okay here they are! =D love k.
Introduction
In the competitive society today, it is crucial that an organization maintains a cohesive workforce, as this would largely affect the company’s performance. In this report we identified problems in AEC and discussed both the author’s and our approach to solve the current issues of a communication breakdown and perception differences.
Conclusion
Our aim in this report is to critically examine the problems and offer relevant and contemporary solutions, while listing out the limitations and benefits they would bring to AEC. Barriers were identified and both our approach and the author’s approach to overcoming them were reflected and their limitations weighed. Our team also evaluated on our individual and group strengths and weaknesses and worked to expand on or accommodate them.
Thursday, September 6, 2007
my part on team effectiveness
Organisational and Team Environment
Communication is vital in a team. Good communication enables us to adapt to each other’s strengths and weaknesses leading generation of ideas. This will be further discussed in Belbin’s Model.
Team Design
In order to be a more effective group, we usually plan our agenda in advance and evenly delegated tasks so each member has their own fair share of work. This will be further discussed in the Contingency Approach.
Team Processes
Through this, our team was able to know each other better and build a strong bond. These processes will be elaborated in Tuckman’s model.
Team Effectiveness
Overall, our team was able to work together to fulfill the requirements of the assignment.
this is the last part~!! =D yays~!
CONSTRUCTIVE APPROACH AND EVALUATION OF LEADERSHIP
The contingency perspective to leadership is based on the idea that the most suitable leadership style relies on the circumstances (McShane and Travaglione 2007). In our team, there was an apparent rotation of leaders. With regards to the Path-goal leadership theory, the leadership style undertaken in our team is the Participative style. With every rotation, the leader facilitates the members’ involvement and consults them before coming to a consensus (McKenna 2006). Thus, unpleasant disagreements were avoided.
WHAT THE TEAM DID WELL
Self-research
Each of us tends to do our own research before every meeting without being told. This facilitates the meeting and cuts down reading time.
Meeting Agenda and Timeline
There was a timeline (Appendix) drawn up at the first meeting. Our team also has an agenda for every meeting. By being disciplined, we managed to meet our deadlines and were able to complete our portion of assignment on time.
Constructive Feedback
Our team did not encounter arguments as everyone is open to constructive feedback with clear examples (Wood et al. 2004). We accepted polite criticisms and were willing to make adjustments to a task.
Flexibility
Our team was able to adapt quickly with the departure of Amal who was exempted from the module by forming a new agenda for the next meeting and re-delegating our tasks and roles effectively.
WHAT THE TEAM DID POORLY
Punctuality
Our team had the problem of being punctual. We managed to overcome it by conducting our meetings after lectures. However, with long school hours, our concentration span became shorter. Hence, each of us made efforts to rearrange personal schedules for group meetings.
Task Deviation
Our team tends to deviate from the discussion topic easily. Sometimes, this tends to make our meetings longer than required.
WHAT THE TEAM COULD DO DIFFERENTLY
Early Start-up
The team agreed that we will start on an assignment earlier than we did this time. This will ensure that we have more time for research and meetings. In addition, we can overcome the clash of schedules as we do not need to work around a tight schedule.
(306 words)
CONSTRUCTIVE APPROACH AND EVALUATION OF LEADERSHIP
The contingency perspective to leadership is based on the idea that the most suitable leadership style relies on the circumstances (McShane and Travaglione 2007). In our team, there was an apparent rotation of leaders. With regards to the Path-goal leadership theory, the leadership style undertaken in our team is the Participative style. With every rotation, the leader facilitates the members’ involvement and consults them before coming to a consensus (McKenna 2006). Thus, unpleasant disagreements were avoided.
WHAT THE TEAM DID WELL
Self-research
Each of us tends to do our own research before every meeting without being told. This facilitates the meeting and cuts down reading time.
Meeting Agenda and Timeline
There was a timeline (Appendix) drawn up at the first meeting. Our team also has an agenda for every meeting. By being disciplined, we managed to meet our deadlines and were able to complete our portion of assignment on time.
Constructive Feedback
Our team did not encounter arguments as everyone is open to constructive feedback with clear examples (Wood et al. 2004). We accepted polite criticisms and were willing to make adjustments to a task.
Flexibility
Our team was able to adapt quickly with the departure of Amal who was exempted from the module by forming a new agenda for the next meeting and re-delegating our tasks and roles effectively.
