Valley Crossing Exercise

Let's start this post with a small musical video made at NITIE, Mumbai.

Valley crossing problem

Problem in hand

 There are three people trying to cross a valley. The gap of the valley is in the range of one foot to two feet. Assume that each of them has the same footstep. They have a rod of a convenient size and they have to cross the valley using the rod as a support. Direct jumping is considered fatal assuming the valley is fathomless.

Solution: 

The following are the steps to be followed sequentially to complete the task.

• Initially, the first person puts his leg forward and hid first foot remains in air and so he is only half safe. The remaining are fully safe. 
• The next step, the first person is totally unsafe and he has hang from the rod, which is being supported by the other two with their weight. 
• The next step, the first person puts its first foot on the other side of the valley and hence half safe again. The second person now puts his first foot in air and hence even he is half safe. 
• At the end of next step, the first person totally reaches the other end of the valley and hence is totally safe again. The second person is totally unsafe hanging in the air with the support of the rod weighted by the first and third persons. 
• Next step, the second person puts his first step on the other side of the valley and the third person puts his first step in the air and hence both are half safe.
• At the end of next step, the third person reaches the other end of the valley and hence totally safe again. The third person remains hanging in the air supported by the first two persons who have reached the other end of the valley. 
• After two more steps, even the third person reaches the other end of the valley and the mission has been accomplished.

The three member roles have been defined as follows:-

A:  A is the first person who undertakes the work. He may called as “INITIATOR” as he is the one who initiates the work.

B: Comparatively,  B’s job  is less risky compared to  A and more risky compared to  C.   

C:    C will  follow his / her  fore walkers in crossing the valley.  C’s  job  is less risky compared to  B and  A

Three wise men Crossing the valley  - Detailed task process

Persons	First Person	Second Person	Third person
Step
1	Safe	Safe	Safe
2	Half Risky,
3	Full Risky,
4	Half Risky,	Half Risky,
5		Full Risky,
6		Half Risky,	Half Risky,
7			Full Risky,
8			Half Risky,
9	Safe	Safe	Safe

The sum total of total tasks, burdens and responsibilities that are shared by the three people is equal but there are variations among the roles of A, B and C in assuming the roles. Thus the importance of TEAMWORK is being highlighted through this exercise.

Some of the other POM concepts highlighted by this task are:

 Load Sharing: This activity involves sharing of the load among the three valley crossers. This is the same scenario we face in the corporate world where load needs to be shared among the team members working towards a common goal. The roles and responsibilities have to be divided among the members by the manager. Hence the task of the manager is very critical because that will drive the final output, the project and indirectly the organization as a whole.

 Simplicity in Design: The design of this example is very elementary but of profound significance as we are seeing via discussion of these principles. This is how the design should be done in industry also - keep the design as simple as possible and work towards its implementation.

Work Planning : As a manager one need to come out with step by step plan in order to help the three members to cross the valley. In order for the three persons to cross the valley the width of the valley must be slightly larger than a single step of one person but must be smaller than two steps. Moreover few technical specifications must be taken into account i.e. strength of the pole, creating markings on pole etc. The managers needs to specify the variety of roles when the three cross the valley. 

Efficiency - usage of minimum resources: Minimum amount of resources with minimal wastage forms the core of management. In the market, scarcity of resources is always there and one should always try to minimize the resources. Then only management is actually successful and drive itself towards excellence.

Interdependent Roles: As we observed, the role of each person in this exercise is interdependent on the other person role. So the roles are actually interdependent and not disjoint.

Role Designing : Every member of the team should understand exactly what role they are fillingin the

 scheme of work. In addition, they should understand each other’s roles and how they interrelate.

 Systems of Excellence: This and many other examples are nothing but system of excellence.

         Excellence = Efficiency X Effectiveness (So both are needed for the system to achieve excellence)

Synchronization (Cohesiveness): The feet movements of each person must be synchronized. This is how the industry works. All the efforts of the team members must be in perfect sync for the achievement of the common goal.

Conceptual Skills:  Imagining the way how to cross the valley is the conceptual skill. This concept of conceptualizing the whole process of valley process is the main job of MANAGEMENT which needs to be implemented very carefully if the whole exercise need to be completed successfully.

Cooperation : Help and effort each of the members contributed to team. It is a very important quality and value that every team should posses and is demonstrated clearly in the valley crossing exercise.

