Mgmt1001 Assessment Task 2

Topics: Leadership, Decision making, Decision theory Pages: 12 (3844 words) Published: May 14, 2012
-------------------------------------------------
MGMT1001

Write a report reflecting on your experiences of the Everest group simulation exercise this semester with reference to concepts and theories encountered in this course -------------------------------------------------

MGMT1001

Write a report reflecting on your experiences of the Everest group simulation exercise this semester with reference to concepts and theories encountered in this course Assessment 2 – Report – 30% of final mark

Assessment 2 – Report – 30% of final mark

Executive Summary
For the Assessment Task 2 students were placed in groups of five as a team of climbers in the Mount Everest Simulation with an additional student as an observer as the others attempt to climb to the top. Everest is a virtual game that was designed by Harvard Business School and Forio Business Simulation to teach students how to work as a team and lead a team effectively. It does this by presenting a series of problems such as oxygen scarcity, unpredictable weather and volatile health condition with the aim of reaching the summit without being rescued. This supplements the teaching of the Lecture Six ‘Understanding Groups and Teams’ and Lecture Seven ‘Leadership’. Each Everest group had to undertake two Mount Everest Simulations with different roles allocated each time to the members of the group. Due to limited experiences, absence of cohesion between members and lack of understanding of the roles of the simulation, the first simulation produced a low score of 67%. Different opinions, lack of transparency and conflicting personal goals led to tense atmosphere that contributed to process loss since there was limited communication, tense interpersonal relationships and a pattern of groupthink apparent in the first simulation. In order to improve our results, leadership styles, delegation of roles, increased communication, a decision making process and a conflict management process was implemented for the second Mount Everest Simulation. The norming stage after the first simulation consisted of a discussion and analysis of what went wrong in the first simulation and ways to improve it. A team contract was created to define our goal and the strategies to improve the results of the first simulation. Since members of the Everest team had already experienced the online simulation, they were able to impart some knowledge of the roles they undertook to other members. This increase in information sharing is an example of a strategy for improvement. There was a positive effect on the overall team of score from 67% to 89% after the implementations of these strategies. These strategies consisted of transforming from having one leader to shared leadership, implantation of a directive decision making process, delegation of task and maintenance oriented roles to suitable members, minimising groupthink and process loss by adopting lateral communication approaches. Therefore, the overall structure of the team was changed due to these changes in strategies and both personal and team scores of all members were improved. In the second simulation, members were given more time to become familiar with one another this contributed to a less tense environment where open debate was encouraged. This also contributed to the improvement of the simulation results. The Mount Everest Simulation is an interactive game that is designed to teach the principles of effective leadership and teamwork.

Table of Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................1 Table of Contents ...............................................................................................3 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 4 Description and Analysis of Personal Everest Experience ................................ 5 The Forming Stage...

References: Benne, K. & Sheats, P. 1948, “Functional roles of group members”, Journal of Social Issues, vol. 4, pp. 41-49.
Dawson-Shepherd, A. 1997, “Communication in organisations operating internally” Journal of Communication Management, vol. 2, no. 2, pp 158-166.
Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. 1974, “Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases”, Science, vol. 185, pp. 1124-1131.
Katzenbach, J. & Smith, D. 2005, “The Discipline of teams”, Harvard Business Review, July – August, p. 164.
Leung, S., Chan, J. & Lee, W. 2003, “The dynamic team role behaviour - the approaches of investigation”, Team Performance Management, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 84-90.
Liden, R.C. 2004, “The Power of Groupthink”, Journal of Management, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 81-89.
Mussnug, K. & Hughey, A. 1997, “The truth about teams”, Training for Quality, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 19-25.
Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S. & Ahearne, M. 1997, “Moderating effects of goal acceptance on the relationship between group cohesiveness and productivity”, Journal of Applied Psychology, pp. 974-983.
Teach, E. 2004, “Avoiding decision traps”, CFO, vol. 10, no. 3, p. 97-99.
Continue Reading

Please join StudyMode to read the full document

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • MGMT1001 Essay
  • Assessment Task 2 2 Essay
  • JET 2 Task 2 Essay
  • Essay about Assessment Task 3 2
  • Assessment Task 2 Essay
  • BSBMKG603B Assessment Task 2 Essay
  • mgmt1001 Essay
  • Mgmt1001 Essay

Become a StudyMode Member

Sign Up - It's Free