COST Company tried their best to grasp the sophisticated technology, thus the COST Company used highly to training the professionals, like the geologists, geophysicists, and the engineers. The COST Company also trained the skilled and semiskilled labor that run the company’s field operations. On the other hand the professional labor and the skilled labor, the two groups always occurs the clashed. As Martin Bouchard as the present and CEO in the COST Company, and his top goals was to introduce teams as a way of solving the morale and productivity problems at the company’s Alberta field operations site.
According to those problems the COST Company hired Algoma Howard, who is a First Nations descendant, to be success in solving teamwork. Howard invited Carlos Debrito as the leader worked for the Alberta pilot program, and Debrito is a long-time employee in the COST Company who was highly respect by the employees in the Alberta Office, and Debrito was looking for one final challenging project before his retiring.
There are three functional groups at the Alberta site; they are “operations” group, the “below ground” group, and the “maintenance” group.
The “operation” group included the hourly workers who operated and maintained the equipment; the “below ground” group, which are the professionals include the engineers, geologists and geophysicists; the “maintenance” group who are the employees always on call. As the Howard and Debrito were the leaders in the COST Company, they tried their best to solving the morale and productivity problems for the Alberta field operations site. The first step was the “fireside chats” which is to get the employees together, ask them to give several ideas to solve the problems.
As many people join the “fireside chats” and almost every session came to fisticuffs until Debrito announced someone needed to go out. Moreover, during the next session, Debrito and Howard established the “rules of engagement” which is better for them to organize. The next step for the Howard and Debrito is to introduce the official “problem busting” teams, which is the temporary team, and the team members are coming from each of the three functional areas and from various hierarchical levels, and each was assigned a team leader.
Their aims are to help the COST Company solving the problems, and after they finishing the work, the team disbanded. Moreover, the problems what they addressed, which within certain cost guidelines and without the management approval. After this the COST Company identified the Colorado office as their next facility, Howard want to introduce her leadership of the cross-functional teams that was successful in the Alberta, however, the employees are all stressful in the Colorado. On the following paragraph, I will focus on what the Howard and Debrito did in the COST Company. 2. 0 Team development stages
The role of Algoma Howard and Carlos Debrito in Alberta As we can see from the case, the COST Company hired Algoma Howard, who was the First Nations descendant. He tried his best to develop the teamwork program which is better for the COST Company to improve the productivity as well as the morale at the Calgary facility. Howard was success before by using the teams, he tried his best to bring the people together, and tried his best to coordinate the employees and everything, to let them understand one another’s problems and challenges, and coordinate their effort to achieve the organizational goals.
Furthermore, his teamwork idea was success and was implementing at other COST locations after the pilot project. As we can see from the case, Carlos Debrito, he was a long-time COST employee who was highly respected by the other employees in the Alberta office. As he was a skilled and experienced employee, he was looking for a big final project before his retiring. Debrito has served in every possible line and staff position at the COST in his 26 years career timing.
He is an experienced leader who knows the problems workers faced on both technical and business, thus Howard invited Debrito as a leader, who served for the Alberta pilot program. Therefore, as we can see the relationship from the Algoma Howard and Carlos Debrito in Alberta sites, Howard as the president in the Alberta pilot program, and Debrito as the leaders who served in every possible line and staff position at the Alberta pilot program.
Thus we can say that Algoma Howard and Carlos Debrito are the leaders in the Alberta pilot program, who want to develop the teamwork in the Alberta sites. “Fireside chats” The first step what the Howard and Debrito decided was to get these different groups talking to each other and share the ideas together; this was the main purpose of the “fireside chats”. The chats were held in the cafeteria during the late afternoon, and the people who show up the chats have the free coffee/tea and some snake which were all bought by Howard and Debrito.
Furthermore, the idea was to give the employees a chance to share the difficulties and unresolved problems in such relaxing time and relaxing places, if the employees get together and share the difficulties and the unresolved problems together, maybe they can solve the difficulties, or share the creativity ideas with the unresolved parts. Initially, there are only two people who attend the “fireside chats”, gradually, more and more people attended the meetings. At first, the early session was focused on the employees saw their needs, as well as the problems in working with other group.
The disadvantage of the early session was that the sessions came to fisticuffs until Debrito announced that somebody had to go out, however, after this session, Howard and Debrito established the guidelines which are the rules of the engagement. Within the six months development, the “fireside chats” had involved lively problem-solving discussions focus on the three important groups. “Problem busting” The nest step for Howard and Debrito to introduce was the “problem busting” teams, which was the temporary team.
