POTENTIAL PROBLEMS OF A DIVERSE WORKFORCE

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

CHAPTER 5 WORK TEAMS

INTRODUCTION

It is imperative for employees from diverse backgrounds to be able to work effectively in teams because most organisational objectives are realised through teamwork (Fripp, 2011). Effective management of a diverse work team equates with the effective management of diversity in the organisation because the team is the unit within which diversity issues are addressed.
Hackman (1987) and Salas (2007) define a team as a group of employees who work together in the same organisation towards a common goal (Hackman, 1987; Salas, 2007). The ability to work together and perform as a team becomes more difficult when the team comprises employees from different backgrounds and with different attributes, that is, different race, culture, gender, education, abilities and so forth.
Conversely, homogeneous teams in which members are markedly similar (i.e. same gender, race, culture, language, etc.) usually find it easier to communicate and cooperate. Managers find it less difficult to manage the team effectively because of the homogeneous qualities of the team members.
To enable a heterogeneous team to make effective decisions, they need to integrate different perspectives gained on the basis of different backgrounds and experience (Figueroa, 1992; Homan, Hollenbeck, Humphrey, Van Knippenberg, Ilgen & Van Kleef, 2008; Makower, 1995, Sunoo, 1996).
From the discussion thus far, it is clear why working effectively in a team equates with effective diversity management interventions in the organisation and why work teams are so essential for effective diversity management.
This chapter explains the different types of team, the skills required in a team, team success and failures, different types of team, the dynamics of work teams, teamwork philosophy and theoretical constructs that affect teamwork development.

TYPOLOGY OF TEAMS

An organisation can benefit from the advantages provided by teams by using more than one structure or type of team in a variety of ways. Management regularly commission and form cross-functional teams to manage designs or projects, improve processes or products, resolve problems or conduct research on new technologies and equipment (Armstrong, 2007).
The main function of a team determines the name or label given to the team. Some of the team names identified in this manner are the following: self-managed, virtual and high performance teams.

Self-managed teams

Self-management means that the team members perform the activities of the manager themselves and have to make strategic decisions to direct and control their own team outputs. Self-managing teams continue to grow and develop in the context of the current concept of a workforce where decision making is entrusted to lower levels and structures are becoming flatter (Aldag & Riggs Fuller, 1993; Blanchard, 2005; Bryant, Farhy & Griffiths, 1994; Hollenbeck, Meyer & Ilgen, 2007).
According to Kirkman, Jones, and Shapiro (2000), self-managed teams normally consist of 10 to 15 employees who have the responsibility of their previous supervisors but retain their previous responsibilities. These teams are not managed by a formal manager and direct activities themselves.
This type of team is a radical substitute for the status quo, which allows employees to grow beyond their expectations and simultaneously allows extraordinary levels of quality improvement and output (Wilson, 1996). A self-managed team comprises highly skilled organisational members who assume joint and wide-ranging responsibility for a whole product or process through the performance of a wide selection of assignments within clearly defined limits (Robbins, Odendaal & Roodt, 2004).
Diverse self-managed teams are better equipped to assume responsibility for the management of their own differences than manager-directed teams because each member takes responsibility for the diversely-related team outcomes. They are more concerned and motivated than other teams to work together.

Virtual teams

Virtual teams involve the performance of activities and tasks, which is made possible by today’s vast network of telecommunications, information technology and electronics (Katzenbach & Smith, 2003). The computer and technology continue to redefine how and where work is done. A virtual team is not bound by traditional team time, practices or locality and does not follow the traditional models of a team approach. Solomon (2001), Horwitz, Bravington & Silvis (2006) and Bergiel, Bergiel and Balsmeier (2008) define virtual teams as those that rely on technology to work together, even though the team is physically separated and employs emails, bulletin boards, instant messages, teleconferencing, meeting managers, web casts and videoconferencing.
Culturally diverse virtual teams have distinct benefits for diversity management, because members of virtual teams do not make physical contact and physical differences are less pronounced. This decreases resistance, which often develops during interaction between diverse members.
Traditionally, teams only operated in a face-to-face environment, with regular meetings and postponing interventions if one team member was unable to attend. In the modern high-tech and time-pressured business environment, the challenges of a team are growing and organisations have to adapt. Technology, globalisation, time constraints and growing competition create an environment in which teams are logistically spread and do not even operate in the same time zones (Ale Ebrahim, Ahmed & Taha, 2009; Horwitz et al., 2006; Robbins et al., 2004).
From a diversity management perspective, this may sometimes have a detrimental effect on cohesion and effective communication (Bergiel et al., 2008; McShane & Von Glinow, 2003; Verghese, 2006).

