Fill This Form To Receive Instant Help
Homework answers / question archive / Option #1: Application of the Tuckman Model and Synthesizing/Evaluating Course Concepts INTRODUCTION (1-2 PARAGRAPHS) Provide an overview of your paper
Option #1: Application of the Tuckman Model and Synthesizing/Evaluating Course Concepts
Provide an overview of your paper.
Module-by-Module Analysis (3-4 pages)
Share your decision logic and what supported the decisions you made in the Capsim experience, as well as the learnings you gained from it.
Tuckman Model (3-4 pages)
The Tuckman Model was developed in 1965 and is now widely acknowledged to represent the stages of team development. The model presents the well-known stages of: a) forming, b) storming, c) norming, d) performing, and e) adjourning.
Read the article, "Team Management by Objectives: Enhancing developing Teams' Performance" (from your Module 8 required readings).
Evaluate your Capsim team's experience by applying the five stages of the model, and provide recommendations for further improvements in team performance.
Career Learnings (1-2 pages)
Discuss how you can take your Capsim and course experiences forward into your career.
Application of Tuckman Model & Synthesizing:
Introduction:
Running a business needs plenty of experience and thought. CAPSIM project provides an opportunity to gain experience for running a business through a simulation platform and to understand the business strategies and goals in simulation. The CAPSIM course consists of 6 rounds spreading over 5 weeks.
The purpose of this additional practice before the 6 rounds team competition is the application and analysis of the Tuckman Model to the simulated business environment. The outcome of this CAPSIM project will be very helpful for the students in the future when they will be faced with real business challenges.
Module-by-Module Analysis:
During the first week, it was decided to initially position the product Able as a product specialized for the market of low technology. The original plan was to make the product Able a leader of that market segment. The team decided to match the R & D profile of the Able product to the one that could make it fit for the low technology market segment.
Price was the most important criterion or metric to position the product as a low technology product. The usual range of low technology products was from $15 to $35. The team decided to make the product’s initial offer within this particular range to make it fit for a low-tech market product. To maximize the revenue, the team decided to choose the maximum price from the range.
The team decided to position the product Able as a product with less than the age of 3 years. The team also avoided the need for long Research and Development about the product by positioning it as not so newer product. Other than the price, the team watched for metrics related to product size, performance, and reliability. The product reliability in the low-tech markets usually ranges between 14 K to 20 K hours.
Similarly, the average performance rating for low-tech products was 6.3, while the average size of the products was 13.7. The team decided to position the hours at 22K, size at 10.7, and performance at 9.8.
The team decided to increase the production of Product Able to gain a competitive edge in the market through automated production processes. The automation will also go on to decrease the labor cost of the product.
The team knew that a significant amount of investment would be needed to fund the company’s assets, especially the required automated plants and machinery. So, the team decided to use debt finance and stock issuance to fulfill the purpose. This resulted in the team’s highest cash reserves among all the teams by the round-end.
The company’s market share and revenue got the second position on the teams. But the low profits of only $1,850 achieved the 5th position in the competition resulting from huge investment costs and variable product costs.
The main focus of the team in the second week was to increase the market share and revenue of the product. The team made minor changes in Research and development to keep the product new. The basic strategy was unchanged for keeping the product in the low-tech segment. While few changes were made for reliability to 21,550 hours, performance to 9.0, and size enhanced to 10.7.
Marketing the product was also included in the agenda, and the strategy worked out with the increase in customer’s awareness of the product to 89%. Unfortunately, this week the accessibility metric of customers dropped sharply to just 36% while keeping it higher for high-tech products at 51%.
Continuing the strategy of the last week, the company remained consistent in investing in infrastructure for automated production with the reduction of labor costs. The inventory closed at 99 units this week.
To achieve long-term strategic goals, the team decided to introduce a new Product, Ark, to gain a position in the high technology market segment while working simultaneously for the betterment of Product Able in the low-tech market segment.