The temporary team included the members who from each three functional areas as well as from various hierarchical levels, and which were assigned by the team leaders. The training by the team leader was including in team-building, shared-leadership, as well as the creative problems-solving techniques. The team was established for the solving the problems which from the “fireside chat”, after solving the problems, the teams were disbanded, furthermore, the CEO in the COST announced that the problems addressing by the “problem busting” team within the certain cost guidelines without seeking management approval.
After a year and a half into the team-building program, the entire workforces in the Alberta were empowering to make their owner decisions as well as to select their own leaders. Team development “Team development creates a captivating atmosphere by encouraging co-operation, teamwork, interdependence and by building trust among team members. ” (Motivating, Bonding & Aligning team, 2012) Actually the team goes through five stages of the team development, the each stage present its own challenge and in each stage, the leaders should adapt the challenging and developing the needs of the group.
The team development has five stages, which are the forming stage, storming stage, norming stage, performing stage and adjourning stage. On the following paragraph I will talk about each stage, and I will combine the case together to analysis the each stage of the team development, and what the leaders need to do in the stage. First of all, I will show the graph, as we can see: Performing: Cooperation, problem solving Leaders: facilitates task accomplishment Performing: Cooperation, problem solving Leaders: facilitates task accomplishment Storming:
Conflict, disagreement Leaders: encourage participation, surfaces differences Storming: Conflict, disagreement Leaders: encourage participation, surfaces differences Norming: Establishment of order and cohesion Leader: helps clarify team roles, norm, and values Norming: Establishment of order and cohesion Leader: helps clarify team roles, norm, and values Adjourning: Task completion Leaders: brings closure, signifies completion Adjourning: Task completion Leaders: brings closure, signifies completion Team development: Forming: Orientation, break the ice.
Leaders: facilitates social interchanges Forming: Orientation, break the ice. Leaders: facilitates social interchanges The first stage is the forming stage, “during this stage, group members maybe anxious and adopt wait-and see attitude, they will be formal towards each other. There would be no clear idea of goals or expectations. Besides, they may not be sure why they are there” (Susan M. Heathfield, 2012) as we can see from the forming stage which is the orientation stage and the members in teams tried their best to getting the acquainted.
The members in the team tried their best to know each other and for the friendship possibilities as well as the task orientation. In the forming stage, the team leaders provide time and place for the members to understand each other, to encourage them for the social discussions. The second stage which is storming stage, “during this stage, team members are eager to get going, conflict can arise as people tend to different ideas of how to accomplish goals. At this time, they notice differences rather than similarities. This leads to some members dropping out mentally physically. (Susan M. Heathfield, 2012) During the storming stage, the members in the team become more assertive in clarifying their roles, thus in this stage, there exist a lot of conflict and disagreement. The members in the team maybe disagree with teams’ goals; maybe disagree with the partners and so on. What the leaders need to do in this stage is to encourage the participation by each member. “Members should propose ideas, dis agree with one another, and work through the uncertainties and conflicting perceptions about team tasks and goals” (Richard L.
Daft, 2012) The third stage is norming stage, “this stage is when people begin to recognize ways in which they are alike. They realize that they are in this together. Hence, they tend to get more social and may forget their focus in favor of having a good time. This is the time to help with training if applicable. It becomes important to encourage them in order to feel comfortable with each other and with systems. Also, the group needs to stay focus on goal” (Susan M.
Heathfield, 2012) As we can see from the norming stage, in this stage the conflict is resolved and the tem is getting harmony and unity emerge, and what the leaders need to do is to help clarifying the teams’ values and norms. The fourth stage is the performance stage, “this stage is when tea members are trained, competent, as well as able to do their own problem-solving. At this time, ways need to be looked t in order to challenge then as well as develop them. The team is mature now. The members understand their roles and responsibilities. ” (Susan M.
Heathfield, 2012) during this stage, it is emphasis on solving the problems and accomplishing the assigned task. Members are all committed to the teams’ mission, the members are coordinated with each other for the problems solving. During this stage, the leader should concentrate on the higher task performances. The last stage is the adjourning stage, in this stage we can see that the team has limited task to perform and disbanded eventually. In this stage, it is emphasis on the wrapping up and gearing down. The members in this stage feel heighted emotionality, strong cohesiveness and regret for the teams’ disbandment.
During this stage, the leaders should signify the team has disbanded. Combine the COST Company’s case According to the case we can see that the Howard and the Debrito are the leaders in the Alberta pilot program. As we can see that the Howard and Debrito established the “fireside chats” which is open for the employees, and it is the optional meetings provide for the employees and to getting the acquainted, and to get the different groups together to share the ideas, this is the idea for the “fireside chats”, and the fireside chats was established in the cafeteria which provide the free coffee, tea and snake for the employees.