WHAT THE TEAM DID POORLY
Punctuality
Our team had the problem of being punctual. We managed to overcome it by conducting our meetings after lectures. However, with long school hours, our concentration span became shorter. Hence, each of us made efforts to rearrange personal schedules for group meetings.
Task Deviation
Our team tends to deviate from the discussion topic easily. Sometimes, this tends to make our meetings longer than required.
WHAT THE TEAM COULD DO DIFFERENTLY
Early Start-up
The team agreed that we will start on an assignment earlier than we did this time. This will ensure that we have more time for research and meetings. In addition, we can overcome the clash of schedules as we do not need to work around a tight schedule.
(306 words)
Reference list updated
1. Bartol, K, Tein, M, Matthews, G, and Martin, D 2005, Management: A Pacific Rim Focus, McGraw-Hill, Sydney
2. Kinicki, A and Kreitner, R 2003, Organizational Behavior: Key Concepts, Skills and Best Practices, McGraw-Hill/Irwin, New York
3. McKenna, E 2006, ‘Leadership and management style’, Business psychology and organisational behaviour, 4th edn, Psychology Press, New York, pp. 375-419.
4. McShane, S and Travaglione, T 2007, Organisational Behaviour on the Pacific Rim, McGraw-Hill, Sydney
5. Mullins, L 2005, ‘Organisation development (culture and change)’, Management and Organisational Behaviour, 7th edn, Pearson Education, England, p. 906.
6. Nichols, R.G, Stevens, L.A 1957, 'Listening to People', in Havard Business Review on Effective Communication, Havard Business School Press, pp.1-24.
7. Robbins, S 1998, ‘Foundations of Group Behaviour’, Organizational Behavior: Concepts, Controversies, Applications, 8th edn, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, pp. 241-3.
8. Robbins, S, Millet, B, Cacioppe, R, Waters-marsh, T 1998, 'Organisational Behaviour' Leading and Managing in Australia and New Zealand, 2nd Edition, Prentice Hall, Sydney
9. Wood, J, Chapman, J, Fromholtz, M, Morrison, V, Wallace, J, Zeffane, R, Kennedy, R, Schermerhorn, J, Hunt, J and Osborn, R 2004, Organisational behaviour: a global perspective, 3rd edn, John Wiley & Sons, Brisbane
2. Kinicki, A and Kreitner, R 2003, Organizational Behavior: Key Concepts, Skills and Best Practices, McGraw-Hill/Irwin, New York
3. McKenna, E 2006, ‘Leadership and management style’, Business psychology and organisational behaviour, 4th edn, Psychology Press, New York, pp. 375-419.
4. McShane, S and Travaglione, T 2007, Organisational Behaviour on the Pacific Rim, McGraw-Hill, Sydney
5. Mullins, L 2005, ‘Organisation development (culture and change)’, Management and Organisational Behaviour, 7th edn, Pearson Education, England, p. 906.
6. Nichols, R.G, Stevens, L.A 1957, 'Listening to People', in Havard Business Review on Effective Communication, Havard Business School Press, pp.1-24.
7. Robbins, S 1998, ‘Foundations of Group Behaviour’, Organizational Behavior: Concepts, Controversies, Applications, 8th edn, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, pp. 241-3.
8. Robbins, S, Millet, B, Cacioppe, R, Waters-marsh, T 1998, 'Organisational Behaviour' Leading and Managing in Australia and New Zealand, 2nd Edition, Prentice Hall, Sydney
9. Wood, J, Chapman, J, Fromholtz, M, Morrison, V, Wallace, J, Zeffane, R, Kennedy, R, Schermerhorn, J, Hunt, J and Osborn, R 2004, Organisational behaviour: a global perspective, 3rd edn, John Wiley & Sons, Brisbane
mike's reply
Hi Liyana and other team members
I suggest you incorporate this 'departure' in your essay, write about your feelings, your reactions, how you manage this sudden change, what happens after this vacuum, etc etc...this is a great opportunity to write something different from other essays....remember - turn 'problems' into opportunities - so here is your opportunity - size it and excel....in the corporate world....changes and surprises occur daily.....people leave the team for many reasons....some people get transferred, others get promoted, others go overseas, resign....some die....
Warm regards
Mike
Hi sir...
One of our group members received a letter from SIM today which said
that she is exempted from ob. But she has been to a majority of our
group discussions and has done her part for the group assignment. But
she didn't realise she is exempted until today.
So what should we do?
Should we include her in the group member list?