Coordination:  Members cooperation are put in systematic way so that the result can be channelized in order to receive the best output. Management is more concerned with coordinating the cooperation of the individuals so that over all result is achieved. 

Competing Values Framework- The Toyota Way

The Competing Values Framework (CVF) has been named as one of the fifty most important

models in the history of business. It originally emerged from empirical research on the question

of what makes organizations effective (Quinn and Rohrbaugh, 1983). It has since been

extended as a framework that makes sense of high performance in regards to numerous topics

in the social sciences and organizations. The CVF has been studied and tested in organizations

for more than twenty five years by a group of thought leaders from leading business schools

and corporations

The CVF serves primarily as a map, an organizing mechanism, a sense-making device, a source of new ideas, and a learning system. From the CVF comes a theory about how thesevarious aspects of organizations function in simultaneous harmony and tension with one another. The framework helps identify a set of guidelines that can help leaders diagnose and

manage the interrelationships, congruencies, and contradictions among these different aspects

of organizations. In other words, the framework helps leaders work more comprehensively and

more consistently in improving their organizations’ performance and value creation.

The Competing Values Framework
 The CVF evolved out of research to determine the key factors of organizational effectiveness. This research initially yielded a comprehensive list of 39 possible indicators to measure effectiveness. Quinn and Rohrbaugh (1983), through factor analysis, condensed this list into a more parsimonious set of two major dimensions, which defined four major quadrants representing opposite and competing assumptions . The first dimension ranges from flexibility and discretion on one end, to stability and control on the other. The second dimension measures the degree to which the organization emphasizes internal focus and integration or external focus and differentiation . The four major quadrants defined by these two axes were originally labeled the Human Relations Model, the Open System Model, the Internal Process Model, and the Rational Goal Model . These respective quadrants have alternatively been labeled as the group, developmental, hierarchical, and rational culture; collaborate, create, control, and compete ; and also clan, adhocracy, hierarchy, and market cultures .

                                           Figure 1. Quadrants of the Competing Values Framework.

 The"Human Resource Model" or CLAN culture is like an extended family. This type of organization emphasizes teamwork, employee involvement, empowerment, cohesion, participation, corporate
commitment to employees, and self-managed work teams. It is held together by loyalty and tradition. In this context, leaders are thought of as mentors or parent figures. Their main responsibilities are to empower employees, and facilitate their participation, commitment, and loyalty .
 The "Open system model" or ADHOCRACY culture is a dynamic, entrepreneurial, and creative organization. This organization thrives in an uncertain, ambiguous, and turbulent environment. The common values are innovation, flexibility, adaptability, risk taking, experimentation, and taking initiative. Leaders are also expected to be visionary, innovative, and risk oriented.
The "Internal Process model"or HIERARCHY culture is a formalized and structured bureaucracy. This culture values efficiency, reliability, predictability, and standardization. Fast and smooth operations are maintained by strict adherence to the numerous rules, policies, and procedures. The employees throughout the multiple hierarchical levels have almost no discretion. Leaders in this organization are expected to be good organizers and coordinators, and minimize costs.
 The "Rational Goal model" or MARKET culture is fiercely competitive and goal oriented. They focus on productivity, profitability, market share and penetration, and winning. Leaders in this culture are expected to be hard driving, tough, and demanding competitors.  One culture is not necessarily better than the others. The proper culture for each organization depends on the organization’s industry and strategy


