Discuss the advantages and disadvantages to working in a team.

Katzenbach and Smith suggest a team is defined through the composition of a small group working together committed to the same performance goals for which they hold themselves mutually accountable. With it being estimated that 80% of employees in fortune 200 companies work in teams, and 91% of managers agree teams are central to success, we can observe  that the focus of many organisations in modern context is centralised to this approach. Baker suggests concertive control is a theory surrounding control within the self regulation of teams through the employees internalisation of the organisation's values. Team composition is therefore an important determinant of performance, yet does performance decline over time due to changes in this composition? During this essay I will apply the pro’s and con’s of working in a team whilst applying them to Bakers analysis for ISE and their move from a bureaucratic approach to a more concertive control.
Baker’s analysis of ISE observes the change form a bureaucratic approach to a concertive approach. ISE produces electronic circuit boards and provides as case for examining control longitudinally. Employees reported feelings of having personal responsibility for the product and more having more control within their working environment. This lead to employees being committed to success and treating teammates as family members.
One advantage of working in a team is an improvement on the quality of output produced. Drawing on Baker’s analysis of ISE we can see workers create their own system of regulation of which are forced upon each other. In a sense the notion of peer pressure is more difficult to resist than instruction, as highlighted by Asch’s conformity studies. Simultaneously, the team had become their “own master and their own slaves”, thereby enforcing elements of quality control continually throughout the process. In essence, on a surface level, this frees organisations from the shackles of bureaucracy leading to long run positive effects of not only improved quality control but possibly improved job satisfaction. In addition another positive of working in a team is that it allows the quick response to rapidly changing markets through innovation. Unlike bureaucratic control, working in team with individuals with complementing characteristics can allow for exploration, innovation and creative ideas resulting in realistic solutions to be comprised with more efficiency. This motivated through the shared values of the group, as seen in Baker’s analysis of ISE. However the extent to which teams can respond to rapidly changing markets is dependant upon how often group composition is changed as research suggests change can hinder performance.
One disadvantage to working in a team is employees could experience job satisfaction. Baker suggests employees will experience burn out through over identification of team values. From an interview with an ISE employee he found that within this style of control, you effectively live the project, “taking it home, eating with it and sleeping with it”. Workers create a system through their own shared value consensus, of which they enforce on each other. This therefore suggests group norms could be counterproductive through social pressure to complete tasks. In the short run, yes we may see a spike in productive, however we are more likely to see negative long run effects. Another disadvantage to working in a team is that employees will experience a reduction in motivation. Drawing on Bakers analysis of ISE, employees felt  “like a supervisor” within their roles in the team and this draws on the very real reality of there being less demand for middle management due to the formation of teams being self regulative. Assel argues employees will be most motivated when experience self actualisation, and if the ability for promotion is restricted, this could cause a long term reduction in motivation. However, from the organisations point of view this does reduce HRM costs, therefore creating a positive effect.