The Economics of Teams among Technicians
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8543.00187 |
| Published date | 01 March 2001 |
| Date | 01 March 2001 |
| Author | Rosemary Batt |
The Economics of Teams among
Technicians
Rosemary Batt
Abstract
This paper examines the economic logic of organizing field technicians into
self-managed teams, an approach to work organization that shifts the division
of labour from a hierarchical to horizontal one. Economic efficiencies arise
through the integration of direct and indirect labour tasks and the alignment
of the organizational structure with the occupational logic of communities of
practice among technicians. Self-managed teams absorb the monitoring and
co-ordination tasks of supervisors, substantially reducing indirect labour costs
but without adversely affecting objective measures of quality and labour prod-
uctivity. For technicians, team membership means longer work hours, but
higher wages through overtime pay.
1. Introduction
Over the last two decades, research on teams has shown that the use of self-
managed or autonomous teams is associated with improvements in work-
related attitudes, behaviours and performance (Beekun 1989; Bettenhausen
1991; Cohen and Bailey 1997; Cordery et al. 1991; Guzzo and Dickson 1996;
Pearce and Ravlin 1987; Wall et al. 1986). Most prior research, however, has
failed to examine the economic efficiencies of teams. Even when researchers
have analysed objective performance outcomes, they have failed to consider
labour inputs or cost-adjusted outcomes. For example, do the benefits of
teams outweigh the costs of up-front and ongoing investment in team
meetings or training? If team members absorb the tasks previously done by
supervisors, do the workers devote less time to direct production?
This lack of attention to economic efficiencies may be due to the fact that
most research on teams uses a psychological or behavioural paradigm and
focuses on teams as the unit of analysis. By doing so, researchers fail to
capture the full range of changes in the division of labour and how the shift
Rosemary Batt is in the Department of Human Resource Studies, New York State School of
Industrial Labor Relations, Cornell University.
British Journal of Industrial Relations
39:1 March 2001 0007±1080 pp. 1±24
#Blackwell Publishers Ltd/London School of Economics 2001. Published by Blackwell Publishers Ltd,
108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.
to team-based systems affects the economic efficiencies in the production system
as a whole. Self-managed teams redefine the division of labour by shifting
hierarchical relations to horizontal ones. In theory, they make the whole system
more efficient by integrating direct and indirect functions into a coherent whole.
In addition, few studies have examined the economic costs and benefits of
teams for workers relative to management. (Exceptions include Weisman et al.
1993; Appelbaum et al. 2000.) While many studies have examined intrinsic
outcomes such as the quality of work-life (QWL) or job satisfaction (see e.g.
Wall et al. 1986), and a handful have considered stress and peer-group pressure
(see e.g. Barker 1993), few have quantified extrinsic outcomes such as wages and
work hours. Do workers in teams, for example, receive higher wages or overtime
pay? Do they absorb additional tasks by working smarter, faster or longer?
This paper focuses on the economic costs and benefits of self-managed
teams, defined as groups of individuals that are semi-autonomous or largely
self-managing, whose members are interdependent and are perceived by
others as a group, and that have significant relations with other groups in a
larger system (Hackman 1987). It contributes to the research on teams in
several ways. First, I examine economic efficiencies in the production system
as a whole and show how this approach (rather than a team unit of analysis)
produces more meaningful results. I compare objective performance out-
comes and the allocation of direct and indirect labour in systems that use
self-managed teams versus traditionally supervised groups. Second, I analyse
the distribution of costs and benefits associated with self-managed teams:
I compare the costs and benefits of teams for management with the wage
and hour outcomes for workers. Third, I examine self-managed teams
among technical workers Ð an understudied occupation that is among the
fastest growing, and one that is especially important for knowledge-based
economies. I use qualitative field research to interpret the quantitative
results. I conclude by discussing how the approach used in this study can be
applied more generally to other contexts.
This paper considers these questions through a study of 230 technicians in
a stratified random sample of self-managed and traditionally supervised
groups in a large US telecommunications company. The subjects are field
technicians who install and maintain network transmission and switching
equipment for a regional Bell operating company (RBOC). In traditional
hierarchies, the supervisor is responsible for the co-ordination and monitor-
ing of geographically dispersed work-groups. Under a self-managed team
organization, the supervisor is removed, and technicians as a team take
responsibility for their geographic area.
2. Alternative theoretical frameworks
Research on Teams and High-Performance Systems
The lack of attention to economic analyses of teams is evident in existing
reviews of the literature. In a meta-analysis of 131 North American field
2British Journal of Industrial Relations
#Blackwell Publishers Ltd/London School of Economics 2001.
To continue reading
Request your trial