An Illustration. In 1937, Kiichiro Toyoda founded the Toyota Motor Company in Japan as a
spin-off from Toyoda Automatic Loom Works to manufacture cars roughly based on the designs of Chrysler and Chevrolet. Toyota emerged from the rubble of war in the late 1950s to become Asia’s premiere manufacturing company and swiftly moved from a regional to a global brand.Gaining a foothold in the United States during the oil embargo of the 1970s, Toyota
systematically extended its product array from compact cars, like the Corolla, to mid-size
sedans. In the late 1980s, Toyota accomplished the previously unimaginable by successfully
introducing, Lexus, a luxury car line to compete with European blue bloods BMW and
Mercedes. In fact, the newly introduced Lexus established previously unimaginable initial5
quality records, and maybe said to havebeen the carthat mostsparked the quality revolution in
theNorthAmerican auto industry. Today, Toyota isJapan’sbiggest carmakerwith over $120
billion in annualsales.
Toyota is one the fewcompaniesthat has demonstrated an ability topursue several directions
simultaneously. The traditional organizational identity at Toyotawas highly focused and
internally directed. Perfecting “leanproduction” and “justin time” manufacturing techniques,
Toyotabecame symbolizedby quality and efficiencywhich made it abenchmark for automobile
manufacturingworldwide. Engineering, extensiveproducttesting andprocessredesign are
competenciesforwhich Toyota hasbecome renowned. More recently, Toyotabecame more
adaptive in orderto respond to external challenges confronting the firm. In the face ofinternal
callsforprotectionism, Toyota diversified its manufacturing and assemblyplantsfrom its core
location in ToyotaCity inAichi,Japan,to newplantsin many regions oftheworld. To survive
theworldwide recession andAsian currency crisis ofthe late 1990s, Toyota introduced
innovative “flexibleplatform” manufacturing to manage globalsupply and demand fortheir
products at optimalpricesregardless of currency fluctuations. Recently, Toyota has also
ventured into non-auto areassuch asfinancialservices, and it nowrunsthe Internetportal,
Gazoo.com.
The value creation story of Toyota representsboth ends ofthe core dimensions and dynamics
continua discussed earlier. Toyota’sinitial approach to value creationwas characterizedby
internally focused, incremental, and control oriented activities. Fine-tuningproduction and
reducing defectswere chief areas of concern. Thereafter, however,the introduction of a luxury
car—which exceededby a substantial margin the quality and design standards of competitorsin
Europe and theUnited States—coupledwith a dramatically successful global manufacturing
and distribution strategy and a rapid automobile designprocess,put Toyota squarely on the
opposite side ofthe dimensions and dynamics continua. The company, in otherwords, created
valueby responding simultaneously to competing tensions and opposites. Itwasfast and slow,
incremental and transformational all atthe same time. It created valuewith flexibility and
anticipation aswell aswith stability and control. It exemplifies a focus onboth internal and
external concerns. Itfocused on the future and thepast,the short-run and the long-run, quick
results and long-lasting results, change and stability,transformation and incrementalism.
In short,by understanding theCVF, and making appropriate choices and efforttoward change
around the positive tensions facing your organization you will begin to create greater value in
your organization.


Reference :http://competingvalues.com/competingvalues.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/The-Competing-Values-Framework-An-Introduction.pdf

Evolution of Management - Neoclassical Approach

Hawthorne Effect

The Hawthorne effect is named after what was one of the most famous experiments (or, more accurately, series of experiments) in industrial history. It marked a sea change in thinking about work and productivity. Previous studies, in particular Frederick Taylor's influential ideas, had focused on the individual and on ways in which an individual's performance could be improved. Hawthorne set the individual in a social context, establishing that the performance of employees is influenced by their surroundings and by the people that they are working with as much as by their own innate abilities.

The experiments took place at Western Electric's factory at Hawthorne, a suburb of Chicago, in the late 1920s and early 1930s. They were conducted for the most part under the supervision of Elton Mayo, an Australian-born sociologist who eventually became a professor of industrial research at Harvard.

The original purpose of the experiments was to study the effects of physical conditions on productivity. Two groups of workers in the Hawthorne factory were used as guinea pigs. One day the lighting in the work area for one group was improved dramatically while the other group's lighting remained unchanged. The researchers were surprised to find that the productivity of the more highly illuminated workers increased much more than that of the control group.

The employees' working conditions were changed in other ways too (their working hours, rest breaks and so on), and in all cases their productivity improved when a change was made. Indeed, their productivity even improved when the lights were dimmed again. By the time everything had been returned to the way it was before the changes had begun, productivity at the factory was at its highest level. Absenteeism had plummeted.

The experimenters concluded that it was not the changes in physical conditions that were affecting the workers' productivity. Rather, it was the fact that someone was actually concerned about their workplace, and the opportunities this gave them to discuss changes before they took place.

A crucial element in Mayo's findings was the effect that working in groups had on the individual. At one time he wrote:

The desire to stand well with one's fellows, the so-called human instinct of association, easily outweighs the merely individual interest and the logic of reasoning upon which so many spurious principles of management are based.

