Ratchetts Ltd.

Management Report

Management Consultancy Services Department

1
because we believe in the difference
Purpose of this report
This report is intended to identify the issues and problems
currently associated with the commercial organization “Ratchetts
Ltd”. The report will also provide a recommendation for
improvement.

Executive Summary
The car dealership organization Ratchetts Ltd. has been analyzed
in this report. The organization is facing issues with customer
service, administration of employees and future finance. From
the analysis it has been identified that Ratchetts Ltd. are working
in groups and not in teams. It has been identified that there is a
lack of communication between employees, the sales people lack
adequate training, there is little organizational identity or
leadership from the manager and we also believe that there is a
little job satisfaction due to intense competition; an effect of the
commission system of payment. Ultimate recommendations are
to train employees, employ new leadership strategies, deploy
strict guidelines on sales strategy, provide job enrichment and
help Ratchetts adopt cross-functional team strategy. Ultimately it
seems to be a human resource issue which can be fixed given
adequate time.

2
 Contents

Purpose and Executive Summary…….………………….………………….2

Introduction...………………………………….…………..………………………...4

Departments at Ratchetts...………………………………….…………..…….5

Issues and Problems at Ratchetts………….………..….…………………..7

MNC’s recommendations………………………………..………………………10
Action Plan…………………………………………………..………………………12

Priorities and Implications…………………..………………………………13

Reference List……………….………………………………..………………………14

3
 Introduction

Management Consultancy Service Department has prepared a report

for Ratchetts Ltd. Issues facing Ratchetts will be discussed and new
solutions will be offered.

There are three main focuses in this report.

The first looks at the different departments in Ratchetts and justifies

whether they work in groups or teams.

The second part of this report outlines and diagnoses underlying

issues and problems at Ratchetts. Issues and problems may relate to
group work, inter-group communication, motivation, leadership and
management of the company.

The third part of the report consists of recommendations as to how

things may be improved. The recommendation will be based on the
knowledge of the organization. Actions will be prioritized and the
implication of the recommendations made will be considered.

In all three areas mentioned above, examples will be drawn from the
organization and analyzed on the basis of organizational behavior
theories

An action plan is provided at the end of the report.

4
 Departments at Ratchetts
It has been asked to justify whether the workers at Ratchetts are in groups or teams.

Why it could be said that the workers are in groups:

By monitoring, a particular dialogue was identified at the workplace- a new car salesman
says “I try to ‘move the metal’ so that I get my commission and keep Lifestyle happy and
now they’re saying that I’m too pushy – in this job you have to be, otherwise somebody
else gets the deal.” This indicates that there is a prevalent tense atmosphere and if the new
car salesman is not pushy then the used-car salesman acquires the deal instead of him. The
pressures of commission payment seem evident here as well as competition. Still, there
must be a reason as to why he is said to be pushy.

The departments at Ratchetts are in groups because it can be seen that the workers
disagree over each other’s tasks, there is constant tense atmosphere between workers
which produces a hostile environment; demonstrating the early stage of group formation
known as “Storming” (Tuckman, B.W. and Jensen, M.A.C., 1977).

To demonstrate tension as part of storming; another used car salesman says “We do the
best we can and Service lets us down each time”- shows there is lack of trust and
interdependence. Here it is being argued with the service department that the sales man is
just thinking about his individual groups’ benefit and not about Ratchetts as a whole.
Another salesman argues ‘She was my customer, I talked to her first but Debbie signed her
up on my day off - I deserve a percentage’, interpersonal hostility is revealed here.

Ratchetts workforce seem to be in

this stage

Group Formation Theory-

Tuckman, B.W. and Jensen, M.A.C.
(1977) - thebanyangroup.com

5
Some attributes have been found at Ratchetts that provide a team working
atmosphere.

The car sales manager reports directly to Alan Ratchett and indirectly to his Lifestyle
regional manager. The car sales manager, the team leader, reports to his regional
manager. The car sales manager is the team leader in this case, and the whole team is
made of departments of skilled people required to complete tasks. These departments
operate together to obtain rewards given by the company.

Another point that shows that these formal groups of people consist of teams is that
“each dealership will be given their results in a monthly league table for the whole
region.” Lifestyle has tried to make the two teams work together for the greater benefit
of the company even though there is little follow up evidence of follow up team work.

The speed and efficiency of work also seem to be low which is indicative of early stages
of teamwork (Katzenbach, J.R. and Santamaria, J.A., 1999).

