Working through the last twelve chapters has taught me much more than anticipated. Although the group motivation project was interested it was not as engaging and eye opening. The group motivation survey taught me that I am moderately motivated which speaks very true to my management style. My current role is a leadership role that also is heavily integrated into team projects. This balance of leadership and equal producer allows me to stay engaged and balance the needs of my reporting workforce. The new organizational culture requires managers to develop new skills in order to lead, direct and motivate groups to act synergistically (Barsade 2008). However, group dynamics is a concept that many managers do not yet understood. Consequently this can lead to bad group dynamics resulting in negative synergy, reduced productivity and wounded morale (Levi 2008). Managers are obliged to rectify this by building cohesion and trust between group members (Carron & Brawley 2009). Some group efforts are more successful than others? Group members, group size, level of conflict and internal pressures to conform are all factors that affect the level of cohesiveness in a group. In order to enhance a groups competitive position and benefit from different viewpoints, organizations today increasingly rely on cross-functional teams composed of members from different functional backgrounds. Based on personal experience groups tend to yield better more formulated results. Studies performed by Edward Randel suggest that employees of a corporation who had participated in training for effective teamwork reported their performance was higher in groups than alone. (Randel, E. 2008) The surveys found that groups brainstormed only half the ideas of the individuals. If teams are formed to increase competitiveness but the result is a fifty-percent decrease in productivity, a serious