Psychology of Organizational Behavior - Assignment Example

Name Course Tutor Date Introduction August session was one of my most felt semesters in university. It was during this time that I realized my potential as far as leadership is concerned. It was during the study of critical and creative thinking unit that I found myself leading a group discussion, which constituted four group members. Our lecturer had given us a scenario and wanted us to discuss and analyze it on what we thought was the best decision for the team leader on the mountain to take. This report is going to reflect on what my group went through. The analysis will be guided by john’s four-step framework. 2.0 Problem and context I had participated in several discussion groups but it is this discussion group that really constituted a turning point in my life. As usual, the lecturer could assign a question and request for a requested for a group leader who is bold and courageous from each group. In the past discussions, I had never got any chance of being selected as a group leader mainly due to the fact that my characters did not qualify the “standards of a leader” I normally view myself as a shy person who cannot lead a group(Northouse,2004). However, through some means, which I did not understand, I found myself being selected as a leader of a group, which constituted of three members. The scenario we were to analyze was actually a difficult one and I doubt myself at first on whether we would actually succeed. To make the matter worst, my group members seem so talkative and outgoing than I was. The actual problem went this way. “A certain group of people had gone for mountain climbing expedition. They successfully climbed up to the peak of the mountain but as they were descending, a fierce storm engulfed the mountain. This made their progression down almost impossible. One of the climbers collapsed with exhaustion at 24000 feet and could not continue down the mountain. The other two stronger climbers insisted on continuing down the mountain. They wanted to leave their leader and the ailing climber because they knew that if they stay too long at high altitude, death was certain. No one had ever survived overnight on the mountain. A rescue attempt was impossible because helicopters could not reach us above 18000 feet. The leader of the group was therefore faced with a difficult choice to make: abandon the dying teammate and descent alone or stay with the dying teammate in the hope that the storm might clear and the rescue party will be sent. However, the leader knew that if they both stay, most likely both of them would die. On the other hand, the leader still felt strong and could still make it down to safety, abandoning the teammate to die alone on the mountain. I was therefore supposed to organize group members and lead them through the whole discussion. We were expected to come up with a solution on what the leader could have done. I was also expected to instill discipline as far as time keeping was concerned. At first glance, I found it very difficult to initiate the discussion process. The team members were at first very uncooperative and was fond of making noises which were not even part of the discussion. Some of them were very rigid in accepting correction whereas others wanted o dominate the whole discussion. All these gave me a lot of challenge but because I had been given the authority, I knew that I had to actually act as a leader. However, I did not make any major conclusion from the first group meeting because I knew that the forming stage is commonly dominated by a lot of chaos because the group members are still adjusting to the new setting. Basing on the Tuckman’s principle, this stage should entails familiarization and knowing each other. In fact, I did not bring out the actual problem at this stage. I just read the whole scenario and requested each of the members to brainstorm about it. 3.0 Reflection As earlier stated, I was the group leader of the teamwork. It was actually my first time being a group leader and I was not sure at first whether the work was going to be successful or not. After giving out the task, our lecturer had requested each of the group members to choose one individual who would be a leader. Each of us was told to suggest by writing on the paper a person who deserves to be a leader. By some means, which I have not yet understood well until now, I was chosen by many as a group leader. I accepted the election with disbelief as a ponder inwardly on my capabilities. The scenario we had was a difficult one and I had to employ all the leadership skill to encourage the members to think critically. Handling such a difficult situation requires a person who is well informed, creative and focus. I knew that the success of the group work would only depend on my leadership skills (Thompson, 2003). I also knew that though I was shy, this should not deter me from leading the group simply because according to my accumulated knowledge, shyness only prevail when a person is not certain of the result to expect and hence most people tend to be shy not because they are naturally shy but because they are afraid of failure and hence opt of being shy so as to avoid being part of those occasion that may reveal their failure. Therefore, I knew that the only way I can gain my confidence is by analyzing the problem alone. I therefore requested each member to go and think over the scenario and then bring his or her views the next day from then, we were to analyze each of the suggestion critically. During the actual discussion, each member had his or her own suggestion on what should have happened. As a leader, I had to read out each suggestion and the reasons that backed up each of these suggestions. The first option of the event was that the issue of the leader abandoning the dying teammate (Thompson, 2003). Two of the group members supported this option. Being a group leader, I had to be neutral at the start of the discussion so as to encourage other members to express all their views. I was keen to know what to do what in every stage