Henry Tam & MGI Team Case Free Essay Example

https://studymoose.com/henry-tam-mgi-team-case-essay 1/10
1 Identify the problem:
What is your evaluation of the MGI team’s processes and outcomes?
The MGI team was comprised of seven members, three of which were
founders: Sasha Gimpeison, Igor Tkachenko, Roman Yakub, Dav Clark,
Alexander Jan Sartakov, Dana Soiman, Henry Tam Jr. The evaluation of the MGI
team concerning processes and outcomes can be determined by analyzing the
five stages of team development. The five stages are, forming, storming,
norming, performing, and adjourning. In forming the stage, members were
brought into the team at different times.
For example, Dav Clark was not introduced until the third meeting. There were
some conflicts and confusion among the group members in the storming stage.
The confusion about group roles arose when Sasha felt Dana and Henry were
merely interns. Dav and Igor, the other team members, saw Dana and Henry as
strategic contributors to the business.
In the norming stage, the group usually starts to work together, conflict is
reduced, and team confidence increases. However, in this case, the team failed
to establish proper ground rules and values, not allowing the team to function
successfully. There were still disagreements between Sasha, Henry and Dana.
Since no information regarding rules and norms had been formally discussed in
the norming stage, the problems amongst the team followed them to the
performing stage. The performing stage was unsuccessful because the team
did not achieve their goal of finishing their task on time. The business plan was
not completed by the appropriated time. In the final adjourning stage, due to
the disagreements between group members, the task of completing the
business plan was not accomplished in the allotted timeframe.
2.Identify the causes: What are the root causes of the team’s problems?
The root causes of the team’s failures came as a result of many factors,
including the task, the people and subgroups that formed, and lack of
organization.
The task was to create a business plan, however the team did a poor job of
assigning roles for each member to complete and their brainstorming sessions
were led in a disorganized manner. Through this case, we also saw the
formation of subgroups in the form of Dana and Henry, who were making the
business plan, and Dav, Igor, and Sasha who worked on the technical side of
product design. The founders were Sasha, Igor, and Roman. With this being
said, role clarification was very poor and team members did not apply their
skills as well as they could have with direction. Group members took on larger
roles than they could handle, as evidenced by Henry and Dana when they
struggled to finish their workload. From an organizational standpoint, there
was no team leader and therefore a lack of cohesion within the team.
The team did a poor job of making decision and assigning roles. There was also
no system of feedback from which they could find their faults and improve
from them. Values and norms were never instilled in the team, giving the MGI
team a poor culture to work in. Team members were putting fault on each
other, as seen by Igor and Roman blaming Sasha for ignoring sales, while Sasha
blamed Henry and others for not utilizing his contributions. Their self-serving
bias as they took credit for good work but looked to blames others in tougher
situations instead of taking collective responsibility. Their poor communication
resulted in-group conflicts and lack of cohesion as a whole.

