Case Study 7
DeAngela L. Dixon
Deangelaldixon@yahoo.com-
GM591-WBREY
September 19, 2010

Part I: Group Development Bruce Tuckman developed a four stage model of group development in 1975 he added a fifth stage. The first stage is forming and that is the “getting to know each other” phase. This stage is basic orientation (Schermerhorn, Hunt and Osborn 2010) and the group members identify with other group members. This stage also defines the task and how to approach it. The second stage is storming, “dealing with tensions and defining group tasks “(Schermerhorn, Hunt and Osborn 2010)”. Within this stage group members attempt to organize the task and chaos way occurs. Questions may arise about who is going to be responsible for what, what the rules are, and what the reward system is. The third stage is norming and that is “building relationships and working together “(Schermerhorn, Hunt and Osborn 2010)”. This is the stage where the group members agree on how the group operates and share a sense of group belonging. The fourth stage is performing and that is when the group is “maturing in relationships and task performance” (Schermerhorn, Hunt and Osborn 2010). This is when the group becomes affective in meetings the groups’ objectives. The group is able to handle disagreements and complex problems in a mature manner. The fifth stage is adjourning, “disbanding and celebrating accomplishments “(Schermerhorn, Hunt and Osborn 2010)”. This final stage is the process of termination of the group, which includes recognition for achievement and participation. This group should be able to work well in the future if the stages for group development are followed. Reflecting on the case, the stage the group is at is storming. The group is now faced with competition and conflict. The group attempts to organize the tasks: Mike seems to have issues with the other group members. The instructor told them to let her know if there were any problems or issues. Christine’s understanding of the stages of group development could have assisted her in the leader strip role with this group by making all the functions of the group an effective. If she applied all five stages of group development there would not be any problems in week five. The group would be preparing for stage five and about to obtain a letter grade of A. Part II: Problem Identification The primary problem for the group is that they cannot agree on a meeting time for everyone as well as social Loafing. It appears to be a major problem for group member Mike. He is never available for the group and it seems as if he does not want to make time. The Ringlemann affect (social loafing) applies to Mike as well it seems as though he is going work less hard in the group than he would by himself. He does his part but does not want to or it seems that he does not want to participate in the group. Christine is the group leader and she has let Mike know that he has to participate in order for the project to be successful. The secondary problem for the group is that two of the stages of group development were used. By this being a project for an Organizational Behavior Class it would seem that the subject of group development should have been discussed. If the group is aware of the stages of group development there would be no problems within the group at all. All problems would have been resolved in the second stage of group development. Part III: Retrospective Evaluation The primary problem of social loafing on member Mikes’ part and the fact the group cannot meet together at any particular time is an issue worth looking at and discussing in this paper. First and foremost a team is a group that works together to achieve a common good or purpose. This group does not appear to be a team at all. Mike appears to want to slack in his responsibility to the group and he wants the other members to do his work for him. Due to the fact of Mike’s slacking the group will suffer significantly. He needs to pull this weight and do his share of his group work. If Mike decides that the group is of importance as well as the group assignment, the group will succeed with the goal of receiving a good letter grade from the class. Once Mike adheres to the rest of the group progression within the stages of group development everything will fall in to proper perspective. The secondary problem of two of the stages of group development being used is one of simple adherence. The group needs to meet and go through stage three, four, and five of group development. Once this task is completed everything will be a success. The group completed stage one and two of group development very well. Stage three is where the problems begin there is no agreement on how the group operates. There is no performing (stage four), the group does not practice or become effective in meeting its objectives. If the group cannot come together on one accord the will be an adjournment but not the kind that goes along with stage five of group developments. Part IV: Reflection Christine was not an effective group leader for her group. There are certain things that you learn in an Organizational Behavior Class and that are the concepts of team, team building and team problems. If she used all the stages of team development her group and all the tasks would have been completed and appreciated by each member. The performance of the team was put in jeopardy by one of the team members. The way team effectiveness was little to nothing. If Christine had applied the foundations of team performance and team development there would be “No Forgotten Group Member.”

References

Schermerhorn, J.R. Jr., Hunt, J.E., & Osborn, R.N. (2010) Organizational Behavior 11th Edition. Danvers, MA: John Wiley & Sons