Henry Tam and the MGI Team Case - Main Managerial Problem Essay

Lack of communication (mutual interaction) and dearth of reciprocal influence becomes evident as we go through the case. Also, Team members shared limited information which

Teams consist of personnel with varied backgrounds, experience, education, and intellectual ability. These differences will, by nature lend themselves to varying perceptions in business, its problems and solutions, which result in

As in every team there will be differences of opinion and therefore stress in the working group. During this case study we saw the largest differences between Sasha and the HBS Business Plan Team. The team was excited about competing in the contest not only for the experience but to practice their skills for future business opportunities as well. In this sense not only were the differences between the musicians and the HBS students an asset, it was their differences that led the musicians to seek out the HBS students in the first place. Tension between Dana, Henry, and the Russians was seen in the following meetings when Sasha felt his material was ignored. In that sense their differences were a major liability. Dana and Henry were also getting annoyed by the fact that they were doing the majority of the work even when they had other things to do. As time went on they learned how to operate better and became more aware of how to look past

The team, after much deliberation and little success, has just 3 weeks before entering the case at the HBS Business Plan competition. In the team there is, Sasha, a former HBS MBA student with experience in drastically different industries; Igor and Roman, exceptionally gifted Russian musicians; Henry & Dana

“Teamwork is critical to successful use of talent, skills, knowledge and labor in a globally competitive marketplace. All members of a team and organization have something to share with others and something to learn” (Kaye, & Hogan, 1999). Combined “Learning Team D” has a lot of strengths some of the innate tendencies are that a majority of the team is tenacious. As a whole they seek to get things done quickly. The members all express confidence in their ability to achieve and make things happen. They are able to create a plan of action and follow-up routines. The team is able to take calculated risks when making decisions. The team is able to see things in black and white. This makes it easier for them to delegate and take charge when it is required. Members often downplay

Throughout the beginning of the book ‘The Five Dysfunction of a Team” by Patrick Lencioni it was apparent that the DecisionTech, Inc. executive team was not a team at all. This group of individuals lacked some of the key attributes that make great teams. One of the most important attributes that was being neglected was that the executive group did not have interdependent members. This attribute was highlighted in the beginning of the book when the author said “Backstabbing among the executives had become an art. There was no sense of unity or camaraderie on the team, which translated into a muted level of commitment” (7). Due to the executive teams lack of interdependence, critical deadlines began to slip and morale deteriorated.

As part of my Business Innovation Development Project Unit, I had the opportunity to put myself into group with my friends or people I believed I could work well with. In the first stages of our group we all tried to get to know each other more through analysing personality and learning types’ test that we previously undertook. I realise we were going through the normal stages of the team formation in particular forming and norming (Tuckman, 1965). In my assignment group we had all Belbin team roles which helped us perform well throughout our project and also helped us to identify other team members’ behavioural strengths and weaknesses. During the initial stages of the group getting together I believed it was

She is expected to build a system that demonstrates trust, understands conflict, commits to collective decision making, and have the ability to hold one another accountable for the betterment of the company. Furthermore, Lencioni incorporates his real life theory the five dysfunctions of a team, into the fable in hopes to persuade the reader to use his methods in real world scenarios. Moreover, Lencioni then describes the five levels of dysfunctions in depth supporting his stance that teamwork is the most important aspect of any successful business. “Teamwork comes down to the mastering of set behaviors that are once theoretically uncomplicated, trust.” (Lencioni, 2002, pg. 21) Furthermore, inspiring the first team dysfunction in absences of trust. The absence of trust ultimately stems from a team being unable to open up to one another about their strengths and weaknesses. “Trust is the foundation of real teamwork and failure also referring the failure on the part of the team members to open up to one another.” (Lencioni, 2002, pg. 42) Furthermore, supporting the authors purpose of the fable, in which is, success depends being committed to enforcing

Bateman, T. S., & Snell, S. A. (2009). Management: Leading & collaborating in acompetitive world (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Available from theUniversity of Phoenix eBook Collection databaseDisney, March 2009. Corporate Responsibility Report, Retrieved from on 5/28/09http://corp

Without trust among team members and having fear of conflict due to the ability to engage in unfiltered debate leads to no commitment in the team. Without these first steps team members have no base to hold each other accountable for their actions. Causing team members to put their individual needs first.

The team is assembled and the task is allocated. Team members behave independently, with anxieties about inclusion and exclusion. Their time is spent planning, collecting information and bonding, with an apparent willingness to conform. This can happen whenever new circumstances occur within a group, or when new challenges or projects are set within established

The third team problem was that norms and values were not identified. Their main problem was the repetitive decision making process with no consensus.The objectives of their meetings where not stated nor was there proper time management. Henry should prepare an agenda of objectives and communicate them clearly to the group prior to the meetings. He should appoint Dana as minute taker for the meetings to ensure schedule is followed and necessary post meeting actions clearly stated and executed.

Work Team development is a dynamic and often difficult process. Most teams find themselves in a continuos state of change and development. Eventhough, most teams never reach full stability, there is a general pattern that describes how most teams evolve. There are five stages of team development, the first stage is forming. In this stage there is a great deal of uncertainty about the teams purpose, structure and leadership. Members are testing the the waters to determine what types of behaviors are acceptable. This stage is complete when members began to think of themselves as part of the team. The second stage is called storming. In this stage there is much intragroup conflict.Team members accept the existence of the team, but there is resistance to the control that the team imposes on individuality. Conflict can arise from numerous sources within the team setting but generally falls into three categories:communication, factors, structural factors and personal factors (Varney, 1989/Townsley). In addition, there is conflict over who will control the team.

Do you have what it takes to enter the annual Harvard Business School Business Plan Contest? Vison, ideas and concepts are great in theory but are ineffective unless you execute them. This case study shows the struggles of the reality three young entrepreneurs faced when they were trying to build a product. It shows the difficulties in forming a team and most importantly turning an idea into reality. The lack of leadership, communication, clash of cultures and individuals

The interpersonal interactions between the two groups during meetings were not conducive to progress. During meetings the business team members often felt lost, confused, and would