Bibliography: Sources

Question:

You are required to submit an annotated bibliography of at least five sources dating from 2012 to 2016 which will be cited in your reflective paper for this course.

Answer:

I am working in the manufacturing organization General Motors for five years in which recently our group has faced problems with the team leader, Marry Bara regarding the issues of ineffective decision making process and inability to mitigate conflicts along with switching to a new culture (Gm.com. 2016). Specifically, two group members are highly dissatisfied to this type of nature of our leader. Moreover, the main problem is that these two group members are very much rigid and remain their own position during the time of making decisions. 

During the time of taking decisions in case of bringing change in organizational culture, the two group members cannot agree with team leader. They continuously oppose with the team leader’s decision. They do not want the entire change in the organizational culture of this organization. As a result, confliction is at its peak adding towards the depreciation of the firm. In addition, the team leader wants to convince the group members and tries to understand the benefit of this change procedure by a positive discussion and meetings. 

In this perspective, I can try towards creating a positive thinking among my fellow colleagues by convincing them. Moreover, my concerned role is to stop the argument process and mitigate the confliction among them. In this situation, I want to resolve this issue as a responsible group member of General Motors by understanding the importance of group activity. In this perspective, I want to make understand the above-concerned two group members that argument is not the right way to reach in the conclusion. However, it delays the whole process of the work along with a poor performance of our group. As a group member of our team, I mitigate the issues through the process of positive discussion with our team leader and all the group members. Apart from this, I suggest the team leader to arrange a meeting. This would help them to reach in a potential decision. Moreover, to be a successful team in the General Motors, both team leader, Merry Bara and the group members need to give respect in all the decisions associated with the positive performance of the group.   

 Apart from this, by repeatedly arguing with the decisions of the team leader, the above-concerned two group members hamper the process of introduction of new thoughts and innovative ideas. As a result, the further growth process of the organization General Motors has severely hampered. Moreover, due to poor leadership style existing in this organization, the decision making process is hampered which is not desirable for this organization (Wit, Greer and Jehn 2012). 

In addition, during the time of decision making process, the above-stated team members make aggressive gestures among each other. They personally attack each other which create a toxic environment in the office. As a result, this incident creates the confliction by raising the tensions in the organization (Esteban, Mayoral and Ray 2012). This would lead to a negative impact on the work culture of this organization (Chai, Liu and Ngai 2013). 

As a group member, I feel very much irritated and cannot concentrate my work. As I belong from this group, I have a responsibility to perform best which would lead to increase the overall standard performance of the group. However, due to the mash up situation in the group along with failing condition of decision making process and inability to mitigate the conflicts, the required new and innovative ideas cannot be generated (Hwang and Yoon 2012). The personal attacks to each other in the group delays the entire work system in our team. Moreover, our team leaders are ineffective to resolve this issue as she cannot be able to represent the multiple constituencies and to define the compelling way for our team. 

By referring to the above issues, it can be notified that the root causes of occurrence these issues are the poor and ineffective leadership style of Marry Bara and confliction between the group members within the team. According to Avolio and Yammarino (2013), as per the transformational leadership style, the concerned leaders need to influence their followers for acquiring great performance along with creativity and innovative ideas. According to the above-stated leadership style, the team leader has the quality to motivate the group members by resolving the issues of decision making and mitigating the conflicts which arises within the groups (Dinh et al. 2014). In this context, the concerned leader Marry Bara has faced the problems regarding the context of appropriate decision making which is a very essential part of the General Motors organization.

As a result, as a responsible group member, I have to work in a toxic environment which is not desirable for me. Due to the confliction over decision making process in this organization, the innovative and creative ideas and informative decisions cannot be taken by all the group members along with the associated leaders (Bendersky and Hays 2012). Thus, it would delay the entire work process of this above-stated organization. Moreover, I cannot be able to precede my growth in this toxic environment. In the words of Antonakis and House (2014), the decision making process in a group indicates the collective decisions of the individuals. In this perspective, single and individual decisions are not considered and bothered, only the priority is given on the whole decisions of the group (Parris and Peachey 2013). Thus, during the time of counter strike and arguing with the opinions of the other group members and also team leader, the whole group cannot be able to reach in the required and potential decision outcomes (Esteban, Mayoral and Ray 2012).

Furthermore, in this perspective, as a group member I am unable to set and reach in the effective decision outcomes which create a barrier for personal foster growth of mine. Apart from this, according to my point of view, as an individual employee of this organization, I am better one to take my own decision as soon as possible during the time of urgency instead of group decisions. As commented by Nohria and Khurana (2013), during the time of making any group decision, due to the several conflictions, the deterioration of procedure of the mental efficiency, moral judgment and testing can be occurred which is not desirable for the organization.

