Writing Assignment & Discussion

Leading Productive Teams

MSL

Hall #

Iron Sharpens Iron: Sharpening the

Team Mind

Format for Hall session

• Introduction of the Hall

• Hall Topics

• Christian worldview applications

• Major points for the week’s learning

Topics we’ll cover

• The Biblical value of communication in work

• Scriptural examples of value of learning and wisdom

•

Team Communication

• Putting a Team together

• Group Size

• Group think

• Team Learning

• Team Decision making

• Decision making pitfalls

• Lessons from “

The Apprentice

Biblical Foundation

• Proverbs 27: 17 Iron sharpens Iron

Hall Objectives

• Team Communication
• Putting a Team together
• Group Size
• Group think
• Team Learning
• Team Decision making
• Decision making pitfalls

• Lessons from “The Apprentice”

Questions for Reflection & Study

• What are makes for good team communication?

• How does group size reflect communication?

• What is the rational decision making model?

• What are some pitfalls of team decision making?

• How do you remedy or prevent unethical
decision making?

• What does the Bible have to say about holding
each other accountable?

Team Communication

• Biases and points of possible error
• Message tuning

• Message distortion

• Biased interpretation

• Perspective-taking failures (curse of knowledge)

• Transparency illusion

• Indirect speech acts

• Uneven communication problem

Distribution of Participation as a

Function of Group Size

Source: Shaw, M. E. (1981). Group dynamics: The psychology of small group behavior (3rd ed). New York: McGraw-Hill.

The Hierarchy of Understanding

DifficultEasy

Specific

General

Context

Noise

Detection

Data

Information

Knowledge

Wisdom

Understanding

Symbols

Understanding

Relations

Understanding

Patterns

Understanding

Principles

Source: Nunamaker, J. F., Jr., Romano, N. C., & Briggs, R. O. (2002). Increasing intellectual bandwidth: Generating value from intellectual capital
with information technology. Group Decision and Negotiation, 11, 69–86.

Three Possible Distributions of Information

A,C,B,D

A,C,

B,E

A,C,D,F
A,D

B,E

C,F

A,B,C,D,E,F

A,B,C,D,E,F
A,B,C,D,E,F

Distributed (partial) overlap:

A, C: Common to all 3 people

B, D: Shared by 2 people

E, F: Unique to 1 person

Fully shared:

All information fully-shared

by all 3 people.

Non-overlapping:

No overlap of information

between 3 people

Hidden Profiles

A,B,C A,B,C,D,EA,B,F,H C,D,E A,B,C,D,EA,B,F,G F,G,H A,B,C,D,EA,B,G,H

# of independent pieces of positive information

Alva

Jane

Bill

Information Sharing Practices:

Things That Don’t Work

• Increasing the amount of discussion

• Separating review and decisions

• Increasing the size of the team

• Increasing information load

• Accountability

• Pre-discussion polling

Team Leader as Information Manager

• Redirects and maintains focus of discussion to unshared (unique)
information

• Approaches task as problem to be “solved”, not a “judgment” to be
made

• Ranks rather than chooses

• Considers decision alternatives one at a time

• Heightens team members’ awareness of types of information likely
to be possessed by different individuals

• Suspends initial judgment

• Builds trust and familiarity among team members

• Communicates confidence

• Minimizes status differences

Collective Intelligence

• Team mental models
• Types

• Accuracy

• Correspondence

• Transactive memory systems (TMS)

• TMS and team performance

Group Longevity

100

120

140

160

180

0-1.5 1.5-2.5 2.5-3.5 3.5-5.0 5.0 or

Group longevity (year

S
ta

n
d

a
r
d

iz
e
d

P
e
r
fo

r
m

a
n

c
e
a

n
d

C
o
m

m
u

n
ic

a
ti

o
n

(m
e
a
n

Project performance

Organizational

communication

Intraproject communication

External professional

communication

Source: Katz, R. (1982). The effects of group longevity on project communication and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27, 81-104.

Team Longevity

• Behavioral changes in teams that worked
together for over five years:

▫ Behavioral stability

▫ Selective exposure

▫ Group homogeneity

▫ Role differentiation

Team Decision-Making Pitfalls

• Groupthink

• Escalation of commitment

• Abilene paradox

• Group polarization

• Unethical decision making

Team Process and

Outcomes

Failure Outcome Successful Outcome

Flawed process Predictable failure “Lucky”

· Nonreplicable success

Vigilant process “Unlucky” Predictable Success

· Best condition for
replicable success

A Rational Model of Group

Decision Making

Orientation

Define the problem

Set goal

Plan the process

Discussion

Gather information

Identify alternatives

Evaluate alternatives

Decision Making

Choose group solution

Implementation

Adhere to the decision

Evaluate the decision

Seek feedback

Forsyth, D. (1990).

