Group Dynamics and Teams

With workplace tasks becoming increasingly complex, the significance of teamwork cannot be overemphasized. Teamwork often facilitates faster and more effective execution of tasks. Nonetheless, managing a group or team of people can be a challenging endeavor in large part due to conflicts and communication issues. Indeed, conflict, misunderstanding, and miscommunication can greatly affect team success and productivity (Bateman, Snell & Konopaske, 2016). With reference to Kolb's learning model, this paper describes my own experience with a team. Following a description of the experience, I reflect on the experience, interpret the experience at a deeper level and identify ways to respond to a similar experience in the future.

At my place of work, I was recently appointed as one of the members of a team aimed at investigating the potential of a certain product the organization wanted to venture into. More specifically, the responsibility of the team was to evaluate whether the organization had the resources and capabilities to offer the product, the revenue potential of the product, and how it would implement the idea if found viable. The team was to thoroughly examine the market for the product and draft a comprehensive report to the management, providing recommendations whether or not to proceed with the idea. The report was to be submitted to the management in six weeks. Led by the head of business development, the team comprised personnel from various functions across the organization, including sales and marketing, research and development (R&D), procurement, and finance.

The team experience was one of a kind for me. It was my first time to work in an inter-functional team. I had worked in teams before, but I had not directly collaborated with individuals from departments other than mine. For me, working with staff from other departments made the task appear much easier. There was morale, enthusiasm, moral support, cooperation, and stimulating team activities, which I strongly believe were instrumental to the success of the team. I also got an opportunity to interact more with colleagues I had not interacted much with before. More importantly, we had a wonderful team leader, who cultivated an open and collaborative teamwork environment. He is actually one of the best team leaders I have encountered. Other members of the team also found the experience quite fulfilling, describing it as a significant learning experience in their career journey. The team delivered the report a week before the expected date.

Nonetheless, there were challenges -- challenges that almost derailed the productivity of the team. One of the challenges stemmed from differences in objectives, priorities, and perspectives. For instance, while almost everyone was convinced that the organization needed to introduce the product as soon as possible, representatives from the finance department were quite concerned about the firm's financial capacity. Likewise, while some members favored a large scale implementation of the idea, some argued that going full scale without first testing the market would be terrible, thereby preferring gradual implementation of the idea or a pilot test. There were also disagreements on whether or not to partner with external entities in implementing the idea. Other challenges emanated from late attendance or skipping of team meetings, non-adherence to the team's rules, and laxity in fulfilling assigned responsibilities on the part of some team members. In spite of these challenges, the experience greatly enhanced my teamwork and communication abilities. I would love to be in such a team in the future.

Broadly speaking, groups are formed to work together to achieve a specified objective. For instance, a soccer team has eleven members, all working together to score against a competing team and to prevent the competing team from scoring. With a team, a seemingly complex task becomes easier as two or more individuals direct their effort towards solving the task as a team. At the workplace, teams are crucial drivers of productivity and performance (Bateman, Snell & Konopaske, 2016). Teams are often assembled to develop a new product, evaluate the potential of a given market, reorganize business divisions or operations, assess potential targets for a merger or an acquisition, and so forth. In a team, members share knowledge and perspectives, consequently accelerating the accomplishment of goals, objectives, and tasks.

The formation of a team undergoes a number of stages as described by Bruce Tuckman's model of group development: forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning (Margerison, 2003). These stages were quite evident during the above team experience. In the first stage, forming, the team is formed or assembled. Team members are introduced to one another, the team is familiarized with the task at hand, and roles and responsibilities are assigned. During the first meeting, each team member mentioned their name and their respective department. In addition, the team leader communicated each person's roles in the team. We also established rules for the team, especially in terms of attending meetings, conduct during meetings, airing views, and communicating progress. The forming stage is often characterized by anxiety as team members may usually be new to each other. This was particularly true for me during the first meeting as I had not interacted with some of the team members before. Other team members also appeared quite cautious during the first meeting.

At the storming stage, team members become more aware of their roles and expectations as well as freer with one another (Margerison, 2003). Most teams fail at this stage due to the occurrence of conflict, disagreements, and personality clashes. Within five days of the team's formation, the storming stage was quite evident. In fact, without an effective team leader, the team may not have successfully achieved its goals and objectives. It is at this stage that some team members appeared to be perfectionists and others quite casual in work. Some were more willing to work alongside others, while others depicted the tendency to work alone despite being in a team. There were also disagreements on how to go about the task. For instance, some members were in favor of meetings during the lunch hour, while others preferred early morning or evening meetings.

Conflicts during the storming stage are common, and if not handled properly can hinder the success of the team (Margerison, 2003). The conflicts may particularly stem from forces resisting change. This is well explained in the force field model, which demonstrates that change is driven by certain factors and at the same time hindered by certain factors (Hayes, 2014). In my case, most team members were convinced that introducing the product was vital for enhancing the organization's competitive advantage, but representatives from the finance department were quite reluctant, arguing that the organization did not have adequate financial capacity to implement the idea and that the idea may not be as profitable as the team projected. The team indeed spent unnecessarily more time attempting to convince finance representatives.

While it may be detrimental to team success, conflict might not always be negative (Raines, 2012). In other words, conflict can be healthy or constructive. In my case, though there were conflicts arising from some members missing team meetings without sensible reasons or arriving for meetings late, much of the conflicts encountered were positive in nature. Team members mostly disagreed on perspectives, especially in terms of implementing the idea. Nonetheless, the diverse perspectives offered were helpful for the team as we were able to consider diverse perspectives and to collaboratively choose the most feasible, suitable, and acceptable ones. With collaboration, conflicts within a team are minimized or avoided (Bateman, Snell & Konopaske, 2016).

In the norming stage, differences start to be resolved and team members appreciate each other's strengths (Margerison, 2003). Members socialize better with one another and develop stronger commitment to the team's goals and objectives. In the first week of the team's formation, some team members perceived conflict in a somewhat negative manner, showing little or no tolerance to other members' ideas. By the end of the second week, however, members were more willing to listen to one another. I would say this was one of the most interesting aspects about the team experience. This set the stage for the team to progress to the performing stage. This stage is characterized by evident focus on the shared goals, a high level of success, as well as little or no negative conflict (Margerison, 2003). By the fifth week, the report was ready, causing the adjournment of the team. The adjournment stage can be a difficult stage for team members since working relationships developed during the duration of the team often have to be broken.