The aim was to uplift the revenue, but the new Product Ark would not be ready until Round four due to research and development workings for the product. The strategies applied were able to increase various performance metrics like sales, contribution, share price, and net income over the last round.
There was a reduction in market share overall, but the team led in the high-tech market segment surprisingly in round two. The uplift in share price, which moved to $40, contributed to this gain, and other products in the high-tech segment failed to match up to it.
During the third round, things did not go as expected, and it forced us to borrow a small loan to make things right. And a minor drop of $0.63 in stock price was experienced due to these anomalies. A significant reduction in market share and sales revenue of Product able was also experienced.
The reliability factor was increased, and a decrease was induced in performance and size factors. The desire for the product was increased due to a drop in the product’s age to 1.3 years. 100% of customers’ awareness was achieved for Product Able in both targeted market segments; the customer accessibility metric resumed its drop as usual.
The reason for this drop is still unknown because our team consistently invested in promotion and marketing. One probable reason can be the price increase for the product, making it cross the low-tech market segment.
Simultaneously, the high-tech customer accessibility moved upward to 57%. Consistency was applied for the automated production of Product Able, and a decision was made to increase the automated production for the inception of product Ark in the next round. The closing inventory at the round-end was 434 units, and the product achieved the lowest labor costs in the market.
In round four, things were back in shape as income, revenue, share price, and contribution margin gained an increase. The market share enhanced overall, causing the upward movement from 5th to 4th position in the team's ranking. R&D remained the same for Product Able, while Product Ark was the center of attention for the team due to its launch in this round.
The strategic focus on high-tech sales resulted in 100% revenue generation solely from the high-tech market segment. This week’s strategy was to enhance the automated production of Product Ark while simultaneously shrinking the production of Product Able. The purpose was to increase cost savings and use for the increase in new product sales. The overall result was reflected in the 5-star score for the company in this round.
Round five did not make any good for the team, as the total income for the round was only $713, and the share of the market fell further below 10%. Product Able crossed the age limit of 3 years, but its sales increased from last round surprisingly. For the first time, the team achieved the 3rd position for its high-tech market segment.
The round six strategies were to move inventory units as quickly as possible, which includes the liquidation of the previous round’s closing units as well. The strategy to reduce the price for both the Product Able and Ark caused the entire stock’s sale. There were some remaining units of Product Ark from the previous round. Therefore no additional units were produced during this round. The summary statistics would be valuable to understand how each team performed over the total six-year period.
Tuckman Model:
The model divides the process of team development into five different phases. The phases comprise 1) Forming, 2) Storming, 3) Norming, 4) Performing, 5) Adjourning. A team consists of multiple pieces of an organization, and their joint workings cause the resolutions to many a problem, and the teams are disengaged after the accomplishment of the task.
The team’s engagement with each other is considered more than a group of team members, which causes the victory of the team. (Burton, & Bruhn, 2004). In the primary step, the team rules for communication, scheduling meetings, and general simulation tasks were formulated.
The formulation of the team charter was done in the form of a blueprint, which discusses the route map of the whole project. It also contained the implementation procedure for the first “Forming” phase of the Tuckman Model.
The first phase of the team development model is Forming. It works on the creation of work behavior and increasing the familiarity for the job in hand with the team members. It also tests the behaviors of team members with relevance to tasks and their interpersonal capacities. (Dennis, Wixom, & Tegarden, 2015)
Relationships between team members and with the leadership are also strengthened. (Burton, & Bruhn, 2004). The foundations for team development are established after the completion of the first phase.( Antoni, 2005).
The second phase of the Tuckman Model, also known as Storming, brings forward many confrontations & conflicts between the team members. Team members tend to influence the whole group and start competing with each other in different matters, changing the course of the team as a whole. ( Antoni, 2005).
But the team did not follow the same scenario unexpectedly, and the team member showed concurrence in the development of a work plan each week. The level of disagreements was very low as each team member welcomed and respected the thoughts, perceptions, and presentations of other team members.
Phase three is the norming stage of the Tuckman Model. And the ultimate result of this phase is unity. The team adopted and implemented this important factor into the team more swiftly than usual due to the dedication and involvement of all team members in their assigned tasks.
