Life and Death of Team

Asya Bell

Fine Design Team
Process
BUSGR 545-01

2009

Busgr 545-01 Final Paper

Outline

Title Page

1. Introduction of the Fine Design Team 3

HPT by definition in relation to Fine Design 4

• Interpersonal Dynamics

• Common Themes (operational and employee value)

2. Help Discover Strengths and Simplification 6

3. Life and Death of a Relationship built on Team Strength 8

4. Help Discover Weaknesses 10

• Five dysfunctions of Teams Graph

5. Conclusion 11

2|Page
A. Bell BUSGR 545-01

Introduction

Hello, my name is Asya Bell and I have chosen to do a research paper on a team that I

was a part of in May 2009. The name of this team was “Fine Design” and this team’s project

was to inform the class of the process of “Designing a Team”. This team formed through a

selection process of four random classmates that just happened to sit near one another. The team

did not appear to be assembled strategically on a single circuit by a higher authority. Our

professor informed the class of an assignment that was worth a great deal for the basis of our

overall grade in this class. I originally wanted this team to be the type of team that I could learn

from and lead! After careful review of my team, I was not so sure of leading or learning

anything from my team. Have you ever began a project with co-workers and soon realized that

you were completing more work also at a much faster and much more efficient pace! "Well if

you have then you obliviously met Fine Design"!

I would like to analyze with you the strengths and weaknesses of Fine Design as a whole.

I would like to inform you of factors that placed this team in compromising positions. There are

3|Page

also examples where simple solutions can allow for further growth of the team. This team

experienced stress factors that began the moment the team signed up to become partners. This

team was informed that (we will use values A,B,C and D as values for Fine Design group

members) teammate A will be out of the Country at the time that the assignment is due for

presentation in class room setting. This in turn leads us directly into non-verbal communication

as a stress factor that was viewed as positive and negative! Fine Design also discovered de-

motivating factors that could have led directly into threats of productivity.

I think that Fine Design as one entity has overcome many obstacles in the road to project

completion for this task. This school project team experienced everything that your normal work

team will face. Fine Design worked independently and incredibly to make this assignment a

successful passing grade or project (or so I believe). In order to truly say that Fine Design was a

High Performing Team we must analyze its mishaps, dysfunctions, communication and most

important its overall outcome.

High Performing Teams

A High Performing Team by definition is a team that exhibits quantum leap in business

results in less than a year and is successful in all key dimensions (Mark Hanlan, 1952). Fine

Design has experienced stress factors such as Teamwork via Technology, Attendance,

Experience or lack of and Expectations in determining if they were indeed a HPT. One of Fine

Designs first major obstacle was the interpersonal dynamics. All team members exhibited

encouragement of one another’s viewpoints. All members were open and excepting to ideas and

concepts for the project. However team member A was very dominate in this process but team

4|Page

member A was also the member that was not going to be in town during the presentation

purpose. This leads me to believe that A was attempting to become a very dominate force in this

project due to the reality of possible absence during the preparation and presentation portion of

the project. It" can't be proven" that A was only encouraging because of his lack of physical

presence. It "can be said" that A was attempting to leave his trademark on the project to ensure

“A” received credit for the proposed project outcome. While working on this team there was a

great deal of gate keeping taking place from C and D towards member B. Group member B is

what we can label as the dreaded “SOCIAL LOAFER”. Group member B was always late for

group meetings, complained about staying for more than one hour, was not a great communicator

and refused to complete any computer related work. Therefore, during the reflection phase,

following phase and standard setting phase team member B was not effective for the overall

project. In order to achieve HPT standards you have to effectively communicate with all

involved. The team members C and D in an ideal environment should not have experienced

these negative attributes from B. A well-rounded team member, who possesses exquisite

technical, task management, and interpersonal skills, is a statistical rarity (Leigh L Thompson,

2008, p. 92).

Common Themes

While Fine Design worked on their project from afar and up close, the entire team had

one common goal. "Success"! The group members worked independently and cohesively on

several aspects of the project. The group worked well while determining what the outline of the

project would consist of. Members A, C and D worked together while determining what the

project would consist of. A, C and D all decided how to present the project to the class. They

also determined the content and the power point information that was to be used. This is where

5|Page

the team begins to divide due to A’s departure to another country. At this moment, the tension

rises among team members and it appears that the theme for success has decreased. Members C

and D are now the face of the project. Member B begins to give less and less to other members

of the team. It appears that B has drawn away from the group. This is also where the “single

dimension”(C and D are only focused on one way of completing the project-meet up and go over

the work for presentation, no phone, no email{because B refuses to communicate via

technology}) way of thinking comes into this project. It is said, “When a team focuses solely on

a single dimension, other pressures often increase significantly” (Mark Hanlan, 1952, p. 21).

