MMM132

TEAM
PRESENTATI
ON
Group Number: 15
Team
• Platform used: Zoom Meeting

• Team Members:
§ Jimmy Mihaloudakis
§ Savjot Singh
§ Ishpreet Sodhi
§ Kevin Bhatia
§ Priyanshi Dubey
Learning
Outcome • Question : What are the different kinds of
teams that companies use to make
LO themselves more competitive? Explain how
each team differ from each other in terms of
6.6 Different their autonomy. (Williams et al, 2020) 

kind of teams
 Slide 3
Companies require an integrated and collaborative working conditions that can foster problem solving, planning and new ideas for future
projects. Teams provide such environment to a company. A company needs different kinds of teams to function better. Each team focuses on its
assigned task. However, these teams differ in the terms of accountability. ‘Autonomy is the degree to which employees have the discretion,
freedom and independence to decide how and when to accomplish their jobs.’ (Williams et al, 2020: 175). Given below are the classification of
different types of teams and how they differ from each other.
• Traditional work groups: These are the teams responsible for executing the task without any authority or control over their work. In this case,
the autonomy lies with the boss or the supervisor. For an instance, if a member of the team is not working properly, then the team leader has
no authority to remove them from the group. Only, the manager or supervisor is responsible for the judgement. (Williams et al., 2020: 176).
• Employee involvement team: These teams have more autonomy as compared to the traditional work groups. However, they can only provide
with suggestions or advices. The final decision making is still in the hands of the supervisor. For an instance, if an employee has a better way to
deal with the problem, he can advise or suggest it to the supervisor, who then, decides whether to implement the suggestion or not. ( Williams
et al, 2020: 176).
• Semi-autonomous work groups: This team consists of typically cross-trained members with several different skills who enjoy the authority to
make decisions and solve problems related to the major tasks (not all) of producing a product and service. But managers still play a role in
decision making to an extent. They can ask questions, provide resources and facilitates performance of group goals. (Williams et al, 2020:176).
• Self-managing teams: They slightly differ from semi-autonomous work groups. Self-managing teams have the authority to make decisions and
solve problem related to ALL the tasks of producing a product or service without getting approval from the management. For example, Spotify,
the streaming music company, organizes its 2000 employees into self-organizing teams called squads. No larger than eight people, squads are
completely responsible for a particular product function, like search algorithms, and decide what to do, how to do it, who to work with (other
squads) and selecting their leaders. All these decisions are made without management’s input. (Williams et al 2020:176)
• Self-designing teams: They  have all the characteristics of self-managing teams, but they can also control and change the design of the teams
themselves, the tasks they do and how and when they do them, and the membership of the teams. (Williams et al, 2020: 176) 
            Diversity and plurality in our team

Our team had diverse members who contributed to make this assignment successful. 'Diversity means variety.
It exists when there is variety of demographic, cultural and personal differences among people who work
together.' (Williams et al, 2020: 208). Our team members differed from each other in terms of nationality,
demographic area and cultural values. Half of our members in our Team are Indian and rest of them are
Australian. Despite of belonging to different nations and cultures, we had a quite collaborative a coherent views
regarding the tasks. We ensured that all the team members are being listened. We had different ideas
regarding the questions we were to choose for the assignment taking others' opinions into account is very
important for a diverse team. Each member of the team was provided authority to choose whatever slide they
wanted to work on. Any doubt or query was welcomed and was solved quite peacefully. 
 Slide 4
    Tuckman's Model -
Forming 
1. Williams et al. (2020:182) explains forming as the first stage of team development, where
members of the team first meet one another, begin to construct first impressions of one
another, and create team norms. It is also seen as the orientation phase. When first forming
this group all team members showed a great form of initiative and enthusiasm for the group
assignment. There was no sign of conflict as team members were given a platform to pick
which slides, they wanted to work on. The forming stages started as team members got to
socialise and meet one another for the first time through a zoom call. This also allowed for
group members to discuss their strengths and weakness for this assignment, this was
successfully done. The unsuccessfulness of this stage for the team members was meeting new
people as this was quite hard to do as it had to be done online instead of in person. However,
the team members overcame this as they realised they had quite a lot in common as they were
around the same age and shared the same culture. Even for the one local student, he was
welcomed to the group in open arms as he was encouraged and fully supported by team
members when expressing his ideas. 
Tuckman's
Slide 5 Model – Storming, Norming and
Performing
Storming is the second stage of Tuckman's model , distinguished by dispute and differences in which group members differ over how
the group should approach set tasks, and how they should do it (Williams et al. (2020:182). There was no sign of any individual in
the team pushing any boundaries or expressing their dissatisfaction towards other group members. This is because each member
worked at their preferred pace and still finished their work within a reasonable time. Each member had their way of doing things
and getting stuff done and in this group that was encouraged. As each person had their own way of approaching things, which was
fine since the work was completed at a substantial level. Usually, in the storming stage, each team member can be hostile but
likely enough this did not happen, as each member was encouraged to express their individuality when approaching set tasks.
Usually, there is hostility at this stage of the model due to team members wanting to express their individuality but fortunately,
this did not occur. 
  Norming refers to the third stage Tuckman’s model, this is when group members begin to find ways to settle into team roles and
harmony among one another, along with team norms starting to assemble (Jones, 2019). As time went by members did feel more
comfortable expressing themselves and start to ask for help or an opinion on their work. Each member was more than happy to
receive constructive feedback, and this was done helpfully and maturely, without any backlash in the process. As for offering
constructive feedback, this was done superbly as each member was given a platform to discuss any issues they have. Luckily
enough the group members had checked and verified each slide and raised no issue with each other’s work. At this stage team
harmony and cohesion normally triumphs. 
  Performing is the fourth and final stage of Tuckman's  model, the actual implementation happens in this stage, where performances
improve exponentially due to group members producing a win-win situation leading to the group being productive and fully
functioning (Jones, 2019). At this stage all team members were well into their roles and finishing up their slides, team members did
not need to be delegated or instructed on what to do as they were fully aware of what was required. Team members were looking
after one another by staying connected on how everyone was progressing, but no one required any sort of assistance whatsoever,
due to each member being more than competent in completing set tasks. 
                  Reflection: Contribution 