In conclusion, because there is little evidence of teamwork and much more group work
at Racthetts, we will instate them as being groups and not teams. If the groups were at
a “performing” stage then we could call them teams but we believe that their
“storming” characteristics instate them as groups.

Still, it can be evaluated that our monitoring attempts may not give us the whole
picture. Using a group stages report may not be the best analytical model because
some people in the organization that have not been monitored may be “performing”
and working together cooperatively. The model tells us what the majority of workers
are doing; disregarding the minority team workers. It does not consider the role that
individuals undertake at Ratchetts. Furthermore, it has been arrived at the decision
that they are in a storming phase purely by subjective analysis. It will also be difficult to
create a timed action plan because it is difficult to know exactly how much time it will
take Ratchetts employees to transit from one development stage to another.

Nevertheless, using Tuckman’s model allows us to, at the least, subjectively

understand the organization and even though it is agreed that this method will
disregard an individuals’ performance; we are aiming to make recommendations on
behalf of the entire Ratchetts workforce and not just one person. Extra time and effort
should be placed on employees with lower performance ratings.

6
 Issues and Problems at Ratchetts
It has been asked to identify and investigate issues and problems at Ratchetts.

The first issue that affects Ratchets Ltd is its affiliation with Lifestyle. Using Hertzberg’s Two
Factor theory; basic hygiene needs need to be provided by Ratchetts; additionally
motivator factor for incentives and thus motivation must also be provided which;
enhancing job satisfaction. A car dealer has to be selected for dealership rights, which
means that “rigorous vetting procedures” of registration guidelines defined by lifestyle;
have to be met. Once they are affiliated with Lifestyle, benefits are entitled and rewards
are given which gives the dealership; incentive to perform. If the employees at Ratchetts
do not achieve specific targets; they will lose out on benefits as well as £30,000 at end of
the year.

Stacy Adams (1963, 1965) argued that we are motivated to act in situations which we
perceive to be inequitable or unfair, practical examples occur when salesmen have “behind
the scenes arguments” regarding to who the commission should go to, comments such as
“‘she was my customer, I talked to her first but Debbie singed her up on my day off – I
deserve a percentage” relate to this. The sales person has perceived inequity and attempts
to resolve it. Perceived equity seems to lead to greater job satisfaction and organizational
commitment (Sweeney et al., 1990), however inequity is perceived more commonly at
Ratchetts due to similar dialogue elsewhere, therefore, we will instate that issues at
Ratchetts include low job satisfaction and poor organizational commitment.

7
Another issue is how the after sales department works. If car dealership technicians are
paid for the number of jobs they do, each job is based on a set amount on the books, so
technicians’ work time precede the set deadlines; having more time to complete another
job.

This is more rewarding for the technician but it leads the service department to experience
high levels of repeat repairs which are unwanted expenses as technicians disregard the
quality of their repair due to conflict of interest. This is a cause of poor customer service
and hence, low future sales due to damaged company image. According to Tolman’s
(1930) expectancy model, employees are expecting to receive rewards after putting effort
in their jobs, but in this sense their efforts are contributing to the negative image of the
company due to unsatisfied customers bringing back their vehicles to be repaired.

Expectancy theory- Victor Vroom, HRZone.com

8
There seems to be a lacking of the sales people to understand the thoughts and
feelings of customers and to manage their relationship with the customer accordingly
(based on Buchanan, Huczynski, 2010) in other words, they lack social intelligence.

“Customers considered that salesmen were too ‘pushy’ and they felt that they were
abandoned once the deal had been done with them”. This is a representation of a lack
of social intelligence; indicating that the sales people have had limited training and
little experience in their field (based on Buchanan, Huczynski, 2010). Customers do not
appreciate such poor sales techniques and therefore complain to Ratchetts; placing its
reputation at stake. Additionally, the sales people could be coding their messages
incorrectly due to external pressures such as the commission system of payment.
Negative feedback is sent by the customer not because of their perceptual filters or
decoding capabilities but because of the sales person’s “pushy” technique of coding
their messages. Lack of training is a problem here.

Mind Tools.com

Still, it would be unwise to say that it is the lone fault of the sales people. Customers
can be difficult to sell to and they may decode the sales people’s messages incorrectly.
Therefore, examining this from a communication process model may not be useful and
there could be other problems affecting face to face communications; between
salesperson and customer.

