Innovation and Business Development
The 19th of April 2013
Table of Contents
2.Evaluation and Analysis2
This paper will be briefly reflecting the author’s experience in the group assignment; his reflection will be supported by some of the literature related to group work and performance in the higher education field as well as team work performance level in organizations. How well the team worked and communicated together, their conflicts, motivation, work load and work quality will be mentioned as well. This paper will also examine their points of strengths and how it helped them in completing the assignment as well as their points of weaknesses and the consequences of having the later. The author’s opinion about what was the best thing he liked in his experience, the worst thing and how would he change his behaviour the next time he finds himself in a similar situation will also be discussed. All theories and arguments will be based on complete academic literature. Evaluation and Analysis
According to McComb et.al (2012), for a team to be successful, proper means of communication needs to be established among the group members. Communication per se may cause confusions and misdirect team members causing lack of coordination. Despite having two different cultures in our group, I felt that every one of us was able at a certain point to establish a communication channel, and not just on an academic level. Numerous nights I would find myself going out for dinner with my team after a long night working on the report. This act of socialisation helped the team to overcome quickly the “Break the Ice” phase. It gave us a chance to know each other on a personal level, reflecting in our academic gatherings a sense of flexibility and understanding, which in turn helped in smoothing the whole process (Stivers et.al 2007). A second strength point in our team is that we all came from a collectivist culture. Roles overlapping and major team conflicts were very few at best, having a pattern of shared attitudes and values helped everyone in committing to his role, and committing to the overall report. The concept of collectivism has worked greatly in our favour in shaping our collaborative team (McAtavey & Nikolovska 2010).
I think the team didn’t achieve a high quality work for the following reasons; although our team members were committed to the report, it was not easy to synchronize our work. The overall linguistic quality of the report was very poor, even after passing through the University’s Learning Skills Unit, somehow nothing seemed to fit together. Having a common format that we’ve agreed upon for our writing style at the beginning, every one of us spent a great deal of time decorating his own part in the way he saw best. By the time we wanted to put everything together, we realized that we’re very short on time and a lot of things must be changed, which imposed to a certain extent a sense of frustration on all of us (Postrel 2009).
Another reason for not achieving high quality work was letting this frustration feeling gain control over us. Being gloomy and pessimistic, we couldn’t achieve more with the due date only few days away. Members, who came up with new ideas, had others facing them with cynical comments. The concept of reconstructing the overall report was resisted by all of us, in addition to our linguistic level problem; rewriting and synchronizing seemed to be a very far from achieving that kind of a goal.
One of the best things I’ve admired in this group assignment was how everyone was dedicated and committed to his task. We had a task oriented structure in our group...