Group Dynamics and Leadership Essay

Abstractwhy are some ag chemical conferences triumphful and differents disappointed? What criteria or pass judgments are driveed for conquest? Contemporary teaching and schooling utilise over the past few geezerhood in higher education institutions has seen a proliferation of open- ceaseed constructivist pecking traffic patterns that incorporate collaboration. This has enkindled the indigence for identifying meaty attributes get hold ofed for self-make aggroup knead. This flying field re expectations the books with a view of identifying a framework that educators can use to uphold recruit telling groupwork in their classes. A case study is used to enquire devil squads of final year mul clippingdia scholarly persons completing a endure- found unit of measurement, in which groupwork was an essential ingredient and immersed in an au indeedtic context. Attributes gleaned from the belles-lettres for winning aggroupwork was used to liken the both divers e aggroups. Keywords aggroup upwork, higher education, authentic milieuIntroductionWith the shift from a predominately instructivist to constructivist training the need for tertiary educators to use a variety of teaching strategies and methods is becoming much and more important. Learning designs need to incorporate student-centred police squad based e advanceding pedagogy much(prenominal) as switch-based, case-based, inquiry-based and enigma-based scenarios (Oliver, 2001). Students need to be immersed in learning environss that bear on real learning in real contexts. aggroups and aggroupwork sustain to promote deep learning that occurs through with(predicate) interaction, problem solving, chat, cooperation and collaboration (Johnson & Johnson, 1995).These learning designs promote the look of knowledge as they are imbed in a social fellowship with a squad environment (Vygotsky, 1978). potent aggroup up upwork can affect the favored rake and implementatio n of these learning designs. Tertiary educators can non drive students will the knowledge, conceiveing and dexteritys unavoidable to ca-ca and contribute to a synergistic police squad environment.Through a review of the literature, this study identifies a pasture of attributes considered necessary for lucky squad upwork. These are then used to compare twain contrasting groups with a view of confirming their validity through a case study.Research has back upd a trope of attributes indispensable for made squadwork. Many of these attributes sire been consistently identified in the literature. confuse 1 provides a compend of literature on the self-made attributes infallible for sound groupwork as follows lading to squad success and divided goals squad elements are connected to the success of the group and their shared goals for the project. prospered groups are motivate, engaged and contain to action at the highest level interdependence team ins talments need to create an environment where together they can contribute far more than as individuals. A verifying interdependent team environment brings out the outdo in each person enabling the team to achieve their goals at a far superior level (Johnson & Johnson, 1995, 1999). Individuals promote and encourage their fellow team members to achieve, contribute, and learn Inter ain Skills includes the ability to argue issues openly with team members, be h 1st, trustworthy, supportive and orient respect and commitment to the team and to its individuals. bringing up a caring work environment is important including the ability to work efficaciously with opposite team members Open conversation and corroborative feedback actively listening to the concerns and take of team members and valuing their contribution and expressing this inspection and repairs to create an resultantive work environment. Team members should be volition to give and sustain constructive check and provide authentic feedback Appropriate team firearm is essential in the origination of a successful team. Team members need to be fully aware of their particularized team role and understand what is expect of them in terms of their contribution to the team and the project and cargo to team offshootes, leadership & accountability team members need to be accountable for their contribution to the team and the project. They need to be aware of team processes, high hat make and new ideas. Effective leadership is essential for team success including shared decision-making and problem solving.Case Study utmost year students enrolled in the Interactive multimedia system course at Edith Cowan University are indispensable to develop skills and expertise in managing the design and culture of knob meshwork sites. The unit IMM 3228/4228 Project guidance Methodologies, uses teams offour or five students to utilise their specialist skills to trifle a real need for an effor t client. Team roles include programmers, graphic designers and project tutors. There were 82 students (20 teams) completing this unit. The aim was to have students experience project counsel issues that occur when dealing with real clients in real projects and was heavily concentered on teamwork and problem solving. The environment was based on the learning principles of authenticity, self-regulation and reflection (Luca & Oliver, 2001).Features included student contracts, journals (for self/peer sagacity & reflection), throng Centre for problem solving, bulletin boards, time caution tools, syllabus and assessment materials, cod notes, legal/QA templates, relevant URLs, web sites and assignments developed by previous students and a student details database. Within this setting, two teams were selected for investigation. One team was highly successful in developing a timber product, and collaborated in a highly successful manner. Another team, experienced pixilated team pro blems, which caused it to become dysfunctional and had to be split. info was collected on both of these teams from focus groups sessions, interviews and questionnaires that were recorded and transcribed for analysis. A summary of the results is discussed below with reference to unwrap attributes undeniable for successful teamwork as outlined in participants understand their purpose and share their goals the combine achieves mission (Francis & Young, 1979) members must share a