First of all, the only people who showed up the meeting were the couple of engineers. Thus Debrito and Howards go to a small talk with the couple of the engineers, thus we can see that the first day of meeting was the forming stage of the team development. After the first meeting, the words spread, and gradually, many people attended the meetings, thus the early sessions focused on talking about the each group’s needs, and the problems in other groups.
This is also the forming stage in the team development, however, during the one session, there exist the fisticuffs during the meeting, the fisticuffs stopped until the Debrito announced that someone need to get out, therefore, we can see that the “fireside chat” became the storming stage in the team development which the team occurring the conflict for each other.
Furthermore, during the next session, Debrito and Howard establish the “rules of engagement” which is the guidelines to avoid such conflicts happened in the meeting again, thus we can see that the stage is the norming stage, which is for the leaders to solve the conflict and let them form the norms as well as the values in the company.
As we can see that the next step for the Howard and Debrito is to establish the “problem busting” team which is the temporary teams for solving the problems which was unsolved in the “fireside chats”, thus we can see that the team was in the performance stage, which is the cooperation, and for the problems solving. Finally, the operation workers suggested that the team members should get rid of the weekly sessions and they could focus on their job, and limited problems for solving.
Thus we can see the program already in the last stage which is adjourning stage; the team is facing the disbanded. 3. 0 member roles and leadership approach Member roles In the team there are two types of roles one is task specialist and the other is the socio- emotional, the two roles are different, they focus on different part. First of all we can see that the specialist role in the team which is focus on the task accomplishment by the human needs. On the other hand, we can see that socio-emotional role in a team which is focus on the people’s emotion needs. Task specialist is an employee who is assigned to the development of valid and reliable tasks for other people working for one and the same organization. ” (Glossary, 2012) as we can see that the task specialist who focus on the task accomplishment over the people’s needs, thus the “task specialist knows and understand task management standard, performance measure, and assessment practices required for identifying and developing tasks descriptions and for use by dedicated human resources” (Glossary, 2012) there are several behaviors which display the task specialist.
First of all, the task specialists are the persons who always propose the new solutions for solving the team problems, which is so called initiate ideas. Secondly, the task specialists are the persons who provide the opinions on the task accomplishment, also give the fair chances to others’ suggestions. Thirdly, the task specialists are the persons who always seeking the information which is asking for the task-reverent facts.
Fourthly, the task specialists are the persons who get a various ideas of the problems at hand, and summary them together, that is so called summarize. Last but not at least, the task specialists are the persons who encourage the team into action when the teams’ interest dropped. “Socio-emotional is a process that consists of variations that occur in an individual’s personality, emotions and relationships with others during one’s lifetime; Socio-emotional role team members devote their time and nergy to supporting the emotional needs of team members and to maintaining the team as a social unit” (Santrock, 2007) the people who adopt the socio-emotional role are the person who support the team members’ needs over the task accomplishment. There are several behaviors which are for the socio-emotional display. First of all, the socio-emotional roles are the persons who are warm and well to receipt the others’ ideas, and also forth others to make the contribution for the team. Secondly, the socio-emotional roles are the persons who are well for harmonize the groups’ conflict, as well as help the teams to achieve the agreement.
Thirdly, the socio-emotional roles are the persons who help the team reduce the tension; they help the team to reduce the tensional environment, like telling the jokes. Fourthly, the socio-emotional roles are the persons who always go along with the team, and always agree the team members’ ideas, that’s we called follow. Last but not at least, the socio-emotional roles are the persons who always shift their own opinions which are better for maintain the teams’ harmony. In the COST Company’s case (Carlos Debrito)
As we can see from the COST Company’s case, Carlos Debrito who is a long-time COST employee who is highly respected by the employees in the Alberta office and he was also looking for the final project before his retiring and Algoma Howard invited the Debrito as a leader for the Alberta pilot program. Debrito did a lot of things to help the Howard to achieve the goals, as far as I am concerned, Carlos Debrito displays the task specialist as well as the socio-emotional roles. As we can see from the case, that Debrito tried his best to help the Howard to achieve the goals which is to solving the morale as well as the problems of productivity.
Thus Debrito established the “fireside chats” and also established the “problem busting” team, which helped the Company to achieve its goals, according to this situation; we can see that Debrito is the task specialist, who help the team to realize the task accomplishment, and he always proposed the solutions which is “fireside chats” and “problem busting” team, to help the team solve the problems. Furthermore, he always was seeking the information for the relevant task which is better for the team to solving the problems, and Debrito always encourage his members when their interests are dropped.