Hawthorne Effect was the improvement of productivity between the employees, it was characterized by:

• The satisfactory interrelationships between the coworkers
• It classifies personnel as social beings and proposes that sense of belonging in the workplace is important to increase productivity levels in the workforce.
• An effective management understood the way people interacted and behaved within the group.
• The management attempts to improve the interpersonal skills through motivations, leading, communication and counseling.
• This study encourages managers to acquire minimal knowledge of behavioral sciences to be able to understand and improve the interactions between employees

Neoclassical theory of management

 Principles of the neoclassical approach

The classical approach stressed the formal organization. It was mechanistic and ignored major aspects of human nature. In contrast, the neoclassical approach introduced an informal organization structure and emphasized the following principles:

· The individual An individual is not a mechanical tool but a distinct social being, with aspirations beyond mere fulfillment of a few economic and security works. Individuals differ from each other in pursuing these desires. Thus, an individual should be recognized as interacting with social and economic factors.

· The work group The neoclassical approach highlighted the social facets of work groups or informal organizations that operate within a formal organization. The concept of 'group' and its synergistic benefits were considered important.

· Participative management: Participative management or decision making permits workers to participate in the decision making process. This was a new form of management to ensure increases in productivity.

Note the difference between Taylor's 'scientific management' - which focuses on work - and the neoclassical approach - which focuses on workers.

There are 3 neoclassical theories: 

Human Relations theory :

The above theory explains the modern advancement of Human Relations Management theory which takes into account human factors like the employer-employee relationship. Human relations theory is largely seen to have been born as a result of the Hawthorne experiments which Elton Mayo conducted at the Western Electrical Company.

The important strand in the development of modern management was the increase in attention to the human factors, which has become known as the human relations school of management. The core aspect of Human Relations Theory is that, when workers were being observed and included in the research, they felt more important and valued by the company. As a result, their productivity levels went up significantly. This represented a significant departure from many of the classical theories, particularly Fordism, as it went against the notion that management needed to control workers, and remove their autonomy at every step. Instead, it showed that by engaging with workers and considering their requirements and needs, company’s could benefit from increased productivity.

Behavioral theory :
The behavioral management theory is often called the human relations movement because it addresses the human dimension of work. Behavioral theorists believed that a better understanding of human behavior at work, such as motivation, conflict, expectations, and group dynamics, improved productivity. 
The theorists who contributed to this school viewed employees as individuals, resources, and assets to be developed and worked with — not as machines, as in the past. Several individuals and experiments contributed to this theory.

Social systems theory:
Developed by Niklas Luhmann is an option for the theoretical foundation of Human Resource Management (HRM).Five major contributions to a theoretical foundation of HRM are identified: (1) the conceptualization of organizing and managing human resources as social processes, thus overcoming an individualistic angle; (2) the new importance of individuals as essential element in the system's environment; (3) the abstention form far reaching or highly unrealistic assumptions about the 'nature' of human beings; (4) the interaction between various levels and units of analysis built into the theory which is essential for comprehensive and in-depth analyses of HR phenomena and (5) the openness for additional theories for which social systems theory provides the overall framework.

Evolution of management- Classical Managment theory

Classical management theory

There are three well-established theories of classical management: Taylor's Theory of Scientific Management, Fayol’s Administrative Theory, Weber’s Theory of Bureaucracy.

Taylor's Theory of Scientific Managment(1900)
Taylor’s theory of scientific management aimed at, improving economic efficiency, especially labor productivity. Taylor had a simple view about, what motivated people at work, - money. He felt that, workers should get a, fair day's pay for a fair day's work, and that pay, should be linked to the amount produced. Therefore he introduced the, DIFFERENTIAL PIECE RATE SYSTEM, of paying wages to the workers.

Taylor's Differential Piece Rate Plan:

If Efficiency is greater than the defined Standard then workers should be paid 120 % of Normal Piece Rate.
If Efficiency is less than standard then workers should be paid 80% of Normal Piece Rate.

- Learn more at www.technofunc.com. Your online source for free professional tutorials.

Principles of Scientific Management.
Four Principles of Scientific Management are:

1.Time and motion study: - Study the way jobs are performed and find new ways to do them.

2.Teach, train and develop the workman with improved methods of doing work. Codify the new methods into rules.

3.Interest of employer & employees should be fully harmonized so as to secure mutually understanding relations between them.

