Adam Smith
MGMT-591
Carr Leadership & Org Behavior
Week 3 Case Study
03/24/2013

Reflecting on the case I just read, the group seems to be at the storming stage due to the hostility and infighting occurring. Mike is not going to meetings and the contribution he has made so far is not nearly up to the standard the group has set. Understanding that the group is in this stage is important to the group to know because to have the problems that they do have at this point are somewhat normal and obviously have been researched, practiced, and documented for future references such as the case with this group. Knowing the different stages as well as the stage they are in now should lead Christine to have some kind of sit down with Mike by now. The fact that there is only one week left makes the decision Christine’s now. Sandra Thiel had frequently told them that if there were problems in the group, the members should make an effort to deal with them first. If the problems could not be resolved, she had said that they should come to her. Mike seemed so distant, despite the apparent camaraderie of the first meeting, but he only has one week now to complete something. If he were able to come up with something the whole group could agree has enough merit to justify including, then fine however, if the group feels that too much time has passed and that Mike had plenty of time but did not display any concern or commitment, then he’s officially “under the bus”.

I have identified some primary and secondary problems the group is currently facing at this point of the process. For one the group seems to be just cruising along without the contribution of Mike and doing just fine. Mike has a commitment to this group and it’s for a grade which means Christine should have been reminding him of that during the time when he was blowing them off. I understand what Mike could be going thru because I am working a full time job, have little children, and a life going on as well. The fact of the matter is that Mike is expecting this group to carry him thru and they do not owe him that just because his life is a little rough. Christine has had five whole weeks to figure out that Mike is not taking responsibility for his assignment and should have went to Sandra Thiel about two weeks earlier to report this. Christine should have also challenge Mike more to do a better job. Offering Mike alternative to showing up for meeting he claimed he could not make such as video-conferencing, group chat, or just in his own time frame consistent with the weeks everyone else did work in. This would have allowed Mike the ability to do it and just have it in to us by the end of the week. Groups do not necessarily need to meet in order to be successful. Secondarily Christine needs to have more backbone in her handling of people like Mike. In order to be taken seriously Christine needed to be more demanding of Mike in order for him to see e was not getting a free ride on this assignment. Given that there is no perfect solution for this problem, I would have (1) had my team members clearly define their weekly intentions to me as the group leader and would have expected those results on a timely basis. In my opinion the group never took Mike serious and probably knew not to get stuck out in the cold waiting on his contribution and therefore had already taken actions to do his part from day one. The group as a whole was a good group with the exception of one member. This is actually not so bad because they could have been two or three members not contributing. Fragmenting the goals to one week at a time could have lowered the overall stress of the project itself making the road to achieving goals a shorter distance. As the group leader, it would have been my responsibility to compile and compose the project the way it was originally envisioned, making the group member aware of those visions on a weekly basis. If there was a group member not living up to his/her part, then I would have told them on week two and by week three if the problem had persist, then I would have went to our professor, made her ware of the situation as well as the remaining group members and devised a plan of action that would ensure that any part given to him was delegated to the remaining group members. A secondary solution could have been us all as member signing a commitment document which would have entailed your intended plan of commitment in terms of what you could have done on a weekly basis. This would have at least given us the group a heads up on what kind of schedule our group members were facing in addition to this project and allowed for an immediate plan of action without so much surprise in the weeks to come. Both solutions are depended on knowing each group members strengths and weaknesses; our forming stage would have done just that. The steps to our project are to be done on a weekly basis. During our storming stage, getting through any hostilities and infighting scenarios will decrease the pressure to perform and make each member feel more comfortable doing is/her part. Once are team has become more organized by week three; the norming stage, I would have had a meeting that marked our accomplishments, celebrated every group member for their part, and plotted our next week’s expectations and goals. The remaining portion of our project would have been the performing stage where everyone went about their parts as fine-tuned machines and by week six we would have been ready and prepared to present our findings to the class with our best effort at hand. In reflecting on this case study I think that Christine was not a very effective group leader simply because she was too shy and fearful of the other members to the point that she couldn’t even bring herself to report the non-performance of another group member to her professor and she certainly could not get him to perform nor did she seem to have a backup plan for the event of something like Mikes non-commitment. This is typical when dealing with non-graduate level students. I have found that in my experiences dealing with such situation I try to convey my commitment as well as have the other group member do so right away, so you can get a feel of their personalities. It’s not often a group goes smoothly because there will always be hard to get several people from different walks of life to commit to something for a short amount of time with so much riding on it. The key is to have an understanding with each and every member and try to adjust on a weekly basis to whatever comes up amongst the group members. In the real world theses excuses will not be tolerated and when dealing with groups, you will be held accountable for your actions.