High performance teams

The main characteristic of a high performance team is that a group of employees work in harmony and accomplish more than what they would have accomplished if they had worked on their own (Dalton, 1996; Greenberg & Baron, 2003). When synergy occurs in a diverse team, the team is more effective because of the variety of skills, strengths and talents that are integrated and available in the team.
The unique attributes of a high performance team are sharing responsibility, participative leadership, aligned purposes, the assurance of high communication levels, a future focus, a focus on tasks, the development creative talents and rapid responses (Greenberg & Baron, 2003; Kreitner & Kinicki, 2001).
As in managing diversity, managers need to focus on the following five key success factors when establishing and managing diverse high performance teams (Rosenthal, 2007):
Ensure a meaningful and shared purpose. Set challenging and specific goals.
Determine a collaborative and common approach. Clarify roles.
Ensure matching skills.
Because the harmony increases in a team when the diversity challenges such as cooperation are effectively managed, the diverse team takes on the characteristics of a high performance team, and actually performs better.

TEAM MODELS

The team models discussed in this section focus on the way in which teams are developed as well as the different stages of team development. Different models for team development are discussed in this chapter, namely the stages of team development model, the changing patterns of team development model, the punctuated equilibrium model and the script-enacting model for team development. The stages of team development model, changing patterns of team development model, the punctuated equilibrium model, the integrated model of team development, the orientation-and-reinforcement model, the integrated theoretical model for teambuilding and the theoretical constructs that affect teamwork development will be discussed below.

Stages of team development model (Tuckman & Jenson)

Tuckman and Jenson (1977) conducted prominent research on the stages of team development. The researcher decided to include this model in the discussion, because it emulates the development of a diverse workforce team and the development of a sports team as applied in this research.
According to Tuckman and Jenson (1977), there are five stages of team development, which include forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning. According to the authors, all these stages are inevitable and necessary to enable the team to develop and grow, confront challenges, resolve problems and implement and identify solutions in order to achieve a desired result. Figure 5.1 depicts the stages of team development model with its five stages, which will then be discussed.

Forming

During this stage, the team is formed. It is characterised by high uncertainty about the team’s goals and purpose, feelings of anxiety, tentativeness and awkwardness, but the members are motivated and enthusiastic to achieve the goals (Tuckman & Jenson, 1977; Weaver & Farrell, 1997; Whichard & Kees, 2006). If the members’ motivation and enthusiasm overcome their feelings of anxiety, tentativeness and awkwardness, the team is able to move to the next stage. However, if the members’ feelings of anxiety and awkwardness are higher than their motivation and enthusiasm, the team could dissolve.

Storming

As the team starts to work and the dynamic focus of teamwork becomes more apparent, the members enter the stage in which different agendas, ideas, work styles and approaches compete for consideration (Bilder, 1989; Spiegel & Torres, 1994; Tuckman & Jenson, 1977). This stage is characterised by conflict both inside and outside the team, frustration because of role vagueness, competitiveness between employees for influence and strong resistance to the development of the team (Harris & Sherblom, 2011; Whichard & Kees, 2006). This stage is crucial for the team because the members feel that they are unable to work together. Many teams break up during this phase. Some teams become so concerned with the conflict during this stage, that they attempt to avoid it, but in avoiding conflict, they also suppress or avoid key aspects of the team’s issues.

Norming

Once the conflict decreases, the team begins their process of establishing protocols and procedures and resolving differences in order to accomplish their goals (Tuckman & Jenson, 1977; Weaver & Farrell, 1997). This stage is characterised by clarifying responsibilities and roles, shifting from interpersonal relationships to decision-making activities relating to the team’s resolving differences, task accomplishment, rededication and negotiation between team members to accomplish their specific goals (Jones & George, 2009). Respect, trust and harmony become commonplace during the norming stage (Harris & Sherblom, 2011; Whichard
& Kees, 2006). The team members feel as if they are trusted and appreciated and they are determined to work towards the team’s goals.

