Question

For years Evo has supported athletic teams, but only recently did the Seattle-based e-commerce company launch a formal work team. Like many organizations, the online retailer of snowboard, ski, skate, and wake gear used team metaphors loosely to describe anything involving random groups of employees. But Evo got an education on real work teams when the company formed a team for its creative services employees.

The new group, which is comprised of a photographer, designer, and copy writer, is responsible for producing Evo’s magazine ads, promotions, and web site content. Although the individuals’ roles are not generally interchangeable, photographer Tre Dauenhauer might dabble in design, graphic designer Pubs One may write a few lines of copy, and copywriter Sunny Fenton might snap photos on occasion. Most team projects require a combination of eye-grabbing photos, clever words, and a compelling design, and the teammates are committed to a common purpose.

When the creative services team launched, group members moved into their own space, away from Evo’s chaotic, open-plan work areas. Being together every day enabled the team members to become better acquainted and move through the “forming” stage more quickly. But even with close quarters, Dauenhauer, One, and Fenton needed help navigating the conflict-ridden, storming stage of their team’s development. Before joining the team, they functioned individually and weren’t used to sharing power or making decisions as a group. To help the members learn to work together, Nathan Decker, director of e-commerce, became the team leader. As a skilled negotiator, Decker makes sure his talented trio steers clear of dysfunction and delivers the goods. Any time the team finishes a project, Decker brings members together for a post-mortem discussion—a method of reviewing what was learned, and how things could be executed differently. It’s here that the team members identify new routines and rituals to incorporate into their process for future improvement.

Due to Decker’s leadership and skillful negotiation of conflicts, members of the creative services team are learning how to communicate in ways never before possible. Having a skilled leader to facilitate work processes has helped build team cohesiveness and deliver a collective output that is greater than the sum of its parts.

1. What organizational dilemma was hurting Evo’s creative output, and how did management resolve the problem using teams?

2.   How might Nathan Decker lead effectively as the team starts “norming”?

3.   Can you relate the group performance factors of composition, size, norms, cohesiveness, and informal leadership to Evo?

Answer 1

*****Please please please LIKE THIS ANSWER, so that I can get a small benefit, Please*****

1. What organizational dilemma was hurting Evo’s creative output, and how did management resolve the problem using teams?

The type of organizational dilemma that was hurting Evo’s creative output was the lack of group decisions and sharing power. Projects cannot be done without a group of people working on the same page, and collaborating with each other. When the creative services team launched, group members moved into their own space, away from Evo’s chaotic, open-pan work areas, before joining the team, they functioned individually and weren’t used to sharing power or making decisions as a group. It is obvious that Seattle’s team members were not on the same page, and in return they had a difficult time completing projects. The talent was there, they just didn’t know how to use each of their individual talents in a collaborative effort. This is why it is crucial that all members of a group are each doing their partand work towards the common goal. What management did to resolve this problem was by making sure all employees were clear from being of no use and can produce the goods.

2.   How might Nathan Decker lead effectively as the team starts “norming”?

To help the members learn to work together, Nathan Decker, director of e-commerce, became the team leader…any time the team finishes a project, Decker brings members together for a post-mortem discussion — a method of reviewing what was learned, and how things could be executed differently. Management made sure that after each finished project, all of the employees will form together and have an examination discussion. This discussion helped them assess what was learned, and how things could be implemented differently. Then from there, team members can find new practices and habits to include into their procedure for future development. Nathan Decker, did an excellent job in implementing this strategy to bring his team together. After teams go through the storming stage of the developmental sequence in small groups, as they begin the norming stage. This is when people start to resolve their differences, appreciate colleagues’ strengths, and respect your authority as a leader. What Nathan Decker should do to lead the team effectively as they start the “norming” stage, is to make certain that this calmness remains and that any negative actions that begin may threaten the calm are directed in the right way. Nathan Decker should also spend time with his team members individually. He should coach and support them to improve their skills that link to the individual’s team role and the jobs that they have to do, in relation to the team objectives.

In conclusion, Nathan Decker did an excellent job in leading his team to work together. Having a post discussion, after every finished project, of what they learned and how things could have been done differently led his team in the right direction. As a result, Nathan Decker’s team successfully created Evo’s magazine ads, promotions, and website content. It is very crucial that all members of a group are each doing their part and work towards the common goal. Working as a team will definitely give any company a better chance to succeed in the marketplace.

3.   Can you relate the group performance factors of composition, size, norms, cohesiveness, and informal leadership to Evo?

I can relate to the group performance factors of composition, size, norms, cohesiveness, and informal leadership to Evo. In relation to composition, I have been a part of many groups with different abilities and backgrounds, such as age, gender, experience and knowledge. Just like in Seattle’s e-commerce situation, it was very hard to work with individuals with different capabilities and educations. For example, one of my group members had 2 years more of experience, therefore he expected a lot from us. It was frustrating for him and for us because a project would come up and, because of our experience, we couldn’t keep up with his pace. Our group member, with the 2 more years of experience, knew exactly what and how to do the project and was basically working on it by himself.

The size of my group was very similar to Seattle’s. It consisted of about 5 to 6 people. Our norms or rules and standards for the group were also very similar to Evo’s team. We had to agree on what types of behaviors were accepted such as respecting each other’s opinions, and value each coworker’s strengths. It was difficult at times, to all agree on the same norms, because we had such a composite group.

The cohesiveness in my group was very challenging at first because some members did not want to work together or interact with each other, but as the days went on and we spent more time working together, we grew a bond and valued each other’s presence. Who we all looked up to was the member in our group who had 2 years more of experience than us. He was classified as the informal leader in our group, because he had more knowledge and knew more than half the material we had to work with. He gave us each different roles that, in end, came together with his part of the project.

*****Please please please LIKE THIS ANSWER, so that I can get a small benefit, Please*****