Case 11-A: Distribution at Hewlett-Packard

11-14. Why do you think a team was needed for the design of a complex project like the

distribution center for HP? How would you classify this team?

=>>The complexity of the project, the need for expertise, commitment, and quality in thesolution

all contribute to the need to use a team. It's a problem-solving team

11-15. Do you believe that the advantage accrued for specialization are lost or diminished when

individuals from different specialities are out together on a team? Discuss.

=> I don't think advantage accrued for specialization are lost or diminished when individuals

from different specialities are out together on a team because when individuals are brought in a

team there is always an advantages of diversity, better quality decisions, more commitment to the

decision. In such a team the decision might take a little longer to make but, the quality is

certainly to improve or the outcome is certainly going to be a better one with ideas of different

minds put together.

11-16. Do you think Loretta Wilsons team achieved its objective? Explain.

=>> Yes, i think Loretta Wilsons team achieved its objective because the team was able to

achieve their task.

Case 11-B: Bullying in the Locker Room

11-17. Thomas coach survived the fall out but was heavily criticized for claiming he was

unaware of the fraternity-house behavior happening in the locker room. Is it reasonable to

believe a coach or any supervisor responsible for creating and monitoring the workplace

environment could not know what was happening in their organization? why or why not?

=>>It is very important for a leader to know what is happening within his/her team and should be

ready to take responsibility for their teams actions. In this case the coach should have known

about the situation that happened in the locker room because in order to be an active leader

effective communication between the team and the coach is very important.The coach should

have addressed the issue prior to any fallout situations if he was a good leader.

11-18. Discuss the topic of group norms as related to this case. How might revising the group

norms improve this situation?

=>> I think hazing a new person is bad because a new person might not like the conditions they

are put through and might quit. A small hazing does not improve group performance, it is a small

display of resistance to internal/external pressure change. If not handled correctly their actions

can cause fear of breaking up. On a professional standpoint they are capable of performing the

task at hand. In addition they respond well to leadership. A harmless jokes can relieve tension

among the staff and new employees. So, a mutual accountability should be implemented. If the

staff can cooperate by positively reinforcing these small harmless jokes this could boost their

moral and increase the friendly bond among themselves.