Working in Teams

  • Uncategorized


Criteria for evaluating team effectiveness

For a team to be considered effective, it organization should meetthe following evaluation criteria output, social processes, andlearning. In terms of output, the final product of the team effortshould surpass the standards set the constituents of the team. Inother words, an effective team should fulfill its set agenda. Socialprocesses in a team refer to social interactions that will motivateor maintain the team’s ability to stay together. The learningcriterion refers to the team’s ability to satisfy the needs of eachmember rather than worsen them. The criteria for assessing theeffectiveness of a team are to be used when the team is still inprogress and after delivering the results.

Based on the aforementioned criteria, the team in the video is noteffective because of a number of reasons. For starters, the teamdispersed before finding solutions to all the items on the agenda.When Joe suggested that the members evaluate the types of softwarethat the employees of the company use, Simon shut him down sayingthat they have repeated the same procedure for years but nothing hasever come of it. However, the team does not go ahead to makealternative suggestions to go about the issue.

The social processes in the team seem poor. The members do not seemto respect each other, including the leader. They talk out of order,are rude to each other, and show a lot of attitude in their speech.The fact that Rosa and Simon did not download the agenda shows howrude they are towards the other members. Simon leaves the meeting,without an apology, when it is far from over. A team with no respectfor each other will never work out.

The team did not meet the personal needs of its members. Joe wantedto allocate all the items on the agenda but ended up allocating none.Chang wanted easy tasks but instead was given the most demanding.Rosa wanted some time off but the leader could hear none of that.

Tuckman’s stages of group Formation

The five stages of group formation are forming, storming, norming,performing, and adjourning (Levi, 2016). The forming stage refers towhen the group sets the agenda for the meeting. At this stage, thegroup heavily relies on its leader. During the storming stage,members contribute ideas to the group and some may end up indisagreement. Members at this stage are seeking to establish theirposition within the social hierarchy of the group. In the normingstage, the social hierarchy has been established within the group anddecisions are made unanimously. The performing stage refers to whenthe group effectively executes the roles set in the agenda. After thecompletion of all tasks, the group comes to an end at the adjourningstage.

The characteristics of the group in the video point out towards thestorming stage. Joe is yet to establish him as the alpha of the grouphence the reason all the members keep questioning his decisions. Thefact that most of the members are rebellious also proves the stage ofthe group. Simon and Rosa have already formed their own faction whosemain aim is to undermine the work of Joe. Simon seems to feelsuperior to Joe especially when he tells him that he would not knowthat a previous analysis of the software situation did not workbecause he is new in the firm. His tone depicts someone who wants tochallenge the alpha of the pack. In addition, the decision makingprocess of the group is in turmoil. The members do not seem to agreeon anything because there is yet to be order in the group. The stageis the most difficult in any group.

Task, maintenance, and dysfunctional roles in teams

The categories of roles in a group are task roles, maintenance roles,and dysfunctional roles (Mumford et al, 2008). Groups have memberswho play various roles in the pursuit of teamwork. Some of theseroles may be threatening to the group while others help to advancethe group’s agenda.

Task roles involve activities such as initiating, informing,clarifying and consensus testing. The role sets the tempo for theteam activity that is to happen. In the video, Joe, the team leader,assumes this role. He initiates the meeting by emailing the agenda ofthe meeting to all the team members. During the meeting, he makes theopening remarks and goes through every item on the list. Whenevermembers have a query, he is quick to make it clear. He tests theconsensus of the group by projecting various questions in order toget the opinion of the members.

Maintenance roles refer to housekeeping chores that ensure theintegrity of the team in order to achieve the set objective. A groupmember assuming this role is usually ready to compromise and oftenacts as the peacekeeper when tempers flare. In the video, Chang playsthe maintenance role. At the start of the meeting, he makes it clearthat he will not take up a role that would run for more than threeweeks because he has a vacation to go to. However, when Rosa andSimon become aggressively defiant, he opts to take up a role thatcould go for weeks (, 2016). He decides to compromiseon his needs just so that the group can know some peace. This is anexample of maintenance role.

Dysfunctional roles are those that hinder the progress of the team.They include conflict, side conversations, dominating andwithdrawing. Rosa and Simon play this role in equal measure. Theyhold side conversations where they joke over each other’s love forsolitaire, Simon withdraws from the meeting, and they demand todominate the leader.

