Twelve Members, Three Groups, Ten Days
Meera is the elected leader of a 12-member Class 9 team organising the school's Independence Day cleanliness drive in 10 days. Three clusters have formed: four volunteers who want to do everything, five who attend but say nothing, and three who have missed both meetings and were heard saying, 'Meera's project, let her do it.' The teacher coordinator is on leave for a week. The headmistress wants a written plan by Friday, a budget of ₹1,500, and permission letters for two nearby shops to place dustbins. Two members have tests that same week. One member uses a wheelchair and has been listed for poster making without anyone asking her. A local shopkeeper offers ₹2,000 if the team prints his shop name on all posters.
1. Diagnose where this team stands and define Meera's main leadership task for the next three days, referring to specific behaviours.
Read the worked answer
Where the team is: between forming and storming. There is a group, but not yet a team.
- Three clusters show subgroups have formed around enthusiasm, silence and absence rather than around tasks.
- 'Let her do it' is social loafing: individual contribution is not identifiable, so effort disappears.
- The five silent members may be indifferent, but are equally likely to be unsure of what is expected of them. Silence is not proof of laziness.
- Assigning poster making without asking treats a member as a category rather than a person, and will cost the team her real skills.
Meera's main task in three days: not to do more work, but to convert a group into a team with a shared purpose, named roles and visible contribution.
Concrete steps: a 15-minute all-hands with a one-page charter (purpose, Friday deadline, three deliverables); a wall task board with named owners and dates; pair one volunteer with one silent member so responsibility is shared; ask each member privately which task they want and can actually do; speak to the three absentees individually before naming them anywhere.
2. Give two ways Meera could respond to the three absentees. Predict the likely effect of each and recommend one.
Read the worked answer
Option A - name them in the group and list who has not contributed. Immediate effect: they may turn up, and the volunteers feel defended. Likely later effect: resentment, defensiveness and proof of the 'her project' story. Compliance today, withdrawal tomorrow, and the teacher returns to a divided class.
Option B - one-to-one, ask what would make it possible, then give a small defined task with a date and a partner. Example: 'We need two people to measure and mark the bin spots on Monday at 4:00. Can you pair with Rohan and finish by Tuesday?' If the answer is no, say plainly what the reduced role will be and that the teacher will be told - a boundary, not a threat.
Recommendation: B, with a documented deadline.
Reasoning: social loafing shrinks when a contribution is identifiable, small enough to start and attached to a person. A public call-out makes the person defend their image instead of doing the task, and it punishes the volunteers by making the team feel unsafe. The boundary matters too: inclusiveness is not the same as accepting non-delivery without consequence. Record the task, the date and the response, and hand that record to the teacher coordinator when she returns.
3. Decide on the shopkeeper's offer and on the poster-making assignment. Justify both using the likely consequences and the values at stake.
Read the worked answer
The ₹2,000 offer:
- Consequences: the team budget is ₹1,500, so the money is tempting; but the posters represent a school citizenship event, and commercial branding turns a public-service drive into advertising. Accepting without authority also commits the school to something Meera cannot promise.
- Values: honesty, non-commercialisation of a school event and respect for the headmistress's authority.
- Decision: do not accept as offered. Counter-propose a single line of acknowledgement - 'Supported by [shop]' - on the back of a banner or in the closing thanks, subject to the headmistress's written approval. Never promise branding she has no power to authorise.
The poster-making assignment:
- Consequence of the current listing: if she only paints, the team loses her data and coordination ability, and she learns that decisions about her are made by default.
- Value: autonomy and inclusion. Inclusion is not just physical access; it is being asked.
- Decision: withdraw the assumed role and ask her which of the listed tasks she wants. Offer options - route survey, shop permissions, budget tracking, volunteer coordination - and accept her choice.
Rule for both: ask before assigning, and let the person closest to the situation choose where possible.