1. The first phase of the group development stage is forming. This phase is where the group starts coming together and introducing themselves. Referring to the case Study, The Organizational Behaviour Group Christine leads, comprises of Diane, Janet, Steve and Mike. The First group meeting in the case study involved Christine and her group getting acquitted with one another, which signals the forming phase.
The second phase is Storming. This is often regarded as the hardest phase in a group development stage as different personalities will emerge, and different opinions will come into the brainstorming process. Referring to the case study, this would be 5 weeks into the semester when Christine planned a meeting for the team. The problem here is that Mike would skip most meetings. As a result he pitched in very little into the overall effort of the team. It is assumed that his carefree personality clashes with the attitude of the entire team.
The phase ...view middle of the document...
The fifth and final phase is Adjourning. This stage means that the group has served its’ purpose and can now be disbanded, also people in the team would also want to give an overall evaluation to their peers. In the case study, the group project is finished, but the final marks will change based on the outcome of the peer evaluation, according to how the groups evaluate one another, which puts Christine in a Dilemma.
2. The causes of conflict in the case study mostly revolve around Mike. It is very obvious from the case study that the difference in Mike’s Personality with the rest of the team caused him to feel left out and unable to express himself earlier on. (Difference In Personality)
And due to Christine’s Inactivity to fix the problem, Mike begun to disassociate himself further from the team. (Group Leader Inactivity)
Lastly, it can be assumed that Christine was worried about how the group was evaluating Mike. Although she still believed that Mike could have contributed, she was scared that the group would not view him in a positive light. (Difference in group decision)
3. In my opinion Christine should employ a leadership style of ‘Middle-Of-The-Road Management’.
The ‘Middle-Of-The-Road’ style of management attempts to strike a balance between task accomplishments and people concerns.
The main reason why I feel that this is the most suitable leadership style for Christine is due to her lack of inexperience in being a leader and because of her student lifestyle. There are other better leadership styles best suited for the situation, but I feel that a leader must always understand his or her own limitations while leading.
The second reason is because I feel that in the case study, Christine has given too much attention towards goal achievement, and not enough for people concerns. I feel that she only has a good relationship with the rest of the group excluding Mike, because they contribute towards goal achievement, while Mike does not. Christine needs to show more concern for people under her command who are falling behind or demotivated in general.