Describe at least one obstacle to achieving effective communications that Fire Art faces
Effective communications at Fire Art Faces faced the problem of individual impediments. Even though Eric had tried to consolidate the support from most of the top executives, Randy strongly condemned the idea of having a strategic team. Randy had an objective of sabotaging the process and always disrupted all meetings held by Eric. As a result, Eric experienced glitches in keeping the track of the discussions in his agenda. Randy was a popular figure in Fire Art faces, and his history was full of the success story. Thus, his influence could not be ignored. In the first two meetings, Randy dominated the discussions, ridiculed other people’s ideas, and sometimes failed to pay attention (Wetlaufer, 1994). Nonetheless, Randy was unwilling to share important information about the company and answered questions put to him with infuriating madness. It can be assumed that Randy felt vulnerable, and that is why he always opted to withdraw or suppress the message in the held meetings. The negativism portrayed never ended in good faith.
Positive and negative team roles displayed by team members in this case
Randy played a negative team role. His negativism interfered with the entire process. He discouraged the formation of teams and emphasized that individual talents could inspire other team members to work towards a common objective. On the other hand, Ray Lapierre, Maureen Turner, and Carl Simmons played positive roles in this case. All of them were committed to supporting the strategic plans and even made presented cost-cutting proposals in the meeting. Ray, for instance, presented a plan that proposed a cut throughout time by 3% and raw materials by 2%, to develop better prices by the company.
One recommendation for Eric Holt to help him improve his team’s effectiveness
Eric could have ensured a common commitment by all the top executives before anything else. The first mistake Eric did was that he proceeded to instill the agenda presented by the CEO without making extensive consultations. It can be said that, “to have a comprehensive plan for strategic realignment,” was a vague approach. Eric could have consulted a team of qualified and experienced expertise that could have guided him in the appropriate manner. As a result, Eric could have focused on promoting the commitment of all members before presenting the agenda to them to avoid the misunderstandings (Gibson & Cohen, 2003).
Does this group function as a team?
It is clear that this group doesn’t function as a team. First, Eric faces a lot of resistance from the managers and Randy interferes with the whole process. To some point, Eric had problems with poor encoding. He failed to generate the right sensory stimuli to understand the message demonstrated in Randy’s voice at first. The group failed to work as a team as they confronted Randy when he had already split the beans. As a matter of fact, the group failed to work as a team since the culture of Fine Art failed to encourage collaboration and corporation since time immemorial. Therefore, it proved difficult to desire team-based results without putting a team-based structure into place (Kozlowski & Ilgen, 2006). Also, the management failed to pay attention to the importance of the task force by underestimating process and relationship.
References
Gibson, C. B., & Cohen, S. G. (Eds.). (2003). Virtual teams that work: Creating conditions for virtual team effectiveness. John Wiley & Sons.
Kozlowski, S. W., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological science in the public interest, 7(3), 77-124.
Wetlaufer, S. (1994). The team that wasn't. Harvard Business Review, 72(6), 22.