The members C and D have now imposed what may possibly be defined as an irrational

expectation on B. Member B may have already felt as if there was originally a single dimension

system put in place regarding Fine Design. It was unclear to C and D that this system may have

placed an unrealistic agenda on B. It can be stated that if the communication was effective in its

delivery, Fine Design may have never experienced disadvantageous effects at this phase.

Discovery of Strengths and Simplification

There are ways to determine where the strength lye’s' within any organization, group or

individual. This also holds true to Fine Design! There are factors that must be considered.

While Fine Designed worked on their project and continued to stumble into roadblocks within

their own group, they could have initially found out where their individual strength was located.

If Fine Design had taken advice from, www.virginia.edu/processsimplification.com in alpha

phase, their conflicting ways (single dimension strategy) would not have arisen. At this website,

you can find many useful tips and guides when you are working in teams, even alone. This

website could have asked Fine Design some extremely valuable questions that they may never

6|Page

considered. If member C and D would have asked “Do members know what needs to be done

next, by whom, and when to achieve the goal”, “In a successful team: Members know what

needs to be done next, by whom, and by when to achieve team goals”

http://www.virginia.edu/processsimplification/doc/TeamLeadership.doc numerous variables may

have changed. Single dimension may have played a vital role, but member B may have

responded differently! Examples:

Roles Do members know their roles in getting tasks done and when to allow a more skillful member to do
a contain task?

Members know their roles in getting tasks done and when to allow more skillful members to do a certain
task.

Decisions Are authority and decision-making lines clearly understood?

In a successful team: Authority and decision-making lines are clearly understood.

Conflict Is conflict dealt with openly and considered important to decision-making and personal growth?

In a successful team: Conflict is dealt with openly and is considered important to decision-making and
personal growth.

Personal Traits Do members feel their unique personalities are appreciated and well utilized?

In a successful team: Members feel their unique personalities are appreciated and well utilized.

Norms Are group norms set for working together and are they seen as standards for everyone in the
group?

In a successful team: Group norms for working together are set and seen as standards for everyone in the
groups.

Effectiveness Do members find team meetings efficient and productive and look forward to this time together?

In a successful team: Members find team meetings efficient and productive and look forward to this time
together.

Success Do members clearly know when the team has met with success and share in this equally and
proudly?

In a successful team: Members know clearly when the team has met with success

and share in this equally and proudly.

http://www.virginia.edu/processsimplification/doc/TeamLeadership.doc

7|Page

Even though these are only a few examples, they are crucial questions that should have been

addressed at the start of the project. "While answering these questions can become difficult at

times"! It could have still played a crucial part in the developmental phase of the initial project,

aided in the discovery of strengths, and simplified the project.

8|Page

Life and Death of a Relationship built on Team Strength

While Fine Design worked steadily on their assignment, it has been stated that working

on your individual strength and team’s strength at the same time will ultimately help design the

type of environment that will play favorable for the ending project result. “One of the mysteries

of the human condition is that we are all born with unique gifts. One estimate argues that we can

each do something better than any 10,000 other people. Those who find a way to discover their

talents and develop them are often regarded as lucky, gifted or excellent in their chosen field.

But we are all capable of following this path if only we are allowed to or shown it. This is

perhaps the greatest service that a manager can perform for his or her team.”

(www.smartads.info/view-authors/?bio=EricGarner). This is very insightful about the average

human. I think this is crucial when you are working with a group. “If Fine Design would have

heard this phrase while developing there project, there would have been less confusion during

the planning phase”! It would have been less confusion because the team would have introduced

this theory and applied it to the project as well as themselves. Fine Design would have looked at

themselves as a project. I truly believe that this strength theory should have been applied. If the

strength theory were, implemented Fine Design would have been able to help each other

discover their strengths and weaknesses. They would have also been able to focus on individual

strengths, develop these strengths, manage their weaknesses and combine people with

complementary strengths. Fine Design could have grasped the concept of exiling the single

dimension way of thinking from the start of the project. Team members “A” and “B” could have

worked on special projects together since there were major time constraints for them. They

could have worked on theories prior to “A” going out of town. That would have allowed “B” the

9|Page

opportunity to complete project portion early versus “B” running into time constraints at the end

of the project. There could have been numerous opportunities that could have arisen that would

have played an even more favorable outcome while alleviating stress factors during this project.