Performing

This stage is characterised by the achievement of consistency, interdependence of team members, excellent results and performance and high levels of team satisfaction (Tuckman & Jenson, 1977; Whichard & Kees, 2006). The team members are knowledgeable, autonomous, competent, capable and motivated to handle the decision-making process without supervision (Gibson, Ivancevich, Donnelly & Konopaske, 2009). Respectful disagreement and dissent are allowed and expected as long as the members are channelled through the means that are acceptable to the team (Gilley, 2005). The team produces the expected outputs, conflicts are addressed and role clarity is continuous without experiencing negative consequences that were common during the earlier stages (Jones & George, 2009). During this stage the team experiences both team effectiveness and a high performance impact (Katzenbach & Smith, 2003).
During this stage the team is likely to have periods of silence, because of tension as the members withdraw from the team or they try to think what to say next. The performing stage describes the team’s willingness to work together to settle specific norms and rules on how decisions will be made and discussions should take place (Harris & Sherblom, 2011).

Adjourning

Adjourning is the final stage of team development. The emphasis is on wrapping up the job, and task performance is no longer the priority of the team members (Draft & Marcic, 2009; Tuckman & Jenson, 1977). The members of the team may feel happy about accomplishing the mission, but they also feel sad about the loss of association and friendship, as well as heightened emotionality, regret and depression and strong cohesiveness over the team disbandment (Draft & Marcic, 2009). As a way of achieving completeness and closure, the team leader may celebrate the team’s disbanding by honouring the members of the team by providing awards and/or plaques for a project well done (Jones & George, 2009; Tuckman & Jenson, 1977). Harris and Sherblom (2011) argue that this stage is crucial in the team’s development. The way in which the group members terminate their activities affects the way they will interpret what they have experienced and accomplished as a team and what they expect of the team in future. The team’s disclosure, feelings of accomplishments in their tasks and the positive relational expression are all key aspects of team development.
Weaver and Farrell (1997) identified four constructs that affect teamwork development namely (1) charge and charter theory, (2) change curve (elaboration on Tuckman & Jenson’s [1977] stages of team development model), (3) performance curve theory, and (4) synergistic relationship theory.
a The charge and charter theory applied to the stages development model
The charge and charter theory is a theoretical construct that affects teamwork development (Weaver & Farrell, 1997; Whichard & Kees, 2006). When a team’s charge and charter are defined early in the team development process, team clarity will be improved.
Team charge involves the overall tasks or assignments that must be achieved, and this is a fairly straightforward process (Whichard & Kees, 2006). The charge must be stated as concisely and specifically as possible to give the team members a clear focus throughout the team’s assignments.
The charter is the explanation on how the team functions (Whichard & Kees, 2006). Charters have the following four components: the purpose of the team’s existence, how the team relates to the organisational strategy, to whom the team is responsible to and how it will benefit an organisation (Whichard & Kees, 2006).
b The change curve theory applied to the stages development model
Another theoretical construct that has an effect on team development is the change curve. It encompasses four quadrants (figure 5.2) which represent the phases employees experience when they start a new project or when they experience a major change (Bilder, 1989). These characteristics of the change curve will be discussed below.
Quadrant 1 is the denial phase, which is recognised as a period of uninformed enthusiasm because the team members lack knowledge about the complexity of the project. During this period, when the team members feel enthusiastic about joining the team, they believe that the assignments they will work on will positively influence the organisation. This period is also equated with Tuckman and Jenson’s (1977) forming stage during team development.
In quadrant 2, the team members realise the complexity of their assignment and start to realise how difficult it may be to achieve the goals. A state of uncertainty leads to a state of informed scepticism (Bilder, 1989; Gilley, 2005). Some of the team members start to resist change. This stage is also known as the resistance phase which is also equated with Tuckman and Jenson’s (1977) storming stage during the development of a team.
In quadrant 3, progress (exploration) is made in the team which reflects the storming stage during the development of the team (Bilder, 1989). During this stage, the realities of the team are perceived more positively (Whichard & Kees, 2006). The team members agree and accept the values, shared methods, working styles and professional behaviour of the team.
The last quadrant represents the commitment stage during which members of the team accept their charge and charter and perform results that increase team effectiveness and performance impact (Katzenbach & Smith, 2003). The team members are committed to the new way in which things are done and are totally focused on achieving the goals (Bilder, 1989). The team members can utilise collective energies and realise the positive full impact of generating the goals required. This commitment stage is equated with Tuckman and Jenson’s (1977) performance stage of team development. Unfortunately not all teams reach this stage of team development because they are sometimes unable to effectively manage their team members through the previous three stages (Bilder, 1989; Gibson et al., 2009; Klein, DiazGranados, Salas, Le, Burke, Lyons & Goodwin, 2009).
c The performance curve theory applied to the stages development model
The performance curve demonstrates the relationship between team effectiveness and performance impact. As teams develop and mature they start to produce improved performance results which positively increase team effectiveness. According to Katzenbach and Smith (2003), high performance teams are the only teams that maximise team effectiveness and performance impact.
d The synergistic relationship theory applied to the stages development model
Gilley and Boughton (1996) introduced the synergistic relationship theory. The relationship skills in a team allow the members to improve their relationship with others to enable them to build a comfortable, nonthreatening, positive communication climate which encourages others to discuss organisational problems, issues and ideas honestly and openly without any fear of reprisal. Synergistic relationships reflect the interdependence of employees working towards a specific goal, which simultaneously provides for development and growth opportunities for employees and the organisation.
These relationships have the following five benefits: they build and enhance the managers’ and employees’ self-esteem; they enhance productivity; they build and enhance organisational communication; they build and enhance organisational understanding; and they build and enhance organisational commitment (Gilley & Boughton, 1996). When the members of the team demonstrate synergistic relationships through caring, cooperation and mutual respect, they can unlock world-class results (Whichard & Kees, 2006).
Tuckman and Jenson’s (1977) model is probably the most utilised model for discussing the dynamics of teamwork (Langan-Fox, Anglim & Wilson, 2004). It is also suitable for planning and conducting diversity management interventions. Diversity managers are able to determine in which stage of team development the team is and then choose and implement an intervention that suits the needs of the specific stage.