of our discussion. I carefully lead my group members through the four stages of Tuckman’s team development model (figure 3.0).To bring up the issue clearly, I had to apply the john’s principle of critical reflection which implies that critical reflection is window through which a leader can view and focus self within the context of her own lived experience in ways that enable her to confront, understand and work towards resolving the contradictions within his practice between what is desirable and actual practice (Johns, 2010). I encourage all the members of the group to place the problem in their shoes and try as much as possible to be creative. After around one hour of a hot debate of giving the pros and cons of this option, we finally realized that it was not good for the leader to leave the dying colleague alone. One of the members gave suggestion that the leader should have left the dying person and safe his life. Most of the other members supported him but as a leader, I had to make a more critical judgment of the suggestion before yielding to their suggestion. I had to apply the principle of critical reflection and convince them that though it may look better for the leader to safe his own life; it was an inhuman act to do that way. This is because the person had not actually died and no one was so certain of what might happen. Leaving the dying man alone might seem good at first but in the long run, the other members may regret. It shows an aspect of individualism, which is a fierce. To completely persuade the members that that option was wrong, I had to include the spiritual principle of love (Thompson, 2003). Figure 3.0 Tuckman’s team development model (Source: adapted by lynch et al, 2006) Stages Description of each stage Forming This constitutes the first stage of teamwork development. During this stage, no one within the team has a role or responsibility. The team members largely rely on the leader for decision-making and direction (Northouse, 2004). Individual roles and responsibilities are unclear Storming This stage starts as the first few questions have been answered. Each individual is fighting for their positions and aiming to improve their own position (Northouse, 2004). This causes a lot of competition. This can lead to conflicts and people not participating Norming Agreement within the team is found at this stage and responsibilities distributed. The team is now able to discuss and develop its processes, working styles and general rules. Team member are now more open with each other (Northouse, 2004). This means that the stage that caused conflict is followed by mutual acceptance and trust. Although some team members may make a better connections with other team members but some may feel left out Performing This stage is where the team has developed its own culture and its own way of dealing with conflicting situations. Roles are more flexible and functional, solutions can be found in a democratic manner, and processes are carried out smoothly(Northouse,2004).. This type of team structure is now able to support the task performance. I would briefly describe how our discussion went through these four stages Forming This constitutes the first stage of teamwork development (Northouse, 2004). In this stage, we introduced ourselves and the general topic of discussion. I took all the responsibility of leading the introduction process. The team members largely rely on me for decision-making and direction as their roles were unclear. I also concluded by giving each member a role to go and play so that the issue of others relying on others for decision could not arise. Storming This stage starts as the first few questions have been answered (Northouse, 2004).. The rapport had been established and hence each individual was fighting for their positions and aiming to improve their own position. This causes a lot of competition. It was therefore my role to moderate the situation. By cooling down the emotional members Norming and performing stage Agreement within the team is found at this stage and responsibilities distributed. The team was now able to discuss and develop its processes, working styles and general rules. Team member were now more open with each other (Northouse, 2004). This means that stage that caused conflict is followed by mutual acceptance and trust. Although some team members may make better connections with other team members but some may feel, left out performing. This stage is where the team has developed its own culture and its own way of dealing with conflicting situations. Roles are more flexible and functional, solutions can be found in a democratic manner, and processes are carried out smoothly. It was at this stage that we manage to achieve 90% of our mission Commitment, which entails the openness, curiosity, and willingness to challenge normative ways of responding to the situations, was a basis of my leadership throughout the discussion(Wheelan, 1999). Although I could explain most of the question raised by my own but I first had to involve the team members by provoking their thinking then after getting their views, I could then make one general conclusion, which was essentially an integration of some of their views as well as my own views. This made the processes proceed smoothly(Wheelan, 1999). My technical rationality was distinctively expressed throughout the process (Johns, 2010). However, I also had to apply the concept of professional artistry. After disputing the first option, we had to discuss and compare the other options so as to come up with the best option. The second option wanted the leader to remain with the dying person. This suggestion was relatively better than the former but when we critically analyze it with the context that was prevailing, we realized that if the leader would stay with the dying man, what better thing would he do alone that may rescue both of them? It was actually not the best option at all(Wheelan, 1999). After along period of hot debate we manage to agree that the best option for the team was to concentrate their energies and help the ailing person descent the mountain. The choice of this option entailed a lot of ideas and principles as well as consideration. We had to involve all the wise ideas. The saying that says unity is strength was used to justify our choice. In linking with the scenario, we realized that if the leader was to stay with the ailing member, then he might not help much. In other words, it was better for the three members to concentrate their efforts in helping the dying member because this was a sure way of achieving success(Wheelan, 1999). 