This paper examines core concepts in organizational behavior and team dynamics. It distinguishes between functional and dysfunctional conflict, explaining how each type can shift into the other depending on group members' responses. The paper traces the five stages of team development — forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning — and illustrates conflict through a real group-project experience. It also addresses the relationship between leadership and management, arguing that while all managers should be leaders, not all leaders are qualified to manage. Finally, it identifies the key factors to consider when building an effective project team, including necessary skills, cohesiveness, and trust.
The difference between functional and dysfunctional conflict is that the former is productive and the latter is unproductive. Functional conflict can sometimes be evidence of progress. Conflict that starts off functional can become dysfunctional — and usually does — if, for example, someone feels offended. Similarly, conflict that starts off dysfunctional can become functional if people stop taking things personally and work toward the group's collective good. This latter shift requires a degree of maturity from all parties involved.
The five stages of team development are forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning. In the first stage, team members are quiet and get to know one another; teams can facilitate this process with icebreakers. In the second stage, a conflict of ideas emerges, which can be addressed by creating space for everyone to speak. In the third stage, members reach agreement through concessions and by establishing shared rules. In the fourth stage, team members work according to their established plan. In the fifth and final stage, the team's work is complete and the group dissolves.
In one group project, a member failed to contribute to the shared work. These actions were both noticed and resented by the other members. Initially, the group tried to compel this individual to participate. When that effort failed, they began devising ways to compensate for that person's lack of contribution. The attitude of the other group members became confrontational at certain points — behavior clearly indicative of group conflict. This experience illustrates how unresolved role issues can quickly shift a team's dynamic from cooperative to adversarial.
"Argues managers need leadership but not vice versa"
"Skills, cohesiveness, and trust as team-building criteria"
You’re 60% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.