Francie
C. Davis, M.A./L.S., M.S.L.S.
Assistant Professor / Reference & Electronic
Resources Librarian
Dowling College
Oakdale, NY 11769-1999
phone: 631.244.3283
fax: 631.244.3374
davisf@dowling.edu
PowerPoint
Presentation
Participative management, widely used in the corporate
world, is scarce in academic libraries.[1]
Although libraries share several
common characteristics with other types of organizations, they are different in
some ways. They are service agencies for information not profit-making
organizations. They perform functions both of supply and guidance…Currently
libraries do not have clear-cut objectives because they have accumulated
functions and methodologies which make for rigid structure and resistance to
change.[2]
Thus, few academic libraries have adopted team management as their
standard. Instead, libraries have lagged behind and remained a bastion of
hierarchical structure.
When Dowling College granted faculty status to the
full-time librarians, it also created a self-governing department. The
librarians took the re-organization one step further and began to run the
department as a self-managed team. Although there is an elected department
coordinator, everyone shares in the responsibilities and decisions of the
department. In the eight years since its inception, the department has
progressed from a dysfunctional group to a smooth-running, collaborative team.
This transformation has been dramatic.
While the results have been exceedingly successful,
the librarians have learned that self-management inherently has pluses and
minuses that need to be explored. A well-functioning team empowers the
participants, allows for diversity, and earns campus respect. But a team, by
its very definition, also diminishes accountability, creates powerless leaders,
takes time, and can be frustrating. Awkwardnesses are further accentuated when
the team structure exists within a hierarchical one, such as the
faculty/administration structure of a university. The Dowling librarians found
that continuous communication and team-building sessions are essential to
creating a smooth-running participative management team. This paper will
discuss both the positive and negative aspects of working in a team environment
and the critical factors necessary to make it succeed.
An organizational crisis [3] or the
promise of resultant benefits [4] provide a
fertile ground for the creation of a successful self-management team but a
team’s success begins with proper design, [5] appropriate
size, [6] and an
enabling structure. [7] It is also
dependent on team members being committed to common goals, open communication,
mutual trust, and a “shared conviction.” [8]
The
organization needs to be supportive of the team, clarify the team’s authority, [9] and provide
open lines of communication. [10] The reward
system of the organization must be supportive and reinforce the team approach
rather than single out individuals and, thus undermine the cohesiveness of the
team.[11] From the
beginning, the team needs to establish norms with guidelines for attendance,
cooperation, and conflict management, etc. [12] If these
factors are in place, the self-managed team has good prospects for success.
Dowling College Library: a Case Study
Dowling
College is a small liberal arts college on the south shore of Long Island, New
York. It serves a non-traditional population of 6,000 graduate and
undergraduate students and specializes in aviation, transportation, business,
and education. In 1992, Dowling College Library was reorganized from a
hierarchical academic library whose faculty librarians were supervised by and
reported directly to an administrative director, to a flat organizational
structure: self-management and no director. Under the new structure, the
librarians became responsible for the professional administration of the
library. Administrative networking and overall vision for the library program,
originally rested under the aegis of (the administrative position of) Assistant
Provost for Learning Resources who reported to the Provost. However, this
position has been unfilled for over three years, necessitating the Department
Coordinator to assume many of these responsibilities. The Manager for Services
and Systems, a non-librarian, assumed the budgetary responsibilities, oversight
of the physical plant, and supervision of clerical staff when the Director of
Information Services left. At present, the librarians report directly to the
Provost. Like other academic departments at the College, the Department
Coordinator is elected by peers but has no actual authority over those peers¾a unique structure, which is at once tremendously
empowering and terribly constraining.
Benefits of Self-Management
With each
member of the department having one equal vote, each person has an equal say
and stake in the governance of the department. No one member has more power, or
more authority than another. This method of representation protects the newer
members of the Department from being overshadowed or intimidated by more senior
members. In fact, because everyone’s input is valued equally it encourages the
participation of newer members. Team equality allows newer ideas to be heard,
and not buried beneath outmoded behavior or practices, while still valuing the
wisdom and experience of older members. When everyone has an equal say in the
operation of the department, a mutually beneficial relationship develops. The
team benefits when everyone works together and each member benefits when the team
runs smoothly. "Team members want
to divide the labor fairly and effectively. They feel a sense of personal
accountability to complete their tasks so that other team members can complete
theirs. They do their own jobs and whatever else it takes so that the team as a
whole is successful." [13]
As Dowling's team members became accustomed to
working together, they found that they were more productive. The result,
whether it was service to customers or a proposal to administration, was better
than if any one individual had led the department alone. Such successes
encouraged further collaboration and reduced competition among department
members. The librarians discovered that working together could be both
productive and fun.