The Two Factor Theory has limitations when analyzing Ratchetts. The theory tends to
disregard the emotional complexity of workers. Some workers at Ratchetts may simply
not want to perform. Hackman and Oldham (1976) note that the theory does not allow
for individual differences, such as a particular personality traits, which would affect
individuals' unique responses to motivating or hygiene factors. The salespeople may
think that the commission they obtain is simply not comparable to the level of effort
they have to place to make a sale, hence, their pushy, take it or leave it attitude. On
the other hand they may be putting in effort but this does not necessarily mean that
they are being effective. Victor Vroom’s Expectancy Theory poses similar limitations as
identified above; it shows outcomes based solely on expectancy, disregards individual
needs while trying to produce rewards. The effectiveness of the theory seems
questionable; it may not apply to every salesperson or worker at Ratchetts because
they have different motivating needs. Nevertheless, these theories have helped
identify issues and we can proceed to rectify management based on this; at least for
the short term.

9
 Our Recommendation
Ultimately, it has been asked that recommendations be provided that will aid Ratchetts.

The contingency theory of leadership states that leaders must adjust their style in a
manner consistent with aspects of the context. Managers should have developed
transformational leadership abilities as soon as problems started elevating at Ratchetts in
order to stay consistent with Ratchett organization’s context. Using the Tannenbaum-
Schmidt (1958) continuum of leadership of behavior model, a change in leadership style
must be enforced; particularly on Alan Ratchett.

SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP®, Organizational Behavior (7th e.d.)

Using the SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP® model (Hersey, Blanchard, 1988), since Alan is
currently in a delegating phase (S4), he needs to move into the other participating, selling
and telling phases. This means he needs to develop a closer relationship with his workers,
keeping regular casual checks of how things are going with his subordinates, asking them
about the problems they are facing and understand their emotions to the problems. This
will build relationship. He then needs to provide his expertise in the task, giving them ideas
on how to perform their work; explaining his decisions and provides opportunity for
clarification. Finally to ensure that the right decision is implemented (S2), he needs to
delegate and provide specific decisions so that his workers are aware of exactly what they
are supposed to be doing (S3). A typical example would be Alan Ratchett understanding
why his customers think salesmen are pushy through a meeting with his salespeople,
understand the sales peoples’ views and feelings toward this matter, then cooperatively
create solutions such as behavior modification techniques, enforce these decisions onto
the sales people and regularly check whether they are implementing these and how they
are implementing these.
10
 He should make a note to explain his sales people the benefit of good customer service
e.g. (“We will not get any sales if we turn our customers off simply because they are
intimidated, it’s up to you so help them in their purchase, by understanding their needs
and diplomatically pushing a sale. Do we want poor sales? No, we want lots of sales from
happy customers because that’s how you guys get bonuses”). Sales people are centric here
because they are the “profit generators”.

Stewart Associates

Job Enrichment (Herzberg 1966, 1968) is a technique for broadening the experience of
work to enhance employee need satisfaction and to improve motivation and performance.
There needs to be a challenging atmosphere to enhance job satisfaction. Vertical loading
factors need to be used to achieve job enrichment (Buchanan, Huczynski 2010).
Additionally using the Goal Setting Theory (Locke 1968) will create challenging goals lead
to higher levels of performance, ultimately helping Ratchetts improve its financial and
organizational situation. Such methods may seem like broad change but given time to
adapt, workers will perform well.

Tutor2U

11
Furthermore, in order to encourage team working, workers should get a chance to
experience other worker’s roles; as part of vertical loading. They should attend programs;
shadowing other employees, and thus will understand how the entire organization works
and implications of poor performance in other departments of the organization. Aims
should also be set to reduce Taylorism and employ quality maintenance procedures.

ACTION TO BE BY WHOM BY WHEN ESTIMATED COSTS

TAKEN
Meetings with sales Alan Ratchett, Sales (monthly) N/A
people acting on People
SITUATIONAL
LEADERSHIP
Meetings with Managers (weekly) N/A
Managers
Meetings with (by Managers (monthly) N/A
sub ordinate
managers)
technicians acting on
SITUATIONAL
LEADERSHIP
Alan Ratchett to Alan Ratchett (immediately) NEG.
create his own
action plan to
change his
leadership style
Workers visit each Workers (w/c 1st December) N/A
other departments
for a week to
monitor their
activities
Workers visit Workers, Lifestyle (w/c 13th December) Transport,
Lifestyle for employees) Refreshments, Extra
conferences from its payment to event
board members and administrators
workshop. ~£2000

12
Priorities (from the start of next month):

1. Workshops with salespeople.

2. Workshops with technicians on quality maintenance and its implications on
Ratchetts.
3. Allocate newer, challenging, additional tasks for all workers.

