Why the team is ineffective
Leadership is an integral part of any profit making corporation. Corporate leadership is remarkably similar to the rudder of a ship. The rudder can either direct the ship to a cataclysmic disaster or guide the ship safely to the shore. Since its inception, Decision Tech has been at the helm of the corporate world. It had high grossing sales compared to other technology companies. Within a short span of time, the company started having major leadership troubles. Subsequently, the morale of the employees dropped and so did the monthly sales of the company. The team became ineffective in its service delivery. As a consequence, the company had to discontinue the services of the chief executive. The Chairman of the board of directors decided to appoint Kathryn as the new chief executive.
A troubling vice had grown in the Decision Tech of backstabbing among the executives. Backstabbing in the corporate arena has a retrogressive effect of causing the staff members to feel devalued by the others. They lose the motivation to work and the trust in the corporation, as well. The moral of the executives who are backstabbed nosedives and that is reflected in their performance. It can be noted that the company had declined in the sales per month as a result of the incongruence in the team.
The executive members appear passive about their job. They have held back attitude on the job they have been assigned by the company. Some of them do not actively participate whereas others are quick to interrupt their fellow staff members. The chief Technologist, Martin Gilmore, is always browsing the internet and checking emails during the executive meetings. The lack of passion in the team can be seen in the way they reacted after the demotion of the former chief executive. Most of the staff members were not surprised by what happened. The spirit of non-cooperation trickled down to the staff members. They performed their duties in a lethargic manner.
During the norming stage, decisions by the team are reached by consensus; the decisions are made expeditiously as each member of the team is aware of the duties and responsibilities that he or she is supposed to perform. The running of the organizations is simpler compared to the storming stage where every member is trying to exert his or her influence in the company. Kathryn Petersen was appointed to the executive position by the chairman of the board of directors. It was only the chairman of the board directors that supported her appointment. Some of the members of the board of directors questioned the sanity of the chair in supporting a person who had very little professional experience to such a professionally demanding office. Kathryn worked as a teacher in her first job. She went to the military and branched to business at the age of thirty seven. It was clear that the decision by the chief executive was not one of the best from the objective point of view. Kathryn was surprised by the decision by the chairman of the board of directors. She decided that she would not let Decision Tech and the Chairman of the board of directors down. Having overcame hurdles in the army she decided she would not be intimidated by any one.
The staff was quick to test her tolerance; Kathryn met all the opposition to her decisions maturely. Kathryn encouraged a spirit of dialogue. She planned for a retreat that would involve the whole at the meeting. At the same time a client agreed to meet one of the company officials during at the same time when the retreat would be taking place. The operating team waited anxiously for the decision by the Chief Executive on the matter. Kathryn stated that the meeting should go on as it had been planned. Martin, the sales executive questioned the priorities of Kathryn. After a short period of time, they found out that they were navigating towards the same destination. Kathryn management set out well defined goals for the team and, therefore, the team felt that the company served their interest and were motivated to work and achieve their goals.
At the Initial stages of the team formation, all the major decisions concerning the operation of the company were made by Kathryn. The team depended highly on the chief executive officer to make the majority of the decisions. After a while, all the departmental heads were aware of their functions in the team. Distrust is one of the greatest challenges that an executive has to overcome in order to eliminate dissonance in the team. Kathryn encouraged the team to share personal stories in order to increase trust within the group. The agenda by the Chief executive came as a surprise to the majority of the staff members that have been in the company for a long time. After sharing their personal stories, the team felt closer and more certain of the future of the company than before. The staff realized the Chief executive had some background in the military. One of her hobbies was playing volleyball. The management ran on well-established patterns of distribution of honor and, therefore, every staff member felt motivated to perform the work.
The Four Stages of Team Development
Kathryn took over the company at a time when the leadership of the Decision Tech was experiencing difficult times. A chief executive had been demoted and replaced by Kathryn who had very little experience in the business compared to her former boss. The forming stage of team has one of the greatest challenges that determine the future success of the team. If a leader passes the tolerance test, the team is bound to succeed. The challenge came from Martin, the sales manager who questioned Kathryn priorities in relation to the company. Kathryn encouraged Martin to continue voicing his opinion. The move by Katheryn was a way of encouraging people to speak out in order to eliminate an instance of artificial peace, where the group members encouraged dialogue. The storming stage follows immediately after the forming stage. At this stage if the leader is not professional the team is driven to the verge of breaking. Kathryn Petersen too charges during this stage. The struggle by some of the members to exert their influence on the organization was welcomed maturely by the chief executive. Different opinions were discussed by the management team, and a proper way out of every challenge was formed. The chief executive guided her team in forming norms that would spur the company to financial prosperity. She encourages trust in the Decision Tech, encourages accountability in the company. These values were vital in the performance stage. The team expected religious accountability in the results the team was getting. The professional acumen of Kathryn Petersen took Decision Tech back to the course.
Tools used by the team leader to develop the team
Kathryn encourages positive energy in the team, the opinion of the members of the staff were not unfairly criticized for their opinions in the company. The chief operating officer welcomed every opinion on how the Decision Tech should be managed. Kathryn Petersen also encouraged the sharing of information between the departments. The sharing of personal information acted as an incentive to encourage the staff members to share information. The technique proved to be very advantageous to the team as the staff was free to share information in the future. Kathryn Petersen provided coaching for the junior member of the team. She coached the new workers on how to perform their duties and responsibilities effectively. The management developed respect for her well-grounded business practices that bore results almost instantaneously. The management of the Decision Tech encouraged vulnerability in the team. That created a situation where the staff and Decision tech could trust one another. The result was an increase in the sales of the company.
The head of sales in the Decision tech, Jeff Rawlins, performs the blocking role in the company. Jeff Rawlins constantly disagreed with other members of the operating team on the opinions that he thought would derail the Decision Tech. Michelle Bebe played the relationship building role in the company. She encouraged growth and peaceful coexistence. Nick Farrell performed the tasking role, he ensured that the entire task was done with due diligence.