This document discusses a team project and identifies factors that led to poor performance. It analyzes the role of "Derek" and how he succumbed to groupthink. It provides recommendations to ensure better performance in the future such as selecting a more diverse team, encouraging open discussion of ideas, providing management guidance, better defining requirements, leveraging past experience, and promoting the right amount of competition within the group.

1. ARE FIVE HEADS BETTER THAN
ONE?
FOUNDATIONS OF GROUP DYNAMICS
Disha Verma 2011209 Sharvani Tiwari 2011232 Vanessa Ferrao 2011241
Veena Menon 2011242 Vignesh Krish 2011243 Dylan D'souza 2011245

2. FACTORS LEADING TO THE POOR PERFORMANCE
• Excess autonomy to the team – proved to be detrimental to
company’s goals
• Lack of clarity on the final goal – no goal setting
• Aggressive leadership - Conner
• Team members couldn’t openly share their ideas just to maintain
group harmony
• Lack of clarity on product requirements

3. DEREK
• Succumbed to team sentiment – did not voice his opinion for
discussion – example of GROUP THINK
• Could have used his past experience with client
• Gave more importance to team harmony over company goal
• Our recommendation for DEREK –
• Not to succumb to group pressure and bring forward his own
ideas on table for discussion

4. WHAT CAN YOU DO TO ENSURE THAT SUCH
PERFORMANCE IS NOT REPEATED?
• Problem: Group Think
• Select a more diverse group – more opinions and ideas– better result
• Team members should create an atmosphere that encourages people to speak up and
brainstorm
• Restricted autonomy- In situations like these, managements expertise can provide
guidance
• Develop better understanding of client’s requirements
• More authority to person having past experience in the domain: In this case: Derek
• Competition within the group: Too much compliance is as harmful as too much
competition. A right amount of competition must be there among team members

5. THANK YOU