MHR 405 Study Guide - Midterm Guide: Industrial And Organizational Psychology, Gossip, Distributive Justice

559 views8 pages
user avatar
Published on 23 Nov 2015
School
Ryerson University
Department
Human Resources
Course
MHR 405
Professor
!
!
!
!
!
!
Reflecting Upon When Teams Form, !
How They Perform !
and !
Why They Disperse
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Onnito Labonno!
500618505!
MHR 405-122!
Oxana Svergun
!
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-3 of the document.
Unlock all 8 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in
It’s in the middle of January and we’re in the middle of nowhere. It’s about 12 p.m. and
it’s also about negative twelve degrees. Our plane has crashed and we don’t know if we’re in
Minnesota or Manitoba. All we know is that our chances of survival are close to nothing. We
must not only stick together, but work together cooperatively so we can reach our one mutual
goal; make it to civilization alive. Given that I have an excitement and adventure-seeking
personality alongside a high self-efficacy and internal locus of control (see Appendix A and B), I
was extremely calm about the whole situation and knew I could make it out. However, the five
other survivors differed in those aspects. All in all, the group formed by the six survivors ended
up being versatile and relatively non-biased. Fortunately, Caroline and Nawal were extremely
agreeable, allowing clashes in decision making to be avoided. We were also fortunate to have
rational team-members like Catherine and Chantelle whose decision-making approaches lead us
to a decision that was far more successful than our individual analyses of the situation would
have been otherwise. We, as a team of a plane-crash survivors, proved that teams collectively
make better decisions that individuals alone (McShane, Steen, 1998).
We had quite a short and harmonious forming stage and fell into our roles quite easily
and accepted responsibilities without hesitation in the norming phase (McShane, Steen, 1998).
This, in my opinion, led to a much more hostile storming phase since the initiating phases were
not foundational at all. Once we started to have conflict, it got resentful very quickly. One major
reason behind was the fact that many of the decisions were interdependent. We had to decide
which items were more useful than others and any one of us could not overwrite the others’
preferences. It was important to come down to a consensus therefore working together
was important. Since the forming and norming stages were more superficial than foundational, "
2
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-3 of the document.
Unlock all 8 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in
we had not bonded enough to try to understand or compromise for each other. At the end of the
day, someone had to step up and take an authoritative initiative to battle the disputes fairly and
efficiently. Given my extroverted and assertive personality (see Appendix A), I took it upon
myself to perform as an informal leader under the radar. Since Chantelle and Catherine were the
much more disciplined and orderly than myself, I used my influence over others to appoint
Chantelle as the formal leader to put an end to the conflicts that arose during and after the
storming phase. I must mention after to emphasize on the inefficient performance stage.
On that note, the reason we encountered process losses (McShane, Steen, 1998) was
because Samuel was having an issues with not being appointed the leader. Throughout the whole
dilemma, he had proved to be excessively extroverted and insensitive towards others’ feelings,
leading the introverted Caroline to shy away from any input or effort into decision making.
However, me being an active listener and encourager (see Appendix B) , I put effort into making
sure that she had her chance to speak. The idea behind that was that she may have substantial
help to offer but lacked the communication skills to put them forward. Nonetheless, it appears
that she engaged in social loafing (McShane, Steen, 1998) as she made absolutely no attempts to
contribute to the problem-solving, even when given the chance. Fortunately, we had enough
competent members to make the performing stage and final decision successful. In regards to
composition of the team, Chantelle, Catherine and I were cooperative whereas Samuel tended to
hoard information (McShane, Steen, 1998). I coordinated the direction of the decisions, initially
making final calls and later proceeded to resolve conflicts between others.
A significant reason why we ended up with so many conflicts lies within our origins.
Survivors being from small towns in Northern Canada, an over populated urban immigrant city
3
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-3 of the document.
Unlock all 8 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in

Document Summary

It"s in the middle of january and we"re in the middle of nowhere. It"s about 12 p. m. and it"s also about negative twelve degrees. Our plane has crashed and we don"t know if we"re in. All we know is that our chances of survival are close to nothing. We must not only stick together, but work together cooperatively so we can reach our one mutual goal; make it to civilization alive. Given that i have an excitement and adventure-seeking personality alongside a high self-efficacy and internal locus of control (see appendix a and b), i was extremely calm about the whole situation and knew i could make it out. However, the five other survivors differed in those aspects. All in all, the group formed by the six survivors ended up being versatile and relatively non-biased. Fortunately, caroline and nawal were extremely agreeable, allowing clashes in decision making to be avoided.