When Dowling College Library first approached
self-management, it was a team in name only. In reality, the "team"
was a dysfunctional group of people that perceived plots and hidden agendas
everywhere. Members were not at all mutually supportive. After essential
personnel changes, a major team-building effort began with a thorough
assessment of the disparate personalities and work styles represented in the
team. The insights each team member gained about her/himself and her/his
co-workers was invaluable. They found that understanding and learning to
appreciate the diversity of personalities and approaches helped them to respect
each other as individuals and accept the unique gifts each member brought to
the team. The team members knew that they had come a long way when, after a
particularly long, intense, meeting, one member said, “We introverts can’t take
any more of you extroverts.” Another member replied, “I'm so glad because we
extroverts have just about had it with you introverts, as well.” Everyone
laughed and the meeting continued. The team members had learned to value one
another’s differences and to recognize the strength such diversity offered.
They had discovered that differences were not wrong; they were merely
different.
As
self-management encourages acceptance of differences and, thus, does not
dictate member conformity, so, too, it allows for personal growth and
individuation. Though they must perform as functioning, contributing team
members of a team, people need not conform to a hierarchical dictate of work style.
In other words, team members retain their individuality and bring their own
talents and strengths to bear on the team.
When the
team fulfills its responsibilities to the organization and is productive, team
members gain a greater amount of individual freedom. In the Dowling Library
team, each person determines her or his own responsibilities, work hours, and
job description. Leftover tasks are divided up equitably. Each member is
expected to oversee her/his areas of responsibility with all of the other
members included on that area’s team. For example, one librarian is responsible
for the oversight of Reference Services, but the remaining reference librarians
are expected to contribute time, ideas, and energy to the Reference Department.
Another member coordinates the Information Instruction program, but the
remaining librarians are expected to contribute to Information Instruction by
teaching and helping to streamline the curriculum. This cooperative structure
and inter-coordination of activities results in a great deal of input and
freedom. Everyone is on everyone else's team (or sub-team, if you will),
therefore, each team member is aware of just what is happening throughout the
department, thus strengthening communication and improving department
performance.
Major
decisions are made by consensus so that each team member has a stake in the
final outcome. That does not mean that everyone is in agreement at the
beginning. "Constructive controversy" [14]
is encouraged or as Drucker has said, "The first rule in decision-making
is that one does not make a decision unless there is disagreement.” [15]
To come to an acceptable solution is thorny difficult work and it requires
examining all sides of a situation, but the ultimate resolution of a problem is
invariably better because of the involvement of all the team members.
"Working as a member of an effective genuine team provides the advantage
of having others' knowledge and experience immediately available to support and
assist, especially in moments¾or
days¾of crisis or challenge." [16]
Decision by consensus forces teams to work together.
Such close contact demands understanding and sensitivity to other members’
needs and shortcomings. For instance, if one team member has faulty listening skills,
another might ask the individual to paraphrase the current discussion, write
down the recently given instructions, or read them to the group for
clarification.
The team
environment levels the playing field, and a flat field is essential to the
success of a flat organizational structure. This is especially important when a
group has become stagnant and needs to be shaken up in order to progress. It does no good to bring in new personnel to
revitalize a group if new personnel will be easily outvoted because of
seniority or weighted voting.
If one has grown up in a hierarchical world, it seems
only fair that having attained seniority, one should enjoy the status. In such
a world, merit is often of little consequence. But in a self-managed team,
seniority does not give more of a say. For those with seniority that is
frustrating; for those without, it is refreshing. Thus, seniority can be a
mixed blessing in an organization. Long-time members have the advantage of
historical perspective: the successes, failures, and changes of the library and
an organization. They are able to contribute the wisdom of their experience
through mentoring newer members, know how to work the system, and usually have
a network of connections within the organization.
Yet there must be room for change and new ideas within
the organization in order for it to grow. When the Dowling College Library was
restructured, new faculty librarians were accorded votes equal to those of
senior librarians; their mission was to speak up and to make a difference. For
someone starting a new job, it can be intimidating to have colleagues who have
been in the field longer than that person has been alive. On an effective team,
this kind of differentiation is moot. Each team member is a valuable resource.
