Case Study: Read the case study and answer the questions that follow.
A team has been pulled together from various parts of a large service organisation to work on a new process improvement project that is needed to improve how the company manages and supports its client base. The team leader on this project is Sandra from the Chicago office who has 15 years’ experience as a project manager/team leader managing process improvement projects.
The other members of the team include:
• Peter: 10 years’ experience on various types of projects, expertise in scheduling and budget control (office location: San Diego).
• Sarah: 5 years’ experience as an individual contributor on projects, strong programming background, some experience developing databases (office location: Chicago).
• Mohammed: 8 years’ experience working on various projects, expertise in earned value management, stakeholder analysis and problem solving (office location: New York).
• Donna: 2 years’ experience as an individual contributor on projects (office location: New York).
• Ameya: 7 years’ experience on process improvement projects, background in developing databases, and expertise in earned value management (office location: San Diego).
Sandra has worked on projects with Sarah and Mohammed, but has never worked with the others. Donna has worked with Mohammed. No one else has worked with other members of this team. Sandra has been given a very tight deadline to get this project completed.
Sandra has decided that it would be best if the team met face-to-face initially, even though they will be working virtually for the project. She has arranged a meeting at the New York office (company headquarters) for the entire team. They will spend 2 days getting introduced to each other and learning about the project.
The day of the face-to-face meeting in New York has arrived. All team members are present. The team members are very excited to meet each other. Each of them has heard of one another, although they have not worked together as a team before. They believe they each bring value to this project. The team building exercises have gone well; everyone participated and seemed to enjoy the exercises. While there was some discussion around roles and responsibilities - with team members vying for "key" positions on the team - overall there was agreement on what needed to get done and who was responsible for particular components of the project.
The team members have gone back to their home offices and are beginning work on their project. They are interacting via the SharePoint site and the project is off to a good start. And then the arguments begin.
Peter has put up the project schedule based on conversations with only Mohammed and Ameya on the team. Donna and Sarah feel as if their input to the schedule was not considered. They believe because they are more junior on the team, Peter has completely disregarded their concerns about the timeline for the project. They challenged Peter's schedule, stating that it was impossible to achieve and was setting up the team for failure. At the same time, Sarah was arguing with Ameya over who should lead the database design and development effort for this project. While Sarah acknowledges that Ameya has a few years more experience than she does in database development, she only agreed to be on this project in order to take a lead role and develop her skills further so she could advance at the company. If she knew Ameya was going to be the leader she wouldn't have bothered joining this project team. Additionally, Mohammed appears to be off and running on his own, not keeping the others apprised of progress nor keeping his information up to date on the SharePoint site. No one really knows what he has been working on or how much progress is being made.
1.1. Describe the characteristics of the organisational design in the case-study.
1.2. Identify the type of team used in the case-study.
1.3. State at least two characteristics of your answer in Q1.2.
1.4. Explain the stage at which this team is at, according to the five-stage model of group development.
1.5. Name the stage preceding the stage in Q1.4.
1.6. Provide examples from the case study to prove your answer in Q1.5.
1.7. State the implications for managers or team leaders, relating to the current stage of the group (Q3).
1.8. There is lack of trust among the team-members, List the five factors that contribute to the establishment of trust.
1.9. Advise the team leader, by discussing the factors that influence group cohesi
1.1. The characteristics of the organizational design in the case study are:
- The organization is a large service organization.
- The team members are pulled together from various parts of the organization.
- There is a team leader, Sandra, who has experience as a project manager/team leader.
1.2. The type of team used in the case study is a cross-functional team.
1.3. Two characteristics of a cross-functional team are:
- The team members come from different parts of the organization, bringing different skills and expertise.
- The team is formed to work on a specific project or objective, in this case, a process improvement project.
1.4. According to the five-stage model of group development, the team in the case study is at the storming stage.
1.5. The stage preceding the storming stage is the forming stage.
1.6. Examples from the case study to prove the stage preceding the storming stage (forming stage) include:
- The team members initially meeting face-to-face and getting introduced to each other.
- The team building exercises that were conducted to help the team members get to know each other.
1.7. The implications for managers or team leaders, relating to the current stage of the group (storming stage), include:
- The need for the leader to address conflicts and disagreements among team members.
- The leader should facilitate open and effective communication among team members.
- The leader should ensure that everyone's input and concerns are taken into consideration when making decisions.
1.8. The five factors that contribute to the establishment of trust are:
- Open and honest communication
- Reliability and consistency in actions
- Competence and expertise
- Shared values and goals
- Mutual respect and support
1.9. Factors that influence group cohesion include:
- Clearly defined goals and objectives
- Effective communication and collaboration
- Trust and mutual respect among team members
- Shared accountability and responsibility
- A positive and supportive team environment