Group dynamics (2nd

ed., p. 286). Pacific

Grove, CA:

Brooks/Cole.

Symptoms of Groupthink

• Incomplete survey of alternatives
• Incomplete survey of objectives
• Failure to reexamine alternatives
• Failure to examine preferred choices
• Selection bias
• Poor information search
• Failure to create contingency plans

Avoiding Groupthink

• Monitor team size

• Provide face-saving mechanism for teams
• Risk technique

• Invite different perspectives
• Appoint a devil’s advocate

• Structure discussion principles
• Establish procedures for protecting alternative

viewpoints

• Second solution
• Beware of time pressure

Escalation of Commitment

Questionable or

Negative

Outcomes

Reexamination of

Current Course of

Action

Perceived Utility of

Current Course of
Action
Perceived Utility of

Withdrawal and/or

Change

Commitment to

Current Course

of Action

Withdrawal and

Assumption of

Losses

Continued Failure

Low

High

Source: Adapted from Ross, J., & Staw, B. M. (1993). Organizational escalation and exit: Lessons from the Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant. Academy of

Management Journal, 701–73

Escalation of Commitment

• Project determinants
• Psychological determinants
• Social determinants
• Structural determinants
• Avoiding the escalation of commitment problem

• Set limits
• Avoid the bystander effect
• Avoid tunnel vision
• Recognize sunk costs
• Avoid bad mood
• External review

Key Causes of Self-Limiting

Behavior in Teams

• Presence of someone with expertise
• Presentation of a compelling argument
• Lack of confidence in one’s ability to contribute
• Unimportant or meaningless decision
• Pressure from others to conform to team’s decision
• Dysfunctional decision-making climate

Avoiding the Abilene Paradox

• Confront the issue in a team setting

• Conduct a private vote

• Minimize status differences

• Frame task as a decision to be made

• Provide formal forum for controversial views

• Take responsibility for failure

Group Polarization

• Risky

shift

•

Cautious shift

• Explanations
• The need to be right

• The need to be liked

• Conformity pressures

Group Polarization

Group polarization processes. Imagine that Group 1 includes

Person A (who chose 1), Person B (who chose 3), and Persons C

and D (who both chose 5); the average of pregroup choices would

be (1 + 3 + 5 + 5)/4, or 3.5. Because this mean is less than 5, a

risky shift would probably occur in Group 1. If, in contrast, Group 2

contained Persons C, D, E and F, their pregroup average would be

(5 +5 + 7 + 9)/4 or 6.5. Because this mean is closer to the caution

pole, a conservative shift would probably occur in the group.

3 5 7 9Risk Caution

BA D EC & D

Group 1
mean

Group 2
mean

Risky

shift
Cautious shift

Source: Adapted from Janis, I. L. (1982). Victims of groupthink (2nc ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Unethical Decision Making

Situational triggers

• Rational man model

• Pluralistic ignorance

• Desensitization

How to Remedy or Prevent

Unethical Decision Making

• Accountability for behavior

• Reward model

• Appropriate role models

• Eliminate conflicts of interest

• Create cultures of integrity

The Apprentice

Questions for Review

• What are makes for good team communication?
• How does group size reflect communication?
• What is the rational decision making model?
• What are some pitfalls of team decision making?
• How do you remedy or prevent unethical
decision making?
• What does the Bible have to say about holding
each other accountable?

What next?

• Take the Hall Quiz

• Complete your detailed reading

• Answer the discussion questions

• Complete the writing assignments

References

• Bell, A.H. and Smith, D.M. (2011). Learning
Team Skills (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.

• Mosely, Curt (2005). TeamWeaver: The 10
Greatest Teams in the Bible and Why They
Were Great. Mustang,OK:Tate Publishing.

• Thompson, L.L. (2008). Making the Team (3rd
ed) . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Ends Hall 4

• Productive Teams steer clear of decision
making pitfalls, and constantly look for
new ways to sharpen their skills

This concludes Hall 4

Turn in your highest-quality paper
Get a qualified writer to help you with

“ Writing Assignment & Discussion ”

Get high-quality paper

NEW! AI matching with writer

Still stressed with your coursework?

Get quality coursework help from an expert!

Order now