Group Consulting Project HMD665

Group Consulting Project

 

This assignment is worth 20% of your grade. It gives you an opportunity to work with a group of peers to synthesize and apply what you have learned this term about effective virtual teams. The assignment addresses Course Objectives 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.

 

This assignment has been adapted from the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), Managing Virtual Work Teams – A SHRM case study by Frankie S. Jones, PhD.

For this group assignment there are three parts.

· Part I: An Introduction to Virtual Teams

· Part II: Building a Virtual Team

· Part III: Managing Conflict Virtually

Directions: In your groups, you will review, discuss, and address questions in each of these parts in order to arrive at your collective responses. As part of your discussion, you are to apply what you have read and discussed in our course in order to justify your position. Use outside sources for any other information you need to complete this assignment. Use the group discussion forum prepared for your team to summarize your group responses to each part of the case study.

After your team discusses all three parts associated with this case, the team will prepare a 7-10 page paper that includes your team’s responses and addresses the questions in each of the three parts properly. This paper will serve as your team voice to coach Lauren on how to lead her cross-functional team to success and overcome the issues presented in the case study. In other words, the team members will collaborate to write the paper, and each team member will submit this paper to the assignment section to facilitate grading. Your team paper should include a minimum of 10 references from sources published within the last ten years.

 

Part I: An Introduction to Virtual Teams

Lauren is assigned team leader of a cross-functional team for a very important project to the company. Lauren reviews the profiles of the six team members her boss gave her. She is both intrigued and anxious when she sees that team members are geographically dispersed.

Lauren works in the Atlanta office. One team member is in India; another is in Germany; and the rest live in the United States, but in different time zones. Two staff members are in the Eastern Time zone (Virginia and North Carolina) and two staff members are in the central time zone (Texas and Louisiana).

Lauren has never managed a virtual team and is unsure what special skills it will take to be successful. She begins to wonder what competencies are necessary for virtual team leaders and members. She studies the team member profiles and creates a matrix to evaluate each member’s strengths and weaknesses from the perspective of working virtually. She includes herself because she realizes she needs to evaluate her own strengths and weaknesses. Lauren thinks about the challenges and opportunities she will face managing this virtual team.

In your assigned groups, you are to:

· Review the supplied team member matrix.

· Brainstorm the challenges and/or opportunities Lauren’s team might face.

· Record your ideas in the group discussion forum.

 

Team Member Matrix

Team Member	Location (Time Zone)	Communication Preferences	Virtual experience	Strengths	Weaknesses
Lauren (Team Manager)	Atlanta, GA (Eastern)	E-mail	No	· Building and maintaining trust. · Performance management and coaching. · Networking.	· Appropriate use of information technology. · Developing and adapting standard team processes. · Managing across cultures.
Santosh	Pune, India (GMT+05:30)	Instant messaging	Yes	· Interpersonal awareness. · Use of technology.	· Self-management. · Project management.
John	Wilmington, NC (Eastern)	Telephone	No	· Networking face-to-face.	· Use of technology. · Spanning boundaries.
Joyce	Norfolk, VA (Eastern)	E-mail	Yes	· Self-management. · Project management.	· Networking.
Helga	Berlin, Germany (Central European)	SharePoint; Webconferencing (with video)	Yes	· Use of technology.	· Interpersonal awareness. · Project management.
Adam	Dallas, TX (Central)	Instant messaging, discussion boards	No	· Networking via technology. · Spanning boundaries.	· Use of technology.
Brenda	New Orleans, LA (Central)	Instant messaging; blogs; SharePoint; e-mail	Yes	· Use of technology. · Interpersonal awareness. · Networking. · Spanning boundaries.	· Self-management.

 

Part II: Building a Virtual Team

Lauren has evaluated the challenges and opportunities that could arise as she manages her virtual team. To mitigate challenges and take advantage of opportunities, she decides to conduct a kick-off meeting next week. She wants to set the ground rules for how her team will operate and present them at the kick-off meeting. What topics should Lauren’s agenda include? Which ground rules should she mandate and which should she negotiate? How will she build relationships and trust during this initial meeting?

In your assigned groups, you are to:

· Create an agenda for Lauren’s kick-off meeting.

· Explain why you chose each agenda topic.

· Identify the ground rules for the team, and propose which ground rules she should mandate and which ones she should negotiate.

· Recommend ways that Lauren could build relationships and trust during this initial meeting.

· Record your responses in the group discussion forum.

 

Part III: Managing Conflict Virtually

Even though your team presented Lauren with an agenda for the kickoff meeting, along with ground rules, she used the agenda below for the kick-off meeting.

She set expectations for status reporting, the technologies to be used, and performance management. The types of communication the team agreed on included e-mail, instant messaging, and web conferencing. The team also agreed to use Microsoft SharePoint to report project status and to create a virtual community for team members to build relationships and trust. Lauren asked all team members to upload their pictures and their résumés to jump-start the community.

