University of Hull Foundation Degree Year 2: The Theory and Practice of Counselling

A Report on Team Working as part of the Contemporary Specialisms Module

Assignment 1 I Contemporary Specialism Word Count = 1100

Student Number 201012597 Submission Date 14/06/2012

Acknowledgements: This research report was produced with the assistance of my fellow team members whose contribution is gratefully acknowledged.

Contents
Significant observations ............................................................................................................................2 Why is teamwork important? ...................................................................................................................2 Scope and approach of the report and the collection of data .................................................................2 What are the characteristics of an effective team? .................................................................................2 What role/s did each member of the team adopt? ..................................................................................2 Individual team member roles and characteristics ..................................................................................3 Team effectiveness ...................................................................................................................................5 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................6

TEAM WORKING
A synthesis of collaboration

Significant Observations
Effective teamwork would improve the quality of our project and enhance our presentation. Our team worked most effectively when we had a clear purpose; good communication and acceptance of the strengths and limitations of each member as an individual. The importances of having an effective strategy to resolve conflict should it arise. The make-up and functioning of our team varied over a period of time.

Why is Teamwork Important?

A cohesive, well motivated team commonly display better performance in relation to the tasks they have been challenged with (Hirsh, 1996). Working as a group creates synergy - where the sum is greater than the parts. It provides an opportunity to examine new and different perspectives and explore a greater number of options or possibilities.

Scope and Approach of the Report and The Collection of Data

This report is a synthesis of both primary and secondary research and draws upon the findings of a variety of key information sources which includes published material (Please refer to the Bibliography section of this report), experiential reflection and questionnaire analysis (please see Appendix 1 and 2). The report aims to address the following three fundamental questions: 1. What are the characteristics of an effective team? 2. What Role/s did each member of the team adopt? 3. What can we learn from each other and the experience of working in this particular team?

What are the characteristics of an effective team?

Teams may be naturally forming or purposely developed and can take on a multitude of identities such as quality teams, continuous improvement, cross-functional, research, investigational are but a few. Teams can also be found in a variety of settings such as businesses, educational and communities (Belbin, 2010). Regardless of the nature or setting of a team, one of the most important realisations in establishing and maintaining an effective team is the recognition understanding and appreciation of similarities and differences in the personalities and attributes of the team members (Johnson, 2006).

What Role/s did each member of the team adopt?

There are many different personality and motivational models and theories including: The Four Temperaments/Four Humours Carl Jung's Psychological Types Myers Briggs personality types theory (MBTI model) Keirsey's personality types theory (Temperament Sorter model) 2

Hans Eysenck's personality types theory Katherine Benziger's Brain Type theory William Moulton Marston's DISC personality theory (Inscape, Thomas Int., etc) The 'Big Five' Factors personality model FIRO-B Personality Assessment model

Each one offers a different perspective. For the purposes of this report, Belbins Team Roles and Personality Types Theory was used as the basis for identification and analysis of individual team members contribution. Dr Meredith Belbin, first developed the Belbin Team Roles Model towards the end of the late 1970s. The Belbin Team Roles Model is used by over 40% of the UK's top 100 companies, and thousands more internationally. Each team member was asked to complete the Belbin questionnaire (see appendix 1).

Individual Team member roles and characteristics

The first section of primary research was conducted to identify individual team members characteristics. A full outline of the common characteristics of each of Belpins team roles can be viewed as part of Appendix 1. Neil His predominant characteristic is that of Shaper
Characteristics SH CO PL RI ME IMP TW Highly strung, outgoing, dynamic, shapers are highly motivated people with a lot of nervous energy and a great need for achievement. Often they seem to be aggressive extroverts with strong drive. Shapers like to challenge, to lead and to push others into action and to win. If obstacles arise, they will find a way round - but can be headstrong and emotional in response to any form of disappointment or frustration. Shapers can handle and even thrive on confrontation.

Shapers generally make good managers because they generate action and thrive on pressure. They are excellent at sparking life into a team and are very useful in groups where political complications are apt to slow things down. Shapers are inclined to rise above problems of this kind and forge ahead regardless. They like making necessary changes and do not mind taking unpopular decisions. As the name implies, they try to impose some shape and pattern on group discussion or activities. They are probably the most effective members of a team in guaranteeing positive action. Shapers have a drive and a readiness to challenge inertia, ineffectiveness, complacency or self-deception but they are prone to provocation, irritation and impatience, and a tendency to offend others.

Jason His predominant characteristic is that of Shaper and Implementer with Joint scores
SH CO PL RI ME IMP TW CF Characteristics Implementers are well organised, enjoy routine, and have a practical common-sense and self-discipline. They favour hard work and tackle problems in a systematic fashion. On a wider front they hold unswerving loyalty to the organisation and are less concerned with the pursuit of self-interest. However, Implementers may find difficulty in coping with new situations.