Efficacy of Communication in the team

The communication portrayed in the team was not effective in a numberof levels. The members do not listen to each other. According toGluck (2012), the key to effective communication in a team islistening. The members of team in the video do not seem to payattention to what the rest are saying because they keep interjectingand holding side conversations. Rosa keeps telling Joe to perusethrough the items faster because she has calls to make a clearindication that she is not paying any attention.

The members seem to hesitate to communicate their thoughts on thetasks but when it comes to expressing personal issues, they are quickto do it. When Joe asks the members to volunteer to do tasks on thelist, they all go silent (, 2016). However, when hestarts to assign duties, they all gang up against him.

The type of noise evident in this video was that coming frominterjecting members and the loud arguing about who should take whatroles the meeting ends up being chaotic because it lacks a leader whoshows direction and stamps authority.

Types of conflict

The two types of conflict in a team setting are positive andnegative conflict. Positive conflicts work to find solutions to groupproblems. At the end of a positive conflict, there is usually asolution at reach. A negative conflict on the other hand causes poorrelations among members and does not give solutions to any of theproblems experienced (De Dru &amp Weingart, 2003).

The conflict in the video is negative because the members dispersewithout finalizing the items on the agenda. They leave withoutdeciding who will handle what tasks. It is still not clear what roleSimon will play in the team. He left before the group could devise ameans of doing the task differently from the past years.

Joe could have dealt with the conflict by being more assertive. Hefails to stamp his authority on the team members hence there reasonfor that many squabbles (, 2016). He should havefinalized by assigning everyone roles and saying that was final.Sometimes democracy just does not work.

Was it a Group or a Team?

The video portrays the characteristics of a group rather than ateam. A team seeks to achieve a common goal unlike a group, which ismade up of various individuals who have personal goals. The group inthe video is in existence because a certain manager decided toassemble some IT guys for a short-term task. It is for this reasonthat the group lacks the cohesion that is characteristic of a team.

The social interactions between the members do not portray those ofa team. The members seem hostile to each other and they form factionsto attack people who do not agree with their opinions. They also cutshort each while in the middle of their speech and use anintimidating tone when addressing the other.

The members also do not appear to give priority to the agenda of theteam. All they seem to think about is how they can be excused fromthe team in order to attend to personal matters. Unlike team members,the members of this group put their selfish interests ahead of thoseof the team.

Motivational issues

The team does not seem to be motivated to proceed with the task athand. Some members feel that the tasks are boring while Simon is ofthe opinion that the tasks are repetitive (Robbins &amp Judge,2012). Chang appears to be the least social in the group. The leadercan motivate him to be part of the group by creating an environmentthat is socially enabling. Making friendship with him will motivatehim to work harder.

The process theory of motivation would be appropriate for Simon. Heis worried that doing the same task as the last time will bear littlefruit. If the leader comes up with a new way of doing task, Simonwill be motivated to join in.

According to the reinforcement theory, the consequences of anindividual’s action will determine whether they will repeat the actor not. The leader can motivate Rosa not to repeat her vile behaviorby ensuring harsh consequences for her misbehavior. He could reporther to her superior for being non-cooperative.

Lunenberg (2011) argues that job enrichment can help to motivate teammembers further. In this instance, Joe could be motivated if his jobcame with more privileges and power. As it stands, it is onlydepressing to him. He needs more power to reinforce his decisions onthe other team members.


De Dreu, C. K., &amp Weingart, L. R. (2003). Task versusrelationship conflict, team performance, and team membersatisfaction: a meta-analysis. Journal of applied Psychology,88 (4), 741

Gluck, S., (2012). Effective Communication &amp Team Work.Chron. Retrieved from&lt 12, 2016

, 2016. Grand Canyon University MediaRetrieved from&lt 12, 2016

Levi, D. (2016). Group dynamics for teams. New York: SagePublications.

Lunenberg, F., (2011). Motivating by enriching jobs to make them moreinteresting and challenging. International journal of management,business and administration, 15 (1)

Mumford, T. V., Van Iddekinge, C. H., Morgeson, F. P., &amp Campion,M. A. (2008). The team role test: development and validation of ateam role knowledge situational judgment test. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 93 (2), 250

Robbins, S. P., &amp Judge, T. (2012). Essentials oforganizational behavior. Boston: Pearson Publishing

Close Menu