■ A student is insecure about being able to contribute during team activities. After the team’s ratings of that student are in, the professor talks to the class about the importance of participating and the different ways students can contribute to a team. In the next evaluation, the student receives the highest rating on the team.
Peer evaluations are a useful way for team members to communicate to one another and to their professor about how the members of a team are performing. Reviewing and evaluating job performance is a marketable skill and is as useful to the employee seeking a job or a job advancement as it is to the supervisor.
Focus on What Your Teammates Do Rather Than What You Think of Them
It is challenging to give a team member a single rating on their effectiveness as a team-mate because some team members will be helpful to the team in some ways, but engage in some behaviors that hinder the team. Another difficulty is that each team member is likely to consider some ways of contributing more valuable than others, so the evaluation of a particular teammate will be overly influenced by that teammate’s performance in certain areas. The only way to be fair is to focus on behaviors—what your teammates do—rather than opinions such as how you feel about them. One way to focus on behaviors would be to ask you to take an inventory of what behaviors your teammates demonstrate and how often. The result would be that you might need to answer 50 or more questions about each member of the team. It is difficult to stay focused on answering accurately when completing such a long survey. A better way to focus on behaviors is by using sample behaviors to anchor each point of a rating scale.
A peer evaluation instrument that is widely used in engineering education is the Comprehensive Assessment of Team-Member Effectiveness (CATME, see www .catme.org ). CATME measures five different types of contributions to a team using such a behaviorally anchored rating scale. Each scale includes representative behaviors describing exceptional, acceptable, and deficient performance in each area. Recognizing that an individual team member may exhibit a combination of behaviors, the CATME instrument also includes “in-between” ratings. The five types of contributions are described below the associate behaviors.
Contributing to the Team’s Work describes a team member’s commitment to the effort, quality, and timeliness of completing the team’s assigned tasks.
■ A student who is exceptional at contributing to the team’s work • Does more or higher-quality work than expected
• Makes important contributions that improve the team’s work • Helps to complete the work of teammates who are having difficulty ■ A student who does an acceptable job at contributing to the team’s work
• Completes a fair share of the team’s work with acceptable quality • Keeps commitments and completes assignments on time
• Fills in for teammates when it is easy or important
■ A student who is deficient at contributing to the team’s work
• Does not do a fair share of the team’s work. Delivers sloppy or incomplete work • Misses deadlines. Is late, unprepared, or absent for team meetings
• Does not assist teammates. Quits if the work becomes difficult
Interacting with Teammates measures how a team member values and seeks contri-butions from other team members.
■ A student who is exceptional at interacting with teammates
• Asks for and shows an interest in teammates’ ideas and contributions • Improves communication among teammates. Provides encouragement or
enthusiasm to the team
• Asks teammates for feedback and uses their suggestions to improve
■ A student who does an acceptable job at interacting with teammates • Listens to teammates and respects their contributions
• Communicates clearly. Shares information with teammates. Participates fully in team activities
• Respects and responds to feedback from teammates
■ A student who is deficient at interacting with teammates • Interrupts, ignores, bosses, or makes fun of teammates
• Takes actions that affect teammates without their input. Does not share information
• Complains, makes excuses, or does not interact with teammates. Accepts no help or advice
Keeping the Team on Track describes how a team member monitors conditions that affect the team’s progress and acts on that information as needed.
■ A student who is exceptional at keeping the team on track
• Watches conditions affecting the team and monitors the team’s progress • Makes sure teammates are making appropriate progress
• Gives teammates specific, timely, and constructive feedback
■ A student who does an acceptable job at keeping the team on track • Notices changes that influence the team’s success
• Knows what everyone on the team should be doing and notices problems • Alerts teammates or suggests solutions when the team’s success is threatened
■ A student who is deficient at keeping the team on track • Is unaware of whether the team is meeting its goals • Does not pay attention to teammates’ progress
• Avoids discussing team problems, even when they are obvious
Expecting Quality is about voicing expectations that the team can and should do high-quality work.
■ A student who is exceptional at expecting quality • Motivates the team to do excellent work
• Cares that the team does outstanding work, even if there is no additional reward • Believes that the team can do excellent work
■ A student who does an acceptable job at expecting quality
• Encourages the team to do good work that meets all requirements • Wants the team to perform well enough to earn all available rewards • Believes that the team can fully meet its responsibilities
■ A student who is deficient at expecting quality
• Is satisfied even if the team does not meet assigned standards • Wants the team to avoid work, even if it hurts the team • Doubts that the team can meet its requirements
Having Relevant Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities accounts for both the talents a member brings to the team and those talents a member develops for the team’s benefit.