2 Evaluation: What are the strengths of the MGI team?

The diverse team at MGI was the biggest strength that the start-up possesed.
MGI had collaborators from many different backgrounds that provided many
of the expertises and skill sets that they needed. The MGI team had strengths
when it came to musical and composition expertise. Roman and Igor provided
musical skills and developed technical skills relating to using music in software.
Roman and Igor were considered to be very creative and thus performed the
creative duties of the product development phase. Dana, Henry, and Sasha all
had a backgrounds in business. Dana, a second year HBS MBA student had
some knowledge in media experience. Henry, also a second year HBS MBA
student, had experience in product development. Sasha, a HBS MBA graduate,
used his knowledge to organize MGI into a business and also provided financial
abilities, obtaining investors twice.
Alex provided MGI with the Music Industry Market expertise that they needed
to market the product correctly. Dav was a MIT graduate with software
development experience. One of MGI’s other strengths was the idea of their
product. While Dav, commented that the program needed technological help,
the design of the software game was excellent. Alex who had knowledge of the
industry was very impressed with the game and remarked that there was
nothing on the market quite like it. The creativity and musical expertise that
was incorporated into the game, gave MGI its largest strength. The MGI
founders shared a common ethnicity and friendship that could be considered a
strength. The founders also shared a dedication to creating and establishing
the start-up as a viable company. Stemmed from the relationships
that the founders had with each other, the case mentioned that none of them
would leave MGI when the company was down. This close knit group of friends
can cause issues in the workplace, but with the founders being close friends
they all approached their business with the same level of seriousness and
dedication.
3 Evaluation:
How would you have evaluated the MGI team “on paper” prior to their first
meeting?
Before the first meeting, on paper, the MGI team looked both good and bad in
different aspects.
Before the first meeting MGI consisted of Sasha, Igor, Roman, Dana, and
Henry. This is a very diverse group of people all having different areas of
expertise, knowledge, and skills. Having a team created from many different
schools of thought can be an advantage when finding innovative ideas
advantage in creating a product/company that would be very innovative and
well developed in all the concerning areas. Having a diverse team also poses
issues relating to group cohesion.
The most obvious possibility of bad group cohesion is the fault lines that could
be created between the founders and the HBS students. The three founders
were not only long time friends but also immigrants to the US from the former
Soviet Union. By having a team comprised of people from different areas of
expertise, one would think that MGI would have a competitive
The possible fault line that could divide the team is a serious factor when
determining if this is a viable team. Due to the diverse set of knowledge,
experience, and backgrounds the MGI team had the possibilities to be
successful “on paper”. Prior to the first meeting the MGI team’s only negatives
would arise out of team cohesiveness and the ability to work together.
4 Evaluation:
Are the differences among the team members an asset or liability? Or Both?
Explain.
The differences among the team members on the MGI team are both an asset
and a liability.
The technical differences the MGI team possesses, are the required experience
and knowledge that would be needed to create a successful software based
musical game. The technical differences that the MGI team has are the best
asset to the team. The cultural differences that the members of the MGI team
posses are a liability. The members of the team all have very different ways
that they participate in groups. Some of these differences lead to
confrontations that create a win-lose negotiation type atmosphere with-in the
team. Aggressive culture also creates an environment where some members
are not able to contribute their ideas. This aggressive behavior lead Alex, to
not speak up for the the lack of interest in the aggressive meetings that
occurred.
5 Identify potential solutions:
What could Henry have done earlier to avoid the team’s problems? How
would this have affected the team’s processes or outcomes?
Henry could have noticed that they lacked a leader, and no one on the team
had specific roles. A potential solution could be to establish who was CEO and
have the CEO coordinate meetings and assign team roles. A knowledgeable
mentor could have helped the team get passed many of the amateur problems
they faced.
Organized structure was also needed to help determine individual roles as well
as roles for meetings. Major fault lines occurred between members in the MGI
team, the most serious lines were between the HBS students and the founders
of MGI. All of the members in these subgroups thought as one. There was no
mixture of ideas, but two groups clashing inside of a team. Henry could have
broken that fault line by splitting the group he belonged to and being creative
with other members. All members on the team, equally could have solved the
issues that destroyed the team, MGI lacked a leader.
6 Identify potential solutions:
At the end of the case, what actions could Henry
take? How would these actions affect the team’s processes or outcomes?
The MGI team had great qualifications to be an effective team. MGI did not
make the deadline because of its lack of direction and organization. This could
have been non existent if one of the team members would have stepped up
and took the role of leader. A leader is required to put all the diverse ideas into
context that can help the team reach the ultimate goal. When there is no
leader everyone likes their own ideas and thus those who are more aggressive
control more of the processes. Henry may have not been the best leader out of
everyone but someone needed take on that role and facilitate progress.
If MGI had a designated leader, he/she could make sure that team members
had roles and duties they would be held responsible to. The leader could also
have created project deadlines to make sure that the team met the contest
deadlines. A leader would have been able to focus the entire team’s efforts
towards a single goal.
7 Recommendation:
At the end of the case, based on your potential solutions, which action would
you recommend and why? How will you know if this action is effective.
Establishing a team leader and seeking a credible mentor are two solutions
that would pay dividends. The team leader would help maximize the group
effort by dividing tasks accordingly, delegating responsibilities and coordinating
team communication. A team leaders effectiveness will show results regarding
group cohesion and team output. The second solution of a mentor could help
organize the team but most importantly give every group member someone to
look up to and respect. Every group member would be humbled with this
effort helping to release tension between ego’s.
Diversity is an Asset to the Organization

• Those organisations that use people-oriented strategies that recognize

diversity are likely to experience better results in:
 Service delivery
 Client satisfaction
 Higher staff morale; and
 Higher staff motivation