Implications:

1. After training, salespeople should be able to handle customers diplomatically, in

the long run; a rise in sales should be seen.
2. Technicians will need more time to complete a task as they are now insuring
quality, reducing tension between the workshop and parts departments.
3. Performance increase due to challenging tasks.

13
 References

1. Tuckman, B.W. and Jensen, M.A.C. (1977) ‘Stages of small group development revisited’,
Group and Organizational Studies
2. Katzenbach, J.R. and Santamaria, J.A., (1999) ‘Firing up the front line’, Harvard
Business Review
3. Adams, J.S. (1963) ‘Inequity in social exchange’, in L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in
Experimental Social Psychology. New York: Academic Press
4. The Banyan Group (n.d.) “The Tuckman Model of Team Development”. Available at
http://banyan-online.com/19.html (Accessed: November 15 th 2010)
5. Value Based Management (2010) “Motivation Factors, Hygiene Factors: Two Factor Theory
and KITA”. Available at
http://www.valuebasedmanagement.net/methods_herzberg_two_factor_theory.html
(Accessed: November 10th 2010)
6. Hrzone (n.d.) “If I make the effort do I meet my goals?”. Available at
http://www.hrzone.co.uk/blogs/brendanwalsh/360-degree-appraisal-and-performance-
reviews/if-i-make-effort-do-i-meet-my-goals (Accessed: November 10th 2010)
7. Mind Tools Ltd (2010) “Why you need to get your message across”. Available at
http://www.mindtools.com/CommSkll/CommunicationIntro.htm (Accessed: November 12th
2010)
8. Buchanan, D and Huczynski , A (2010) Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard , (7th ed.) UK: Pearson
Education Ltd.
9. Stewart Asoociates (n.d.) “The continuum of Leadership Behaviour”. Available at
http://www.stewart-associates.co.uk/leadership-models.aspx (Accessed: November 16th
2010)
10. Hackman J. R., & Oldham, G. R., 1976, "Motivation through design of work", Organizational
behaviour and human performance, vol. 16, pp. 250–79
11. Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K. H. (1977). Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing
Human Resources (3rd ed.) New Jersey/Prentice Hall

Words: 2474, does not include contents page or references and in text reference

14
 15
because we believe in the difference
Meeting Log MNC
Meeting Subject: MYO ASSIGNMENT Date of Meeting: November 4th 2010

Facilitator: Saptarshi Masid Location: Kingston College 11th Floor LRC

Minute Taker: Delman Babaker Start Time: 1700 HRS

Attendees:
Abdullahi Guled, Delman Babaker, John Rochwani, Nikolaos Gratsos, Saptarshi Masid

Agenda:

Items Discussed Decisions Reached

Outline of Assignment- What tasks are to be Report, Presentation, Formalities
completed
Task Allocation Abdullahi - Issues at Ratchetts, Delman-
Problems at Ratchetts, John- Prove they are in
groups, Nikolaos- Prove they are in teams,
Saptarshi- Conclusion, References, Executive
Summary, Introduction, Presentation

Planning:

Items Discussed Points Made

Task Allocation Stress made on applying course theory
Each tasks will be discussed in meetings
The presentation will be discussed together

Meeting Log:

Outstanding Assigned Date Assigned Target Completed

Tasks To Completion
Date
Issues at Ratchets Abdullahi November 4th 2010 November 12th 2010 NO
Problems at Ratchetts Delman “ November 12th 2010 NO
Prove Groups John “ November 19th 2010 NO
Prove Teams Nikolaos “ November 19th 2010 NO
Conclusion Saptarshi “ November 28th 2010 NO
Formalities Saptarshi “ November 28th 2010 NO

Upcoming Meetings:
November 5th 2010

Proposed Items for Next Meeting Agenda:

Issues and Problems at Ratchetts
Meeting Log MNC
Meeting Subject: MYO ASSIGNMENT Date of Meeting: November 8th 2010

Facilitator: Saptarshi Masid Location: Chiko Land Fast Food Restaurant

Minute Taker: John Rochwani Start Time: 1710 HRS

Attendees:
Abdullahi Guled, Delman Babaker, John Rochwani, Nikolaos Gratsos, Saptarshi Masid

