Scribd
Upload
7 views3 pages

Assignment 3

science

Uploaded by

thebigad22
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
7 views3 pages

Assignment 3

science

Uploaded by

thebigad22
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Starts with a Bang, Ends with a Whimper

A faculty member, Kim Green from the Management Department, was asked to chair a major
university committee to plan the mission of the university for the next 20 years. Three other
senior faculty and seven administrators from across the campus were also asked to serve on
this committee. The president of the university, Dr. Sulgrave, gave the committee its charge:
What should Northcoast University be like in the year 2020? Dr. Sulgrave told the committee
that the work of this task force was of utmost importance to the future of the university, and
the charge of this committee should take precedence over all other matters. The task force
was allowed to meet in the president’s conference room and use the president’s secretary. The
report of the committee was due in 2 months.
The task force members felt very good about being selected for such an important team. The
team met on a weekly basis for about 2 hours each time. At first, the members were very
interested in the task and participated enthusiastically. They were required to do a great deal
of outside research. They came back to the meetings proud to share their research and
knowledge. However, after a while the meetings did not go well. The members could not
seem to agree on what the charge to the group meant. They argued about what they were
supposed to accomplish and resented the time the committee was taking from their regular
jobs. Week after week the team met but accomplished nothing. Attendance became a problem,
with people skipping several meetings, showing up late, or leaving early. Group members
stopped working on their committee assignments. Kim didn’t want to admit to the university
president that they didn’t know what they were doing; instead, she just got more and more
frustrated.
Meetings became sporadic and eventually stopped altogether. The president was involved in a
crisis in the university and seemed to lose interest in the committee. The president never called
for the report from the committee, and the report was never completed.
Discussion Questions:
1. What is the type of this task force (group)?
It is an informal group done within an organization to achieve a goal that will benefit the
organization later on.
2. Which characteristics of excellence were lacking in this task force?
Collaborative Spirit: The spirit of collaboration is indeed a basic hallmark of high-performance
teams, embodying mutual support, shared responsibility,
and the feeling of team ownership of goals. In this situation, the focus on individual
achievement may have suppressed this collaboration, replacing cooperation with rivalry,
resentment, and distrust.

Shared Vision and Goals: Within a team that has dominant goals of the
individual, the development and sharing of a common vision is extremely hard to achieve.
Without a clearly defined common direction and personal commitment to support each other in
pursuit of a mutually desirable objective, a team becomes fragmented and less effective.

Supportive Feedback: Constructive feedback and support will be less forthcoming or used for
personal gain in an individual recognition-
oriented team. As a matter of fact, it hampers the growth of individuals and teams; it also discour
ages innovation because open and honest communication is not taking place.

Accountability and Shared Responsibility: Emphasizing individual


achievements water down accountability for team performance. People will be more
concerned about protecting their own turf than taking shared responsibility for successes and
failures of the team.
3. Which characteristics of excellence were evident in this task force?
Team spirit can be said to be fundamentally lacking: the
description showed no trace of teamwork principle whatsoever. Brainstorming, perhaps the most
essential form of team problem-solving,
was wholly nonexistent. That itself signifies an absence of initiative, poor communication,
and failure to even establish basic ground rules for working together.
Disregard to Diverse Perspectives: The fact that the team failed to "accept the different culture,
beliefs, and cognitive evaluation of the other side of the
argument" is a clear indication of complete disregard for respect
of individual viewpoints and not capitalizing on the varied strengths of the team members.
Communication Breakdown: Poor communication caused "chaos" in
meetings and thus suggests that there is no active listening, poor articulation of ideas,
and respect for opinions.
Lack of structure and roles: Unclear structures and undefined tasks within the
team could only create mass confusion and, therefore, inefficiency.
Without apparent individual contributions by the team
players, there had been duplication and ambiguity of some
roles, which obstructed progress as a result.
Neglect of Psychological Contracts: The absence of "psychological contracts"-
unwritten agreements between team members and the organization about expectations, rewards,
and contributions-further eroded trust and motivation within the
4. How would you assess Kim as a leader?
The worst level of leadership ever a leader is supposed to control and regulate the flow of ideas
and maintain the level of aggressiveness and understanding of the audience she was basically a
judge in court for all the good or bad ideas to be either flourished in the group and exploited or
just let go. She however just stood there watching without utilizing any of her roles as a manager
or a coordinator to this task force which shows that she was the wrong choice to be the leader for
this task force
5. What actions would you take (internally or externally) if you were the leader of this
task force?

Allow methods of conversation in regards of ideas. Just getting ideas without discussing
them until we reach the top 5 and start getting into those alternative ideas and choose the
best one based on cognitive thinking alone and making sure that wer are benefiting the
organization making the control smooth between all the members however I would make
centralized at certain limits such as judging or any form is not being a king helpful
employee trying to solve a problem with your colleagues

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy