Case Analysis of the Team That Wasn't

Case Analysis of The Team that Wasn't

After reading through the whole story, people might be skeptical that Randy is the crux to ruin the team harmony. Isolating Randy out off the team would be the most efficient way to get work done. However, there are other factors besides Randy hindering behind the problem. Only if Eric can figure out these drivers, the team could collaborate and make the collective goal successful.

Analysis and disclose the hidden factors

Here, the Model of Team Effectiveness is being applied to analyze the performance of the team. Eric, as a team leader, should first evaluate team inputs in team building phase, team working process management and measure perform and viability in order to find factors driving the poor effectiveness of the teamwork.

Goals

There is no evidence of a common commitment to a team purpose. From the CEO level, the goal to Eric is not clear. Eric, as a team leader, did not adjust the vagueness of the goal or establish a new one in the building phase. He tried to hold the members to an agenda only based on the CEO's charge: "to have a comprehensive plan for strategic realignment, running, and winning within six months." Consequently, the members do not understand the purpose of the Strategic realignment and what are the criteria or the result to be used to evaluate the win of the strategic realignment. All the members failed to understand why they should work together and why teamwork is more significant than individual contribution. (Recom. 1)

Norms

There is no evidence of a clear working approach. The team was composed of top people from all divisions, manufacturing, design division, human resources, distribution, finance as well as marketing and its diversity of skillsets and experiences is enough to form a well performed team. However, without a clear work approach, people could not maximize their competences and mix them together to generate greater impact. In this case, the only preparation Eric did to make the team work was preparing a structure and guideline for the group discussion, disagreement, and decisions. That might work well for people rich in working in a team environment, just like the one where Eric worked before as a consultant. Consulting firm has clear titles and roles from analyst, consultant, manager, team leader, principle and partner. Everyone knows pretty well his or her responsibility and the rules of the road in his or her post. However, at FireArt, these managers were unaccustomed to the team process. They did not know how each is expected to contribute, how they will collaborate, or how each person's "nonteam" responsibilities will be handled.

In addition, Randy, the same level as other team members, seems to play a tricky role at FireArt. He is treated by CEO Jack as " had the best mind" and "the future of the company". Randy also thinks himself more important and more intelligent than others. As a team leader, Eric did not do anything to minimize the effect of Randy's different status. Does he play the same role with the same level responsibility as other members? Or does he take a higher level of position in the team? Eric even did not prepare to handle this specific situation.

Task process

There is no clear task division. We know little about what they are supposed to be working on and accomplishing. In the whole story, Eric never divided specific tasks to different members. Since there is no common goal, the process was that team members tried to propose their own ideas within their own division. Well, Randy never executed any task as others. He could listen, comment or ignore just as he liked.

In addition, Eric's group spends more time on feelings and past experiences than on the task at hand. In an effective team, leaders can always create a safe environment for member to feel comfortable to ask questions or express their ideas. To get thing done and get goal accomplished

...