The changing patterns of team development model (Kur)

The researcher decided to include the changing patterns of team development model in the current research because Kur (1996) emphasises the changing patterns during the team development process – hence the so-called “changing patterns model”. According to Kur (1996), work teams go through five changing patterns of team development stages (as depicted in figure 5.3).
This model assumes that a team “wears one face and then another face” in no specific order, unless the members of the team are forced to engage in a specific pattern of behaviour or wear a specific face. According to Kur (1996), his model is more powerful, encompassing and forgiving than sequential development models. It therefore has an enhanced utility value for implementing diversity management interventions than the stages model.

The punctuated equilibrium model (Gersick)

The punctuated equilibrium model proposed by Gersick (1989a) does not follow the stages of team development and can therefore be regarded as a new model that explains Gersick’s observations. The researcher decided to postulate the punctuated equilibrium model because some diverse teams and sports teams do not follow the same stages as the stages of the team development model owing to the fact that the teams are influenced by the circumstances at a specific point in time.
Teams can conduct a task until a midpoint transition (work break) when the members of the team re-evaluate their work and must decide whether to take a new direction (Gersick, 1988) or decide to progress to more distinct and advanced stages (e.g. Tuckman and Jenson’s team development stages – forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning).
According to Gersick (1988), teams form rapidly, influenced by the stage in which they would continue within the first few minutes of their meeting. There are quick agreements on the project objectives and on how the team should work together to achieve the objectives. The project objectives and the reasons for the team members working together remain unchanged until a temporal midpoint (work break) is reached. Initial work, however, is often unproductive and unfocused.
During the temporal midpoint, all the teams undergo a series of essential changes (midpoint transition). The members of the team become aware of the time that has passed, and this triggers them to rethink the tasks. The teams begin to question the objectives and the way in which they function, which leads to a shift in the objectives and/or work methods.
The second stage is characterised by an increased focus on the project and improved task performance. Research has shown that although some teams evaluate their processes and progress, not all teams implement change. The midpoint recess affords an opportunity for transition but does not guarantee that a transition will take place (Okhuysen & Eisenhardt, 2002; Okhuysen & Waller, 2002).
The punctuated equilibrium model and the stages of team development model coexist because they function at two different levels of analysis. The focus of the punctuated equilibrium model is on how the team functions on specific projects, while the focus of the stages of team development model is on the overall development of the team (Chang, Bordia & Duck, 2003).
The punctuated equilibrium model includes specific task-related actions, while the stage model includes components of the team’s social and emotional interaction patterns. Both these models describe different aspects of the team’s process of development. Studies have shown that the performing stage of the stage model matches the post-midpoint transition actions in the punctuated equilibrium model (Chang et al., 2003).