Agenda:

Items Discussed Decisions Reached

Task Allocation Eight points identified in total

Planning:

Items Discussed Points Made

Problems and Issues Stress made on applying course theory
Expansion of points discussed
Stress made on evaluation of work

Meeting Log:

Outstanding Assigned Date Assigned Target Completed

Tasks To Completion
Date
Issues at Ratchets Abdullahi November 4th 2010 November 12th 2010 NO
Problems at Ratchetts Delman “ November 12th 2010 NO
Prove Groups John “ November 19th 2010 NO
Prove Teams Nikolaos “ November 19th 2010 NO
Conclusion Saptarshi “ November 28th 2010 NO
Formalities Saptarshi “ November 28th 2010 NO

Upcoming Meetings:
November 15th 2010

Proposed Items for Next Meeting Agenda:

Justification of groups or teams
Meeting Log MNC
Meeting Subject: MYO ASSIGNMENT Date of Meeting: November 15th 2010

Facilitator: Saptarshi Masid Location: Kingston College 11th Floor LRC

Minute Taker: Nikolaos Gratsos Start Time: 1700 HRS

Attendees:
Abdullahi Guled, Delman Babaker, John Rochwani, Saptarshi Masid

Agenda:

Items Discussed Decisions Reached

Task Allocation Eight points identified in total

Planning:

Items Discussed Points Made

Problems and Issues Stress made on applying course theory
Expansion of points discussed
Stress made on evaluation of work

Meeting Log:

Outstanding Assigned Date Assigned Target Completed

Tasks To Completion
Date
Issues at Ratchets Abdullahi November 4th 2010 November 12th 2010 YES
Problems at Ratchetts Delman “ November 12th 2010 YES
Prove Groups John “ November 19th 2010 NO
Prove Teams Nikolaos “ November 19th 2010 NO
Conclusion Saptarshi “ November 28th 2010 NO
Formalities Saptarshi “ November 28th 2010 NO

Upcoming Meetings:
November 22th 2010

Proposed Items for Next Meeting Agenda:

Conclusion
Meeting Log MNC
Meeting Subject: MYO ASSIGNMENT Date of Meeting: November 19th 2010

Facilitator: Saptarshi Masid Location: Train Compartment

Minute Taker: Abdillah Guled Start Time: 1645 HRS

Attendees:
Abdullahi Guled, Delman Babaker, John Rochwani, Saptarshi Masid

Agenda:

Items Discussed Decisions Reached

Task Allocation Question 1 Discussed again as difficulties were
identified in completing it

Planning:

Items Discussed Points Made

Task Allocation Further discussion of question 2

Meeting Log:

Outstanding Assigned Date Assigned Target Completed

Tasks To Completion
Date
Issues at Ratchets Abdullahiv November 4th 2010 November 12th 2010 YES
Problems at Ratchetts Delman “ November 12th 2010 YES
Prove Groups John “ November 19th 2010 YES
Prove Teams Nikolaos “ November 19th 2010 NO
Conclusion Saptarshi “ November 28th 2010 NO
Formalities Saptarshi “ November 28th 2010 NO

Upcoming Meetings:
November 22th 2010

Proposed Items for Next Meeting Agenda:

Conclusion and formalities
Meeting Log MNC
Meeting Subject: MYO ASSIGNMENT Date of Meeting: November 22nd 2010

Facilitator: Saptarshi Masid Location: Kingston College 11th Floor LRC

Minute Taker: Delman Babaker Start Time: 1700 HRS

Attendees:
Abdullahi Guled, Delman Babaker, John Rochwani, Nikolaos Gratsos, Saptarshi Masid

Agenda:

Items Discussed Decisions Reached

Task Allocation Conclusion and Formalities

Planning:

Items Discussed Points Made

Conclusion Various items to go into the conclusion
Formalities- Journal Resume’s, Strengths as a group, weaknesses,
what we learned about ourselves, what we could
do differently, recommendations

Meeting Log:

Outstanding Assigned Date Assigned Target Completed

Tasks To Completion
Date
Issues at Ratchets Abdullahi November 4th 2010 November 12th 2010 YES
Problems at Ratchetts Delman “ November 12th 2010 YES
Prove Groups John “ November 19th 2010 YES
Prove Teams Nikolaos “ November 19th 2010 YES
Conclusion Saptarshi “ November 28th 2010 NO
Formalities Saptarshi “ November 28th 2010 NO

