I chose functional and taskforce teams. The former comprises members from the same functional area, such as a division, branch, or department. Alternatively known as working teams, functional groups have different responsibilities, but they function in unison to realize a common set of goals. The team is usually permanent and is answerable to a single manager who oversees everything the team does. This setup is common with rigid and hierarchical organizations that lack organizational fluidity (Levi & Askay, 2020). Examples of functional teams include the finance team, maintenance team, IT team, HR team, etc. Just like the name suggests, the functional team setup’s main advantage is that it is task-oriented. Task orientation ensures efficiency and practicality in the performance of a given set of responsibilities, ultimately realizing organizational goals. The setup also preempts miscommunication cases within departments as employees are members of the same team (Kozlowski & Bell, 2012). However, this proves to be a disadvantage as there is hardly any inter-departmental communication in organizations employing functional team setup. The lack of communication often creates an environment of conflict and rivalry between different departments, which may hinder the organization’s overall performance, especially when each department starts viewing itself in “us versus them” prism.
Unlike functional groups, taskforce teams are non-permanent. Also known as problem-solving teams, taskforce groups are essentially ad hoc committees formed in response to an emergency (Gilley & Kerno Jr, 2010). Therefore, their main job description is to remedy a pressing problem, and as soon as the problem is solved, the team is usually dissolved. Due to the demanding nature of the work, a taskforce is required to do, members of the taskforce tend to be the most qualified and able members in an organization. In other words, members are picked primarily due to their expertise or ability to respond effectively to the emergency or problem at hand in the shortest duration possible.
To ensure they render the highest quality service, members of a taskforce are usually relieved of any other responsibilities. They are only required to dedicate their energy and effort only to the taskforce duties (Zoltan & Vancea, 2015). Additionally, they may be sometimes be apportioned special benefits or allowances to motivate them. Taskforce teams’ main advantage is that they are multi-disciplinary and multi-talented since members are drawn from different sectors. They are also the best in their areas of specialization hence highly-talented.
Moreover, most taskforces tend to be highly successful as they only focus on the performance of what is essential and necessary thus cutting out unnecessary functions and responsibilities. Additionally, the synergy and complementarity required to solve a pressing problem create a sense of teamwork and cooperation among the crème de la crème of the organization thus increasing the chances that the problem will be satisfactorily solved (Bratton, Callinan, Forshaw & Sawchuk, 2010). However, there is a drawback to this since building synergy and camaraderie between members takes time as the members might be strangers to each other. During the normalization stage of team formation, members start to know each other and form working-group rules. In other words, it takes time for people in a team to get comfortable with each other or instead work seamlessly together.
I would like to be in a multi/cross-function team mainly because such a setup pools talents and expertise from different areas and put them on the same hierarchical level. Also known as the working team, members of this kind of team are drawn from different departments and they are required to bring on board different skills, talents, viewpoints, or capacities in the performance of a common set of responsibilities. Members of multi-functional teams have divergent capabilities and training, but they work together in a complimentary way. This allows the team to develop creative and holistic solutions to problems as each member contributes a different output from the rest. This setup’s main advantage is that the team can handle a wide spectrum of issues, tasks, and projects since they have a broad talent and skills pool (Xenikou & Furnham, 2012).
Moreover, as fore-noted, cross-functional teams are a great source of ingenuity and unorthodoxy, especially when it comes to the formulation of ideas and solutions to problems. This is because everybody in the group has their unique ideas as they pass through different training from their counterparts in the team. Moreover, multi-functional teams tend to be highly efficient, especially in speed, considering that members do not need to consult outside sources. Since each member has a different skill-set, there is always a team member who is somewhat conversant with any issue that may arise in duty performance. However, just like the taskforce teams, it takes a long time to develop teamwork and camaraderie between members owing to their different backgrounds (Gilley & Kerno Jr, 2010). More importantly, the unity in diversity manifest in cross-functional teams can also be a source of conflict and misunderstanding, especially when some members feel their unique training and skill-set are superior to others.
Similarly, suppose before joining the multi-functional team, a member was previously used to a particular way of doing things as per his/her training. In that case, they may find it hard to cope with a different way of doing the same things as other multi-functional team members. Additionally, it is hard to manage a team compromising of diverse talents and skills.