MAY E.

ESCALONA
MPA- HUMAN BEHAVIOR IN ORGANIZATION
Case Study – A Difficult Task Force 

Summary

In the case the group has been formed and started a meeting for new high-end,
designer pet coffins in the market to develop new designs for the new product to meet growing
demand everywhere. José has been appointed as its chair. Mariana Preus said that the current
designs are top-notch and no need to develop a new product line and Noto Takeshi agreed on
that. Then José reminded everyone why the group has been formed; to revolutionize the
product and its manufacturing systems based on solid evidence and industry data. Since
existing designs were old enough to manufacture easily at low cost to make a significant impact
on the market, though the discussion turn up again into the benefits of using the existing
designs. At the end Tex suggested to follow what Mariana recommended. Others nodded their
heads in agreement and exhorted to start right away to design the plant and the manufacturing
system. In addition they urged José to submit the memo to the council of presidents with this
recommendation. José repeat the purpose and informed that the proposal would not be
satisfied the council of presidents.

Case Questions

Which characteristics of group behavior discussed in the chapter can you identify in this case?

ROLE:
In the case the joint venture was created to make, sell, and service pet caskets (coffins) for the
burial of beloved pets (cats and dogs). Each company has assigned their valuable personnel.

NORMS:
In the case the group members shared their point of views and everyone listened to each other.

STATUS
In the case the members of the group are from three different countries with different way of
perception and rituals.

SIZE
In the case, there are nine people in the group. The group is not small but not that big also.
However, it has enough members to solve problems and make decision for the improvement of
the product line.

COHESIVENESS
In the case, the group is under the Moderate Productivity because the members were in high
Norms but less cohesive; they are not motivated enough to contribute their productivity rather
then they are interested to finish the meeting as soon as possible without giving importance to
the purpose of the meeting.

DIVERSITY
In the case, the diverse nature of the members of the task force influence and affect the
committee’s actions and decisions.
 How did the diverse nature of the group affect the committee’s actions?

The diverse nature of the group affected the committee’s actions negatively. The members'

diverse perspectives undoubtedly influenced the decision process. Supposedly, a cross-
functional design team like this task force would be expected to make better design decisions
than a more homogeneous team because task related underlying attributes such as knowledge,
skills, and abilities are assumed to be associated with unit membership. Instead, stages  of 
group formation wasn’t properly conducted,  focus  was  largely  centered  on  task‐
performing.  As  a  result  members  knew  very  little  about  each  other  and  did  not
bond as a team, which was  critical  for sharing and achieving the objectives and vision of the
project. The team‐exercise was done (golf) after  the  task  was  executed  which  I think was 
a bit too late. Jose approached the task with  a  top‐down  approach  (didn’t  own  the  idea) 
which made the group resist the new changes. Jose himself  seemed  not  sold into  the  idea 
as  he  failed  to  express  his  own  feelings  on  the  matter.  He  also  lost  control  of  the
meeting to Maria allowing her to  influence others. 

 If you were in Jose’s position, what would you have done differently? What would you do
now?

If I were in Jose’s position, as chair of the task force, I would have tried harder to keep the
group headed toward the stated goal. I would have finished or applied rightly the remaining
stages of group formation: norming stage- in the case, though everyone was agreed in one
point but they didn’t understand the purpose of the meeting that José were continuously
repeating; performing stage- in the case, members were decided to stay with the existing
product line though the purpose was to develop the new product line and its manufacturing
systems according to industry data; adjourning stage- in the case the group is not at the stage
where the will discontinue because the purpose yet not accomplished. Also, I would have used
advantage/ disadvantage  approach  to  assess  whether  to keep old designs or not which is
good for dissolving group think. I would take  ownership  of  the  idea and encourage a more
serious group discussion and not rely on one person’s, in this case, Maria’s opinion. As chair of
the task force I would allow  more  time, maybe a week for  task  to  be  completed instead  of 
a day. Lastly, I would have tried reaching for a compromise to be able to completely
revolutionize the product which is the sole purpose of this joint venture.

Now, I would do the following strategies:

 Before starting the meeting everyone should be clear about the objective
 Have clearly defined tasks, with sharp timings and with the appropriate tools organized
 Have clearly defined group roles
 It the responsibility of the chairperson to guide the group into the organization’s mission
to accomplish the purpose.
 Have clear ground rules for talk, listening and fair allocation of workload etc.

RECOMMENDATION:
 Emphasize the importance of group work.
 Use team-building exercises to build cohesive groups.
 Successful group work requires respect and trust between group members, as well as
an individual willingness to be responsible, work in tandem with others and commit to
collective undertakings.
 Consider roles for group members.
 Require individual members to keep track of their contributions.
 Strive for continuous improvement.