4.Establish fair levels of performance and pay a premium for higher performance.

Practical Uses of Theories in our day to day life

Scientific management is present when workers assemble a McDonald’s hamburger or when a technical 

support representative answers a call under pressure from a 90/10 protocol (a set of procedures that 

requires 90 percent of all calls to be answered within 10 seconds and that 90 percent of all problems be 

resolved within 10 minutes of the customer’s first call). 

Administrative theory

The importance of the function of management was first recognized by French industrialist Henri Fayol in the early 1900s.

· Division of work or specialization This increases productivity in both technical and managerial work.
. Authority and responsibility These are imperative for an organizational member to accomplish the organizational objectives.
. Discipline Members of the organization should honour the objectives of the organization. They should also comply with the rules and regulations of the organization.

· Unity of command This means taking orders from and being responsible to only one superior.

· Unity of direction Members of the organization should jointly work toward the same goals.

· Subordination of individual interest to general interest The interest of the organization should not become subservient to individual interests or the interest of a group of employees.

· Remuneration of personnel This can be based on diverse factors such as time, job, piece rates, bonuses, profit-sharing or non-financial rewards.

· Centralization Management should use an appropriate blend of both centralization and de-centralization of authority and decision making.

· Scalar chain If two members who are on the same level of hierarchy have to work together to accomplish a project, they need not follow the hierarchy level, but can interact with each other on a 'gang plank' if acceptable to the higher officials.

· Order The organization has a place for everything and everyone who ought to be so engaged.

· Equity Fairness, justice and equity should prevail in the organization.

· Stability of tenure of personnel Job security improves performance. An employee requires some time to get used to new work and do it well.

· Initiative This should be encouraged and stimulated.

· Esprit de corps Pride, allegiance and a sense of belonging are essential for good performance. Union is strength.

Earlier thinkers on management followed learning by experience approach in developing theories of management. Learning principally is through empirical process and through analysis of the data collected through observation. Draw the principles of managment by looking at and anyalysing the jobs that all managers commonly do. This approach served as a starting point for pioneers on management science to verify the validity and improve the applicability of the principles and practices of management. Analysis of observd data is what constitute a case study. The observational method of case study helps arriving at logical conclusions about past experience and to test the same as standards for future events.
The German socialists, Max Weber followed the classical approach and developed his theory of Bureaucracy, which portrays the structure and design of organisation characterized by a hierarchy of authority, formalized rules and regulations that serve to guide the coordinated functioning of an organization.

 Classical Approach by Max Weber

1. Management of an organization is considered as a chain of inter-related functions. The study of the scope and features of these functions, the sequence through which these are performed and their inter-relationship leads one to draw principles of management suitable for universal application

2. Learning principles of management is done through the past experiences of actual practicing managers
3. As business environment consists of uniform cycles exhibiting an underlying unity of realities, functions and principles of management derived through process of empirical reasoning are suitable for universal application
4. Emerging new managers through formal education and case study can develop skill and competency in management concepts and practices
5. The classical approach also recognized the importance of economic efficiency and formal organizational structure as guiding pillars of management effectiveness.
6. Business activity is based on economic benefit. Organizations should therefore control economic incentives

Strengths of Classical Management Theory

Current management organization and structure can find much of its roots from the classical management theory. One of the main advantages of the classical management theory was to devise a methodology for how management should operate. Management principles devised during this period can be seen as a foundation for current management behavior today, such as serving as a force of authority and responsibility.

In addition, another benefit of the classical management theory is the focus on division of labor. By dividing labor, tasks could be completed more quickly and efficiently, thus allowing productivity to increase. Division of labor can be seen in many applications today, ranging from fast food restaurants to large production facilities. In addition, the classical management theory also gave rise to an autocratic leadership style, allowing employees to take direction and command from their managers.

Flaws of Classical Management Theory

The main weakness of the classical management theory arose from its tough, rigid structure. One of the main principles of the classical management theory is to increase productivity and efficiency; however, achieving these goals often came at the expense of creativity and human relations. Oftentimes, employers and theorists would focus on scientific, almost mechanical ways of increasing productivity. For example, managers would use assembly line methods and project management theories that focused on efficient division of tasks. However, employers ignored the relational aspect in employees, in the process of trying to predict and control human behavior. In fact, the human relations movement arose in response to the classical management theory, as a way to understand the role of human motivation in productivity.

