Managing teams effectively Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Managing teams effectively - Essay Example An obstructionist or a toxic group member is usually an individual who methodically and systematically impedes and blocks the progress of a project (Holpp, 1098). Hence, team leadership essentially involves the talent and the ability to deal with all forms of members in a team, be it the slackers or an obstructionist. As per the existing knowledge and theories of team management, the best way to deal with a slacker or an obstructionist is to follow a mixed approach, which aims at confronting the inherent propensities of such people, to bring them out into the open, while accompanied by soft tactics like acknowledging one’s best qualities and by motivating one to contribute to team effort (Holpp, 1998). Such a hot and cold approach towards the personality types under consideration is bound to yield the desired results, because of its moderation and versatility (Holpp, 1998). A slacker shirks responsibility or work does not mean that one is devoid of talent, skills, insight or a ptitude. So, simply speaking, a slacker stands to be a potential asset for a team if somehow one figures out a way to make one work (Holpp, 1988). Usually a slacker tends to avoid or by pass responsibility because one has a perception that the other team members are not consciously aware of one’s tactics of or predilection for doing so (Holpp, 1998). So the most effective way to disarm a slacker is to confront one and make one realize that the others are well cognizant of one’s talent for shirking work. However, confrontation here does not connote to aggressive or brazen interactions. In fact it means making a slacker realize that in a friendly and decent way, while giving one a chance to save face. A slacker is a talented person who cheats on work, and once one realizes that others are well aware of one’s propensity to cheat, one will certainly avoid repeating such a behavior, at least conspicuously (Holpp, 1998). Bringing things out into the open should be acc ompanied by meaningful soft strategies like defining the job responsibility of a slacker, appreciating one for one’s abilities and the immense contribution one could make to the team, allocating one short term targets with chalked out deadlines and the like. On the contrary, if a slacker continues to cheat even when one is revealed, then this calls for a timely disciplinary action. One way or other, sooner or later, a slacker will have to be confronted. There is no other way out, or is there? The team is bound to lose or face unrest if it indefinitely allows a member to be a non performer (Holpp, 1998). When it comes to an obstructionist, they are the team members who stymie projects while strongly believing that their stratagems are not obvious to other team members (Holpp, 1998). Again, bringing things out into the open by confronting an obstructionist is the best possible way to desist one. However, such a confrontation is bound to fail if not accompanied by a revelation o f the strategy and modus operandi of an obstructionist, as it will give one a chance to deny charges (Holpp, 1998). There are many ways in which an obstructionist operates. Some tend to withhold the information required by a team to succeed. There are others who bring in an element of aggression and controversy in the group meetings to mislead a team from its real objectives. Then there come obstructionists who play on resources by allocating resources to

Was it a mistake for Hitler to allow German forces to venture into the Research Paper

Was it a mistake for Hitler to allow German forces to venture into the Mediterranean regions - Research Paper Example It was not famous for the bad defeat the Americans faced there. It was far better to lose in this way at the beginning of the engagement then later in the decisive days of the campaign. The truth is that what the American army learned in this loss helped them immeasurably to improve their command structure and strategy when dealing with the Germans later on. This led Hitler and the Germans to underestimate the Americans too. The truth was always that Hitler saw the Mediterranean as a diversion (Murray, 108). And that it is what it was—something that distracted him from what he should have been doing, a mistake. Although many see Eisenhower as the most towering figure to come out from the victories of North Africa, two other Allied generals also made their name in that dusty theatre of war. The first of these two men, General Patton, was able to take control over one of the main American armies after the battle of the Kasserine Pass and to use it to maximum advantage. Patton wa s well known for driving his men hard and also for his iron discipline. The second famous general of this part of the conflict was the British general Bernard Montgomery, who became famous at the battle of El Alamein, one of the decisive victory of the North African theatre. These men gained the confidence in this theatre that they would later use to crush the Germans (Murray, 2002).