Presentation 4: Case study: The forgotten Group Member

Case Questions:
1. Identify the five group development stages (forming, storming, norming, performing, adjourning) in the case.

Forming: Members are acquainted with each other. 
Professor Sandra divided class into groups of five people : Christine, Diane, Janet, Steve and Mike. Each group given group assignment that worth 30 percent of final grade with the task of analysing the seven-page case and come up with a written analysis. Interaction amongst them who have had no previous relations is facilitated through the first stage; where personal preferences and work schedules are exchanged, strengths and weaknesses made apparent and expectations clarified. The first group meeting held was used to recognize these necessities. Christine was elected "Team Coordinator" at the first meeting.

Storming:Group members frequently experience conflict with one another. 
Diane - quite & never volunteered suggestions but will give out high quality ideas when directly asked.
Mike - as clown in the group, he balked when Christine suggested to have meeting before the 8am class because of his favourite TV show.
Steve - business-like individual, he always wanting to ensure that every meeting should guided by an agenda, noting the tangible result achieved or not achieved at the end of meeting.
Janet - reliable, who would always have more for the group than was expected of her.
Christine - saw herself as meticulous and organized and as a person who tried to give her best in whatever she did.


Norming:A real sense of cohesion and teamwork.
Christine's group doesn't really have the teamwork as Mike missed almost all the meeting where Christine already tried to arrange a meeting for a time that suit all of the team members. The assignment progress might be delayed because of the part of Mike that haven't done. He didn't responsible for the work he suppose to do and give excuses when he missed the meeting.


Performing:Issues have been resolved and the group is ready to work.
When Christine grabbed something to eat at cafeteria, she saw her OB group and joined them. They have the light and enjoyable discussion when they met informally.
The written case was due on next week, all of them had done their designated section except Mike just handed in some rough handwritten notes. 

Adjourning:Group may cease to exist because they have met their goals. Concluding a group can create some apprehension - in effect, a minor crisis. 

Christine was empathized about Mike's problem as Mike could have creative ideas to raise up the assignment final marks which is peer evaluated. This is a group assignment where everyone has the responsibility to do their designated section and all of the members should have equal contribution to the work. They met their goal but Christine still wondered what should she do because of Mike, should she bring up Mike's problem to Miss Sandra or just letting it be. Christine was worried about the mark gave by Sandra depending on the group's opinion about the value of contribution of each member.


2. Identify and describe the causes of conflicts in the case.
There are few conflicts in the case:
- In the forming stage, Christine and her team members didn't know each other well. 
- She didn't assign the work to her team members and set a deadline to each of team so that the work can be done in a specific time.
- Mike always didn't turn up to the meeting and contribute his idea even though he has creative idea.
Causes of conflicts:
- Christine as the team coordinator didn't assign work to her team members .
-  Even Christine didn't know her group members well, she didn't take any action to improve it (tell Sandra about it).
- Christine didn't set clear expectations at the beginning.
- She just wants to get good grades for her course but not the team success.
- Christine didn't take any action when Mike didn't turn up in the meeting and done his work.


3. Suggest the approach to leadership best suitable for the case.
- The clue that the group is in 5th week of OB class, denotes that the team members should have been familiar with the principles of group development. If Christine (the designated leader) had followed these concepts, the team should have eventually transitioned to the performing stage very comfortably.
- The storming stage might be the hardest one to get through but if Christine had done a better job in helping the team transition through this stage by facilitating better communication, the team should have gone past this stage to the norming stage. In this phase they would have resolved their basic conflicts which actually caused problems in the later stages in this case. This would have helped the team greatly in going towards performing and adjourning stages rather easily as they would have been able to spend more time and energy on the actual task instead of processing human interaction problems. 
- Also, if Christine had identified the difference in personalities of the team members and that of Mike, she could have interacted little differently with Mike or could have given him a different role in order to leverage his capabilities and amusing attitude. 


Reference:
http://www.drexel.edu/oca/l/tipsheets/Group_Development.pdf