Moreover, we can see that after the “fireside chats”, we can see that Debrito always helped the team to summarize the relevant ideas and summarize the perspectives for the organization. On the other hand, we can see form the case that, Debrito displays the socio-emotional roles in the team, and he supports the team members’ emotional needs. As we can see from the case, that Debrito find several ways for the team to solve the conflict between the labor and the professionals, moreover, Debrito tried his best to make the compromise which shift his opinions to maintain the harmony of the team.
Thus we can say that Debrito display both task specialist roles as well as the socio-emotional roles, Debrito not only achieve the organizational goals, but also do a lot of things to consider the team members’ emotional needs. Leadership approach “participative leadership is a style of leadership that involves all members of a team in identifying essential goals and developing procedures or strategies for reach those goals” (wiseGEEK, 2012)as we can see that the participative leadership which is the leadership approach required all the members join the team to solving the problems as well as making the decisions together.
As we can see from the COST Company’s case, which the Algoma Howard and the Carlos Debrito tried their best to achieve their goals. The goals of the COST Company are to solving the morale as well as to solving the productivity problems. Thus Howard and Debrito established the “fireside chats”, which is for the optimal meeting provided for the employees to understand them each other. At the first time, there are only two people join the meeting, Howard and Debrito established a small chatting with them and talk to them.
After the first meeting finished many people know the meeting and want to join the meeting, thus gradually many people join the meeting, and the meeting becoming very important in a team. As we can see that the meetings are very important in the organization, and many people join the meetings. Furthermore, we can see that during the meeting many team members share the ideas each other, and talk to each other with the departments’ needs, making the decisions together, and solving the problems together. During this process we can see that the leaders using the participative leadership approach to help the organization to achieve their goals. Situational leadership is a leadership style that has been developed and studied by Kenneth Blanchard and Paul Hersey. The situational leadership refers to when the leader or manager of an organization must adjust his style to fit the development level of the followers he is trying to influence. ” (Small Business, 2012)As we can see that the situational leadership approach is the leadership style which depends on the situation, it is focus on the situations as well as the development of the company and the members in the company
As we can see from the COST Company case, in this case we can see that the Howard and Debrito using the “fireside chat” to help the employees understand each other as well as share the ideas for each other, however, when the “fireside chat” are famous in the organization, there exist some conflicts between the member, thus according to this situation, Debrito establishes the “rules of the engagement” which include the guidelines that to let the employees obey the rules for the meeting. Furthermore, during the “fireside chat” developing, Debrito established another team which is “problem busting” team.
This team is established for solving the problems which discovered the in “fireside chat”, thus according to this situation we can see that leaders who is according to the situations of the organizational development. Furthermore, as we can see that, as the “fireside chat” developed, and after this the members find the information is limited to share and the employees have limited problems to share, according to this situation, the leaders reduce the frequency of the “fireside chat” times.
Thus we can say that the leaders who is Howard and Debrito are using the situational leadership approach as well as the participative leadership approach, which ask the members to join the “fireside chat” and share the ideas each other, and the leaders also adjust the leadership style according to the development of the “fireside chat” as well as the members’ emotions. Do you agree the project will succeed or not? As far as I am concerned I disagree with Algoma Howard that just has a Carlos Debrito in the Colorado project.
As we can see from the case, Carlos Debrito is the employee who worked in the Alberta office in the COST Company, and he is respected by the employees in the COST Company, as we can see from the case he served in every possible line and staff position at COST Company, thus he know the COST Company well, for the each possible line and the staff’s position. Furthermore, as we can see from the case, that he understand the problems what the staffs facing now, and the technical problems that the company facing now, thus he is an skilled as well as the experienced employees in the Alberta office in the COST Company.
Furthermore, he worked 26 years old in the Alberta office in the COST Company, and he knows the COST Company well. Moreover, as we can see from the case, Howard invited Debrito as the leaders in the Alberta project, and during the project, he point many methods to help the organization to achieve the goals, as well as to help them solving the conflict between the labors and the professionals. Although Debrito know how to solve the problems during the Alberta offices, Debrito know how to solve the conflict between labors and professions, and he has ability, he has knowledge and he a skilled as well as experienced employees and leaders.
