Why is it important for an organization to have a mission?
Article Critique
Why is it important for an organization to have a mission?
A mission drives the company and its stakeholders in the right direction. In other words, the importance attached to a mission involves its ability to provide the much-needed purpose to the organization while, at the same time, giving employees and customers a sense of belonging. For instance, mission statements give an overview of the context or industry in which the company operates, including its role and product offerings (Dyer Jr. et al., 2013). For example, from the case study, ElectriGov’s mission involves supplying electric power to multiple locations in the U.S. Moreover, a mission does not necessarily end with stating the organization’s desires and resolution to be the best, but what makes it unique in the rapidly changing and highly competitive corporate world. Concisely, I think having a mission is important for any organization because it helps translate the company’s objectives into relatable and achievable measures, positioning the firm within the market to compete effectively.
Why is it important for team members to know their roles on a team?
The ability of a firm or leader to create a balanced team depends on whether or not each team member understands their roles. Recognizing team roles allows the organization to assign tasks based on the employee’s competencies: skills, experience, knowledge, and associated abilities (Dyer Jr. et al., 2013). As in the case of ElectriGov’s crews prior to the interteam-building session, teams members who do not know the individual roles tend to lack cohesion. Therefore, every team member should be able to gain a deeper understanding of their roles and responsibilities to prevent and resolve conflicts.
Is competition within a team a good or bad thing? Explain your response.
I think a competition-driven team is more productive than team members who fail to set and pursue personal goals alongside their team’s goal. In this respect, I am talking about healthy competition, with every team member utilizing their expertise to outcompete colleagues, while at the same time, working together for common good (Dyer Jr. et al., 2013). Unfortunately, many team members engage in unfettered and ruinous competition in which crews employ a variety of ill strategies meant to bring down others. A typical case in point involves some ElectriGov crew members endangering their colleagues’ lives in a move to outperform them. I believe in constructive competition: team members compete naturally, complement one another, work towards achieving and maintaining efficiency, and utilize their skills to emerge the best. In this way, underperforming team members would be able to recognize their weaknesses and build on their strengths to either catch up with others or outperform them.
Why is it important to set short –and long-term goals when planning a meeting regarding conflicts? Provide examples.
Setting short-term and long-term goals prior to attending a meeting to solve a conflict creates a sense of satisfaction of accomplishment at the end of the conversation, especially when each of the short-term goals have been realized. Typically, the achievement of a short-term goal indicates the likelihood of attaining long-term goals. In this respect, team members who identify with their organisations’ already-accomplished short-term goals would emphasise achieving long-term goals through hard work, coordination, consultation, and associated performance and teamwork strategies. Equally important, setting both goals create a favorable environment for team members to understand that their differences only hamper progress.
I recently met with my team to address the issue of groupthink. The majority of our team is from one culture, which means they could rely on their mother tongue to run the project, which, in turn, created a series of conflicts. One week before the meeting, I engaged each team member to present what he or she thought should be our short-term and long-term goals. From their submissions, I made a list of the most appropriate suggestions. When we finally met, we narrowed down to three goals: two short-term and one long-term. The former involved a need to start using formal language and burying our differences, with the latter revolving around the creation of an organizational culture characterized by cultural competence within 12 months. During the meeting, each of the short-term goals were met, with every member remaining optimistic and committing to the realization of the long-term goal.
What is an unhealthy agreement? Why is it significant to leaders to understand how to resolve conflict and avoid unhealthy agreements?
According to Dyer, Jr. et al. (2013), an unhealthy agreement constitutes just a few members in the organization, especially top leadership, reaching at critical decisions without necessarily consulting or seeking the input of the majority, but have others adopt these decisions as total agreement. This explains why, at times, the team leader makes poor and unpopular decisions, but members choose to accept them to avoid conflict. Consequently, leaders should master the art of conflict resolution, which is achievable through appropriate methods, including negotiation, arbitration, and mediation. Additionally, leaders should integrate the democratic approach to decision-making, allowing every team member to contribute. By doing so, the leader would have avoided an unhealthy agreement and prevented and solved any potential conflicts.
Reference
Dyer, W. G., Jr., Dyer, J. H., & Dyer, W. G. (2013). Team building: Proven strategies for improving team performance (5th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
