Stephen White, Jennie Zhang
BUAD 304 Section #14728
3 March 2011
Team Case Analysis: Are Five Heads Better Than One?
In the case “Are Five Heads Better Than One?” a newly formed marketing group, composed of Evan, Conner, Alexis, Derek, and Judy, failed to resurrect the firm’s revenues. First, management failed to select a group of diverse individuals who would be able to contribute unique ideas towards the project. The backgrounds of these five members bared too many similarities for the members to work together efficiently. The article states, “Evan, Conner, Alexis, Derek, and Judy were around the same age, had worked for the company for about the same amount of time, and because they all tended to be sociable, friendly, and valued getting along with others, their personalities seemed to mesh as well” (700). Management felt that these surface-level similarities were sufficient enough to put together a team that would create a stellar commercial. On the surface, it appeared these members would work well together. However, they did not have the in-depth connection found within individuals who share deep-level characteristics. Second, there is an uneven power distribution among the group members. Conner takes control and nobody stands up to him, even when the other members of the group who have, in this case, more accurate ideas to contribute. There is no diffusion of responsibility, members were not able to emphasize individual accountability or clarify job responsibilities. Throughout the entire project, Conner develops an overconfidence bias. This inevitably leads to the downfall of the marketing assignment. He leaps straight into the project without gaining a clear prospective on what needs to be done and works outside of his expertise when he takes on the role of being a leader for the client. Third, there is a lack of conflict within the group. Conflict can be both constructive and destructive...