The potential value of the punctuated equilibrium model for diversity management lies mainly in the greater flexibility it provides. Different teams do not necessarily develop through all the stages, and some of the stages can be omitted because of their unique circumstances. Diversity managers can design the diversity intervention to focus on the specific needs at that point in the development of the team.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgments 
Declaration 
Abstract/Summary 
Key terms 
CHAPTER 1: GENERAL INTRODUCTION 
1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.2 BACKGROUND
1.3 PROBLEM STATEMENT
1.4 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
1.5 SUMMARY OF THE RESEARCH PROCESS
1.6 ASSUMPTIONS
1.7 RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY
1.8 THESIS STATEMENT
1.9 DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS
1.10 THEORY BUILDING
1.11 SUMMARY
1.12 CHAPTER LAYOUT
CHAPTER 2: DIVERSITY IN THE WORKPLACE 
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.2 EMPLOYEE DIVERSITY
2.3 SHIFTS IN THE WAY DIVERSITY IS DEFINED
2.4 CONTEXTUAL NATURE OF DIVERSITY
2.5 EMPLOYEE DIVERSITY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE WORKPLACE
2.6 DIMENSIONS OF EMPLOYEE DIVERSITY
2.7 DIVERSITY IN THE BROADER SOUTH AFRICAN CONTEXT OR SOCIETY
2.8 COMPARISON OF THE NEW WITH THE OLD DIVERSITY MESSAGE
2.9 POTENTIAL PROBLEMS OF A DIVERSE WORKFORCE
2.10 POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF A DVIERSE WORKFORCE
2.11 ORGANISATIONAL EVOLUTION
2.12 MOTIVES FOR DIVERSITY
2.13 SUMMARY
CHAPTER 3: DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT 
3.1 INTRODUCTION
3.2 RELEVANT DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT CONTENT MODELS
3.3 DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT PROCES IMPLEMENTATION MODEL
3.4 THE IMPORTANCE OF DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT IN SOUTH AFRICAN ORGANISATIONS
3.5 REQUIREMENTS FOR ATTAINING EFFECTIVE DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT
3.6 SUMMARY
CHAPTER 4: GROUP WORK 
4.1 INTRODUCTION
4.2 TYPOLOGY OF GROUPS
4.3 STAGES OF GROUP DEVELOPMENT
4.4 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF EFFECTIVE GROUPS
4.5 TRANSFORMING FROM A GROUP TO A TEAM
4.6 ACCELERATING THE TRANSITION FROM A GROUP TO A TEAM
4.7 SUMMARY
CHAPTER 5: WORK TEAMS 
5.1 INTRODUCTION
5.2 TYPOLOGY OF TEAMS
5.3 TEAM MODELS
5.4 GENERIC COMPETENCIES AND ACTIONS REQUIRED FOR TEAMWORK
5.5 FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO TEAM SUCCESS
5.6 FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO TEAM FAILURES
5.7 A DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVE OF THE GENERIC ADVANTAGES OF EFFECTIVE WORK TEAMS
5.8 A DIVERSITY PERSPECTIVE OF THE SPECIFIC ADVANTAGES OF PARTICIPATION IN A TEAM FOR THE INDIVIDUAL TEAM MEMBERS
5.9 A DIVERSITY PERSPECTIVE OF THE DISTINCT ADVANTAGES OF EFFECTIVE TEAM FUNCTIONING FOR THE ORGANISATION
5.10 SUMMARY
CHAPTER 6: SPORT INTERVENTIONS IN ORGANISATIONS 
6.1 INTRODUCTION
6.2 THE CONTRIBUTION OF SPORT IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN SOCIETY
6.3 CONTRIBUTIONS OF ORGANISATIONAL TEAM SPORT TO EFFECTIVE DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT IN THE WORKPLACE
6.4 SIMILARITIES BETWEEN ORGANISATIONAL TEAM SPORT AND ORGANISATIONAL WORK TEAMS
6.5 SUMMARY
CHAPTER 7: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS 
7.1 INTRODUCTION
7.2 SUMMARY OF THE RESEARCH PROCESS
7.3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
7.4 RESEARCH DESIGN
7.5 THE FOCUS OF THE RESEARCH DESIGN
7.6 POTENTIAL SOURCES OF BIAS
7.7 RESEARCH METHODS
7.8 SUMMARY
CHAPTER 8: CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAMPLE 
8.1 INTRODUCTION
8.2 GRAPHIC ILLUSTRATION OF DIVERSITY IN THE FOCUS GROUPS AND INDIVIDUAL INTERVIEWS