Lauren’s Agenda:

· Getting-to-Know-You Activity

· Team Goals and Objectives

· Technologies We Will Use (open discussion)

· Virtual Community (pictures and bios)

· Status Reporting

· Team Meetings

· One-on-one meetings

 

Despite setting ground rules, the following conflicts arose within Lauren’s team:

· Lags in e-mail responses generated mistrust between two team members.

· One team member complained that the other team members tried to use instant messaging to solve complex problems and resolutions are never reached.

· There has been an uneven exchange of project knowledge.

In your assigned groups, you are to:

· Recommend actions Lauren should take now to resolve these conflicts.

· Discuss what Lauren could have done to prevent the conflicts from occurring in the first place.

· Recommend actions Lauren can take to minimize team conflict in the future.

· Record your responses in the group discussion forum.

 

Remember: As a team, you will prepare one paper and on the cover page you will include the names of each team member. Additionally , you will each submit the paper to the assignment section, to facilitate grading.

 

Note: I will observe your level of engagement with your peers on this project. I will also send you a peer evaluation form (will be sent just prior to submitting your team paper). Each team member will evaluate the contributions of her/his peers to the project. Evaluation will consist of ratings on team member input, involvement, and support.

 

 

Due date: November 25 11:59 p.m. Eastern time

 

 

Please see the next page for the grading criteria for this assignment.

 

 

 

6

 

Criteria for Grading Group Consulting Project

 

Note: The group’s paper should be 7 to 10 pages long, excluding the reference and cover pages.

 

A B C F Points Earned Knowledge of Relevant Theories and Concepts (40 pts) Group demonstrated exceptional knowledge of relevant theories and concepts from the course; all statements and opinions were supported by appropriate citations from the literature.     40 – 36 points Group demonstrated satisfactory knowledge of relevant theories and concepts from the course; most statements and opinions were supported by appropriate citations from the literature.   35 – 32 points Group demonstrated less than satisfactory knowledge of relevant theories and concepts from the course; some statements and opinions were not supported by appropriate citations from the literature.   31 – 28 points Group demonstrated unsatisfactory knowledge of relevant theories and concepts from the course; many statements and opinions were not supported by appropriate citations from the literature.   27 – 0 points   Comments   Quality of Research (30 pts) Group did an exceptional job of integrating course readings with the team’s additional research. Group cited more than the minimum number of references; sources listed were all scholarly or practitioner journals, newspapers, annual reports, or academic books from the last ten years.     30 – 27 points Group did a satisfactory job of integrating course readings with the team’s additional research. Group cited the minimum number of references; sources listed were primarily scholarly or practitioner journals, newspapers, annual reports, or academic books from the last ten years.       26 – 24 points Group did a less than satisfactory job of integrating course readings with the team’s additional research. Group may not have cited the minimum number of references; some sources listed were not scholarly or practitioner journals, newspapers, annual reports, or academic books from the last ten years.   23 – 21 points Group did an inadequate job of integrating course readings with the team’s additional research. Group did not cite the minimum number of references; many of the sources listed were not scholarly or practitioner journals, newspapers, annual reports, or academic books from the last ten years.   20 – 0 points   Comments     Presentation of Ideas and Mechanics (20 pts) Group presented ideas in a compelling manner with no distracting grammar or spelling problems; the tone was consistently professional and appropriate for the audience; the page length requirement was met.     20 – 18 points Group presented ideas presented in a clear, coherent manner with few distracting grammar or spelling problems; the tone was generally professional and mostly appropriate for the audience; the page length requirement was met.     17 – 16 points Group presented ideas in a somewhat organized manner with several distracting grammar or spelling problems; the tone was not consistently professional and appropriate for the audience; the page length requirement may not have been met.   15 – 14 points Group presented ideas in a poorly organized or incoherent manner with many distracting grammar or spelling problems; the tone was unprofessional and not appropriate for the audience; the page length requirement may not have been met.     13 – 0 points   Comments   APA formatting (5 pts) All citations, quotations, and references were properly formatted or contained one or two minor errors.     5 points Most citations, quotations, and references were properly formatted or contained a few minor errors.   4 points Some citations, quotations, and references were not properly formatted or contained major errors.     3 points Most citations, quotations, and references were not properly formatted or contained many errors.     2 – 0 points   Comments   Contribution to Group’s Work (5 pts) Instructor’s observations and peer ratings indicate outstanding contributions to the group’s work.   5 points Instructor’s observations and peer ratings indicate satisfactory contributions to the group’s work.   4 points Instructor’s observations and peer ratings indicate minimal contributions to the group’s work.     3 points Instructor’s observations and peer ratings indicate unsatisfactory or no contributions to the group’s work.   2 – 0 points   Comments           Total Points Earned (100 points max)       Overall Comments