■ A student who has exceptional knowledge, skills, and abilities
• Demonstrates the knowledge, skills, and abilities to do excellent work • Acquires new knowledge or skills to improve the team’s performance • Is able to perform the role of any team member if necessary.
■ A student who has an acceptable level of knowledge, skills, and abilities • Has sufficient knowledge, skills, and abilities to contribute to the team’s work • Acquires knowledge or skills needed to meet requirements
• Is able to perform some of the tasks normally done by other team members
■ A student who has deficient knowledge, skills, and abilities is • Missing basic qualifications needed to be a member of the team
• Unable or unwilling to develop knowledge or skills to contribute to the team • Unable to perform any of the duties of other team members
COMPREHENSION
CHECK 3-3 Research shows that team performance can be enhanced if team members reflect on their own and their teammates’ performance and give each other high-quality feedback. “High-quality” ratings are consistent with observed behavior, which may or may not be “high” ratings. We also know that rating quality (again, con-sistency with observed behavior) improves with practice. Guided practice in giving and receiving feedback and in practicing self- and peer-evaluations using behavioral criteria will help you improve. Please take your time in evaluating the members of the fictitious team below.
Pat Friendly and very well-liked, makes working fun, and keeps everyone excited about working together. Relies on teammates to make sure everything is going okay. Pays attention to keeping the team upbeat but does not seem to notice if the team’s work is getting done.
Struggles to keep up with the rest of the team and often asks team-mates for explanations. The team has to assign Pat the least difficult jobs because Pat does not have the skills to do more complex work.
Offers ideas when able, but does not make suggestions that add any-thing unique or important to the final product. Always shows up for meetings, prepares beforehand, and does everything promised. Is confident that the team can do everything that is essential. Agrees that the team should meet all explicit task requirements.
Chris Okay as a person and does not interfere with the contributions of others but rubs teammates the wrong way by frequently griping about the work and making excuses for not following through on promises to the team. Chris has the brains and experience to make a unique and valuable contribution, but does not try. The fact that Chris is so smart frustrates some teammates who have to try hard to accom-plish tasks that would be easy for Chris. Ignores assigned tasks or does a sloppy job because “Robin will redo the work anyway.” Misses meetings or shows up without assigned work. Contributes very little
during meetings. Was late to one meeting because “no one told me the meeting time.” Missed another meeting because “the alarm clock did not go off.” After missing meetings, he asks lots of questions to make sure that everyone is making progress and the team’s work is being accomplished. Spends more time checking that everyone else is doing their work than getting the job done. Chris always seems sure that the team will do fine and says that the team should do good work that fully meets the standards for acceptable performance. In response to a teammate’s question about Chris’ failure to deliver a promised piece of work, Chris said, “Why should I bother? Robin won’t let the team fail.”
Robin Very bright. Has far greater knowledge of the subject than any of the other team members. Extremely skilled in problem solving. Robin has very high standards and wants the team’s work to be impressive, but Robin worries whether the team’s work will be good enough to stand out. Robin completes a big chunk of the team’s work and takes on a lot of the really difficult work. Does the work that Chris leaves unfin-ished. The quality of Robin’s work is consistently outstanding. Tends to just work out the solutions and discourages teammates’ attempts to contribute. Reluctant to spend time explaining things to others. Does not like to explain “obvious” things. Is particularly impatient with Pat’s questions and once told Pat “You are not smart enough to be on this team.” Complains that Chris is a “lazy freeloader.” Sometimes gets obsessed with grand plans and ignores new information that would call for changes. Does not pay attention to warning signs that the current plan might not be effective until the problems are obvious.
Then handles the situation as a crisis and takes over without getting team input. Robin is reluctant to acknowledge or discuss problems in the team until they affect his work.
Terry Not nearly as bright as Robin, but works to develop enough knowl-edge and skills to do the assigned tasks. Terry can usually fill in for other team members if given specific directions, but does not under-stand most of the tasks that other team members normally perform.
Does more grunt work than any of the other team members, but does not do as good a job as Robin and does not take on difficult tasks.
Sometimes makes mistakes on the more complex work. Super respon-sible, spends a lot of time giving one-on-one help to Pat. Always on time to meetings. Often calls to remind everyone (especially Chris) about meetings and usually makes some nice comment about one of the teammate’s strengths or a valuable contribution that the team-mate has recently made. Terry is outgoing and highly supportive of teammates when well-rested, but is sometimes too tired to get excited about teammates’ ideas. Is not defensive when teammates’ offer feed-back, but does not ask for teammates’ suggestions, even when team-mates’ input could help Terry to do better work. Terry thinks that the team can do great work and encourages teammates to do their best.
When Robin expresses doubts if the team can do superior work, Terry reassures everyone that the team is capable of outstanding work.
When the team is headed in the wrong direction, Terry is quick to