The newly hired may be just out of library school, but s/he has information
about the latest technology resources. A new librarian may never have had
academic library experience, but s/he may have an interest in the latest
teaching techniques that s/he can share with the team. The person with
seniority may, indeed, be able to contribute the history of the organization,
but the others have much to offer as well.
Since
team members do not compete with each other, team members work towards the
common goal of an improved library. All team members’ ideas, productivity, and
services are welcomed. Team members also assume a mentoring role, assisting
each team member to grow and succeed. When everyone works together and shares
information, other members of the team are inspired to do more.
When the library went from DOS to Windows 95, CD-ROM
to online with full-text, and from stand-alone to networked access, the team
was extraordinarily selfless. The success of this major conversion directly resulted
from the substantial efforts of the entire team. Each member of the team
contributed to the technology plan and, when there were budget cuts, each team
member forfeited a sizeable chunk from her/his budget to the project. Once the
conversion was completed, the team shepherded the Library through the painful
transition (due to multiple platforms and inadequate computer support) that
ensued. The project impacted every member of the team. Each person had to give up old, familiar
resources and learn new ones, develop new teaching tools for the new resources,
and deal with the vagaries of the new technology. Now everyone rightfully takes
credit for a successful project.
Being part of
a self-managed team does not automatically invite teamwork, however. Anyone who
has ever been part of a committee knows that teamwork is difficult work. When
working alone, one has to agree only with oneself, but working on a team,
requires cooperation, sensitivity, honesty, and communication with a number of
different people, each with her or his own point of view. But, teamwork is worth the aggravation.
Although the
librarians at Dowling have had faculty status since the College was founded,
their fellow teaching faculty have traditionally viewed them as second-class
faculty members. Self-management has altered that perspective. When the Library
became a self-governing department in 1992 and the department was reorganized,
the success of the librarians' team-building efforts made the Library more
responsive to campus needs and the librarians subsequently earned the respect
of the teaching faculty.
As faculty, the librarians participate in all faculty
activities and college governance, and are active on campus-wide committees and
task forces. As a team, they have worked hard to update their library service
programs; customize their Information Instruction program; provide personalized
research; create a dynamic web page, teach searching skills, and, in short,
become a presence on campus. The librarians have been successful and little by
little they are remaking their image from unresponsive and reactive to
technologically savvy and proactive leaders on campus.
Although the faculty librarians have been liaisons to
the various Schools and Divisions of the College for some time, it is only
after recent contract negotiations that they were granted designated seats on
all standing campus-wide committees, thus allowing them to fully participate in
administrative governance. Now with votes on the following committees: Academic
Research, Academic Standards, Curriculum, Long Range Planning, and Faculty
Personnel Committees, the librarians have entrée to many other campus
sub-committees and task forces (Scenario planning, Electronic Resources, etc.).
They have also presented at Faculty Colloquia and the President’s
Administrative Council meetings. By making every effort to cooperate and become
known on campus, they have helped publicize their programs and improved their
campus-wide image. Such college participation is part of the librarians' team
effort. Each team member selects her/his preferred committees and division or
school and then the team nominates accordingly. In addition, everyone has
contributed to department documents, course curricula, library web pages, announcements,
etc.
Now that the Dowling Library is self-managed, not only
do the teaching faculty recognize them as academic equals, but the
administrators recognize them as truly capable managers. In fact, because of
their record of library management, the new Provost and the new President
recently commended the librarians for a job well done. They saw a library that
has changed and is progressing, that can provide current information when they
need it. They saw a library of which they can be justifiably proud.
Dilemmas of Self-Management
Team
management can have its flaws. When no one person is directly responsible for
the supervision of the “team,” there is less accountability. In addition,
unless the team determines how it will handle specific types of difficult
situations, conflict management may present a problem. Both of these issues
must be addressed early in the team’s formation.[17]
It cannot be over emphasized that the team needs to agree to norms,
accountability, and conflict resolution procedures, and each of these needs to
be discussed and revisited often.[18]
In Dowling's situation, each team member accepts
responsibility for carrying out her/his tasks, overseeing her/his area of
leadership, i.e. Information Instruction, Collection Development, Electronic
Resources, but one person does not have the final say or authority to ensure
that all areas are running smoothly.
The team as a whole shoulders that responsibility. Since each member has
equal status and say, no one person has the authority to hold the group
accountable or take it to task for infractions. If one group member does not
complete a project or fails to come to work, no “director” will reprimand
her/him. The team leader or Department Coordinator is nominally responsible and
currently reports directly to the Provost as the team spokesperson. The
coordinator can speak to the individual, but the coordinator has the same vote
as her/his peers and no authority over her/his colleagues. The team itself must
deal with whatever the issue is but its only power is to influence its members
by censuring any individual and bringing peer pressure to bear. There are no
tangible consequences for infractions unless the team recommends them. That is
why it is vitally important for the team initially to decide on team norms, and
goals and to determine how to deal with accountability and conflict.
