Nursing Leadership Teams and Norms

Several general practitioners are looking for a managerial arrangement that offers adequate integration to make them competitive in the managed care world of commercial activity nevertheless maintains as much of the long-established method of therapeutic tradition, however, the group custom is one of the pleasing possibilities, at least over a limited period (Moseley, 1999, p.213).

The responsibility of leadership and management in groups, teams and committees comprises strategically considering the job to be successfully completed, deciding the arrangement generally suitable to undertake the job, setting the structure in position, and alleviating the work progression. However, this requires a leader who recognizes the essential variations involving workgroups and teams, committees, and informal groups. The leader also must be able to think cautiously about the work to be successfully completed and decide if it is chiefly collective or individuate (Huber, 2006, p.579). Furthermore, the leader’s role comprises stimulating members to take part, preparing important queries, developing plans and background materials, and influencing the extended span of time strategy.

Advantages and Disadvantages of forming a group

The hazards of organizing groups are that they do not understand that they are wedged in actions that frequently result in unproductive effects. General behaviors perceived in teams include lack of a common anticipated outcome, a purpose with which members cannot recognize, lack of ability to center on an objective, deprived associations among members, social attacks, members whose private objective outshines the common goal, failure or reluctance to assess results, lack of obvious responsibility, and unidentified or unsuitable altitudes of power. In health care, the term “team” is often used when referring to and describing working groups. (Leander, Manion, & Lorimer, 1996, p.13). A review of health care managements inquiring on the subject of teams in their organizations revealed astonishing outcomes.

Team behaviors that affect the groups are listed below:

  • personal responsibilities and performance anticipations are indistinct
  • Slow decision making
  • Some individual members are not loyal to the group.
  • Team members are unenthusiastic in supporting one another in the execution of the responsibilities
  • Credit and praise do not overshadow threats and detractors.
  • Planned risk-taking is not optimistic.
  • Individuals are uncertain about team objectives

However, teams are structural entities intended to enhance the interest of a members of staffs in making decisions about their work hence acting as a replica of contributing supremacy with other staff. This helps in uniting members of staff as they are appreciated (Leander, Manion, & Lorimer,1996, p.10).

Advantages of teams

Any organization willing to commit to teams will experience many advantages that come along with the formation of teams.

Teams Creates Higher Employee Satisfaction

Teams with genuine responsibilities and authorities make their own decisions, hence the feeling of increased possession and control in their work-life contributing to higher levels of employees’ contentment. Researchers discovered that increased allegiance is higher in organizations where output is grounded on group performance and augments when individuals depend on the success of the group for their success.

Teams Improves Performance Outcomes

The most important reason for employing teams is to develop performance outcomes. If there is work to be completed and or accomplished with some stipulated time, then a collective effort is required and this is where teamwork is necessary. The best outcome is where each team member contributes to the effort and the quality of contribution being improved or enhanced as a result of ideas and incentives others bring to the process (Leander, Manion, & Lorimer, 1996, p.18)

Types of team found in health care

There are at least three types of teams namely: primary work teams, executive or management leadership teams, and ad hoc teams. Each has specific planned issues and characteristics to give careful consideration (Leander, Manion, & Lorimer, 1996, p.10).

Primary work teams comprise a patients care team, a specialty team in the operating theatre, or a shock team in the urgent situation department.

Leadership or management teams include the executive team or the department leadership team. These teams exist to direct others or to manage precise functions or processes.

Ad hoc teams are teams, for example, quality teams, or creative teams such as a design or project team.

Team norms

Team norm is a standard of behavior that is held or experienced in common by members and guides their conduct (Marcic and Daft, 2008, p.538). Norms decide the satisfactory and intolerable behavior. However, at the early development of a team, norms start to build up and often gain reception and significance in every team member’s work life.

Team leaders can play the most important role in helping to shape norms that will help the team productively realize its goals and also keep members content and dedicated to them. Norms usually get formed through diverse ways like significant events and signs. Norms often materialize out of critical events in the team’s time and way(s) in which team members act in response. This sets an example that is used to justify similar occurrences later and becomes the standard for potential behavior (Achua and Lussier, 2009, p.286).

Consequently, the different ways in which norms spring up for controlling and directing behavior are critical events, primacy, carryover behavior and explicit statements.

Types of disruptive members

Reluctant group members can exhibit behaviors that hinder the achievement of a goal. To give a description of some of these disruptive behaviors, the behaviors will be observed as qualities or charisma.

  • The Bear: This disruptive behavior explicitly demonstrates a feeling that is oriented toward some real or supposed grievance, intense anger, aggravation, feeling of deep and bitter anger and ill-will, and antagonism. The bear may be sad as a member of the group or with the occurrence of the group.
  • The Clown: This disrupter is infrequently concerned with work or important matters rather than play or trivialities and slows down other members from conveying their opinion and view because of the fright of being Subject to laughter.
  • The Psychoanalyser: this disruptive member is a persistent investigation of what other members are doing and saying is the psychoanalyzer’s strong point.
  • The Withholder: A withholder has the vital information or source of aid or support that may be drawn upon when needed that would assist the group completes its job but deliberately withholding support.
  • The Beltline: These groups are dirty fighters.
  • The quiltmaker: they make an effort to direct others by making them feel responsible for or chargeable with a reprehensible act.
  • The catastrophe Crier: they strengthen crisis rather than handle it.
  • The subject changer: they feel antipathy or aversion towards vehement discussions.
  • The whiner: A whiner repeatedly criticizes everything without taking action to come to a conclusion.
  • The Trivial Tyrannizer: rather than sincerely sharing cares, frustrations, and longing for something better than the present situation, this member irritates a group with regular disruptions and digressions.
  • The Shirker: When allotted definite tasks, the shirker will avoid these responsibilities for a range of reasons.
  • The power grabber: They create disagreements that make the leader look bad and disrupt the efforts of the leader.

In controlling the problem of a disruptive member, the group leader will take advantage of numerous creative practical methods to compound both the subject and the method of group work (Huber, 2006, p. 578).


Achua, C. F., & Lussier, R. N. (2009). Leadership: Theory, Application, & Skill Development. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.

Huber, D. (2006). Leadership and nursing care management. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Elsevier Health Sciences.

Leander, W. J., Manion, J., & Lorimer W. (1996). Team-based health care organizations: a blueprint for success. Gaithersburg, Maryland: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Marcic, D., & Daft, R. L. (2008). Understanding Management. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.

Moseley, G. B. (1999). Managed care strategies: a physician practice desk reference. Gaithersburg, Maryland: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Find out your order's cost