The team worked as a unit by preferring the team goals over individual goals, resolving the individual differences, ignoring internal conflicts, collaborating, and working for the united goal of the team. ( Antoni, 2005). The team was united right from the start to all the for achieving the primary goal of succeeding as a business unit.
The cohesion between the team members kept on increasing with time with clarification of duties and assignments for each team member. It also made the implementation of the next phase easier for the team.
The team moved into the sixth phase of team development of “performing”, quite comprehensively. By now, the team has become highly cohesive, working as a problem-solving instrument to enhance the efficiency of tasks at hand. (Dennis, Wixom, & Tegarden, 2015).
The team members focus greatly on their assigned tasks and become so workable that each team completely understands the tasks of all team members. Team members started making suggestions for the simulation parts, which did not fall under their primary assigned duties.
This resulted in multiple innovative suggestions for various areas of the simulation that were not enlightened previously. And the unity and cohesion between the team became more evident when such suggestions were welcomed and implemented by the whole group. The team combination worked perfectly as a result.
In the fifth and final stage of the model, the team members adjourn after the successful completion of the task at hand. During this phase, the results of the team members, the group as a whole, and the project outcome are reviewed, evaluated, and analyzed. (Burton, & Bruhn, 2004). The portfolio papers for this CAPSIM simulation present the realistic results for this last phase of the Tuckman Model.
Career Learnings:
The course experience learned during the CAPSIM simulation is worthwhile and will bring plenty of opportunities to the team members. It was a valuable experience that will be remembered by the group member for the rest of their lives.
We learned about two major things. One was how the businesses are run, and the second was how the team and its leadership work cohesively to achieve a common goal. We were able to enlighten our hidden capabilities and capacities that made us confident enough to face any future challenge of our career.
The project did not only tell us about business success. Instead, it also told us about business failures. It made us learn to develop the courage to face failures and overcome the fear of failure in the first instance. We also learned the lesson that failure is a step forward towards success instead of the end.
Conclusion:
Modern business and work environments demand teamwork. And it has become compulsory for modern employees to develop this most important skill of teamwork to achieve success in their career. Most companies apply at least a small bit of teamwork in their organizations. (Antoni, 2005).
The group learned the main component of communication which works as a core factor to mitigate the conflicts and unnecessary confrontations between the team members. Another important phenomenon was learned by the team members to respect the opinion of others in a team and make concurrent decisions.
The modern business era needs these employment skills more than anything else. The Tuckman model was implemented successfully during the simulation activities. The valuable experience gained from the simulation project will be helpful for the students in their future career growth and businesses when they will be faced with realistic business scenarios.
OUTLINE
Application of Tuckman Model & Synthesizing:
Introduction:
Running a business needs plenty of experience and thought. CAPSIM project provides an opportunity to gain experience for running a business through a simulation platform and to understand the business strategies and goals in simulation. The CAPSIM course consists of 6 rounds spreading over 5 weeks.
Module-by-Module Analysis:
During the first week, it was decided to initially position the product Able as a product specialized for the market of low technology. The original plan was to make the product Able a leader of that market segment. The team decided to match the R & D profile of the Able product to the one that could make it fit for the low technology market segment.
Tuckman Model:
The model divides the process of team development into five different phases. The phases comprise 1) Forming, 2) Storming, 3) Norming, 4) Performing, 5) Adjourning. A team consists of multiple pieces of an organization, and their joint workings cause the resolutions to many a problem, and the teams are disengaged after the accomplishment of the task.
Career Learnings:
The course experience learned during the CAPSIM simulation is worthwhile and will bring plenty of opportunities to the team members. It was a valuable experience that will be remembered by the group member for the rest of their lives.
Conclusion:
Modern business and work environments demand teamwork. And it has become compulsory for modern employees to develop this most important skill of teamwork to achieve success in their career. Most companies apply at least a small bit of teamwork in their organizations. (Antoni, 2005)