In this perspective, as the two group members are counter attack each other regarding the making of decisions, the new information cannot be gathered and the growth process hampered and delayed (Trotzer 2013). Furthermore, being an individual one sometimes I feel an immense pressure on the dominance part of the decisions. As opined by Hwang and Yoon (2012), with the help of formal processing of the decision making such as brain-storming and nominal group strategy, the issues related to this fact can be reduced. In the manufacturing organization General Motors, the key problems of this fact are that lack of coordination, discussion and participation procedure (Gm.com 2016). This would lead to delay and bogged down the overall procedure in the case of trivial details. 

Thus, this incident would lead to overrate the decision making procedure of its own whereas, the opponents decision making system is underrates in this situation (Anderson et al. 2015). According to Chai, Liu and Ngai (2013), the Belbin Team leadership theory indicates the 9 Team roles which refer the tendency to contribute interrelate and behave with others in the particular manner. To be a successful team, the group members and associated team leader need to maintain the nine roles of Belbin Team which is beneficial for their growth process (Pettigrew 2014). As per the Belbin Team analysis, the team workers need to cooperative, diplomatic and perceptive which is missing in this organization within the group members (Bénabou 2012). The two members always busy in the action of counter attack each other and oppose in the decision of other group members along with the leader. Thus, by contradicting the rules of Belbin Team theory, the concerned group of this organization cannot be able to fulfill the criteria by which the foster growth procedure is hampered severely (Avolio and Yammarino 2013).

 As per the theoretical concept of Balebin Team Roles, the team leader should have the quality of creativity, free-thinking, innovative ideas and ability to solve difficult problem (Edman 2014). Moreover, the leader should have effective communication power and decision making power. However, in this organization, this quality is missing in the team leader. This would increase the confrontation between the group members. In this perspective, I take the coordinator role as per the Balebin Teams role. In the words of Triantaphyllou (2013), the Balebin Team roles indicates that the team members need to be focus on their objectives and mature in their work. By following this rule, I want to motivate my fellow colleagues and want to understand the objectives of our team and work. I think that it would help to mitigate the issue. However, I am unable to fulfill my aim properly. On the other hand, according to Cheng and Huang (2013), the role of shaper as per the view of Balebin Team role is to ensure the concerned team to keep moving ahead and does not give up the focus. Thus, if I am taking this effective role for resolving the issue, I may be able to give the courage to conquer the obstacles. This would be the better strategy for our group.   

Moreover, in this organization one more important issue is the confliction over the group members and inability to mitigate this confliction by the associated team leader. In this perspective, in the words of Wit, Greer and Jehn (2012), the theoretical framework of Belbin Team theory refers that by avoiding the confrontation within the team members in the adverse situation, the weaknesses of the group can be reduced. However, in the above-stated organization, the weaknesses of the concerned group are disposed through the confrontation of the group members. 

In this context, our team leader is ineffective to resolve the alarming issue by which the problem is created and it never ends. In this situation, as a group member of this team, I entirely loosed my motivation power to do a better and innovative work which is essential my re-growth process. Apart from this, I have faced a situation of lacking of my concentration power to my work. As a result, the creativity and innovative thought procedure is hampered. On the other hand, I feel unstable in this situation as confrontation is the daily routine for this group.

Furthermore, the ethical code of conduct of this organization is severely hampered for this issue. According to Caselli and Coleman (2013), the ethical code of conduct controls and maintains the safety, advantage and disadvantage of the employees of the company. Hence, in this organization, due to the confliction issues of the group members, the ethical issues can be violated for which my advantage and disadvantage policy is not maintained properly. On the other hand, due to inefficient and poor leadership style of this group, the group members cannot give respect to the team leader and they cannot obey the person for which the adverse situation cannot be handled (Foddy et al. 2013). 

Reflection:

As a group member of the well known manufactured organization General Motors, I have faced the above-stated problems related to the issues of confliction of the group members within the team. If I were the team leader of the group, then as a responsible leader the first and foremost thing I have done is to resolve the confrontation of the group members by group discussion process. Moreover, as a group leader, I would concentrate on all the decisions of all the group members and from which I reach a conclusion on the appropriate and required one. The ultimate decisions always made by me which would reduce the level of confliction within the group members. 

Furthermore, in this perspective, I would increase my efficiency level through which I can convince my group members to remain in a same decision level. Apart from this, as a group member of the above-concerned team, my key role is to understand and convince the other group members for not conflicting to each other regarding the issues of different opinion. During the time of confronting to each other and personal attack and disobeying the team leader, as a responsible group member, I want to handle the adverse situation by organizing a meeting and group discussion procedure. Thus, in this way, I would implement my knowledge to resolve this alarming issue.

By concerning the above issues of the manufactured organization General Motors, my thinking is totally changed about the potential team group of any well known organization. In this organization team leader is not so much efficient to control the group members from which the confliction within the group increases day by day. Previously, I thought that ethical code of conduct should maintain by all of the organization. However, in this situation, this is violated for this problem within the group and the whole team cannot be able to reach in the potential and appropriate decision outcome.

