Write A Minimum Of Two Pages In Which You Recall Team Experi

Write A Minimum Of Two Pages In Which You Recall Team Experiences You

Write a minimum of two pages in which you recall team experiences you have had in which a team was effective and another in which it was not. Write a description of these teams and their tasks, paying particular attention to the behavioral expectations for which the team members held each other accountable. The ground rules for a team are the spoken and unspoken functional rules and expectations that help or hinder the team in reaching a goal. Systems thinking can inform an analysis of team ground rules in that it addresses the interrelationships between people and departments, and the way things are done in an organization. Understanding the larger contexts in an organization can help you communicate with those affected by a problem or issue.

Think of a team experience you have had in which the team was effective. Write a description of this team and its tasks, paying particular attention to the behavioral expectations for which the team members held each other accountable (these might have been spoken or unspoken). List the ground rules and describe how the rules helped the team perform and work well together. Think of an team experience you have had in which the team was not effective. Write a description of this team and its tasks, including the spoken or unspoken ground rules that describe the expectations for behavior on this team.

Examine the possibility that some members held ground rules that others did not. How might this have been a source of tension? Analyze how this difference in what is expected of team members caused conflict and damaged performance. What effect could a dialogue about ground rules as a method of team learning have had for this group? Your assessment should be a minimum of 2 pages in length, double-spaced.

Paper For Above instruction

Throughout my professional journey, I have encountered various team dynamics, some fostering success and others hampering progress. Reflecting on these experiences offers valuable insights into the importance of clear ground rules and the influence of systemic understanding within organizational settings. I will describe one effective team and one ineffective team, focusing on their tasks, behavioral expectations, and ground rules, followed by an analysis of how differing expectations among members impacted their performance.

The Effective Team: Collaborative Project in a Healthcare Setting

The first team I was part of operated within a healthcare organization, tasked with developing a new patient care protocols. This team consisted of physicians, nurses, administrative staff, and quality assurance professionals. The primary goal was to streamline patient care procedures to enhance efficiency and patient outcomes. The team adhered to explicit ground rules, such as punctuality, active listening, mutual respect, and accountability for assigned tasks. These rules were both spoken—formal meetings, clearly defined roles—and unspoken—an understood expectation to prioritize patient welfare above individual agendas.

These behavioral expectations fostered a culture of trust and shared responsibility. For instance, punctuality was universally valued; arriving on time for meetings demonstrated respect for colleagues’ schedules and emphasized the importance of the task. Active listening ensured that all perspectives were considered, promoting collaborative problem-solving. Accountability for tasks meant each member was responsible for their contributions, which minimized errors and built confidence among team members. These ground rules created an environment conducive to communication, innovation, and effective decision-making, ultimately leading to the successful implementation of the new protocols.

The Ineffective Team: Cross-Departmental Initiative in a Corporate Environment

Conversely, I participated in a cross-departmental initiative designed to improve internal communication processes within a corporation. This team included marketing, IT, human resources, and operations. The challenge was to establish a unified communication platform. Unlike the healthcare team, this team lacked clear, mutually understood ground rules. There were unspoken expectations that varied significantly among departments—some believed meetings should be brief and informal, while others saw them as formal and detailed. Communication norms were inconsistent, and accountability was ambiguous; some members did not follow through on commitments or failed to attend meetings without explanation.

This disparity in ground rules created tension, as members harbored differing beliefs about what was appropriate behavior. For instance, IT staff expected timely follow-ups and documentation, whereas some marketing members viewed spontaneous discussions as sufficient. These conflicting norms led to misunderstandings, missed deadlines, and decreased trust. The absence of a shared understanding regarding behavioral expectations created friction, reduced productivity, and compromised the project's success.

Impact of Differing Ground Rules and Potential Dialogue Benefits

The differences between team members’ ground rules often stem from varying departmental cultures and individual perspectives. When some members hold unspoken rules that differ from others’, it can lead to tension and conflict. In the aforementioned corporate team, unaligned expectations caused frustration and a breakdown in communication, hampering overall effectiveness. Such conflicts diminish cohesion and can erode trust, which are vital for team success.

A dialogue about ground rules as a method of team learning could significantly improve cohesion. Establishing explicit, mutually agreed-upon behavioral expectations at the outset fosters shared understanding. For example, a team could collaboratively define acceptable communication norms, meeting protocols, accountability standards, and conflict resolution approaches. Such dialogues promote transparency, reduce misinterpretations, and foster a culture of accountability and respect. When team members understand and agree on ground rules, they are more likely to hold each other accountable and adapt behaviors to support collective goals.

Furthermore, implementing regular check-ins about ground rules allows the team to address emerging conflicts proactively. This practice also encourages continuous learning, adaptability, and the building of trust. In organizations where interdepartmental coordination is essential, systemic thinking can enhance this process by recognizing the influence of organizational structures and cultural norms on individual behavior. Addressing systemic factors ensures that ground rules are aligned with organizational values and processes, enabling more sustainable improvements in team performance.

In conclusion, the contrasting experiences of effective and ineffective teams highlight the critical role of shared ground rules and systemic understanding. Clear behavioral expectations foster trust, accountability, and collaboration, thereby enhancing team performance. Recognizing and addressing variation in ground rules through dialogue and systemic thinking can convert conflicts into opportunities for growth and learning. Cultivating this awareness and fostering open communication around expectations are essential strategies for building cohesive and high-performing teams in any organizational context.

References

• Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2019). Joining together: Group theory and group skills. Pearson.
• Roberts, C., & Greenberg, J. (2020). Organizational behavior. Routledge.
• Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage publications.
• Schein, E. H. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership. Jossey-Bass.
• Schmidt, J., & Tannenbaum, S. I. (2019). The dynamics of teams: Foundations and innovations. Psychology Press.
• Jackson, S. E., & Ruderman, M. (2020). Diversity in work teams: Research paradigms for a changing workplace. American Psychological Association.
• Wheelan, S. A. (2016). Creating effective teams: A guide for members and leaders. Sage Publications.
• Hershey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (2019). Management of organizational behavior: Leading human resources. Pearson.
• Marks, M. A., & Matthieu, J. E. (2018). Teamwork and performance: Cooperative approaches. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(4), 523-540.
• Woodcock, S. (2021). Systemic thinking in organizations. Routledge.