Essay on The Human Resource Frame Analysis: Team Work

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

Throughout the readings communication was identified as a vital component for establishing and maintaining relationships. Porter-O Grady sanctioned for leaders to establish firm rules of engagement to help support a positive group dynamic (2013). While Kelly & Tazbir explained that friction and conflict were a normal part of group development and were representative of the Storming stage of group process (2014). Moreover, they explained that with assistance from the team leader the team can overcome these obstacles, strengthen inter-professional relationships, and enter into the Norming stage (Kelly & Tazbir, 2014). Here the team is able to participate in the effective exchange of communication and begin making progress toward goals. This represents progression into the Performing stage of group process (Kelly & Tazbir, 2014). When the team has met its intended target they are ready to anylze the outcomes of their work and enter the final stage of group process—Adjourning (Kelly & Tazbir,

Explain conflict management techniques that may be used to resolve team conflicts (Planned: 00, Completed: 0)

Disagreements are unavoidable in any business. A humble stage of disagreement can be helpful in creating enhanced thoughts and approaches, stimulating apprehension and resourcefulness, and motivating the appearance of long-suppressed tribulations. Conflict resolution approach must intend at keeping disagreement at a stage at which different thoughts and viewpoints are completely voiced but uncreative conflicts are discouraged. Encouragement of conflict situations is suitable if the project leader recognizes circumstances of 'group-think.' Group-think is a circumstance where disagreement hardly ever occurs because of high-minded group unity, which results in poor choices and insufficient production. Group-think conquers when there are a large number of members in a group that just agree with anything, with the outcome that there is no grim assessment of the circumstances and innovative thoughts are not recommended. Group members connect larger significance to status, stillness and calm in the group relatively than to procedural capability and capability. Members are unwilling to voice their impartial outlook in order to shun away from offending the

what would need to occur in order to reshape these things into something positive. Throughout

For example our group sometimes got off topic while talking with each other and it was challenging for us to get back on topic, this made us realize that we needed to stay on topic to make sure that we are getting the most quality work done and what we wanted to get out of this project. Secondly, we ran into an issue with not communicating about what plan we should use when we were planning during our plan time, for instance the weight of the marshmallow was not accounted for and was like a brick crashing down on the spaghetti which was as thin and weak. This made our tower crashing down and made us very disappointed

However, the changes that occurred during this group project were minor, compared to others and the team experience/interaction was pleasant. Nadler (1998) point out: “Develop and communicate a clear image of the future state” (Nadler, 1998). To be specific, Nadler’s point of communication was taken to whole new level during this project.

Because our team only had seven members, not every role could be performed. As a matter of fact, some of us had to play two roles or three or more occasionally. According to Adair (1986), no matter which role who performs, individual contributions can be seen. Overall strengths of team and areas of weakness have been embodied in group work adequately. Unfortunately, due to less group members, 4 roles described by Belbin such as resource investigator, co-ordinator, implementer and completer finisher have not been well reflected.

This exercise discusses the membership, social identity, and mechanics operating within the team informally known as ERAU Nighthawks. This team, originally assembled as Group 3, formed by instructor assignment during the August 2016 section of class PGMT 502 Effective Communication for Managing Projects. In addition to the group mechanics, this paper includes a discussion of the best practices for ERAU graduate course meetings discovered by the Nighthawks.

The details of organization structure are part of this experience, our struggles in firing a member, working together on details, and communicating clearly were all evident last week. I felt like we needed to fire one team member before last week. There had been no response, and I knew it was going to hurt the team effort; but I also felt like the person needed an opportunity to contribute, as well as not wanting to be the team member who expressed the idea of firing someone else. If I can go back to chapter nine, I believe groupthink caused each of us to hesitate, even when we all knew what needed to be done. The third question on the assessment dealt with the genuine belief that others can do as well as I can, and I answered mostly true. I do believe that all people are capable, and need opportunities to succeed and prove it to themselves, but question seven was also answered mostly true, which stated that I get upset when someone doesn’t do the task correctly. That is the contrast between the perfectionist in me and the delegator. I enjoy the text messages and conversations on discussion boards in the collaborative work of classes, but when it comes to a team project, I worry about someone else not being as motivated or not getting the work in on time. I don’t mean that about my team members right now, I am reflecting more on past team projects in school. It has always been a couple of us doing most of the work, so we could bail

Group member cohesiveness was absent from the group meeting for several reasons, but the primary reasons were due to the fact that the group members did not have a common description of value or structure to the discussion. Each member viewed their own area of involvement within the organization as being more valuable than any other area, and it was this exclusion of other valuable traits that lead the group to begin to clash in such a

The human resource frame is known to operate from drastically different paradigms. Bolman and Deal (2013, p. 113) state that opposing paradigms are identified when an individual asks which statement is true; 1.) “Our most important asset is our people”, or 2.) “Organizations exploit people --chew them up and spit them out” (Bolman & Deal, 2013, p. 113).

Many authors have highlighted the inevitability of conflicts on the other hand it is said that disputes can be prevented or at least can be minimized through proper management. Conflicts are ubiquitous where ever a large number of people are involved i.e. where the human relationships proliferate (Kumaraswamy, 1997). People are the principle resource for any commercial project today. Different project managers, engineers, surveyors belonging to different organizations and having different needs, goals and each of them looking to maximize their benefits are brought together to form a team. Because of these differences in the individuals the conflicts and disputes become inevitable in a project. Conflicts are generally perceived as a negative term but it has both positive and negative sides. Positive conflicts can be helpful to generate new ideas, make innovations, helps people to ‘Be real’ and creative. But this conflict has to be maintained so that it does not get out of control and bring about dysfunctional consequences. There are large numbers of potential sources that makes conflict inevitable in a project. Some of them are explained below: - (scribd)

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

Levin (2005) suggests that the idea of a team is to share the same objectives. This may not always be the case if team members have never met before and are not fully clear of the task set. This can lead to confusion between members and may mean that some team members are unwilling to be told by their peers what to do. This is an example on ineffective team work.