Implementers are well organised, enjoy routine, and have a practical common-sense and self-discipline. They favour hard work and tackle problems in a systematic fashion. On a wider front they hold unswerving loyalty to the organisation and are less concerned with the pursuit of self-interest. However, Implementers may find difficulty in coping with new situations. Implementers are useful because of their reliability and capacity for application. They succeed because they have a sense of what is feasible and relevant. It is said that many executives only do the jobs they wish to do and neglect those tasks which they find distasteful. By contrast, Implementers will do what needs to be done. Good Implementers often progress to high management positions by virtue of good organisational skills and efficiency in dealing with all necessary work. Strengths Organising ability, practical common sense, hard working, self-discipline. Allowable Weaknesses Lack of flexibility, resistance to unproven ideas.

Helen Her predominant characteristic is - Planter

Characteristics SH CO PL RI ME IMP TW Individualistic, serious-minded, unorthodox. Plants are innovators and inventors and can be highly creative. They provide the seeds and ideas from which major developments spring. Usually they prefer to operate by themselves at some distance from the other members of the team, using their imagination and often working in an unorthodox way. They tend to be introverted and react strongly to criticism and praise. Their ideas lack practical constraint.

The main use of a Plant is to generate new proposals and toare independent, clever and original and may be They solve complex problems. Plants are often needed in the initial stages of a project or when a project is failing to progress. with other people on a their weak in communicating Plants have often made marks as founders of companies or as originators of new products. different wave-length. Too many Plants in one organisation, however, may be counter-productive as they tend to spend their time reinforcing their own ideas and engaging each other in combat. Strengths: Genius, imagination, intellect, knowledge. Allowable Weaknesses: Up in the clouds, inclined to disregard practical details or protocol.

Team effectiveness
As well as individual team members characteristics and roles, this report wanted to establish the cohesiveness and effectiveness of the team as collaboration. It was important to investigate what we learnt from each other and the experience of working in this particular team? In the second section of research, the report aims to examine the overall effectiveness of the team and this was achieved again by using a performance questionnaire which allowed the team members to validate the teams efforts against a pre-determined set of criteria (see appendix 2). Each team member was asked to complete the questionnaire. The scores where then analysed to identify similarity and difference in team perception of ten basic qualities recognised to be representative of a successful team environment. When completing the questionnaire the respondents were informed that there were no right or wrong answers and to score the questions by expressing how much they agree with the statements. The scoring was on a scale of 1 (disagree strongly) to 10 (agree strongly). The following is a factual synopsis of those results based on statistical analysis and as such is not subject to interpretation or personal bias.
1. We have mutually agreed and understood aims and objectives Range Score 6 8 Average Score 7 Outcome definition Close Correlation

2. We have well balanced roles that complement each other Range Score 5 8 Average Score 6.6 Outcome definition Average Correlation

3. We have good decision making processes, information systems and co-ordinate resources Range Score 7 8 Average Score 7.6 Outcome definition Very Close Correlation

4. We have productive meetings and good communication within the team and the organisation Range Score 4 7 Average Score 5 Outcome definition Poor Correlation

5. There is positive team leadership Range Score 7 9 Average Score 8 Outcome definition Close Correlation

6. There is a high level of support and trust Range Score 4 5 Average Score 4.3 Outcome definition Very Close Correlation

7. People express themselves openly and honestly and deal with difficult situations Range Score 7 10 Average Score 8.3 Outcome definition Poor Correlation

8. Team members work together co-operatively Range Score 6 7 Average Score 6.6 Outcome definition Very Close Correlation

9. There is scope for individual learning and development Range Score 7 9 Average Score 8.3 Outcome definition Close Correlation

10. Relations with other groups are sound. Range Score 7 10 Average Score 8 Outcome definition Average Correlation

Conclusion
This report has examined both the effectiveness of the team and the characteristics of individual team members and in conclusion would emphasise that no team and no individual can possibly be good at everything. However it does suggest that a blend of characteristics and strengths is probably the best combination for a successful team. The report would also like to emphasise the importance of the relationship between strengths and weaknesses. In trying to correct the weakness we may, at the same time, be lessening the strength. In trying to analyse our abilities we should be careful to be objective and not to become self-critical and too introspective.

Bibliography
Belbin, M. (2010) Team Roles At Work, Butterworth - Heinerman. Hirsh, S. (1996) Work it out: Clues for solving people problems at work, Mountain View CA: DaviesBlack Publishing. Johnson, D. (2006) Joining Together, Boston Alyn and Bacon.