COMPARAÇÃO DE MODELOS DE AVALIAÇÃO DE DESEMPENHO DE EQUIPES MULTIFUNCIONAIS BASEADOS EM CONCEITOS DE INTERAÇÃO DE GRUPOS E FERRAMENTAS DE ANÁLISE COMPORTAMENTAL

• Ano de defesa: 2009
• Autor(a) principal: Brito, Luiz Carlos Mendes de
• Orientador(a): Marras, Jean Pierre
• Banca de defesa: Sanchez, Otávio Próspero , Veloso, Henrique
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Metodista de São Paulo
• Programa de Pós-Graduação: PÓS GRADUAÇÃO EM ADMINISTRAÇÃO
• Departamento: Gestão de organizações
• País: BR
• Palavras-chave em Português: Avaliação de Equipes; Equipe de Alto Desempenho; Modelos de Avaliação
• Palavras-chave em Inglês: Team Evaluation; High Performance Team; Team Evaluation Models
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::ADMINISTRACAO
• Link de acesso: http://tede.metodista.br/jspui/handle/tede/141

Multifunctional team evaluation is a concept that has been approached by the academy more often on the last two decades. Several theories and methodologies have been developed to reduce the qualitative and perceptive effect on the evaluations, comprising a number of different techniques that aim to describe and decode the components of a complex system of meanings. Focusing these techniques this project assessed and compared three models to evaluate team performance. The first model based on team member personality states that team results are influenced by individual personality and the right components previous selection are critical factors for the team performance. The second model correlates team member relationship with the level of performance. The third model evaluates the interaction among the members but did not measure the level of performance. The models were evaluated based on a case study methodology developed on a chemical industry located in S. Paulo. Evaluation data were compared with the team goals results after completion. The results approached the models selected satisfactorily and confirmed the influence suggested by authors. The three models comparison results did not allow to select one model as the most effective to evaluate team performance. It is possible, however, to suggest that a practical and effective evaluation for team performance could be built based on the combination of the three models.(AU)