Group Analysis: An Insider’s Perspective

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Team Motivation
Team Effectiveness
Team Roles
Team Cohesion
Communication
Improving Team Effectiveness
References

Introduction

This paper carries responses to questions relating to group dynamics. The group analyzed is part of the management class. The title of the workshop the team is presenting is, “managing people in a way that inspires creativity”.

Team Motivation

Motivation refers to the level of desire to do something (Johnson & Johnson, 2006). The team was highly motivated during the preparation for the workshop. Motivation levels of a team influence the quality of the output of the team. Highly motivated teams post high-quality results. The team met regularly during the preparations for the seminar. This enabled the team to complete the preparations on time. Several theories attempt to map out the factors that influence the motivation of teams. Highly motivated individuals are an exception hence the need to understand how to motivate people (Colquitt, LePine, & Wesson, 2009).

Maslow’s needs hierarchy is one of the well-known theories of motivation. It maps out the needs of an individual based on an increasing scale that covers physiological needs, safety needs, social needs, esteem needs, and self-actualization (Scott, 1964). Under Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, the team was motivated to do a good job because of social and esteem needs. Conducting a successful seminar would earn the team respect from the rest of the class. Performing poorly in the same seminar would put the group in disrepute. On the other hand, the team needed to perform well to receive high marks from the seminar. Failure to perform well would put the group at risk of receiving low marks. These factors created a punishment and reward system. In other words, the group performance conformed to the expectations of the incentive theory.

Team Effectiveness

The measures of the effectiveness of a team include the processes and the results of activities done by the team (Colquitt, LePine, & Wesson, 2009). Some of the specific factors to explore when gauging the effectiveness of a team are the results posted by the team, the morale of the team members, the clarity of the roles each team member plays, and the clarity of the goals of the team in the process towards achieving the objectives of the task (Flannes & Levin, 2005). Based on these factors, the team was very effective. First, the team successfully prepared for the seminar. This alone speaks volumes regarding the effectiveness of the team. Secondly, the team had a high degree of motivation throughout the process. This is the same as saying that the morale of the team was high. The team had good reasons to work hard, and the team had high enthusiasm in the process of doing this. Thirdly, the team had very clear functional roles from the onset. Each team member took up a role in an aspect of the project and fulfilled the requirements of that role throughout the preparation process. Finally, the team had very clear goals based on the requirements of the seminar. During the first meeting, the team took the time to understand what the project required and set specific goals to meet the laid down goals. This included setting targets and setting deadlines for each task related to the preparations for the seminar.

Team Roles

The three main roles that different members of the team took up included those of group leader, group secretary, and group scheduler. The group leader chaired all group meetings and ensured that the group set clear goals. The leader also ensured each group member played his or her part in the preparation for the seminar. I took up the role of the group’s secretary. My main duties were managing correspondence and keeping records of the group’s work. The main function that this role needed me to perform was to keep all group members informed about the progress of each member’s task. This was very important between meetings because we had planned to carry out most of the work between the meetings. By doing this, we made the meetings more effective because the meetings were for reporting purposes and assigning new responsibilities. The third role we had in the group was that of a scheduler. Our scheduler took all the tasks needed to accomplish our group objectives and developed a schedule. The schedule became the basic measure of how well the team was progressing with the seminar preparation activities. The scheduler also kept an eye on the actual progress of each team member about the overall schedule. This made it very easy for the team to keep time.

Team Cohesion

While the team was highly effective because of the clarity of the objectives and the high levels of motivation and morale, the group was not highly cohesive. The time needed to complete the project did not allow the group members any meaningful opportunity to develop into a cohesive team. Part of the reason why the team chose to assign specific tasks related to the seminar to individual members was to reduce the potential impact of a lack of team cohesion. The team was functional, but not highly cohesive. The impact of the low levels of cohesion in the team was a hindrance to the formation of personal relationships within the team. The members had no time for social interaction. On the decision making front, lack of cohesiveness made it difficult for the group to introduce changes to the seminar preparation because each member was already committed to the tasks assigned. Lack of cohesion reduces the flexibility of a team to take on new challenges and to improve existing processes.

Communication

The team communicated regularly on a task basis. Most of the communication was formal, via phone and email. All the team members sent regular updates after receiving prompts from the group leader. As the secretary, I was in charge of compiling and disseminating information needed for the functioning of the group. Some of the information related to the actual tasks while at other times, I communicated with the group members to remind them of upcoming meetings and to confirm their availability. This way, the attendance of the group meetings was satisfactory. The main conflict in the group was the scheduling of meetings because each member had a different preference. The time eventually chosen for regular group meetings was not among any of the original proposals from the group members. It was a compromise.

Improving Team Effectiveness

If an organization asks this team to prepare for a series of workshops, some interventions would be necessary. First, it would be important to locate the team’s development process in Tuckman’s model of team development to identify whether the team is in the forming, storming, norming, or performing stage (Johnson & Johnson, 2006). Secondly, there is a need to improve the team’s cohesiveness to ensure that the planning process is more integrated. Thirdly, based on Herzberg’s motivation and hygiene theory, the team will need a clear motivation strategy for the members.

Tuckman developed a model describing the stage that teams go through in their life cycles. During the forming stage, the team comes together to solve a given problem. The team members do not have any relationships at this stage. It is the best time to articulate the vision of the group. During storming, the team members go through a period of storms, usually caused by differences in perspective and expectations. When these are settled, the team settles down and focuses on performing the tasks needed to complete the assignment. The seminar group in this case is about to enter the storming stage. This means that the team will need to go through a time of disclosure so that the team members understand each other’s personality and expectations.

Improving team cohesiveness is also an important element that needs attention before proceeding with a series of seminars. To increase cohesiveness, team-building activities will be useful (Flannes & Levin, 2005). This will mean taking time off as a team to build relationships. Team building activities that do not include the actual tasks the team is working on are the best option for increasing team cohesion.

The third issue is the creation of a proper motivational framework. Managing seminars for the organization will be different from carrying out a seminar for a class assignment. The motivators applying to the class assignment will not apply in the case of the company assignment. One framework that can help to develop a motivational framework is the motivation-hygiene theory developed by Herzberg. This theory stresses that the factors that contribute to motivation are distinct from factors that erode motivation (Johnson & Johnson, 2006). The team will need specific motivational factors such as a cash reward and recognition. On the other hand, the team will need to identify factors eroding motivation such as unclear topics, and stress and get rid of them (Colquitt, LePine, & Wesson, 2009).

References

Colquitt, J., LePine, J., & Wesson, M. (2009). Organizational Behavior: Essentials for Improving Performance and Commitment. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Flannes, S., & Levin, G. (2005). Essential People Skills for Project Managers. Vienna, VA: Management Concepts.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, F. P. (2006). Joining Together: Group Theory and Group Skills. London: Pearson Education.

Scott, W. R. (1964). Group Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Courier Dover Publications.

Click Here To Order Now!