Week 3 Case Study

649 WordsMay 29, 20123 Pages
Group Development The stage that this group best falls under at their current state is the Norming Stage. If Mike was performing better and contributing more to the team, I would put them at the Performing Stage, but with the minimal contributions and the way that Mike blows off the team meetings I would say that the team is stuck in the norming stage. According to the text, deviations from team directions occur during the norming stage and with Mike’s behavior I would definitely say it is deviating from the team’s direction, hence the norming stage diagnosis. Problem Identification The primary problem Christine is facing is the problem of an uncooperative team member, or at the very least the team member is doing the bare minimum and expecting the others to pick-up his slack. I think in the forming stage Christine should have asked what each team member could contribute to the team. Also, she should have found out what type of time commitment each of the team members could give. Christine could have possibly found out that Mike wasn’t very committed to the team and could have requested another team member. The secondary problem I believe Christine is dealing with is her own assertiveness. If she was more assertive she would have confronted Mike and told him that he is dragging the team down. She should have told him that he needed to contribute more to the team and meet with the team at the agreed upon time. Also, she could have sympathized with his personal problems, but tell him he needs to separate that from his contributions to the team. She should have told him to separate work from his personal life. Christine should have next gone to the teacher to explain the situation, as was instructed at the beginning of the project. Retrospective Evaluation The primary problem was that Mike was not holding up his part of the team work. The teacher at the

More about Week 3 Case Study

Open Document