• Jimmy M: I believe my contribution to the team’s success was deciding which question I was going to do for this
assignment and not needing to be assigned a question. I also finished my set tasks within a reasonable time and made
sure they were answered to the best of my ability. 
• Savjot S: My contribution involved initiating early meetings where decisions related to assigning the tasks were taken.
This meeting was important because every team members was assigned equal amount of work. I also had to
collaborate with other team member as my task was dependent to successfully complete this presentation.
• Ishpreet S: I took the initiative to find the team members and arrange the zoom call so that we can discuss about our
tasks. I took the responsibility to answer the question and made sure every doubt and query of the group member is
being answered properly. Every group member was given authority to choose what slide they want to work on.
• Kevin B: My contribution involved the summarisation of notes in every zoom call, highlighting, each of the action
taken by the group members accordance with the duties assigned followed by a brief summary in the table. 
• Priyanshi D: I posted threads on the discussion forum to look for more team members. I studied the brief of this group
activity and discussed the execution of this group project along with the group members. We divided the work equally
in order to complete the presentation on time, effectively & efficiently.
                  Reflection: Improvements

• Jimmy M: I believe I can improve my contribution to teamwork in the future by responding to messages and,
emails much quicker than I have been currently doing. I had realized that my sluggishness when responding
to important emails could sometimes slow down the group's progression on set tasks. 
• Savjot S: I could have initiated meetings early on as we were all working on different time zones. This would
have given us enough time to work on our assigned task more effectively. Doing this could also help us to
review our work and make as less mistakes as possible. 
• Ishpreet S: I could have worked well with the citation and researching part as most of the information cited
by me is taken from the textbook. In future, I will make more efforts and take help from journal articles and
other sources to provide information.
• Kevin B: I could have initiated more on the feedback process of teams' performance, As constructive
feedback are essential in boosting the team's productivity thus which encourages the cultural of open
dialogue making the future collaboration easy than before.
• Priyanshi D: I could have shown better team spirit. In the future, I will make sure not to let personal
circumstances affect team activity, take initiatives, organize meetings, ensure that team members don't feel
burdened/left out ; I hope I can interact with the members and become good friends with them.
     Date 15th May 2021                                 19th May 2021
     Time 5-6 pm AEDT                                            6-7 AEDT 
     Location Zoom call                                                 Zoom call 

     Attendees Jimmy Mihaloudakis, Savjot Singh, Ishpreet Sodhi, Kevin Bhatia, Priyanshi Dubey, 

2nd- Jimmy Mihaloudakis, Savjot Singh, Ishpreet Sodhi, Kevin Bhatia and Priyanshi
Dubey

     Actions Calling everyone to the meeting requires resources and logistical commitment. To be

worth the effort , participants need to have a clear point of actions and understand
how their actions will help achieve broader goals which are usually created during a
meeting when a  decisions are made on how to accomplish a plan or achieve a
goal. For example, Ishpreet was one of the InCharge for assigning the roles and
deadlines for example Savjot was expected to do a slide 1st and 2nd by 15th May and
so on , thus ensuring that the action items are clear to each one of the group members

     Encouraged participation Regular zoom calls, consistently discussing of new ideas, made everyone familiar with
each other thus making it easy for everyone to talk and get to know each other
without having a sense of embracement thus encouraging participation among all the
group members. 
REFERENCES
• Jones, D, 2019. The Tuckman’s Model Implementation, Effect, and Analysis &
the New Development of Jones LSI Model on a Small Group. Journal of
Management, 6(4). 
• Williams, C, McWilliams, A, and Lawrence, R (2020) MGMT4, 4th edn, Cengage,
Melbourne, Available from: ProQuest eBook Central, pp. 176.
• ___________________________________ (2020) MGMT4, 4th edn,
Cengage, Melbourne, Available from: ProQuest eBook Central, pp. 177.
• ___________________________________ (2020) MGMT4, 4th edn,
Cengage, Melbourne, Available from: ProQuest eBook Central, pp. 208.
• ___________________________________ (2020) MGMT4, 4th edn, Cengage,
Melbourne, Available from: ProQuest eBook Central, pp.182