Upcoming Meetings:
Project report to be handed in on the 29th, no upcoming (formal) meetings

Proposed Items for Next Meeting Agenda:

N/A
Group Profile and critical reflection
Profile
Our group consists of five members. They are Abdullahi Guled, Delman Babaker, John
Rochwani, Nikolaos Gratsos and Saptarshi Masid. We have all combined our efforts to
produce a report on Ratchetts Ltd. Several meetings were arranged in which ideas were
brought together. A leader (Saptarshi) was chosen who would delegate specific tasks to the
other group members. This was to ensure that all members were aware of what they were
doing.

Strengths and weaknesses as a group

Strengths Weaknesses
All were eager to complete the task Poor communication with a group member
All provided feedback on progress Different perceptions
One group member had previous experience Different message decoding abilities
of this assignment
Worked collaboratively as a team Social Loafing
Good group cohesion Time management
Comfortable with other members, well Conflict in shared frames of references of
acquainted individual members

How our group worked together:

Firstly, we all gained understanding of the case study, in the first meeting; we presented our ideas
and views on the case. Then the leader planned out specific tasks for everyone. The assignment was
split into different sections: Contextual work or the important work was work that formed the main
body of the report. This was hard factual information that had to be done, using research and
analysis. Delman, Abdullahi, John and Nikolaos were given these tasks, focusing their time and
effort on these sole tasks. The other section included what we called “formalities” to complete the
assignment. These included the introduction, conclusion, purpose of the report, executive summary,
formatting, presentation and the group profile. These were tasks that needed to be done at the end
because they required that the hard information be present in the report. Formalities were
undertaken by the leader; Saptarshi. Each question was split into two parts and the respective group
members responsible for getting the task done had one week to do half the question. Ultimately,
each question was completed in one week of research and writing. The leader requested that the
questions follow a consistent thesis, antithesis and a synthesis approach, the thesis involving
application of knowledge from course theory to the cases study. Antithesis required a critical
evaluation of the thesis and synthesis required that the underlying fundamentals of both the thesis
and antithesis be identified and a resolution be stated at the end of every question. At the end of
completing each task of a group member, tasks had to be forwarded electronically to the group
leader for moderation and formatting. Aspects of each task were discussed in meetings and the
responsible group member simply had to expand points raised and convert them into logical
structures. This approach was under taken in every meeting. Problems raised with some challenging
aspects of questions, however these were resolved in informal group meetings. Our group also
utilized instant messaging technology to create a common workplace at home where we could talk
to each other and combine our ideas to help the member responsible for the task to complete it.
This helped us work individually at home where there would be no distractions and also supported
by the group leader’s decision to utilize the Collective Effort Theory (Karau and Williams, 1993).
Finally, all the hard information was obtained by the group leader on the week nearing the deadline
and it was formatted, into one cohesive and consistent report; writing the conclusion, introduction
and executive summary. Finally the group profile was completed and rough notes from meetings
were converted to formal meeting logs. It can be evaluated that our method may not have been the
best work method as we were working in a disjunctive task style, relying on the leader to produce
the final document of the assignment. Conflicts arose from the leader’s decisions and delegations
because of the attitudes and feelings of other group members but the leader tried to convince the
others of the correctness of his decisions (based on Buchanan, Huczynski, 2010). Still, the
assignment was completed before deadline.

Task allocation:

ASSIGNMENT
JUSTIFY IN GROUPS: JOHN,
JUSTIFY IN TEAMS: NICK

PROBLEMS AT RATCHETTS- CONCLUSION, EXECUTIVE

DELMAN, ISSUES- SUMMARY, FORMATTING-
ABDULLAHI SAPTARSHI
What we learnt about ourselves:
We learned new ways to solve problems- group members were having difficulty on applying relevant
case theory and working together, new approaches were identified that solved problems.

Patience in coming up with ideas- group members were at times facing difficulty with developing
ways to apply course theory into case study. It had been realized that being patient; carefully
conducting research and application helped solve this.

We learned new things about each other’s mode of work- all the group members preferred different
modes of work, Nikolaos tended to be too descriptive about the case study while Abdullahi tended
to utilize too much application. By analyzing such situations, we learned how to obtain a balance
between both methods of work.

