West Coast Transit: Criteria for Evaluating Effective Team
Write a paper (1,600-1,800 words) in which you address the following based on the information provided in the "West Coast Transit Case Study" resource.
Describe the three criteria for evaluating effective team/group work (as stated in the textbook) and use the criteria to analyze the effectiveness of the team.
Review each of the five stages of group formation. Determine what stage(s) are evident in the case and provide a justification of your response.
Apply Schein's three behavioral profiles to specific members of the team. Identify how the profiles are demonstrated in the case.
Evaluate whether the communication among the participants in the case was effective or not. Justify your answer by considering any existing barriers to communication.
Review the two main types of conflicts described in the textbook. Explain how each type of conflict is evident in the case.
Propose how Denson should resolve the conflict in this case using one direct conflict management approach. Justify your response as to why this is the most realistic direct conflict management approach given the existing dynamics between and among team members.
Identify one specific leadership activity and one specific maintenance activity that should be encouraged. Identify the most significant disruptive behavior that should be discouraged.
Identify a significant motivational problem experienced by each individual: Jing, Mahonney, and Tanney. Describe how Denson should motivate each person. Be sure to provide a specific motivational suggestion for each person based on their motivational needs. Ensure that you have at least one suggestion from each of the motivational theory/techniques: content theories, process theories, and reinforcement strategies.
West Coast Transit Case Study
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Name and Number
Lecturer’s Name
Assignment Due Date
Criteria for Evaluating Effective Team
The three criteria for team effectiveness include task performance, member satisfaction, and team viability (Uhl-Bien et al., 2021). Based on the case study, the team is ineffective because the criteria for team effectiveness are not met. For employees to achieve the task performance principle, there has to be sufficient time to complete a project. Employees should also understand each other and reach an agreement before they begin working on the task. Understanding each other will promote a suitable working environment, thus boosting work efficiency. However, from the case study, there is neither sufficient time to complete the project nor proper understanding among the members, which will reduce the project's effectiveness.
The second criterion, member satisfaction, is also unmet because the employees are expected to put in a significant amount of unpaid overtime to complete the project before the deadline. Normally, employees are motivated by compensation. Working overtime under pressure without compensation might reduce employee morale and promote dissatisfaction. Tanney already expressed her concerns saying, "It does not help when one does not get paid for doing this" (West Cost Transit Case Study, 2016).
The third criterion, team viability, refers to a team's capacity for sustainable growth and future success. It captures employee satisfaction and commitment to the team. The fact that Lea Jing has about a month left in the department before transferring to another area indicates that she has diverted attention from the group's marketing project. Therefore, she is highly unlikely to show commitment to the project.
Stages of Group Formation
The five stages of group formation are forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning (Jones, 2019). The first stage, forming, is putting the team's structure together. Here, members get to know the project details and determine if the task is attainable. The second stage, storming, is where team members openly share ideas with their colleagues. This stage is the most difficult and crucial because it is riddled with conflict and competition (Jones, 2019). Team performance may decline in this stage because members tend to prioritize unproductive activities.
In the third stage, norming, teams have figured out how to work together towards a common goal. There is no more conflict or internal competition at this stage as members have learned to trust and cooperate. The performing stage follows and involves the execution of duties and tasks. It is the stage where the team is fully functional because members have properly built consensus and cooperation (Jones, 2019). The final stage is adjourning. This is where most of the tasks have been completed. The team focuses on documenting the successes and determining the improvements for future projects.
Considering the five stages, the first stage is evident in the case study. After Pete Denson, the marketing manager, is handed the project, he calls a meeting with three other employees to work on the task. During this meeting, the manager informs the team of the project's details. Another evident stage is the second stage: storming. Unfortunately, the team did not go beyond this stage due to conflict and misunderstanding.
One member, Tanney, cites personal issues and lack of payment as factors that may hinder her participation in the project. Another member, Jing, raises concerns over her pending transfer that is due in a month. Tanney also takes issues with Denson for addressing her family issues as complains and demands an apology. No conflict is resolved at the end of the case study, indicating the group formation did not go beyond the second stage.
Schein's Behavioral profiles
Edgar Schein's three behavioral profiles include the objective thinker, the friendly helper, and the tough battler (Schein, 2017). According to Schein, objective thinkers are reflective and single-minded individuals concerned with meeting the personal goals and needs of the group. From the case study, Lea Jing fits the profile of an objective thinker because she remains quiet and observant during the conversation, only to inform the group later that she is to relocate to another department in about a month. She is reflective because she thinks deeply about the project before commenting. She is also single-minded because she focused on one thing: - relocation.
A friendly helper is somehow insecure and tends to offer help and care to others. They are emotional (Uhl-Bien et al., 2021). An example of this role from the case study is Tanney. She demonstrates uncertainty when she notes that the agenda and the proposed plan are massive and unattainable, considering time constraints and workloads. She also becomes emotional when Denson addresses her family issue as a complaint and threatens not to work with him until Denson apologizes and treats her with the respect she deserves.
A tough battler is a person who wants things done regardless of the challenges. They are assertive, motivated, and driven. Such people act aggressively and seek authority (Schein, 2017). Mahoney and Denson suit this role because they are the only ones committed to the project despite the workload, time constraints, and lack of payment. Mahoney reminds the team that they are selected to work on the project because ...