1. Problem recognition, definition and evaluation
The preparatory AACE certification course with face to face method was just completed. Eleven practitioners were participating in the class room from 26 -30 August 2013 on the course held by PT. Mitratata Citragraha’s AACE/PMI/INCOSE Certification course. The main objectives of this course are to have each of the students successfully complete the course with a passing grade and subsequently pass one of the supported certification examinations in February 2014 at first attempt and return on training investment back to their working office. Understanding the position of the team will help the team understand of where they stand, what kind of leadership is appropriate and also to make individual adjustment in order to make highest result. To determine the leadership style seems as a key factor here that will support the team achieving best contribution as the mission has already stated.
2. Development of the feasible alternative
Dr. Bruce Tuckman in 1965 introduce Forming – Storming – Norming – Performing model of group development who maintained that these phases are all necessary and inevitable in order for the team to grow. Hersey and Blanchard categorized all leadership styles into four behavior types, which they named S1 to S4:
- S1: Telling – is characterized by one-way communication in which the leader defines the roles of the individual or group and provides the what, how, why, when and where to do the task;
- S2: Selling – while the leader is still providing the direction, he or she is now using two-way communication and providing the socio-emotional support that will allow the individual or group being influenced to buy into the process;
- S3: Participating – this is how shared decision-making about aspects of how the task is accomplished and the leader is providing less task behaviours while maintaining high relationship behavior;
- S4: Delegating – the leader is still involved in decisions; however, the process and responsibility has been passed to the individual or group. The leader stays involved to monitor progress.
3. Development outcomes of the feasible alternative
Refers to Dr.Bruce Tuckman’s model here are characteristics of each alternatives of leadership :
S1 (Telling) :
- Each member of the team focuses on the leader
- Distant relationship with the others
- Individual roles and responsible are unclear
- Leader must prepared to answer a lot of question from team
- Team members are more concerned with the impression they are making than the project in hand;
- Wanting to be respected,
- Battling with feelings of inadequacy,
- Wondering who will support or undermine them, and above all
- Proving to the leader their value to the team.
- Many new ideas turned into reality, risks taken and failure seen as simply another step along the pathway to success.
- Roles and relationships are now established, freeing people up to concentrate on exercising the talents that got them into the team in the first place.
- Plenty of healthy conflict
- The leader and team members have learned to give their very best then get out of the way
4. Selection of acceptable criteria
As all team member has already fill the survey, we collected from 11 team member; the data was computed by using PERT calculation number to get a single value from a group of data that represent four stages:
The highest value result is forming
5. Analysis of the alternative
As shown in Figure.1 above, the stages of Simatupang aace 2014 team is is likely on forming stage. stage in which members are positive and polite. Some members are anxious, as they haven’t yet worked out exactly what work the team will involve. Others are simply excited about the task ahead. Program manager plays dominant role at this stage while other members’ roles and responsibilities are less clear.
This stage is usually fairly short, and may only last for the single meeting at which people are introduced to one-another. At this stage there may be discussions about how the team will work, which can be frustrating for some members who simply want to get on with the team task.
6. Selection the best alternative
As team development survey result indicates that Simatupang aace 2014 is still at forming stage it means that all team member should take any actions needed to to be able to instantly bring together team to the next step in order to be best team to stage performance. For this kind of stage a role of Program Manager and Project Manager should bring team members work together on common tasks and establish roles among team members.
7. Performance Monitoring dan Post Evaluation Result
The development of the team we are within should be considerably measured time after time as we are go along as we go through step by step doing every assigment we had as part of team or as individual. Each of development progress of team members should be measured by individual assesment and subsequently team development progress could be measured as an outcome of each team member. By doing this way we will know how far the progress we have made as a team and what leadership style need that most suitable for our team.
PTMC/APMX Building Project Management Competency (2013).Certified Cost Consultant/Cost Engineer Competency Development Blended Learning Class Jakarta, Indonesia. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.build-project-management-competency.com/open-enrollment-courses/online-courses/certified-cost-consultantcost-engineer-certification-next-blended-learning-class/[Last Accessed 2September 2013].
Tuckman, B. (1965). Bruce Tuckman forming storming norming performing team development model.Retrieved from Web site: http://www.businessballs.com/tuckmanformingstormingnormingperforming.htm, web.2 September 2013
Hersey. Blanchard situational theory. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hersey%E2%80%93Blanchard_situational_theory
Donald Clark (May 11, 1997), http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/leader/leader.html, section on training leadership and performance.