Also as of now we only have 4 members left but the requirement is 5
members.
Liyana (& group members)
I suggest you incorporate this 'departure' in your essay, write about your feelings, your reactions, how you manage this sudden change, what happens after this vacuum, etc etc...this is a great opportunity to write something different from other essays....remember - turn 'problems' into opportunities - so here is your opportunity - size it and excel....in the corporate world....changes and surprises occur daily.....people leave the team for many reasons....some people get transferred, others get promoted, others go overseas, resign....some die....
Warm regards
Mike
Hi sir...
One of our group members received a letter from SIM today which said
that she is exempted from ob. But she has been to a majority of our
group discussions and has done her part for the group assignment. But
she didn't realise she is exempted until today.
So what should we do?
Should we include her in the group member list?
Also as of now we only have 4 members left but the requirement is 5
members.
Liyana (& group members)
okay this is the new part a, i've added the 60 words to complete broken sentences or weirdly phrased sentences and improved fluency. plus enhanced a few points. someone please DEFINE MBWA?
love, kaela.
Q1. COMMUNICATION BARRIERS THAT EXISTED IN AEC
STRUCTURAL BARRIERS AND PERCEPTION DIFFERENCES
In AEC, the management is regarded with authority by employees. The employees are not given opportunities to express their opinions as management does not involve them in meetings. Additionally, separate facilities for the management exist as structural barriers resulting in social interaction being affected. This resulted in the employees viewing themselves unimportant and not of value as compared to the management staff.
INFORMATION OVERLOAD
AEC’s vice-president, George, faces friction with his employee John and usually sends written memos instead of having direct confrontations. These memos result in information overload as they convey important and complex instructions for production. Employees are likely to misinterpret these memos and this would lead to incorrect procedures taken in the production.
FILTERING AND LANGUAGE BARRIERS
John refused to voice out his frustrations and practiced filtering to delete negative information presented about his work so that events sound more favorable. Many employees behave similarly to earn the management’s approval. Additionally George’s compliments to John were misinterpreted as complaints, showing that language is yet another barrier among AEC’s staff.
HOW DID THE AUTHOR DEAL WITH IT?
AUTHOR’S APPROACH TO COMMUNICATION BARRIERS
Thus the author has employed the management by walking around (MBWA) method to find out more about the barriers in AEC (McShane and Travaglione 2007). Through this, he made use of verbal communication, “written or oral use of words” and non-verbal communication which involves “elements and behaviours not coded into words” to win the trust of the floor employees (Bartol et. al., 2005 p.433). He made an effort to be around the shop floor staff frequently. By playing the role of an active listener to many of the shop floor members, he empathised with them and made sure not to demand anything from them. The author was also able to communicate with them verbally and as such he became the messenger between the management and floor staff.
LIMITATIONS TO THE AUTHOR'S APPROACH
The advantage of MBWA is that there is direct communication between the employees and the management (Wood et al 2004). The management can also understand the internal organizational problems better (McShane and Travaglione 2007). The active listening and MBWA that John practiced improved communication and relationship with the employees. However, overcoming the communication barrier in the communication barrier in the organisation alone will not improve the situation much.
WHAT WOULD WE DO DIFFERENTLY
PERCEPTIONS
The perception among employees remains that the management view themselves as more superior than the floor employees. Culture change or changes in perception of employees play a big role. The only way to have culture change is to have good communication since they cannot be separated. Usually, the norm culture for employees would be that they identify themselves with their organization and accept its values and would be motivated by them (Mullins 2005).
TYPE OF COMMUNICATION TOOLS/STYLE
However, in organizations, communication breakdown is the main problem. The type of communication existing in AEC is a chain network that does not have much interaction with the employees. A more suitable form of communication would be an all-channel network whereby all the employees are fully involved in participation and discussion. To implement all these however, surveys can be done. Doing so can help to determine the attitudes of the employees to the functioning of the organization. George should also be open to the criticisms made by the floor employees. It would be difficult to implement changes in the organisation if the management do not cooperate and see the floor employees as equals (Mullins 2005). Thus mindset and the culture of the company should be changed. The management should be the ones to implement these changes.
TEAMWORK
Another way to improve communication would be to promote effective teamwork between the management and staff. The employees should view themselves as a body working together to bring the company to greater heights. George as the vice-president should be more aware of and pay attention to the floor employees. Only by understanding that each and every employee plays an important part in the success of the organization can they move forward in this area(Mullins 2005). Therefore, awareness of roles in the organization is fundamental in effective teamwork.
