McGuire and Edmondson (2001) analysed the evaluations of more than 50 students who had participated in small group projects. 36 stated they would choose to work in a group for their next project, if the choice was available. The main reason for opting out of group-work was the desire to take individual responsibility for the grade achieved. Only one student did not want to be involved in more group-work in the future.
A well-designed project plan helps to keep everyone focused on the goal and it provides a benchmark against which you can monitor progress.
A project plan typically involves a number of stages (see figure 5.2). A project management checklist is a rational plan of action. Try to treat it as a living document – refer to it often and be prepared to modify it as the project develops.
Agree the project aims and objectives
Agree the work/tasks involved
Allocate work – who does what?
Task timings
On-going monitoring
Final review and report writing/presentation
Considerations
How flexible are the project guidelines? Does everyone agree the aims and objectives? Are the outcomes SMART – see chapter 00?
What activities will the project involve? What is essential? Are any ‘nice to have’?
What skills and resources are needed? Who can offer these? Is the work fairly allocated?
Are the boundaries between activities clearly defined and non-overlapping?
Should the activities follow a specific order? How long will each activity take?
How often do you need to meet to review progress? Where and when?
How will you keep in touch between meetings?
How long should you allow to ‘pull it all together’? What part will each person play in the written report or presentation?
TOP TIP
Successful group work requires a balance between ‘good people skills’ and ‘good project management’ skills. When the two are brought together effectively, the experience is likely to be enjoyable and productive. Are you and your group considering both?
Most people, if asked to form groups, will gravitate towards their friends. Is that what you do? By doing this you remain within your ‘comfort zone’ – you know and like the people you work with and you are aware of their skills. Yet working with friends also brings some potential disadvantages, including: • You may not have the best mix of people for the job – particularly if we
choose friends who are similar to ourselves
• As a group you may become too relaxed, easy going or uncritical • You may waste time through chitchat and socialising rather than getting
on with the task
• There are fewer opportunities to develop your own people skills if you always work with the same people
• Choosing your own team does not mimic many ‘real-life’ situations. Student project teams tend to be either friendship groups, randomly allocated teams (e.g. by allocating numbers in the classroom) or teacher allocated.
Belbin (2003) observed groups of managers attempting to solve specific business problems and suggested that the most effective teams contain people who, between them, are able to occupy nine different roles. Although there may be a danger of over-emphasising the importance of roles, our suggestion is to try and work with members’ role preferences whenever you can. People tend to be more motivated when they are occupying a role they enjoy, and it can be helpful to explore this during the planning stage when the responsibilities are being assigned.
Each Belbin role has been associated with some distinct skills that con- tribute positively to the group functioning and also some potential weaknesses
Table 5.2
Belbin’s nine roles
The nine identified roles and associated skills Plant:
An imaginative problem-solver, the creative thinker who
looks at topics in a new way Co-ordinator:
Clarifies issues, keeps everyone on target, confident
and delegates the workload Monitor-evaluator:
Considers all options, is pragmatic and shows
good judgment, evaluative and analytical Implementer:
Practical – makes things happen. Organised and
efficient Completer-finisher:
Attends to detail, is conscientious and delivers
on time Resource
investigator:
Enthusiastic, follows up new ideas and is
good at networking Teamworker:
Perceptive, averts friction, listens, and manages
the emotional state of the team Specialist:
Single minded, provides scarce knowledge and is a
self-starter Shaper:
Challenges ideas, works well under pressure, overcomes
obstacles, and is good at prioritising
The nine identified roles and potential weaknesses
Plant:
May disregard detail and not consider the practical
implications of new ideas Co-ordinator:
May be seen as lazy, avoiding work or manipulating
others, which may result in group tension Monitor-evaluator:
May not be able to motivate others: appears
dull and unexciting Implementer:
Inflexible and may be resistant to new approaches or
new ideas Completer-finisher:
May be anxious, ‘nagging’, nit-picking and
unwilling to delegate Resource
investigator:
Liable to become bored and so lose interest
quickly Teamworker:
Finds it difficult to make decisions, especially when
under pressure Specialist:
Contributes narrowly and may not be that interested in
team success Shaper:
Figure 5.3 Role groupings
(see table 5.2). In a well-performing team, individual members can moderate their behaviours to prevent these weaknesses occurring. The table summarises the best and worst of each role so it is really quite an ‘extreme’ summary. Even so, can you see yourself in any of these simplified descriptions?
Groups with a concentration of mainly one role may experience problems working together. How do you imagine a group of mainly plants would behave, for example? It is likely to generate novel and imaginative ideas but the group may struggle to evaluate them or implement actions!
INTERESTING FINDING
A study comparing the effectiveness of ‘mixed’ versus ‘shaper’ groups found that although the shapers had more group interaction, they were less likely to identity either the key objectives or the details that needed to be addressed, or reach a consensus (Prichard & Stanton 1999).
These nine roles can be grouped together in different ways. Figure 5.3 shows one way of doing this:
They can also be grouped in other ways. For example, using Kolb’s Learning Style Preferences (see page 80), you could group the roles into: Thinking (plant,
Mixing Resource- investigator Teamworker Acting Implementer Completer- finisher Leading Co-ordinator Shaper Thinking Plant Monitor- evaluator Specialist
specialist, monitor-evaluator), Feeling (teamworker, and resource-investigator), Watching (co-ordinator) and Doing (implementer and completer-finisher). The important point is to consider role mix and balance when forming a group. If you are interested in finding out your own preferred role(s) you could ask whether your college or workplace has purchased rights to administer the Belbin questionnaire – many have! There is also an official Belbin web- site that you might want to look at.
DANGER!
A natural preference for a given role(s) is no guarantee that the role will be performed well. Mental ability, values and social skills also matter. The ideas generated by a plant, for example, may not all be good ideas!