Q1. Which stage of group development is demonstrated by the group at this time? Identify two characteristics of this stage that are evident in the case.

After going through the different stages, the team seems to move back to the Storming stage again. The team has a problem in the implementation of the initiative, and its members have agreed to collect more information before to take a decision. The not solved problem, the discussion, the necessity of additional information before to take the decision are indicators that the team are again in the storming stage.  

 

Q2. What evidence is there that this group has vulnerability trust?

When two members of the group expressed their concern on that the group had not accurately diagnosed the problem, the group shows a relative vulnerability trust (vulnerability trust refers the ability to show a weakness without losing something - esteem, pride, or strength). Nevertheless, it seems a relative or weak vulnerability trust because it is recognized as group, not for an individual. In addition, so far this group vulnerability trust is not expressed to other groups or people, which means that the risk of losing esteem, pride or strength are minimum.

Q3. What is the stage of group development now? Identify two characteristics of this stage evident in the case.

The team has substantially changed; a 33% of the team was renovated and the profiles of the new members look to be different than the former members. Team members anticipate concerns in the interpersonal relationship as well the change in the dynamic of the team. All these substantial changes look to move back the team at the stage of Forming. The confusion and the doubts about how the group will work and the task to accomplish (How did I get into this?, This group won't be the same) as well as the uncertainty of the structure and leadership (Will I ever be able to express an honest opinion again in this group with Mr. Lafontaine running the show?, The goals and focus will change.  Can I even contribute to this group anymore?) are indicators that the team are again in the Forming stage.

 

Q4. From Exhibit 6-4 on page 229, what characteristics are now lacking in the committee?

Clear purpose: so far, there is some concern whether the purpose of the team will be modified.

Informality: the climate is tenser now with new members.

Open communication: the inclusion of Mr. Lafontaine to this team difficult the open communication at least during the first meetings. Many perception problems is affecting that (halo effect, selective perception, stereotyping and prejudice)

Shared leadership: Mr. Lafontaine presence in this group affects to share leadership.

Participation: there is concern about the future full participation of every member as before.

Style diversity: this characteristic has become broader.

Clear purpose, Listening, Civilized disagreement, Consensus decisions, Clear rules and work assignments, External relations, Self-assessment: there is not evidence that these characteristics will change. Nevertheless, there are some concerns about Mr. Lafontaine leadership style and its impact in all these characteristics.

 

Q5. Which stage of group development is demonstrated by the committee at this time? Identify two characteristics of this stage that are evident in the case.

The team looks to move ahead to the Storming stage. Many members have expressed their thoughts, showed his concern through body language, so the team is dealing with interpersonal conflict and many concerns about who could control the team. The conflicts expressed by the members (And where does that leave the issues we are currently working on?, the meeting and discussion during the lunch) and the concerns about the control of the group (Wes Tandy (with all due respect to Mr. Lafontaine) expressed concern that the control of the group seemed to be shifting) are indicators that the team are in the storming stage.

Q6. Is the conflict Mavis expresses functional or dysfunctional? Why?

Mavis’ comment seems to be dysfunctional. The tone and body language will strongly stress or diminish this dysfunctionality, but her comment has a negative component for the team work that it will hinder the group performance. The group apparently has good reputation in the general performance tackling challenging issues for the corporation; this comment gives the idea that the group could take a different way forgetting the background and work done. Instead of this new way could be very positive for the group, the body language perceived by Mr. Lafontaine and the Mavis’ question express a dysfunctional behaviour based on their perception of what it could happen with the group.

Nevertheless, there are some indicators that the group could perceive its work with a degree of self-serving bias. The group believe that they have contributed to the company, but some mistakes were recognized; this could mean a wrong perception of the group performance by their team members and Mr. Lafontaine’s control of group could be functional to this group. In either case, Mavis’ comment seems to be dysfunctional.

   

 

19/05/11