Managing Group and Teams Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Managing Group and Teams - Essay Example Presently, organizations depend immensely on teamwork, hence the need for all employees to possess effective communication skills. Coevolutionary gaming is a scenario process developed by Jim Miskel and Jeff Cares in their article â€Å"Take Your Third Move First†. Coevolutionary gaming has revolutionized the way organizations consider aspects such as teamwork and decision making, both in issues that affect the organization internally and externally. This paper will examine coevolutionary gaming, discussing how the strategy enhances proper decision making, particularly within a group situation such as an organization or department in an organization. The paper will also describe the fundamental limitation of the coevolutionary gaming and the way through which this limitation can be resolved. Miskel and Cares’ article builds on the conception that planning, as well as resultant decision making should never be done within a vacuum. This means that it is not sufficient to just consider the present facts, as well as historical information and data in order to arrive at decisions or plans (Evans, 2012). The coevolutionary gaming also argues that it is unfeasible to presume that those who will be impacted by such planning or decision making, for instance, competitors will simply accept the decisions and not institute some form of counter action. Plans, as well as decisions, made within a vacuum process can be characterized as shortsighted at best. This is primarily because these decisions and plans typically do not take into consideration other factors such as the implications of counter plans and actions, which could be instituted by parties affected by the decision or plan. A decision made on the basis of existing data could turn out to be worse than simply sustaining the status quo, particularly if reactionary actions are taken into consideration (Branke & Rosenbusch, 2008). For instance, the decision of a newcomer to a market to implement robust price reductions so as to capture massive market share can be considered as detrimental in a coevolutional milieu (Axelrod & Hamilton, 1981). On the basis of existing data, this decision appears quite simplistic; however, the choice is erroneous since it wrongly presumes that the market leaders will do nothing in retaliation against the extremely low prices of the newcomer. What such existing data fails to show is that the market leaders are better equipped to retaliate in the event of a price war than the newcomer because of their robust, incumbent market volumes, which provide them the economies of scale needed to make long term decisions such as cutting prices (Ficici, 2004). Consequently, the market leaders can fight aggressively to the point where they bring their prices below the newcomer’ s point of breakeven, which is often higher, until the newcomer collapses since its sales will be incapable of supporting its overall operations (Thompson, 1994). Simply put, this means that if the decision made by the newcomer is not based on coevolutionary gaming, it could prove more fatal for the company than, for instance, identifying a geographic market niche where it can build its brand. Coevolutionary gaming is an essential tool in decision making, particularly within groups when the risk factors, as well as uncertainty levels are extremely high. This is the fundamental reason why Cares and Miskel poised that the process of coevolutionary gaming lends itself particularly well to all decision making endeavors, regardless of the business, from the Department of Defense to the