Market analysis and product development in a team environment

INDIVIDUAL
REFLECTION

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
WHAT WENT WELL.....................................................................................................................3
WHAT DID NOT GO WELL.........................................................................................................4
OWN'S CONTRIBUTION..............................................................................................................5
OTHER’S CONTRIBUTION..........................................................................................................5
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................6
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................7

INTRODUCTION
This assignment is based on my personal reflection of working in a team. This discussion
is based on the market analysis with use of marketing mix for understanding the stages involved
for product development (Peattie and Belz, 2013). However, I always found marketing as one of
the most complicated aspects of the management. Hereby, I had used Tuckman's theory and
Belbin's theory as well for showcasing my experience while working with others in a team.
WHAT WENT WELL
As per the Tuckman's theory, I initiated and formed the team with set objectives and
time-frame. The other team members were cooperative, yet they were reluctant for establishing
any connections. However, the forming stage helped to ensure that members must be involved to
work together (Humphrey and Aime, 2014); this stage led the foundation of team formation on
the basis of backgrounds and overall experience. Next is storming, which shed light on the
sustenance for staying in the team (Thurgood, 2011). In this regard, I found indifferent member
who was not cooperative with any one of us. Moreover, the acceptance was low and led to
disagreements. Here, I conducted sessions to have one to one interaction for resolving the
conflicts. This helped in facilitating a more assertive approachability and made the team
members understand about active listening skills (Berlin, Carlström and Sandberg, 2012).
Furthermore, the third stage refereed as norming assisted me to gain insights about
completion of presentation by doing research in collective order. I was not active at this stage.
Although, the others were ready to take any suggestions for making the assignment better and
this collaboration accelerated the team's performance in positive direction (Chiocchio, Forgues,
Paradis and Iordanova, 2011). Later, on the presentation day, our team performed satisfactorily
due to encouragement, motivation and consistent practice. Overall, the results was above average
as understanding while addressing answers was good. There were no mismatched answers while
interacting with audience (Gerhardt, Chandler and Hill, 2018). Lastly, we successfully
accomplished our tasks and catapulted these efforts in effective manner. Moreover, we decided
to stay in contact and meet once in a while.