Additional flaws of the classical management theory include a heavy reliance on prior experience. The theorists of this time only tested their assumptions with certain industries, such as manufacturing and other high production companies. However, in today’s environment, the rigid structure of classical management theory would not translate well in most companies. Many businesses realize the importance of improving employee motivation and behavior, and implement departments devoted solely to improving human relations.

- Learn more at www.technofunc.com. Your online source for free professional tutorials.

- Learn more at www.technofunc.com. Your online source for free professional tutorials.

- Learn more at www.technofunc.com. Your online source for free professional tutorials.

The Three Monks !

Three Monks is a Chinese animated feature film  produced by the Shanghai Animation Film Studio. It is also referred to as The Three Buddhist Priests. When the movie starts a note appears in which first column states "one monk fetches water to drink", the second column reads "two monks carry water to drink" and the third one just states, "three monks". To get a better understanding first let us watch the movie.

The movie can be divided into 3 parts:

1. When only one monk is there - We can see that when the monk was alone he used to do the work i.e. bringing the water from the river to the monastery happily. He had no qualms with the way things were moving. In other words he was content with the life he was living or the work he was doing.

2. When another monk joins the first one - The attitude of the first monk changes drastically when the second monk joins him in the monastery. Initially he intimidated him into bringing water from the river but after some time the newbie monk demand equal distribution of work. This altercation resulted in loss of man hours as well as gloomy atmosphere in the monastery. After lot of deliberation, they decide to share the responsibility and once they started sharing the job, their productivity also increased. We can see that the method adopted in this case is much better then used in the previous one. 

3. When the third monk joins the other two - Initially the same thing happened wherein the veterans forced the newcomer into work. After sometime it was total chaos in the monastery with none of the monks willing to go to the river to get the water. One fine day when fire breaks in the monastery then all the three monks work together in tandem thereby giving fruitful results. The method in this case is superior to the methods used in case 1 and case 2 as it involves active participation of all the resources.

Learning

The movie teaches us a lot of managerial lessons. I have listed down few of them:

1. Team work - The work which could have been done very easily had they worked as team took a toll on them. As we have seen in case of emergency (monastery catching fire), they worked as a team and got the desired results very easily. The manager has to ensure that the employees are working in a team, individuality hinders the progress of a firm. Team work can do wonders.

2. Job distribution - The situation can be compared to an organisation which has all the resources in the world but is not able to utilise them properly. In the movie even with three monks (resources), water (end result)  was scarce in the monastery. It is responsibility of the manager to utilise the resources provided to him optimally. As we can see in the end the monks divides the job and get the desired result very effectively and easily. 

3. Innovation - There are two ways of completing a job, one is monotonous conventional method which every body follows and the other one being innovative method. In the movie the monks could have very well adopted conventional approach (three monks standing at regular intervals) to get the water, but it would have been very tiresome as well as time consuming. Thus they went for innovative idea of placing a pulley thereby reducing the mechanical effort one has to put in which in turn increased their productivity. In a company the manager has to be a Theory Y manager, always pushing the employees for new ideas, always having faith in the man power assigned to him. If the manager backs the employee then only employee can come out with a new and innovative idea. Innovation can be continuous (over a period of time), can be drastic (out of the exigency). The one which we had seen in the movie is drastic. But we should always aim for continuous innovation. If the innovation is continuous then it will be flawless because sufficient amount of time and thought process would have invested in that idea, whereas drastic innovations arises out of the emergency situation. 

What you have to say about this?

4. Crisis management - In the movie when the temple catches fire all the three monks work together as a team and gets out of the crisis situation. There are times when people looses their cool during emergencies. A manager must always keep a clam composure no matter what the situation is. In case of emergency, the manager should adopt a rationale thinking in getting the team of the emergency situation. He/she should be in a position to assign different employees in different roles so as to counter the exigencies.

An organisation can flourish only if it has cordial atmosphere as well as convivial employees. If the manager is able to bind the team together jovially, there is no stopping to the company. In the movie the same set of people were fighting against each other but circumstances changed them and the same set of people started working together and with increased productivity. The manager in a company must ensure that the employees are not dependent on emergency situation to come together and work as a team, they should work in coordination from the moment they join the team.