Multiple Factors That Caused the Poor Functioning of Each Group - Essay Example

Groups and Teams al Affiliation Groups and Teams Enlisting the Multiple Factors That Caused the Poor Functioning of Each Group The multiple factors that caused the poor function of each group are summarized in the tabular form below: Category of Factors TEAM A TEAM B Delegation of Roles Failure to designate roles and responsibilities according to the consensus of all members Failure to designate roles and responsibilities according to the consensus of all members Leadership Assumed leader (All Talk) dropped out in the middle of the project The leader role (Organizer) was noted to be assumed and not elected by consensus, and was replaced by another person (Technical Leader) towards the end of the project Communication Accepted norm or mode of communication was not utilized (Discussion Tool) No agreed norms or modes of communication were appropriately established Schedule of Face to Face (f2f) Meetings All Talk presumed that f2f meetings could be scheduled at his house, without prior consultation or approval of members Organizer suggested f2f meetings at his house, which is near the university; the team reportedly met 8 to 10 times. Interpersonal relationships (Sociogram) Sub-groups were developed according to members who perceived other members as actively contributing to completion of tasks. The isolated members (2) did not contribute at all, and therefore were regarded as not preferred to interact with other members. Sub-groups were developed according to members who perceived other members as actively contributing to completion of tasks. The isolated members (2) did not contribute at all, and therefore were regarded as not preferred to interact with other members. Existence of Conflicts Conflict at the beginning and at the end where members of the sub-group delivered nasty verbal conflicts towards All Talk Avoiding the expression of active or direct conflict (Borkman, 1996). Too Nice Syndrome Source of poor functioning for lack of ability to enforce performance of tasks Source of poor functioning for lack of ability to enforce performance of tasks Performance Monitoring Due to the lack of consensus in assigning tasks, as well as respective roles and leaders, there was no one who took into account the need to monitor the progress of performance of the project on a regular basis. This included ensuring that members were well informed in meetings and attend, as required. Due to the lack of consensus in assigning tasks, as well as respective roles and leaders, there was no one who took into account the need to monitor the progress of performance of the project on a regular basis. This included ensuring that members were well informed in meetings and attend, as required. According to Tuckmans five stages of group development, conflict occurs as the second stage after the orientation phase in ordinary groups. Compare the two groups in respect to the conflict process that took place in each using the Tuckmans as a framework. The two groups’ ability to address and resolve the conflicts that emerged, according to Tuckman’s framework, is hereby compared as follows: Team A As noted by Borkman (1996), Team A’s conflict existed both at the beginning and at the end of the project. The conflict at the beginning of the project allegedly emerged as a result of the Too Nice Syndrome, especially when roles and responsibilities were not appropriately established. In addition, the presumption that All Talk would lead the members also caused eventual conflict when he eventually left the group and the rest of the members had to conceptualize another project in lieu of that which was suggested by All Talk. This is consistent with Tuckman’s stages of group development which asserted that “although conflicts may or may not surface as group issues, they do exist. Questions will arise about who is going to be responsible for what, what the rules are, what the reward system is, and what criteria for evaluation are. These reflect conflicts over leadership, structure, power, and authority” (5 Stages of Group Development, n.d., p. 1). Likewise, towards the end of the project it was pointed out that the inability of the three isolates to contribute to the project would eventually render them kicked-out. As such, some form of conflict in verbal exchange was reported to be exchanged between the members of the sub-group and All Talk. It was evident that at this phase of the project, the members were already experiencing anxiety due to the need to comply with a completed project within the indicated time frame. Team B The conflict that was manifested in Team B was perceived by members of the subgroup as inconsequential and emanted only in terms of the need to prod non-performing members to deliver. Again, avoiding active and direct confrontation, the members of the subgroup, exemplify characteristics of confict which are consisent with Tuckman’s second stage of group development, exhibiting “wide swings in members’ behavior based on emerging issues of competition and hostilities. Because of the discomfort generated during this stage, some members may remain completely silent while others attempt to dominate” (5 Stages of Group Development, n.d.). For each group, suggest a resolution to the conflicts and explain why you think it is going to be effective. For Team A, the conflicts that emerged could actually have been avoided if and when delegation of roles and responsibilities were undertaken, in the first place. Likewise, when a leader has appropriately been appointed or elected, according to capabilities and with proper accountabilities, the conflict in complying with anticipated tasks within projected time frames should have been scheduled, monitored, evaluated, and addressed, with consensus of members, as needed. In addition, conflict would also be resolved and avoided through proper communication between and among members. The leader must ensure that all messages, progress results of meetings, and reports of tasks accomplishments should have been complied, as per schedule. Monitoring of performance and progress should have been undertaken regularly to prevent emergence of pressing issues and concerns. For Team B, the noted minimal conflicts would have been avoided also through delegation of roles and responsibilities of members. Likewise, effective communication should be exchanged through diverse media (other than the Discussion Tool), as preferred and agreed upon. Further, as proposed under Team A, regular monitoring of performance of each member according to delivery of assigned tasks; as well as overall progress of the project, according to agreed schedule, would assist in avoiding emergence of unexpected issues and pressing concerns. If any unexpected issue emerges, the leader should immediately communicate to all members these pressing concerns and seek ways to resolve these on an amenable and agreeable manner. References 5 Stages of Group Development. (n.d.). Retrieved from med.fsu.edu: http://med.fsu.edu/uploads/files/FacultyDevelopment_GroupDevelopment.pdf Borkman, T. (1996, December 17). Case Studies of Two Poorly Functioning Teams. Retrieved from Virtual School: http://virtualschool.edu/98c/Soci305/Soci305Thomasina.html Read More