."
Vanessa Urch Druskat and Anthony T. Pescosolido (2002) agree with the majority of theories supporting the superiority of teamwork. Specifically, these theories hold that teams operate efficiently because they capitalize on the diverse intellectual skills and capabilities of their members. Druskat and Pescosolido take this research a step further by assessing the role of the organization itself in team success, particularly for self-managed working teams. They find that teams are efficient and effective when the organization supports them in terms of development, self-management, responsibility, and resources. As organizational support decreases, team efficiency and effectiveness decline correspondingly. Daniel J. Alberts (2007) similarly argues that team efficiency is tied to the organization's ability to stimulate communication and provide the structural framework teams need to function.
A comparable conclusion is reached by Geert Van Hootegem, Rik Huys, and Anne Delarue (2004), whose research was based within the automobile industry — specifically Ford and Volvo. They found that teams, and subsequently their efficiency and effectiveness, are sensitive to changes at the organizational level.
Beyond organizational features, Robert Duimering and Robert Robinson argued that team efficiency and effectiveness are also tied to the internal characteristics of the team itself. While efficiency advantages over individually handled tasks may exist, they are sensitive to internal team dynamics. The most important of these dynamics include the willingness and ability of team members to help one another, the flexibility of both the team and its tasks, low levels of interdependence between tasks, and the absence of overly rigid formal standards.
Thomas Capozzoli (2006) examines team efficiency and concludes that it arises from teams' ability to complete professional tasks while simultaneously self-managing. This generates efficiencies at both the administrative level — since managerial functions are performed by team members themselves — and the cost level, since the need for separate administrative staff is reduced. Capozzoli argues that team efficiency and effectiveness can be improved through the following measures:
"Walmart team failures and improvement recommendations"
"Teams outperform individuals with context-sensitive management"
You’re 39% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.