Establishing coherent groups is critical to the success of an organization as employees cannot work independently. Scholars have identified five crucial stages of group development. They argue that a majority of organizations follow these phases either knowingly or unknowingly. Regardless of the steps that an institution follows, the primary objective of group development is to attain synergy and guarantee the accomplishment of company goals. This paper comprises a reflection of personal experience in the group formation process and how it relates to existing models.
Assignment of Roles and Responsibilities
Delineating the roles and responsibilities of individual employees is critical to promoting teamwork and avoiding unnecessary disputes. Moreover, organizational leaders require understanding the capabilities of their employees to ensure that they assign them the right tasks. In our group, the team leader was mandated with setting functions and responsibilities to members. They started by establishing the primary goals of individual studies. The leaders evaluated the schedules and experience of all members before assigning them work. It ensured that team members assumed duties and responsibilities depending on their strengths. Allowing employees to take complete control of operations boosts their morale and promotes innovation. Hence, organizational leaders ought to trust their employees upon delegating jobs. The group leader did not require checking on us every other minute because they believed in our capabilities. This move gave us a chance to make independent decisions on matters that affected our areas of specialization.
Establishment of Group Norms
Individual groups create regulations that govern their operations and promote cooperation. These norms cannot be practical if they do not receive support from a majority of the team members. I once happened to participate in a group where we had to come up with policies to guide our operations. The group leader assembled all members and gave them an opportunity to set rules of engagement. Most members expressed their opinion on what they felt would engender cohesion. The suggested policies were discussed, and the team adopted those that received support from most members.
Competing interests among employees contribute to disagreements, which can be detrimental to a team if not addressed. Hence, organizational leaders must know how to resolve conflicts that arise within their groups. In the event of a disagreement, our team leader assembled all members and allowed us to share our concerns, preventing possible miscommunication. The team used this meeting to identify facts and postulations that contributed to divergence, thus enabling members to understand the issues at hand. This initiative also alleviated the possibilities of business and unfounded arguments. The group concluded by formulating actionable steps that could aid in addressing the underlying disputes.
Comparison to Other Models
The establishment of our team compared significantly to Tuckman’s model of group development. Instances of disputes among team members were common as some individuals were reluctant to embracing change. Moreover, some members lacked adequate knowledge of their functions, prompting the need for the creation of rules and regulations. Tuckman’s model identifies norming as an essential stage of group formation that sets the terms of engagement. Similarly, our team had to come up with policies that did outline not only the duties of individual members but also the laws that governed our operations. This initiative promoted harmony among workers and facilitated seamless operations.
Group development comprises numerous stages that are meant to promote cooperation, thereby ensuring the efficient realization of corporate goals. Organizational leaders should understand the strengths of individual employees before assigning them duties. Additionally, it is imperative to involve team members in the formulation of policies to guide their activities. Engaging workers in dispute resolution may help to avert biases and irrational arguments.