Assess The Impact Of The Team's Attitude Towards Group Work (Other (Not Listed) Sample)
you were part of a group who presented your finding on a case study relating to an issue in your sector of study. you will need to write a reflective account of your approach and attitude to the presentation task:
TASK 1: ASSESS THE IMPACT OF THE TEAM'S ATTITUDE TOWARDS GROUP WORK.
TASK 2: evaluate the impact of individual's capabilities and competences towards group work. (NB: DISCUSS TUCKMAN AND JENSEN'S THEORY ON TEAM DEVELOPMENT FRO TASK 1 AND BELBIN'S THEORY RELATING TO TEAM ROLES FOR TASK 2)
TASK 3: MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVING YOUR GROUP'S EFFECTIVENESS.
TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u Introduction PAGEREF _Toc509549744 \h 3Task 1: Impact of the Team’s Attitude Towards Group Work PAGEREF _Toc509549745 \h 3Forming PAGEREF _Toc509549746 \h 3Storming PAGEREF _Toc509549747 \h 4Norming PAGEREF _Toc509549748 \h 4Performing PAGEREF _Toc509549749 \h 4Adjourning PAGEREF _Toc509549750 \h 5Task 2: Impact of Individual’s Capabilities Towards Group Work PAGEREF _Toc509549751 \h 5Task 3: Recommendations for Improving Group’s Effectiveness PAGEREF _Toc509549752 \h 7Conclusion PAGEREF _Toc509549753 \h 8List of References PAGEREF _Toc509549754 \h 9
This report will provide a reflection focused on the assessment of the impact of the team’s attitude towards group based on the theory on team development by Tuckman and Jensen. In the second task, the report will evaluate the impact of individual’s competences towards group work using Beblin’s theory on team roles. Further, recommendations for improving effectiveness of a team will be provided.
Task 1: Impact of the Team’s Attitude Towards Group Work
In order to understand the impact of the team’s attitude towards group work, Tuckman & Jensen (1977) have put forward some common stages for team growth and development. Both authors argue that all teams or groups tend to demonstrate aspects of the five succeeding phases they suggest; Forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977). The theory is important because it distinguishes the fact that teams do not commence fully-formed and functioning. Both indicate that teams develop through well defined phases, from their formation as groups of individuals, to consistent, task-focused groups.
Source: (Kaplan Financial Ltd, 2012)
The initial stage requires high dependence on leader for direction and guidance. Little conformity on team objectives other than picked up from leader (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977). The roles and responsibilities of individuals are indistinguishable at this stage. It is therefore necessary for leaders to be reader to answer countless questions regarding group’s purpose, aims and external relationships. Mostly, processes are often overlooked whereas group members test forbearance of leader and system. Besides, members explore the peripheries of satisfactory group behaviour. Combined with enthusiasm and satisfaction as being selected for the group, there is often a few unease and trepidation regarding the success of the venture (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977).
It is obvious that decisions do not come without difficulty within a team (Johnston, Clark & Shulver, 2012). At this stage, group members contend for position as they try to ascertain themselves proportionate to other group members and the leader, who might face challenges from group members. Precision of purpose increases and on the contrary plenty of ambiguities persist. Groups and factions develop and as a result there may be struggle for power. Thus, the group need to be focussed on its objectives to avoid becoming diverted by emotional and relationships matters. Concessions may be needed to enable group development. Besides, Tuckman & Jensen (1977) argue that group members may show intolerance, jealousy and possibly a tacit or explicit identification of a pecking order within a group.
At this phase, most of the members understand and recognize the team customs, or basic rules, including the roles they are required to perform as individual groups. Agreement at this stage largely forms among the group, who take action effectively to facilitation by director. Responsibilities and roles are understandable and accepted. Unison and commitment is also strong at this phase. The group members may participate in entertainment and social activities; they can also discuss and develop its processes and the methods of working. There is general admiration for the team leader and a few of leadership is more shared by the group.