Help Discover Weaknesses

The “Strength Theory argues that just as we each have unique strengths, so each of us has

weaknesses” (www.smartads.info/view-authors/?bio=EricGarner). In this theory, there are three

major points that are made. The first is that weaknesses can never be turned into strength no

matter how had one tries. The second is even if you devote all your resources to improving a

weakness, it will only ever be improved to the level of average, no more. The third is while all

your energy has been devoted to improving the weakness to reach average standard, you could

have wasted time and energy that could have gone into improving the strength

(www.smartads.info/view-authors/?bio=EricGarner). In this weakness theory I think that team

member “C” could have allowed each member to find there weakness and expose it during the

initial stage. If this were to have taken place all team, members would have held this project to a

new standard. All members would have known exactly what not to expect to be completed from

individual team members. I think that all team members would have been able to focus on what

was needed for the project and all members would have know exactly how to go about attaining

what was needed and what team member to get it from. If the weakness theory were applied, I

know that team members would have corresponded much more effectively with team member

“A” since the issue with this member was distance. I think that with team member “B” everyone

in the group would have understood the importance of verbal communication and lack of timing.

10 | P a g e

With team member “C” everyone would have understood that controlling the tempo of the

assignment and the "everything has to be completed as soon as possible" was the only way that

this member knew how to approach the project. With team member “D” the group should have

been able to focus on the group work as “a whole is better than the sum of its parts”, since this

member has never worked in a group setting prior to this project. For Fine Design as a whole, I

know that the weakness theory would have played a critical role throughout the project if it were

implemented throughout the entire project. I also think that the weakness theory is more

powerful than any other theory that has been introduced during this paper because it really gives

you a focal point of understanding what will “NOT” work and what will “Never” work for

everyone. I think that says a lot for a group of people working together, because it sets the

standard, and let us face it we have standards with all that we do in life.

Inattention to
RESULTS

Avoidance of
ACCOUNTABILITY

Lack of
COMMITTMENT

Fear of
CONFLICT
Absence of
TRUST

11 | P a g e

www.virginia.edu/processsimplification/doc/TeamLeadership.doc

The graph above is a great example of the discovery of weaknesses that team members

may face. This graph also shows us what to look for while determining an individual’s strengths

and weaknesses. While Fine Design faced many obstacles, the graph shows us what the typical

obstacles that team members usually face. In accordance with this graph, Fine Design did

receive the five typical dysfunctions of a team. If this graph were to have been introduced during

the initial phase of the project I believe that there would have been less stress, less lack of

commitment, more time delegated for the project and the team would have planned the project

prior to team member A going out of town.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Fine Design faced many obstacles on their road to project completion.

The obstacles that they faced were manageable and they could have been overcome. All group

members should have allowed each other the opportunity to extend their educational in addition

to personal and professional growth into this project. "Once you have evaluated all team

members and align them with their true strengths, the project at that moment becomes

explosive"! Even though Fine Design did experience stress factors, de-motivating factors, single

dimension way of working and thinking and lastly communication via information technology

they refused to allow these negatives to get in the way of the projects productivity. In addition,

even though Fine Design did not start as a high performing team, the final project showed only

high performance. While evaluating the team based on its overall performance I pose the

question; “Is a high performance team only a team that can exhibit quantum leap in results and is

12 | P a g e

successful in all key dimensions”? I think the answer is no. I think that the only way a team can

be considered a high performance team is to perform beyond its noted potential and perform

beyond the clients’ expectations and in the case of Fine Design beyond the professors,

classmates as well as the team’s overall expectations.

13 | P a g e

Reference Page

1.) Hanlan, Mark (1952) xviii High Performing Teams

2.) Leigh L Thompson (2008) Making the Team, A guide for Managers.

3.) www.askteamdoc.com/index.php/2005/10/10/assessing-your-organization-for-team-

strength/

4.) www.insightinstitute.com/building-personality-strengths.html

5.) www.managesmarter.com/msg/content_display/incentive/e3i90f5972ce0b39bdf4eb4a1111bc8d

6.) www.smartads.info/view-authors/?bio=377&Author=Eric_Garner

7.) www.virginia.edu/processsimplification/doc/TeamLeadership.doc

14 | P a g e

15 | P a g e

Life and Death of Team

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (19)

Ähnlich wie Life and Death of Team

Ähnlich wie Life and Death of Team (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Life and Death of Team