Recommendation:

In this analysis, the following points are considered to be as suitable recommendations for this alarming issue. In the context of decision making problem within the groups, the team leader need to arrange a meeting in which first the problem statement can be stated in different perspectives. After defining the problem properly to the all group members, as a responsible leader, the second step should be analyze the problem thoroughly. By analyzing the problem and questions associated with it, the entire team needs to generate the possible solutions of this issue. 

In this perspective, during the time of generating the possible solutions associated with this issue, the opinions are collected from all the group members. All the decisions and opinions of the group members give respect and by evaluating altogether them the potential decision outcome is taken for ultimate measure. This procedure would mitigate the issues related to decision making problem along with minimizing the confliction level of the group. 

Moreover, by following the groupthink strategy in the leadership style, the confliction within the group member can resolve and avoided. In addition, the internal relations between the leader and the group members can be improved through this process. In this perspective, by following the open leadership style through the procedure of groupthink, the issues related to decision making system can be mitigated properly.

Conclusion:

By referring to the above analysis, it can be inferred that the manufactured organization General Motors have faced the above-stated issues within the group related to the decision making problem and confliction of the group members. As a group member of this team, I faced a lot of problems such as instability, lack of concentration power, do not apply my innovative ideas and creativity. Moreover, due to the above problems in the group, my growth process is stagnant and ethical code of conduct is also violated in this situation. With the help of relevant leadership theory, this issue is evaluated and suitable suggestions have been provided which would resolve this problem along with improving the adverse situation. In this perspective, the groupthink strategy, open leadership style and some prospective steps need to be taken into the consideration. This would help to mitigate the decision making problem and the whole team can be able to reach the desirable decision outcome as soon as possible.             

Reference list:

Anderson, D.R., Sweeney, D.J., Williams, T.A., Camm, J.D. and Cochran, J.J., 2015. An introduction to management science: quantitative approaches to decision making. Cengage learning.

Antonakis, J. and House, R.J., 2014. Instrumental leadership: Measurement and extension of transformational–transactional leadership theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(4), pp.746-771.

Avolio, B.J. and Yammarino, F.J. eds., 2013. Transformational and charismatic leadership: The road ahead. Emerald Group Publishing.

Bénabou, R., 2012. Groupthink: Collective delusions in organizations and markets. The Review of Economic Studies, p.rds030.

Bendersky, C. and Hays, N.A., 2012. Status conflict in groups. Organization Science, 23(2), pp.323-340.

Caselli, F. and Coleman, W.J., 2013. On the theory of ethnic conflict. Journal of the European Economic Association, 11(s1), pp.161-192.

Chai, J., Liu, J.N. and Ngai, E.W., 2013. Application of decision-making techniques in supplier selection: A systematic review of literature. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(10), pp.3872-3885.

Cheng, H.H. and Huang, S.W., 2013. Exploring antecedents and consequence of online group-buying intention: An extended perspective on theory of planned behavior. International Journal of Information Management,33(1), pp.185-198.

Dinh, J.E., Lord, R.G., Gardner, W.L., Meuser, J.D., Liden, R.C. and Hu, J., 2014. Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly,25(1), pp.36-62.

Edman, J., 2014. Group composition and Groupthink in a business game.Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, 33.

Esteban, J., Mayoral, L. and Ray, D., 2012. Ethnicity and conflict: An empirical study. The American Economic Review, 102(4), pp.1310-1342.

Foddy, M., Smithson, M., Schneider, S. and Hogg, M.A. eds., 2013.Resolving social dilemmas: Dynamic, structural, and intergroup aspects. Psychology Press.

Gm.com. (2016). Corporate Officers | Leadership | GM.com. [online] Available at: http://www.gm.com/company/leadership/corporate-officers.html [Accessed 20 Sep. 2016].

Hwang, C.L. and Yoon, K., 2012. Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications a state-of-the-art survey (Vol. 186). Springer Science & Business Media.

Nohria, N. and Khurana, R. eds., 2013. Handbook of leadership theory and practice: An HBS centennial colloquium on advancing leadership. Harvard Business Press.

Parris, D.L. and Peachey, J.W., 2013. A systematic literature review of servant leadership theory in organizational contexts. Journal of business ethics, 113(3), pp.377-393.

Pettigrew, A.M., 2014. The politics of organizational decision-making. Routledge.

Triantaphyllou, E., 2013. Multi-criteria decision making methods: a comparative study (Vol. 44). Springer Science & Business Media.

Trotzer, J.P., 2013. The counselor and the group: Integrating theory, training, and practice. Routledge.

Wit, F.R., Greer, L.L. and Jehn, K.A., 2012. The paradox of intragroup conflict: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(2), p.360.