8.3 SUMMARY
CHAPTER 9: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 
9.1 INTRODUCTION
9.2 RESEARCH QUESTION (SECTION 7.2, RESEARCH PROCESS STEP 1): IS THERE A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ORGANISATIONAL TEAM SPORT ACTIVITIES AND OUTCOMES AND THE MANAGEMENT OF DIVERSITY ACTIVITIES AND OUTCOMES IN ORGANISATIONS? IF SO, WHAT IS THIS RELATIONSHIP?
9.3 RESEARCH QUESTION (SECTION 7.2, RESEARCH PROCESS STEP 2): IS THERE SUFFICIENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTICIPANTS ON THE MEANING AND OUTCOMES OF DIVERSITY AND DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT IN THE ORGANISATION?
9.4 RESEARCH QUESTION (SECTION 7.2, RESEARCH PROCESS STEP 3): WHAT
ARE THE DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCES (OUTCOMES) THAT
MANIFEST FROM PARTICIPANTS IN THE ORGANISATIONAL TEAM SPORT
INTERVENTION (TESCH’S METHOD)?
9.5 RESEARCH QUESTION (SECTION 7.2, RESEARCH PROCESS STEP 4): WHAT
ARE THE DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCES (OUTCOMES)
REGARDING THE CONTENT OF THE TEAM SPORT INTERVENTION MODEL
IDENTIFIED USING THE ATLAS.TI?
9.6 RESEARCH QUESTION (SECTION 7.2, RESEARCH PROCESS STEP 5): WHAT
ARE THE DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCES (IMPLEMENTATION
ACTIVITIES AND STEPS) IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A DIVERSITY
MANAGEMENT ORGANISATIONAL TEAM SPORT INTERVENTION MODEL?
9.7 RESEARCH QUESTION: (SECTION 7.2, RESEARCH PROCESS STEP 6):
WHAT ARE THE DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCES
(IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES AND STEPS) IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A
DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT ORGANISATIONAL SPORT INTERVENTION
MODEL IDENTIFIED USING ATLAS.TI?
9.8 SUMMARY
CHAPTER 10: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 
10.1 INTRODUCTION
10.2 CONCLUSION REGARDING RESEARCH QUESTION (SECTION 7.2,
RESEARCH PROCESS STEP 2): IS THERE SUFFICIENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE PARTICIPANTS ON THE MEANING AND OUTCOMES OF
DIVERSITY AND DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT IN THE ORGANISATION?
10.3 CONCLUSION REGARDING RESEARCH QUESTION (SECTION 7.2,
RESEARCH PROCESS STEP 3): WHAT ARE THE DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT
EXPERIENCES (OUTCOMES) THAT MANIFEST FROM PARTICIPANTS IN THE
ORGANISATIONAL TEAM SPORT INTERVENTION?
10.4 CONCLUSION REGARDING RESEARCH QUESTION (SECTION 7.2,
RESEARCH PROCESS STEP 4): WHAT ARE THE DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT
EXPERIENCES (OUTCOMES) REGARDING THE CONTENT OF THE TEAM
SPORT INTERVENTION MODEL IDENTIFIED USING THE ATLAS.TI?
10.5 CONCLUSION REGARDING RESEARCH QUESTION (SECTION 7.2,
RESEARCH PROCESS STEP 5): WHAT ARE THE DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT
EXPERIENCES (IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES AND STEPS) IN THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF A DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT ORGANISATIONAL TEAM
SPORT INTERVENTION MODEL?
10.6 CONCLUSION REGARDING RESEARCH QUESTION (SECTION 7.2,
RESEARCH PROCESS STEP 6): WHAT ARE THE DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT
EXPERIENCES (IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES AND STEPS) IN THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF A DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT ORGANISATIONAL
SPORT INTERVENTION MODEL IDENTIFIED USING ATLAS.TI?
10.7 STRENGTHS OF THE STUDY
10.8 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
10.9 RECOMMENDATIONS
10.10 PERSONAL EXPERIENCES DURING THE STUDY
10.11 SUMMARY
ARTICLE
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT