Teamwork Self Reflection - Organizational Behaviour

INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT

SELF REFLECTION

My project team was one that is able to collaborate effectively, communicate well and focus on a task. The team dynamic was very positive, enthusiastic and productive. However, there were hurdles in the process that we had to work to get over. These included time management and avoiding distractions. My team was able to use its strongest characteristics and interdependence upon each other to overcome these problems and complete the task at hand.

The project team worked as a cohesive unit from the very start. At our first meeting, we went through a forming stage where we worked through a transition process involving mission analysis and planning. We discussed the project requirements and how to effectively complete the task based on each other 's strengths, weaknesses and abilities. Then the team began to research and investigate ideas to include in the report. These action processes caused some conflict since the report was a limited length, and we had to decide on the most important and noteworthy information. This storming stage was short-lived and we quickly progressed into the norming and performing stages of team development. We soon realized that we were short on time so we made definite plans to facilitate and organize virtual meetings.

Subsequent to the punctuated equilibrium, we began to have Skype meetings often and used Google Docs to collaboratively type up the report while offering recommendations and making corrections through a 4-way Skype call. We found that this method worked extremely well for our team, since when we attempted to work together in person, distractions were inevitable and productivity would be stunted. Using mainly a virtual interface, allowed for a very comprehensive interdependence where all members contributed, interacted and collaborated simultaneously. We shared a high degree of goal interdependence to get the project done, and to ensure it was well-written and addressed all project requirements.

The team was composed of 5 members, among which there was a great deal of diversity ethnically, gender-wise and deep-level diversity in our personalities. The diversity within the group, allowed us to explore many different views and perceptions, as supported by the value in diversity problem-solving approach. Each member played several roles, including the energizer, encourager and harmonizer, as it was required of them. The project was mainly an additive task, where everyone 's contributions made up the final result. All members had a unique sense of humor that kept the process fun and light-hearted. This attitude allowed for interpersonal processes such as motivation, encouragement and relationship-building to occur very naturally. Due to the pressure that the time limit enforced, team harmony did not result in groupthink behaviors, because we ensured that the project was the most important priority.

In an overall analysis of our team performance and effectiveness, I believe that we worked very well together, and achieved our objectives with satisfaction and accuracy. The team dynamic was composed of a diverse set of personalities, shared mental models and a high degree of cohesiveness and collaboration. Performance might have been improved if the team had been more mindful of the time span available and taken advantage of time more effectively, earlier on. Procrastination not only caused more difficulty in planning meetings but it also motivated us to remain focused during our meetings. I observed that each member could easily feed off each other 's ideas and contributions, making it easy to collaborate and put it a sequential effort according to the team development model.

Bibliography

Lepine, Wesson, Gellatly and Jason Collquitt. Organizational Behaviour Improving Performance and Commitment in the Workplace. Canada: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 2010. Print.

Bibliography: Lepine, Wesson, Gellatly and Jason Collquitt. Organizational Behaviour Improving Performance and Commitment in the Workplace. Canada: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 2010. Print.