Having no one colleague with authority over others is
a facet of self-management that demands a great deal of attention. It is the
flip side of the freedom benefit of self-management. At Dowling College
Library, the librarians are still working hard to master this unruly aspect of
teamwork. They handle it in a number of ways: they hold weekly meetings where
everyone reports on her/his responsibilities and neglected items are repeatedly
placed on the agenda until accomplished. Minutes record the meeting and can be
used to chart progress and check decisions, and open discussion on problem
areas is encouraged so that team members take responsibility for participating.
When there is a difficulty, they seek to resolve it. Through team-building
workshops, the librarians have learned a great deal about each other and know
that by using all of their talents,
they can accomplish great things. The
key is to tap into those special and unique talents, and channel them into the
team's mutual goals.
Some team
members will avoid conflict at all costs, which wreaks havoc when issues need
to be resolved. The librarians have tried numerous approaches to dealing with
this, from: group discussion to one-on-one discussion, compromise to avoidance.
While they have learned that avoidance is probably the most damaging approach
(since the issue remains, festers, and is not resolved), avoidance still
abounds. Research shows that the healthiest thing for everyone involved is to
use a problem solving or collaborative approach so that all sides win.
“Self-governing” has as many definitions as there are
team members. Some take self-governing to mean determining their own work
parameters. They are free to decide when to come and go and what to do while
they are at work. This has the potential to become an abuse of the system.
There is no problem if someone comes in late and makes up the time, but
repeated lateness, without time made up, makes it difficult to get a job done
in the remaining shortened hours. As a self-governing entity, some team members
consider their privileges to be rights and do not recognize that these rights
come with responsibilities. For example, unlimited sick time is a privilege,
but if taken at the slightest provocation, it can create stress for the one
taking the time and those who must fill in for the absent person. Since the
person taking the time off still needs to accomplish her or his work in a shortened
time span, the resulting stress is not caused by the job, but by rather by an
abuse of a freedom. Such an abuse also has ramifications for others. Colleagues
will need to pitch in for the absent co-worker, leading to additional stress
for the substitute, and possible conflict with the absent co-worker.
Eventually, the team must get involved.
The group
size of the self-managed team is important. If the group is too large,
decisions will not necessarily reflect the sense of the whole group. Martell
advises teams to beware of fake participation[19]
wherein some members may participate in decisions only by voting¾going along with the majority vote but not investing
any of their own thoughts into the process. If they see themselves as not being
personally affected, the ultimate decision is unimportant to them. On the other hand, with groupthink,[20]
team members avoid introducing any controversial issues. They want the decision
to reflect the agreement of the majority. Unfortunately, when the team proceeds
as if in agreement, not considering critical information that would necessitate
a reconsideration of the decision, the decision made is not necessarily the
best for the whole team. The Bay of Pigs and the shuttle explosion are classic
examples of groupthink. In both instances, members of each team had
information that contradicted the group decision but these members did not want
to appear contrary by disagreeing with the group. In each instance, the
information would have prevented the resulting disasters.
In addition, when the team is too large, social
loafing[21]
occurs wherein members of the team let others do the work for them. They
are group members in name only and get neither intellectually nor physically
involved.
With eight members, the Dowling team is a workable
size, large enough to provide a variety of points of view and small enough to
be productive. Adding the eleven part-time librarians to the team would change
the focus of the team since the commitment of a part-time employee is different
from that of a full-time one. The librarians, therefore, hold separate
reference meetings and the part-time librarians act in an advisory capacity to
the full-time librarians.
The leader of
a self-managed team is in an excruciating position: virtual authority with no
real power. The Department Coordinator sets the agendas for meetings, runs the
meetings, submits reports, represents the Department at college-wide functions,
and acts as a liaison with the Provost, other administrators, faculty, and
customers, but s/he has no power over her/his peers. When a complaint is made
about customer service, the Department Coordinator must deal with it
appropriately, but when the complaint involves one of the team members, s/he
has little recourse for getting the colleague to alter her/his behavior. For
instance, they had an issue with posted hours not being adhered to by the team
member responsible for a particular collection. The Department Coordinator
brought the matter to the responsible individual, to the team, and, finally, to
the appropriate administrator who gave his advice on the matter. The
constraints of team leadership being what they are, the problem continued until
the person left the team.
