Henry Tam Case Study
What is your evaluation of MGI’s team processes? What were the root causes of the team’s process problems?
The root cause of MGI’s process problems are a lack of direction and clear personal responsibilities. When looking at the team meetings it is very clear that there was little organization to their efforts. It also seemed as though there was not sufficient purpose to the team’s efforts. Many members were more interested in validating their ideas on what to do to others rather than exchanging ideas or creating an open environment. Quiet often there would be time spent on one topic, then another, then more and more without resolving the first topic. The arguments between Sasha and Dana, the HBS students and the musicians, and others never seemed to go anywhere as mentioned by Dana:
“The brainstorming sessions were great at first but they went on too long, and there was no implementation.”
Establishing finite goals at the end of each meeting could have greatly increased meeting effectiveness. If resolved, the arguments could have become more useful in determining the company’s direction.
A good example of how the process problems were caused by a lack of clearly defined personal responsibilities was how the role of the HBS students Henry and Dana were perceived differently by Sasha and Igor. Igor understood that Henry and Dana wanted to help with MGI’s business strategy. Sasha on the other hand, thought that Henry and Dana where there primarily to write the business plan for the contest and that he could also utilize their status as HBS students to call HBS school graduates for help. Henry and Dana disagreed with Sasha’s view of their role and it led to some conflict. As team members brought more people on throughout the project they never spelled out what they wanted the new person to bring to the table. Only after it would become an issue would there be a conversation. Further if someone was tasked with heading the meetings, there wouldn’t
The root cause of MGI’s process problems are a lack of direction and clear personal responsibilities. When looking at the team meetings it is very clear that there was little organization to their efforts. It also seemed as though there was not sufficient purpose to the team’s efforts. Many members were more interested in validating their ideas on what to do to others rather than exchanging ideas or creating an open environment. Quiet often there would be time spent on one topic, then another, then more and more without resolving the first topic. The arguments between Sasha and Dana, the HBS students and the musicians, and others never seemed to go anywhere as mentioned by Dana:
“The brainstorming sessions were great at first but they went on too long, and there was no implementation.”
Establishing finite goals at the end of each meeting could have greatly increased meeting effectiveness. If resolved, the arguments could have become more useful in determining the company’s direction.
A good example of how the process problems were caused by a lack of clearly defined personal responsibilities was how the role of the HBS students Henry and Dana were perceived differently by Sasha and Igor. Igor understood that Henry and Dana wanted to help with MGI’s business strategy. Sasha on the other hand, thought that Henry and Dana where there primarily to write the business plan for the contest and that he could also utilize their status as HBS students to call HBS school graduates for help. Henry and Dana disagreed with Sasha’s view of their role and it led to some conflict. As team members brought more people on throughout the project they never spelled out what they wanted the new person to bring to the table. Only after it would become an issue would there be a conversation. Further if someone was tasked with heading the meetings, there wouldn’t