Creating a Safe Environment for Discussion

By ensuring that issues that could create problems in a workgroup are discussed comprehensively through developing an environment where individuals feel safe to discourse issues. I would ensure that individuals understand that advancing issues is crucial in making the group vibrant (Joni & Beyer, 2009). It is also vital to ensure that the group recognizes its goals are essential and that working as a team could facilitate achieving desired goals and objectives. Thus, when people are given the opportunity to discuss all issues touching on them ensures that after the discussion they can work together. Therefore, managers can encourage discussion of unspoken conflicts transparently without making such disputes worse by motivating people to discuss and bring out any pressing issues that they may have plus any challenges and difficulties they may be encountering. Also, if it is in the manager’s knowledge that some problems have not been discussed, then it is the responsibility of the manager to address such issues openly without naming anyone. However, they have to link their advice and moral lessons to companies or groups of people, and in that sense, nobody may take offense to what the manager says. 

Negotiators can make use of conflict management in making both parties feel that they are attaining the same goals and objectives. The negotiators could employ the smoothing strategy where both parties dissolve their differences and focus on the common interest between the two parties. Thus, both parties will not only be focusing on resolving their differences but also will be trying to work in harmony to identify and attain their shared goals. Negotiators can also employ compromising strategies that entail both groups dropping some of their pride and ego. 

Yes. I recall a situation in my life where silence exacerbated a conflict. When I was young more often my friends would get into a fight, and instead of discussing their differences they would ignore the problem. The problem would turn worse due as they would talk negatively about each other to other people. Such a matter I believe could be conducted through an open discourse to ensure cooperation. A bunch of my friends would recommend that the warring parties should talk to each other as opposed to gossip about each other in the group. If such friends of mine diplomatically discussed the issue, am sure the problem would appear less and would help reduce the level of hatred and animosity between the two fighting friends.

If I were Samantha Parks, I would have to prioritize which projects to delegate using parameters such as the complexity of the task and the value of the tasks at hand (Tushman, Smith, & Binns, 2011). Projects requiring knowledge and expertise that others don’t have on completing a particular project would mean that it is crucial for the manager to finish the task by themselves. However, if the junior employees have the knowledge and expertise to perform the job, then it would be noble to assign the task to them and commit that time doing something else. If a particular part of the project is crucial for the entire project to be completed, then it will be prudent to complete the project personally to be sure that it is completed in the right manner unless someone can be trusted to complete part of the project. It is general knowledge that if the completion of the task can be entrusted to other people and that such a job is not of great importance, then the task can be delegated to other people. However, that does not mean that someone is not in the loop to oversee the progress of the project more so if the task is being done by some else. 

Employing Conflict Management

Samantha can address such concerns by outlining the framework of what she anticipates and her involvements in the project should be made clear. In such a manner, individuals will fathom from the beginning what to anticipate. As such it would not appear as if Samantha is checking on them to ensure that they are doing the job right instead it would see how they are faring on and giving them direction to ensure they are in line with the required business direction. Thus, Samantha allowing people to have some degree of control and input of the project will enable such people to comprehend that CEO wants to be involved in the project to help them. 

In my own opinion, I don’t think it is wise for executives to exercise control over projects as a means of maintaining authority. Instead, they should be acting as a guide helping individuals in their tasks so that they are in a position to achieve their desired goals. For instance, if an executive spends too much time and effort in trying to regulate and manage every project they come across they will lack time to work on other items of importance. Exercising control over projects may not be the best way to exert control as to when people feel that they have no say in what is happening around they will fail to invest their time in the projects. On the other hand, valuing people and making them feel part of the project will give them morale and motivation to be engaged and committed to seeing the success of the project. Employees do have the right to exercise some level of authority on the projects and be involved in decision making thought the overall objective is not for them to be in-charge always. Checking the progress of the projects is part and duty of the executives. Having executives that have no idea on what is going on in their business units could translate to the business heading towards the wrong direction. It is thus, crucial that the executives take charge of major projects as they are better positioned to manage all facets of their business as opposed to just controlling others. They should thus work collaboratively with other employees in a manner that is beneficial for both parties to attain some desired objectives.

Group behavior and team at work 

The core elements to establishing successful teamwork identified by Hackman was that teams are more probable to perform effectively in groups considered small that have regular members so that such a group can have a better comprehension of the varying strengths and weaknesses among members (Coutu, 2009). Thus, this will assist in saving more time for other tasks of importance, for instance, checking for any errors and preparing the team for emerging tasks. Hackman also identifies that working groups ought to have a leader who has a strong character capable of motivating all members to complete their tasks.

Q2

Another crucial condition that serves as a characteristic of an efficient working team is that there should be a well-crafted method of assessment that enables all members of a team to be assessed and given feedback on other members of the group so that all members of the group can have a picture of their pros and cons in the context of the organization. The use of feedback ensures that the team members avoid future conflicts as all members know the sections that they need to work on so that they can improve. 

In leading a new team of hired employees considered to be new, I will start by first understanding the strengths and weaknesses of my team to enable me to categorize and place them in groups where members have shared values. Thus, after placing them in groups, I will assign them tasks to help them become effective while minimizing any issues that may arise that may affect a particular project. One of the justifications for understanding the pros and cons of new workers is to help shed some light on the areas they need that they need to work on and improve. This ensures that the new employees do not end up being wasted as they can be assets valuable to the human resource and may drive in success for the company. Developing strategies for teamwork is essential in ensuring that once the team is in place, then they can be assigned tasks to see how collaborative they can be in managing the different situations they are faced with.

According to trait theory, it stresses that there is a particular group of fundamental personality distinguishers that distinguish leaders from followers. Theories that propose specific behaviors differentiate leaders from non-leaders. Behavior theories, on the other hand, refer to natural potential approach form of leadership. According to behavior theories, leaders are not born but are trained and the traits that leaders are expected to have been nurtured and taught. 

The organization can train people through seminars and workshops on the kind of leaders that they want to have. After such training, they should be examined to ascertain that they learned. Once satisfied that they have passed the evaluations, the application of what they learned should be facilitated and, in this way, effective leaders are developed.

The movie Six is about a group of soldiers that undertake various missions in countries such as Afghanistan where there are terrorists and extremists. Though from my point of view I believe that some of the actions during the mission were unfair for instance shooting one of the kids though he had no weapon as he had surrendered, my friend thinks it was the right move. He also believes that religion has been used to harbor terrorist groups a point that I defer since there are many occasions where religious leaders condemn such acts. 

References

Coutu, D. (2009). Why teams don’t work. Harvard Business Review, 99-105.

Joni, S. A., & Beyer, D. (2009). How to pick a good fight. Havard Business Review, 48-57.

Tushman, M. L., Smith, W. K., & Binns, A. (2011). The Ambidextrous CEO. Havard Business Review, 74-79.