Although
there are many satisfying aspects to self-management, it can be time consuming
and frustrating. The person who is the Department Coordinator is not
necessarily selected because of leadership ability, skill, intelligence, or
knowledge. The person is elected by peers and does not have to apply, be
interviewed, or selected from a pool of candidates applying for the position.
Simply put, there is a pool of team members and the team elects the Department
Coordinator from within the team. The tradition in the library has been to
rotate the position. This has pros and cons. While everyone is given an
opportunity to share the responsibility, to learn and to grow from the
position, the team will need to adapt to different approaches towards
management and allow for the steep learning curve during which time the leader
is not as effective as s/he might be. Rotation also allows for some incompetent
leaders but the hope is that, strong leadership will set a certain standard for
succeeding coordinators to follow. Ultimately, however, the team is responsible
for achieving its goals.
Working as a
consensus building team is a time-consuming endeavor. Meetings can proliferate
and lengthen in an effort to gain agreement. There are certainly times when one
person/one vote is a disadvantage: consensus is time consuming and can delay
decisions while discussion ensues. Simply having the authority to direct some
activities would be a welcome quick fix. On the other hand, when a decision is
made by consensus, everyone supports it and the benefits of one person/one
vote, far outweigh the disadvantages. The creativity and productivity that
teams engender are much too valuable to give up for the opportunity to say,
“Just do it because I say so.”
Although the Department Coordinator has more
responsibilities that take more time, the extra compensation is only a token.
While other faculty coordinators teach fewer classes, that does not translate
easily into library management and team responsibilities. At first the team determined that the
Department Coordinator would be responsible for fewer hours of duty at the
reference desk. Next, as the Department Coordinator took on the Associate
Provost's responsibilities, the team relieved this person of all desk duty and
teaching responsibilities. This was a great help but ultimately resulted in
resentment among the team members who had initiated the offer. While the
Department Coordinator was doing the job, some feared s/he was not fulfilling
the faculty contract. Airing the grievances helped clear up the issue.
The
self-managed team system is just that, self-management.
It does not grant any say in what goes on in any other department on campus. In
point of fact, self-management does not even have the final authority on what
goes on in the library. Its authority begins and ends with how the librarians
regulate their workday and their work responsibilities. When there is a major
problem, the team leader still has to go to someone within the administrative
hierarchy for help. Although self-managed, the library team still has to find a
way to work within the hierarchical structure of the entire college, and go to
it for final approval on all major plans, budget requests, or proposals.
Teamwork has proven to be an invaluable weapon in
their arsenal when the team has to produce a document such as the library's
strategic or technology plans, or course curricula. Each member brings
different talents and strengths to the project, which makes the final document
that much stronger and ensures a greater likelihood for success. Working
together on various projects has helped build and reinforce mutual respect and
trust. It has also made the library's team members ardent supporters of team
management. Yet no matter how eloquent the document or how cogent the argument,
only those in administration have the final say on whether or not a proposal
may be accomplished. Administrators do
not have to abide by the consensus recommendation of the self-managed work
team. Even when the librarians have spent countless hours writing and
justifying a new faculty position, those in authority can table the proposal.
For this reason alone, it is especially important for the team to have a good
working relationship, with mutual trust and respect, in order to overlook
disappointments and continue to work together to improve the department.
While the
librarians all have the same status and are all equal, the library staff is
hierarchical in structure. This complicates staff interaction with the
librarians. Although everyone working in the library is a member of the same
“team” and the librarians view each other as peers, the staff have supervisors.
Misunderstandings can arise when the librarians work with staff. Because of
their hierarchical orientation, staff view themselves in a position inferior to
the librarians. On the other hand, the librarians, recognizing the
interdependence of the roles, view the staff as equals who, when they are doing
their job, make it possible for the librarians to do theirs. The hierarchy can
further complicate the interaction when a librarian asks a staff member to
perform a task. The librarian is making
the request of a colleague; the staff member hears it as an order coming from
someone superior who is not her/his boss. Thus, a hostile situation can arise
that was never intended. When librarians interact with administrators, an
additional complication arises. Some administrators view themselves as
superiors of the librarians who are accustomed to viewing everyone else as
peers. The lines of communication must be constantly re-defined.
Conclusion
§Self-management is empowering. By giving each team
member an equal say, everyone gets to participate equally in an organization.