4.0 Alternative Course of Action Although our group work was successful, I feel that if I were to be a leader again, I would do a few things differently. Firstly as stated by (Kayes, 2004) a leader needs to function in an orderly and purposeful manner. To my case I realized that I was not as orderly as expected due to the fact that at one time during discussion, we found ourselves just discussing and arguing over issues. There was nobody to put them down. I realized that it was my problem as a leader because I should have organized on whom to write. Given another chance again, I would try as much as possible to improve my level of coordination. To achieve this I would have to be as audible and confident as possible. Additionally, a leader should be in a position to generate humor during the discussion. This would ensure that the group members are very attentive (Wheelan, 1999). Therefore, given another chance, I would try as much as possible to be humorous; I also learnt that as a leader, those under you rely on your moves. Therefore, given another chance I would ensure that I am in a position of giving direction. To achieve this, I would ensure that I master the topic of the problem from all angles. On the other hand, I realized that the cooperation among the members is very important as far as achieving the success is considered. The more the members cooperate, the easier and faster the achievement of success is. Finally, I realized the overall success depends on two major things. The first thing is technical rationality whereas the other requirement is professional artistry. The technical rationality for this case represents the cognitive aspect of knowledge. In this case, the overall success of any problem-solving mission involves the ability of members to describe the problem by breaking it into finer components (Johns, 2010). This involves understanding of all the factors both the immediate, underlying, as well as basic factors. With this, the problem can be handled adequately. Professional artistry on the other hand involves manipulation of knowledge to achieve desired goal. Each and every members of the group must have these two basic requirements if the overall success is expected (Johns, 2010). 5.0 learning From the team project I have learnt that my common characters such as shyness are only temporal and that these negative characters are bound to become positive only if I know that I am the one with authority (Thompson, 2003).. In other words, I realized that authority is a source of power that can change the characters of somebody. I have also learnt that you should never judge someone after the first time of encounter because apart from the commonly expressed characters, there are also other characters which though it may not come out in a normal situation, they are bound to come out during critical situations which do not only require the technical rationality but also professional artistry. I also realized that at least each one of us is courageous in nature and that people’s courage is determined by other factors, which is why some people are generally referred to as courageous by virtue of them expressing their courage in common happenings (Thompson, 2003). However, though others may not look courageous on general outlook, their aspect of courage come when the situation demands their courage. This is well depicted by my scenario. Throughout the whole expedition process, I have developed many new skills. Firstly, I have learnt to tell people my opinions more and not worry about them not agreeing as previously I felt that I had to agree with people. Additionally, I have learnt that with professional artistry, you can convince people by manipulating different aspects and weaving them to bring out a new perspective, which is extraordinarily convincing to the conflicting parties (Johns, 2010). Lastly, I have developed my confidence considerably and throughout the project, I became more and more talkative and was able to command the team members whenever there was need, which I have always found difficult. I also believe that I have learnt how to interact with people who do not necessarily have the same personality as me. Lastly, I have learnt that reflection is vital within teamwork as it enables you to see what you are doing well and what needs to be improved (Johns, 2010). 6.0 Conclusions In conclusion, I feel that each and everyone have inner ability and it is from this form of ability that a person can be judged (Thompson, 2003). Therefore, a shy person does not means that he or she cannot be entrusted as a leader in any project. In fact, such person is likely to perform better if he or she is entrusted a leadership position. I have learnt many new skills, which I will be able to use in the future, based work situations and now I feel a lot more confident about leading a team. However, I do believe that I cold have handled certain things a little differently. Overall, I feel that the expedition went better than expected. References Johns, C. (2010) Guided Reflection. A Narrative approach to advancing professional practice, Chichester, Ames-Lowas, Wiley-Blackwell Kayes, C. (2004). The 1996 Mount Everest climbing disaster. The breakdown of learning in teams. Sage publication Kolb, D. (1984). Experimental learning .New Jersey, prentice hall Northouse, P. (2004). Leadership. Theory and practice. London. Sage Thompson, L. (2003). The Social Psychology of Organizational Behavior. Psychology press. New York Wheelan, s. (1999). Creating effective teams. London Sage publications Read More