Presentation 4: Case study: The forgotten Group Member
1. Identify the five group development stages (forming, storming, norming, performing, adjourning) in the case.
First stage- Forming
This is the stage where ice-breaking takes place.The “forming” stage takes place when the team first meets each other. In this first meeting, team members are introduced to each. They share information about their backgrounds, interests and experience and form first impressions of each other. They learn about the project they will be working on, discuss the project’s objectives/goals and start to think about what role they will play on the project team. They are not yet working on the project. They are, effectively, “feeling each other out” and finding their way around how they might work together.
In this case, a team coordinator was chosen.
Second stage- Storming
In this stage, the team members compete with each other for status and for acceptance of their ideas. They have different opinions on what should be done and how it should be done – which causes conflict within the team. As they go progress through this stage, with the guidance of the team leader, they learn how to solve problems together, function both independently and together as a team, and settle into roles and responsibilities on the team.
In this case, Diane was a quiet individual who never volunteered suggestions unless she is asked for one. Mike on the other hand was the joker in the team. Steve was the business-like individual. Janet was the reliable one who put a lot of effort in the team. Lastly, Christine was an individual who focused mostly on her grade instead of teamworking. However, Christine did not perform her role well as a leader to lead the team well.
Third stage- Norming
In this stage, agreement will eventually be reached on how the group operates.
The major task function of stage three is the data flow between group members: They share
feelings and ideas, solicit and give feedback to one another, and explore actions related to the task. Creativity is high. If this stage of data flow and cohesion is attained by the group members, their interactions are characterized by openness and sharing of information on both a personal and task level. They feel good about being part of an effective group.
In this case, works are distributed. However, Mike was a 'defect" in the team as he was not able to attend the meetings regularly, in spite of that, he has been giving excuses of his misbehaviour. Moreover, sharing of information on the task level was not performed properly. For example, Mike did not discuss his problem of the task he is facing with his team members at all.
Fourth stage- Performing
In this stage, people can work independently, in subgroups, or as a total unit with equal facility. Their roles and authorities dynamically adjust to the changing needs of the group and individuals.
Stage four is marked by interdependence in personal relations and problem solving in the realmof task functions. Members are both highly task oriented and highly people oriented. There is unity: group identity is complete, group morale is high, and group loyalty is intense. The task function becomes genuine problem solving, leading toward optimal solutions and optimum group development. There is support for experimentation in solving problems and an emphasis on achievement. The overall goal is productivity through problem solving and work.
In this case, Mike obviously is not an individual who is task- oriented. He put his personal task and issue before the assignment. Such as, the times when he mentioned that he was not able to attend the meeting due to the fact that he worked the night before as a member of the campus security force and he delayed his work by the excuse of having a problem with his girlfriend. Besides, they have a miscommunication problem in the team. Due to the ingenuine problem solving, optimal solutions and optimum group development were not achieved.
Fifth stage- Adjourning
Basically, the final stage includes the process of "unforming" the group, that is, letting go of the group structure and moving on. In other words,The final stage, it involves the termination of task behaviors and disengagement from relationships.
2. Identify and describe the causes of conflicts in the case.
i) Christine Spencer focuses a lot on her grades that she is selfish naturally towards her team members. Therefore, teamwork is neglected.
ii) The fact that Christine Spencer was elected as the team coordinator. Firstly, she did not arrange the work meticulously despite she perceives that herself being a 'meticulous' person. Secondly, Mike complained that he was not going to attend the meeting before the class 8.30a.m. and she barely makes an effort in ensuring Mike's attendance and let it past. Instead, she laughed with her team members at Mike's indignation. There is also a case following, such as the night Mike worked as a night security force. Thirdly, knowing the existence of the problem that the team has with Mike, Christine did not act in accordance to what Professor Sandra Thiel told her to. For example, she did not take any actions to resolve the misunderstanding of Mike to the team.
iii) Most of the team members were able to complete their designated part of assignments on time, apart from Mike. He does procrastination a lot by giving excuses, such as he worked the night before as a campus security force and he had problems with his girlfriend. As a team member, it is not suitable to introduce his own personal problem all the time to avoid getting his designated part done.
iv) Miscommunication occurs when Mike was not able to make it to one of the meetings. He sent in brief notes to Christine and expected her to discuss it on his behalf. However, she was in mist of what to do with the notes. Moreover, she did not ask the reason she was sent the notes and on the other hand, Mike did not express openly of what he wants Christine to do with it.
3. Suggest the approach to leadership best suitable for the case.
I believe that Situational Approaches should be taken in handling the problematic occasions that occured in this story. Especially when Mike had some problems with the team due to certain misunderstandings, Christine, as a team coordinator, should act quick in response to it. She did not interpret the problem wisely, instead, she is looking things at her own perspective of getting good grade. What she did not realise is that by handling the situation'meticulously', she would actually already have achieved what she desired.
Third stage- Norming
In this stage, agreement will eventually be reached on how the group operates.







.jpg)