§Self-management develops greater team spirit,
collaboration and mentoring. When team
members work closely together, they develop a deeper respect and trust for one
another. Self-management does not encourage competition.
§Because of the potential for conflict, groupthink and
social loafing, self-management works best with inner-directed individuals who
are self-motivated and want to do their best. Self-management is not for all
persons or all organizations.
§A self-managed team needs to agree to norms and goals
early on in order to handle conflict, and accountability. If it does not,
oversight may become difficult when reprimands are necessitated. It is much
more difficult for a peer to correct a peer than it is for a boss to lay down
the law.
§Development is an important component of self-management.
That includes training in decision-making, problem solving, communication and
team-building. Team-building efforts and programs, which take time, energy, and
patience, are an essential component of a successful self-managed team.
The reorganization of a hierarchical academic library
into a self-managed team of equals can create a safe environment for personal
and organizational growth and improvement. The ultimate success of the
re-structuring requires intense team-building efforts, improved communication,
the establishment of trusting relationships, and some drastic personnel
changes. The resulting flat team structure will be a stronger, more creative,
and much more productive entity than the former hierarchical one, as long as
each member accepts responsibility for being a significant part of the team.
The essential challenge for any team is to balance empowerment with
accountability.
The self-managed team in the Dowling College Library
has come a long way from its paranoid, dysfunctional beginnings. Today the
Dowling librarians are a cohesive group¾they work well together, trust each other, value their differences,
mentor one another, and respect each other, as well as enjoy working, laughing,
and having fun together.
Theirs is a self-management success story of which
they are proud. They are aware that there are many successful hierarchical
management stories, as well. Despite many studies of library management style,
no one has shown objectively that one style is superior to another. The
librarians at Dowling can attest that their staff morale and performance have
greatly improved under the new management structure, even if it does take
longer than formerly
Works Cited
Bluck, Robert. “Team Management and Academic Libraries: A Case Study at
the University of Northumbria.” British
Journal of Academic Librarianship 9, No. 3 (1994): 224-242.
Butcher, Karyle S. "Decision-making in a Team Environment at
Oregon State University: Case Study. Library Administration & Management
11 (fall 1997): 222-230.
Clark, Donald J. “Senior Leaders Reveal Team Truths.” The Journal for Quality and Participation
21 no. 3 (May-June 1998): 16-20.
Deming, W. Edwards. Out of the Crisis, Cambridge, Massachusetts:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Advanced Engineering Study,
1986.
Drucker, Peter. Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices, New
York: Harper and Row, 1973).
Goodman, Paul S. and Associates. Designing Effective Work Groups.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1986.
Hackman, J. Richard, ed. Groups
That Work: (and Those That Don't). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990.
-----. "The Psychology of Self-management in Organizations."
In Psychology and Work: Productivity, Change and Employment edited by
Michael S. Pallak and Robert O. Perloff. Washington: D.C.: American
Psychological Association, 1986.
Hackman, J. Richard and Richard E. Walton. "Leading Groups in
Organizations." In Designing Effective Work Groups by Paul S.
Goodman and Associates. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1986.
Janis, Irving Lester. Victims of Groupthink, 2nd ed.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1982.
Latané, Bibb. "Responsibility and Effort in Organizations."
In Designing Effective Work Groups by Paul S. Goodman and Associates.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1986
Likert, Rensis. The Human
Organization; Its Management and Value. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.
-----. New Patterns of
Management. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961.
Martell, Charles. "The Nature of Authority and Employee
Participation in Management of Academic Libraries." College and
Research Libraries 48, No. 2 (March 1987): 110-122.
Pearce, John A., II and Elizabeth C. Ravlin. "The Design and
Activation of Self-regulating Work Groups." Human Relations 45
(1987): 751-782.
Rader, Hannelore B. Creative Library Leadership for the 1990s: Using
Team Management to Ensure Two-way Communication in an Academic Library.
Paper presented at the Library Administration and Management Association
President's Program at the Annual Convention of the American Library
Association, New Orleans, Louisiana (10 July 1988). ERIC. ED 304137.
Sundstrom, Eric, Kenneth P. de Meuse, and David Futrell. "Work
Teams: Applications and Effectiveness." American Psychologist 45
(1990): 120-133.
Tjosvold, Dean. Team Organization: An Enduring Competitive
Advantage. New York: John Wiley, 1991.
-----. Working Together to Get
Things Done: Managing for Organizational Productivity. Issues in
Organization and Management. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1986.
Appendix
Indicates the position is
currently vacant..