When happened in the Colorado the situations are different, as Debrito worked just in the Alberta office, and he do many researches on the Alberta office, and although he understand the problems of the employees, but he do not know the details in the Colorado office, thus if Howard just has Debrito in the Colorado project, as far as I am concerned it is not enough. The best way for the Howard is to invite the leaders who understand the Colorado project well, and combine the leader with Debrito together to solving the problems and help the COST Company solving the problems as well as achieving the goals. . 0 Conclusion: work team effectiveness What is team effectiveness? “Team effectiveness refers to the system of getting people in a company or institution to work together effectively. The idea behind team effectiveness is that a group of people working together can achieve much more than if the individuals of the team were working on their own. ” (WiseGEEK, 2012) As we can see that it is better for the company to achieve the team working effectiveness, if the companies make the team effectiveness, they can solve the problems effectively and they can achieve the goals effectively as well.
There are several ways for the organization to testing their team effectiveness, on the following paragraph I will focus on the methods what to testing the team effectiveness as well as give some recommendations for the COST Company to develop their team effectiveness. First of all, is the right mix skill, “team effectiveness depends in part on bringing together people who have different skills that somehow complement each other. ” (WiseGEEK, 2012) as we can see that it is important for the company to bringing all the skilled, experienced together in a team to help the company solving to problems as well as to help them achieving the goals.
Thus as we can see from the COST Company, when the Howard became the CEO in the Alberta office, he invited Debrito as a leader in the Alterta’s project, and Alberta is the employee who respect by the employees and he is the skilled people and experienced people. Moreover, as far as I am concerned, the COST Company should invite more skilled and experienced people, who can help the COST Company solving the problems as well as to help them achieve the goals.
The second is the right motivation, “team effectiveness is directly linked to the interest that the group has on the project. If the job is too easy or too difficult, or if the rewards for achieving the end result do not seem worth the effort, the team may end up working half-heartedly in the project. ” (WiseGEEK, 2012) As we can see that the motivations are very important to the team, if the team leaders always do the motivations for the employees, the employees will worked well and will help the organization solving the problems as well as to achieving the goals.
Thus in the CSOT Company, the leaders in the organization should do a lot of things to do the motivations for the employees, make sure every employees are happy working in the organization, and to improve their working effectively. Last but not at least, “is the ability to solve conflicts without compromising the quality of the project, the team work has one major downfall. Sometimes groups end up making decisions they know are not in the best interest of the project, just so they can keep the process moving.
Conflict is innate to any work done in group, and should be taken as part of the challenge rather than as something to be avoided by compromising. ”(WiseGEEK, 2012) as we can see that if want make the team effectiveness, the organization has to solving the problems of conflict, as we can see from the COST Company, in Alberta project, the leaders tried their best to solving the conflict between the labors and the professionals. Moreover, as far as I am concerned, the team has to solve more conflict between the labors.
All in all, the organization want to make the team effectiveness, they must organize the skilled person together, and to provide the motivation for the employees, moreover, to solve the conflict in the organization. If the organization establishes the effectiveness team, they can solve the problems as well as to achieving the organization goals. Bibliography 1. Susan M. Heathfield (2012) what are the stages of team development [Online] Available at: http://humanresources. about. com/od/teambuilding/f/team_stages. htm (Accessed date: 15th Nov, 2012) 2.
MSG (2012) Team Development- meaning, stages and forming an effective team [Online] Available at: http://www. managementstudyguide. com/team-development. htm (Accessed date: 15th Nov, 2012) 3. Center for Management & Organization effectiveness (2012) Team Development & Team Building [Online] Available at: http://www. cmoe. com/team-development. htm (Accessed date: 15th Nov, 2012) 4. Harvard Business Review (2012) Choose the right leadership approach [Online] available at: http://business. time. com/2012/07/27/choose-the-right-leadership-approach/ (Accessed date: 15th, 2012) . JoomlArt (2012) Five Approaches to Leadership [Online] Available at: http://www. roxburghmissionalnet. com/index. php? option=com_content&view=article&id=139:five-approaches&catid=45:leadership&Itemid=89 (Accessed date: 15th Nov, 2012) 6. WISEGEEK (2012) what is Team Effectiveness? [Online] Available at: http://www. wisegeek. com/what-is-team-effectiveness. htm#lbss (Accessed date: 15th Nov, 2012) 7. Mind Tool Ltd (2012) Team Effectiveness Assessment [Online] Available at: http://www. mindtools. com/pages/article/newTMM_84. htm (Accessed date: 15th Nov, 2012)
Cite this essay
Assignment: Leadership and Cost Company. (2018, Oct 29). Retrieved from https://studymoose.com/assignment-leadership-and-cost-company-essay