We learned the importance of setting and achieving smaller goals- we reviewed our progress every
day, stating how much time we have left till deadline. This showed that we were all feeling the
pressures of the goal. Therefore, to relieve pressures, we set smaller goals which were easier to
achieve, lifting the burden of the entire assignment. Thus, we learned the importance of setting
tactical goals as it greatly helps making the ultimate goal easier to achieve. This was done by
attaching smaller tasks and work such as splitting questions and setting shorter deadlines.

We learned that we can put effort into effective research to achieve our goals- we learned that it is
very difficult to apply theory to the case study from mere intellect and saw that conducting effective
research opened new perspectives of analyses and aided us in achieving our goals. We used a variety
of sources- books, the internet and journals.

Communication styles were big factors in our group work. Abdullahi being an INTJ tended to
reserve his views and ideas, conveying them far less than others but provided powerful judgments to
other’s views, helping them perform good evaluation of their work. Nikolaos being extrovert,
communicated a lot of thoughts and ideas, even though he didn’t judge his ideas of think about
them, he provided more descriptive work showing his (SF) feeling characteristics, while AbdullahiV
provided more analytical work. Nikolaos generated a lot of ideas from his sensation-feeling
personality even though he tended to be aggressive in his communication to convey his ideas. John
was more reserved in his communications, tending to communicate less creatively but strongly
convey fundamental flaws of other’s work, demonstrating his objective and straight to the point
communication style originating from an INTP personality. Delman was quite the opposite; he
tended to communicate creative ideal well but lacked persuasive power in conveying his ideas.
Never the less, he used his feeling personality to develop new ideas and write them down to be used
in the final report, even though he didn’t persuade other group members well.

On the basis of Belbin’s team roles, we identified our group member’s as the following: Abdullahi -
Monitor-Evaluator/ Specialist because he judges a lot, sees options and is strategic, Delman-
Teamworker because he is diplomatic and very cooperative, Nikolaos- Resource Investigator/ Shaper
because he is very extrovert, is dynamic and motivates others to overcome obstacles, John-
Implementer/ Completer because he gets things done and the group can depend on him, Saptarshi-
Coordinator/Plant because he clarifies goals, delegates and does creative work.
What has worked best for the group?
The fact that group work employs collaborative thinking and bouncing of ideas helped and the entire
assignment administrated by one leader worked very well. Therefore, despite the negatives of
assigning a leader, the leader’s direction helped us get the tasks done.

Positive aspects of working in a group:

We can produce work that is not one sided but form multiple points of view, because each of the
group members had different perceptions about aspects of the report, we could create an unbiased,
effective report.

What we would do differently next time:

Next time, we will try to focus on the structure of written work. We will try to clearly identify
sections, ensure that we don’t overlap ideas and paragraphs and restrict to what we have specifically
been asked to do. For example, John and Nikolaos inserted recommendations and suggestions which
were not their tasks. They could have used that word limit to focus on justifying whether they are in
groups or in teams. So next time more focus will be given to the quality of the report. The leader will
also be used to work on the actual hard information instead of formalities. Next time we will also
enforce vertical loading measures so that group members are motivated because they have more
challenging tasks to complete.

Negative aspects of working in a group:

Communication as described earlier was a big problem. Some members didn’t convey their ideas
clearly, effectively while others were too aggressive and asserted their ideas strongly even though
they were not good enough. Administrating a group as a leader is very difficult. Motivation is an
important factor as due to little motivation, group members were not progressing on their tasks and
therefore, working in a group enforces codependency. The question arises as to whether you can
depend on others to do their work. Some deadlines were not met that were set by the leader. An
individual on the other hand engages in less social loafing and therefore completes his task
effectively.

For next year students:

We strongly recommend that next year students complete assignments with a leader based group.
The leader can provide direction and motivate others when there is little motivation to complete
tasks (it is understood that such a leader needs to be present in the first place). Students need to set
very early deadlines so the assignment can be repeatedly revised and revisited (we learned it the
hard way). Tasks need to be allocated specifically so that everyone knows what to do. Ultimately it’s
all about leadership. As a group, we believe it is very important to motivate group members, set
challenging goals and collaboratively complete tasks. We also advise to complete certain formality
tasks such as introductions, group profiles, formatting etc. in conjunction to work progress, this lifts
the final burden. Use checklists and progress maintenance charts from the start and structure work
clearly.
END OF ASSIGNMENT
Our first uni assignment complete…oh
yea..uhuh…oh yeah…oh yeah….