This is the phase at which the tea works most effectively. The team is motivated and can develop on individual efforts and reduce weaknesses. Group members often form close connections at the performing stage and show capability to constructively work through problems. The team has a common idea and is able to depend in themselves without meddling or involvement from the leader. In this case, the group has a high level of autonomy. Incongruities occur but groups can now resolve them within the group effectively, and appropriate changes to structure and processes are developed by the team. The group members are able to work towards attaining the objective, and also deal with relationship, process and style problems along the way (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977).
At this phase, the group members end the duty and the relationship and proceed to the next problem. If the group has been successful, adjourning can be one of the most problematic stages. Also, the sense of incomplete business can develop obstruction to future development of individual team (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977).
Task 2: Impact of Individual’s Capabilities Towards Group Work
Identification of individual roles, performance, structure and team roles are some ways to use the outcome Belbin’s theory (Johnston, Clark & Shulver, 2012). The Belbin study enables the understanding of other roles such as manageable roles that the group member can perform effectively, if asked. It also illustrates roles that the group member would entirely dislike to be asked to do. According to Belbin, the theory of team has become particularly significant as businesses have hunted flatter structures, supple working models and organizational networks to gain competitive advantage (Beblin, 1993). The customary hierarchy of workplace has been resolved through either reputation or function and experience or expertise as well. He suggests that most team role methods fail to consider behaviours or individual traits.
Belbin developed a theory relating to team roles after ten years of conducting tests with mishmash of various behavioural and personality types in a steady management setting. As a result, Belbin identified eight team roles and formed a tool called ‘Belbin Team Role Self-Perception Inventory (BTRSPI) for measuring individuals’ team role penchants. These teams roles include; Plant, Shaper, Monitor-evaluator, Implementer, Team Worker, Coordinator, Shaper and Resource Investigator (Belbin, 1993). The recognition of Belbin’s theory lies on its simplicity of implementation through the available Inventory, promptly individual roles and its investigation basis. His theory recommends effective teams should have individual groups that are able to perform the eight team roles mentioned. As a result, every member will be completing the other’s competencies and decreasing their flaws. Belbin (1993) claimed that the more a group exhibits an increase of individual characteristics, laying the basis for different team role competencies, the greater the tendency for the role to be performing effectively.
In addition, Belbin has hypothesised that in a composed team of all the team roles mentioned will obviously be represented. He also assumes that the performances of a team will essentially decrease if all the eight roles are not logically epitomized as successful, provided that the omitted roles are there at a lesser but, “able to be feigned’’ level (Beblin, 1993). Based on his theory, it can be argued that other than having the necessary technical competencies and capabilities to perform the task, aspects such as maintenance, attitudes, characters and task process are essential capabilities that are required for effective performance. For the team to perform well, Belbin (1993) argue that both social and task oriented behaviours are needed. The past behaviours are focused on ensuring things such as obtaining information or proposing solutions are done.
The end behaviours help to contain the team process, for instance by building and encouraging each other’s opinions and releasing anxiety. On contrary, some behaviour might be troublesome to ending tasks or upholding a positive emotional/social environment such as eliminating other...
- Customer Service Management for Tourism and HospitalityDescription: Explore How Implementing The Crm Model, The National History Museum Could Create Value By Embracing Aspects Of Its Daily Business Activities Where Customers Tend To Be Directly And Regularly Engaged...10 pages/≈2750 words| 14 Sources | Harvard | Management | Other (Not Listed) |
- Hospitality, Tourism and Events Management Writing AssignmentDescription: The discussion will clearly provide a comprehensive understanding of the function of PEST analysis and further identify and assess various macro environment factors that affect Eden Project operations...9 pages/≈2475 words| 11 Sources | Harvard | Management | Other (Not Listed) |
- Contemporary Issues In Professional Business CommunicationDescription: For instance, Nokia was failed to comply with the needs of the market and struggled a lot to convert its innovative ideas into services. ...6 pages/≈1650 words| 11 Sources | Harvard | Management | Other (Not Listed) |