for prof paul
| Assignment and Guidelines |  |
The Case Study for this week is “The Forgotten Group Member,” which appears on page W–113 of the course text.
Each student is required to analyze this week’s case study and submit a 2–3 page paper addressing the key questions identified below. Remember that all case studies present both too much and too little information. There may be information presented that is not really relevant, and there may be scant information about a key area. This analysis does require interpretation of the information and there is not “one” right answer. However, you must explain and defend any assumptions you made andor conclusions resulting from your analysis with citations from the text or from the case itself. There is no need to research outside sources for this paper.
Your paper MUST include the following labeled sections:
| Category | Points | Description |
| Part I: Group Development | 15 |
Identify and summarize the stages of group development. Reflecting on the case and textbook material, what stage is the group at now? How could an understanding of the stages of group development have assisted Christine in her leadership role with this team? Support your conclusion with evidence from the case and our text. |
| Part II: Problem Identification | 30 |
Identify key problems. Identify primary and secondary problems the group and/or Christine are facing. Identify what Christine should have understood about individual membership in teams in order to have built group processes that were supportive of her workgroup’s performance. Do not necessarily limit yourself to only team theory here. Plumb any concepts we have covered to date in class if you feel they are relevant. |
| Part III: Retrospective Evaluation | 40 |
Given that there is no “one perfect solution” for this situation, identify, describe, and defend two possible solutions to the primary problem(s). Clearly identify and defend both courses of action. Identity and discuss specific steps needed to implement your selections. Support your selections with evidence from the case, the text, and/or weekly discussion. Remember that deciding on a course of action entails envisioning and planning the steps to success. Be sure to identify implementation steps for both possible solutions. Almost every situation presented with relation to group dynamics and behavior can have multiple avenues for remedy. It is important to develop the ability to critically evaluate more than one alternative and rationally identify pros and cons of each. Presenting pros and cons for the identified alternative solutions in a table format within the paper is acceptable. |
| Part IV: Reflection | 15 | Discuss whether Christine was an effective group leader in this case. Why or Why not? |
|
Grading Rubric |
|
|
Criteria |
Failed to Meet Minimum Standards |
Met Minimum Standards 60% = 60 pts, D |
Satisfactory 70% = 70 pts, C |
Good 80% = 80 pts, B |
Superior 90% = 90 pts, A |
|
Part I: Group Development (15 points) |
No problem summary included. 0 |
Identifies the stages of group development with some summary. Does not tie theory back to the case. 9 |
Identifies the stages of group development with some summary, and ties theory to the case situation with minimal supporting evidence from the case and text. 11 |
Identifies the stages of group development and ties theory to the case situation with supporting evidence from the case and text. 13 |
Clearly and accurately identifies the primary issues presented by the case with clear supporting evidence from the case. 15 |
|
Part II: Problem Identification (30 points) |
No possible solutions discussed. 0 |
Discusses case in general terms with no insight into the real issues presented. 20 |
Discusses issues presented by the case generally, without supporting references. Identifies secondary issues, not primary issues. 23 |
Identifies the primary issues presented by the case with some supporting references to the case. 26 |
Clearly and accurately identifies primary and secondary issues presented by the case with clear supporting evidence from the case. 30 |
|
Part III: Retrospective Evaluation (40 points) |
None provided. 0 |
Does not clearly identify or explain selected recommendation for solutions. 27 |
Identifies recommended solutions with no implementation steps. 31 |
Clearly identifies recommended solutions with discussion of implementation steps at a summary level. 35 |
Gives a clear and focused analysis with implementation recommendations; directly relates selection to course readings. 40 |
|
Part IV: Reflection (15 points) |
None provided. 0 |
Perfunctory effort at answering question. 10 |
Summary level reflection on leadership. 11.5 |
Good faith effort in examining leadership issue with supporting material. 13.0 |
Well-presented insights into leadership issue with supporting material. 15 |