grueling common goal (Kets De Vries, 1999) groups provide each member of the team with prestigiousness and recognition (Scarnati, 2001) successful teams are move to succeed (Bradley & Frederic, 1997) there is strong team commitment to succeed (Critchley & Casey, 1986) members have strong shared values and beliefs (Kets De Vries, 1999) engaged in and satisfied with their work (Wageman, 1997)creation of a team atmosphere that is informal, relaxed, comfortable and non-judgemental (Harris & Harris, 1996) pr omote group cohesiveness (Bradley & Frederic, 1997) people screw regular interaction with individuals who have analogous interests and goals (Scarnati, 2001).Interdependence one cannot succeed unless the other members of the group succeed (Smith, 1996) together the group can deliver more than the individuals who agree it could do in isolation (Francis & Young, 1979) team members must work together in effect to produce successful systems (Bradley & Frederic, 1997) team members interact to help each other contact the task and promote one some others success (Smith, 1996) team members bring in on the capabilities of their fellows the combinations energised through synergy (Francis & Young, 1979) team members must take an interest in both the group and each individuals execution (Harris & Harris, 1996) team members must never be fully self-directed or only independent (Johnson, Heimann, & ONeill, 2000) teams are much empowered to accomplish tasks not forthcoming to individu als (Scarnati, 2001) Individuals experience a wide range of new ideas and skills when interacting with team members (Scarnati, 2001) team members learn together so that they can by and by perform better as individuals (Smith, 1996) made TeamThis team of students was highly successful in developing a gauge product, as well as macrocosm highly collaborative. Their journal entries continuall(a)y reflected positivist comments close other team members, and at no stage during the semester was there a request or requirement to canalise marks from one team member to another. Team meetings were always friendly, and at no stage were team issues discussed as universe problematic. The team always focused on the project and how the process of development could be improved byexploring expectations of the tutor, client and end users. An analysis of the data collected from this team indicated that they showed the attributes needed for successful teamwork. In just about all of their respons es in interviews, focus group meetings and questionnaires it was perspicuous that this team was committed to commission to team success and shared goals the team was highly focused on delivering a tonus product, and not pre-occupied by personal issues that might have interrupted this objective. They facilitated and nurtured positive, cooperative-working relationships based upon the focus of developing a quality final product that would impress their client tutor, peers and end users. The whole team was strongly motivated to out-perform other teams and shared a strong common goal of absent to develop a product that would support their chances of gaining employment at the end of the course. This was homely in almost all of their responsesInterdependence the team members felt that they had a duty towards the other members of the team and that the success of the project was based upon each team members contribution. Team members were always joyful to help peers when they were ex periencing exhaustingies. The team would proactively brainstorm problems individuals team members were having and offer assistance if needed social skills the team recognised that team members had different personalities and experienced problems at different stages. They showed condition for each other, prize and supported others in difficult times.Open communication and positive feedback the team recognised that it was a anicteric thing to discuss problems or difficult issues and undertake to offer constructive help/ reflection in trying to scatter these. They strongly valued open dialogue that enabled team members to express their concerns in a non-defensive manner. They were open and truthful about all aspects of the projectAppropriate team composition this team was proactive in selecting their team members well in advance for this unit. They had carefully considered the skills needed for each team member, and similarly the type of personality for each team member. The se were carefully discussed and considered by two team members four months in the lead the unit commenced Commitment to team processes, leadership & accountability team members were all aware of the importance of e realones role within the team and the process used by the team to course of study and track the timing and quality of required tasks. The project manager was well respected by the team, and always consulted the team before making any major decisions. Also, the team had a number of quality sureness procedures which helped monitor activities as well as individual team members accountabilitiesUnsuccessful TeamAnother team of students experienced severe team problems, which caused it to become dysfunctional and had to be split. At the first peer assessment session, marks were transferred between team members, as it was perceived that some team members werent contributing. Even though agreement was made at this meeting that marks should be transferred, and suggestions were made about how to improve the situation, gall amongst team members escalated. This was cl wee evident from the comments organism made through the confidential on-line(a) journal entries each week. The tutor had several(prenominal) meetings with the project manager and individuals to help try to re work on issues, but to no avail.At one of the team meetings a overserious disagreement occurred, in which one of the team members verbally berated another, from which point there was no reconciliation. After this altercation, team members felt they could no longer work together, so stock-still though they would experience a heavier workload, they nemine contradicente agree to split and form two separate teams. An analysis of the responses given by the successful team indicated that this team had a strong awareness of the attributes needed for successful teamwork. Comparing responses from this team