MOTIVATION
Additionally, motivation also plays a vital role. One way to tackle the issue of employees misunderstanding that they were being sent for training courses due to their ineffectiveness is to simply promote it in a different manner. Companies could suggest training courses as a form of performance-based reward, as it not only acknowledges the employee’s ability at work, it also act as an incentive for employees who want opportunities for promotions. Such training courses would equip them with the appropriate skills and certificate level to receive promotions.
love, kaela.
Q1. COMMUNICATION BARRIERS THAT EXISTED IN AEC
STRUCTURAL BARRIERS AND PERCEPTION DIFFERENCES
In AEC, the management is regarded with authority by employees. The employees are not given opportunities to express their opinions as management does not involve them in meetings. Additionally, separate facilities for the management exist as structural barriers resulting in social interaction being affected. This resulted in the employees viewing themselves unimportant and not of value as compared to the management staff.
INFORMATION OVERLOAD
AEC’s vice-president, George, faces friction with his employee John and usually sends written memos instead of having direct confrontations. These memos result in information overload as they convey important and complex instructions for production. Employees are likely to misinterpret these memos and this would lead to incorrect procedures taken in the production.
FILTERING AND LANGUAGE BARRIERS
John refused to voice out his frustrations and practiced filtering to delete negative information presented about his work so that events sound more favorable. Many employees behave similarly to earn the management’s approval. Additionally George’s compliments to John were misinterpreted as complaints, showing that language is yet another barrier among AEC’s staff.
HOW DID THE AUTHOR DEAL WITH IT?
AUTHOR’S APPROACH TO COMMUNICATION BARRIERS
Thus the author has employed the management by walking around (MBWA) method to find out more about the barriers in AEC (McShane and Travaglione 2007). Through this, he made use of verbal communication, “written or oral use of words” and non-verbal communication which involves “elements and behaviours not coded into words” to win the trust of the floor employees (Bartol et. al., 2005 p.433). He made an effort to be around the shop floor staff frequently. By playing the role of an active listener to many of the shop floor members, he empathised with them and made sure not to demand anything from them. The author was also able to communicate with them verbally and as such he became the messenger between the management and floor staff.
LIMITATIONS TO THE AUTHOR'S APPROACH
The advantage of MBWA is that there is direct communication between the employees and the management (Wood et al 2004). The management can also understand the internal organizational problems better (McShane and Travaglione 2007). The active listening and MBWA that John practiced improved communication and relationship with the employees. However, overcoming the communication barrier in the communication barrier in the organisation alone will not improve the situation much.
WHAT WOULD WE DO DIFFERENTLY
PERCEPTIONS
The perception among employees remains that the management view themselves as more superior than the floor employees. Culture change or changes in perception of employees play a big role. The only way to have culture change is to have good communication since they cannot be separated. Usually, the norm culture for employees would be that they identify themselves with their organization and accept its values and would be motivated by them (Mullins 2005).
TYPE OF COMMUNICATION TOOLS/STYLE
However, in organizations, communication breakdown is the main problem. The type of communication existing in AEC is a chain network that does not have much interaction with the employees. A more suitable form of communication would be an all-channel network whereby all the employees are fully involved in participation and discussion. To implement all these however, surveys can be done. Doing so can help to determine the attitudes of the employees to the functioning of the organization. George should also be open to the criticisms made by the floor employees. It would be difficult to implement changes in the organisation if the management do not cooperate and see the floor employees as equals (Mullins 2005). Thus mindset and the culture of the company should be changed. The management should be the ones to implement these changes.
TEAMWORK
Another way to improve communication would be to promote effective teamwork between the management and staff. The employees should view themselves as a body working together to bring the company to greater heights. George as the vice-president should be more aware of and pay attention to the floor employees. Only by understanding that each and every employee plays an important part in the success of the organization can they move forward in this area(Mullins 2005). Therefore, awareness of roles in the organization is fundamental in effective teamwork.
MOTIVATION
Additionally, motivation also plays a vital role. One way to tackle the issue of employees misunderstanding that they were being sent for training courses due to their ineffectiveness is to simply promote it in a different manner. Companies could suggest training courses as a form of performance-based reward, as it not only acknowledges the employee’s ability at work, it also act as an incentive for employees who want opportunities for promotions. Such training courses would equip them with the appropriate skills and certificate level to receive promotions.
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