against the key attributes needed for successful teams sh accept in Table 1, it was evi dent that this team was not congruent with these criteriaCommitment to team success and shared goals one team member was highly motivated to achieve a high quality product, though two others were content with provided just gaining a pass i.e. they were riant to put in minimal effort. This couple of expectations caused many problems and frustration for team members early in the semester Interdependence two team members were highly competitive in this team that negated the development of a synergistic team environment. They were highly focused on our own tasks, and were not interested in serving others who may have been having problems. If others werent performing, then the attitude was that peer assessment should be applied, rather than trying to support and help the individual. This caused a lack of team cohesion and cooperation, a feeling of disempowerment, and resulting in the ultimate split of the teamInterpersonal skills the team showed little consideration for each othe r and gave almost no support for others in difficult times. Team members seemed unaware and very surprised that they had upset other team members by their comments. They seemed to have not notice they were hurting others feelings by their comments and the approaches taken to solve team problemsOpen communication and positive feedback comments made by team members indicated that peers were bluff of their situation and problems, and were not inclined to discuss problems, as they would only attract criticism and negative feedback. This resulted in team members not communicating freely or discussing their problems that had potentially damaging effect on the teamAppropriate team composition this team was formed haphazardly. Three of the original team members had a quick discussion in the class and decided to make a team, and another team member arrived a week later, so the team agreed to accept them in their team, as they needed to make a team of four. Expectations and skill were not carefully considered Commitment to team processes, leadership & accountability the project manager happened to be the youngest in the team, and didnt influence the respect needed.Team members often complained about team meetings being a untamed of time, and also of team members being late or contributing effectively. One team member felt that he was not included in decision-making and did not receive all communication regarding the progress and development of the project from the project manager. The overall management of this team was perceived to be toothless by most of the team members sum-up and ConclusionsThis study compared how well two teams performed by comparing attributes identified for successful teamwork, as shown in Table 1. From the results it is evident that these attributes vie an important role in find the success of these teams. The results show a obligate relationship between how the teams embraced these six attributes, and how successful the team was in co llaborating and developing a quality product.The results from this study indicate that these key attributes need to be carefully considered by both tutors and students when teamwork activities are proposed. Further query needs to be considered on how scoop out to implement these strategies in a methodological fashion to ensure tutors and students acknowledge and understand the importance of how to implement each attribute i.e. a template outlining implications for best practice when designing and implementing constructivist learning designs which incorporate teamwork activities.ReferencesBradley, J. H., & Frederic, J. H. (1997). The effect of personality type on team performance. ledger of Management Development, 16(5), p. 337-353.Critchley, B., & Case, D. (1986). Teambuilding At what outlay and at whose cost? In A.Mumford (Ed.) enchiridion of Management Development. Gower Publishing Company Limited, University recommend CambridgeFisher, S. G., Hunter, T. A., & Macrosson, W. D . K. (1997). Team or group? Managers perceptions of the differences. diary of Managerial Psychology, 12(4), 232-242. Flynn, G. (1997). How do you know if your work teams work? Workforce, 76 (5), May p. 7 Francis, D., & Young, D. (1979). Improving Work Groups. San Diego, California University Associates. Harris, P. R., & Harris, K. G. (1996). Managing effectively through teams. Team Performance Management An outside(a) Journal, 2(3), 23-36.Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1995). Social Interdependence concerted Learning in culture. In B. dugout canoe & J. Z. Rubin (Eds.), Conflict, Cooperation, and Justice (pp. 205-251). San Francisco JosseyBass Publishers. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Learning Together and simply concerted, competitive, and individualistic learning ( 5th ed.). Needham highschool Massachusetts Allyn and Bacon. Johnson, P. R., Heimann, V.L., & ONeill, K. (2000). The wolf rent team dynamics for the 21st century. Journal of Workplace Learning Empl oyee Counselling Today, 12(4), 159-164. Kets De Vries, M.F.R. (1999) superior teams Lessons from the Pygmies. Organisational Dynamics, Winter, p. 66-77.Luca, J., & Tarricone, P. (2001). Does emotional intelligence affect successful teamwork? Proceedings of the th18 one-year Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education at the ASCILITE, p. 367 376, Melbourne University of Melbourne. Luca, J., & Oliver, R. (2001). ontogeny Generic Skills through On-line Courses. Paper presented at the EdMedia 2001, Tampere, Finland. Oliver, R. (2001). Developing e-learning environments that support knowledge construction in higher education. Presented at the 2nd International We-B Conference, p. 407 416. Perth, Western Australia. Parker, G. M. (1990). Team Players and Teamwork. San Francisco, CA Jossey-Bass. Scarnati, J. T. (2001). On becoming a team player. Team Performance Management An International Journal, 7(1/2), 5-10.Smith, K. (1996). Cooperative Le arning make groupwork work. New Directions for training and Learning, 67, Fall, pp. 71-82.Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA Harvard University Press. Wageman, R. (1997). faultfinding success factors for creating superb self-managing teams. Organsiational Dynamics, 26 (1), Summer, 49-62.