Introduction

Reflective writing is a practice that includes consideration of individual or group

experiences of knowledge application in a particular discipline of professional studies.
Adams et al (2003) elaborated that the reflective writing practices are the representation
of ‘knowing-in-action’ and/ or ‘professional artistry’, that shows the internal reflection of
one’s own experiences of artistry. The ability of reflection facilitates the future learning
procedures after realization of success and failures in a particular project.

Modes of team Development

1.2 Tuckman Model

The design we used in this project was Tuckman (1965) five levels of group growth as shown

below.

Source: Tuckman (1965)

My team has used five levels of group growth as proven below in table A.

The first level of team development was the development of the team which has been obtained in
the level of team development (Elliot et al 1994). In this level all team members have presented
their passions, abilities, and skills related to the project. Third stage has been Norming, tasks
were particularly assigned along with work has been officially started out (Buchanan et al 2007).
According to Avery (2001), the success of the teamwork relies on synergy of initiatives taken by
people in accomplishing the required objective. In the level of performing, the major difficulty
experienced through the group is insufficient coordination inside distribution as regards allocated
assignments (Baker et al 2003).
2. Lewin Model
The change management in project designing is significant task as it impacts on the
outcomes directly. Initially, Lewin (1983) force field model of change management is
applicable in formation of a group or team. According to Lewin (1983) model, there are
certain forces driving the change and restrain it to impact on the proceedings. Also, an
equilibrium is reached where the state of change become stable. Also, the meaningful
change occurs only when driving forces are stronger than the restraining forces.

Fig. I: Lewin’s Change Model

Source: Lewin (1983)

Simultaneously, as group members managed the change occurred in the beginning of
the project, the next task is the development of an effective team that can perform on
the desired objectives (Deresky 2011).

GRPI Team Model

GRPI stands for goals, roles, process, and interpersonal relationships as the critical
factors considered for the team formation in project management. These fundamental
dimensions are used in organizations and teams to ensure the professional approaches
(Hey et al 2006).

Progress of Project Teams

The purpose of teams and their official working procedure were not known to us in the
beginning and we assumed understanding of each other was enough. On the other
hand, Bruffee (1999) asserted that the teams should take care of the mutual benefits as
well as the individual interests. Therefore, collaboration and organized procedures were
important in our project team also. Adair (1982) suggested that the major role of team is
to take care of the assigned project, individual needs, and the dynamics of the actions.
Another aspect of team development was the assignment and processing of roles
according to nature of the person. The division of roles suggested by Belbin (2003)
used in the team development as follows:

Thinker

Action Person An introvert, good planner,

prefer to start alone, poor

An extrovert, act bossy, and communicator

get along with group.

situation

People Person
Source: Adapted from Belbin (2003)

Team leadership Issues

Team leadership is one of the important aspect that controls the conflicts and resolve
important consideration during the processing of teamwork (Zaccaro et al 2008).
According to Lencioni (2002), the major dysfunctions of the team like lack of
commitment, missing deadlines, less coordination, and absence of understanding can
be solved by the visionary role of leadership. Leaders have to concentrate on
broadening and expanding the vision and linking it with performance of every individual
member of the group. Thus, conflict management and negotiation are two significant issues
knowledgeable in team work. Within this project, the problems of team can be assessed by
means of Lencioni (2002) model of "five dysfunctions in a team".
 As a

leader, the condition that author have got knowledgeable through the project was connected to

the dysfunction of conflict (resolved by mutual discussion and well-timed coordination), absence

of dedication (not coming the concentrate on set deadlines) had been settled by way of a final

meeting in with team, and reduction of responsibility from one of the group member due to

urgent conditions, therefore, the writer modified his assist common contract in the team

Impact of group work on individuals

When group work is used, the social and emotional effects on individual group members

are often overlooked. From their study of 3 rd year Business students in Australia, Volet

& Mansfield concluded that “the study highlights the importance of explicitly valuing

social forms of learning at university, and monitoring of group processes to encourage

positive outcomes for individuals and the group” (ibid: 355, Volet & Mansfield, 2006). A

study conducted by Livingstone and Lynch (2000) comparing groups with a different
approach to groupwork found that group members with roles were less likely to conflict

with other members.

Belbin’s model is based on the premise that individuals will adopt a ‘preferred role’ in a

group or team. The eight roles identified by Belbin: company worker; chairman; shaper;

plant; resource-investigator; monitor evaluator; team worker and completer-finisher

each have particular attributes that help them contribute the essential qualities for an

effective team, and the preferred role can be discovered using a simple questionnaire.

One of the groups in Livingstone & Lynch’s study (2000) mentioned above admitted that

the high achieving student had completed most of the work on the basis they could do it

better than the others in student groups.

References

Adair, J., (1998) Effective Team Building, Aldershot: Gower

Adams, R.S., Turns, J., and Atman, C.J., 2003, "Educating Effective Engineering
Designers: the Role of Reflective Practice," Design Studies, Vol. 24(3), pp. 275.
Belbin, M. (2003) Management Teams, Why they Succeed or Fail, Heinneman: London
Buchanan and Huczynski (2007) Source: Based on B.W. Tuckman, ‘Development sequences in

small groups’, Psychological Bulletin, vol. 3, no. 6, 1965, pp. 384–99; J.E. Jones, ‘Model

of group development

Deresky, H. (2011) International Management: managing across borders and cultures :

text and cases, 7th edn., London: Pearson Education.
Elliot A., Timothy D. and Robin M. (1994), Social Psychology: The Heart and Mind/W Study

Guide, Pearson Education, Inc. 1994, p. 332

Jing, FF & Avery, GC 2008, 'Missing links in understanding the relationship between leadership

and organisational performance', International Business and Economics Research Journal

7(5):67-78.

Katzenbach, Jon R., and Douglas K. Smith. (2001). The Discipline of Virtual Teams. Leader to

Leader. 22: 16-25.

Fiedler, F. E. (1967). A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness. McGraw-Hill, New York.

Hey, J., Joyce, C., and Beckman, S., 2006, “Framing innovation: The negotiation of
shared frames during early phases in design teams,” accepted for the Journal of
Design Research, 6.
Lencioni (2002), Five Dysfunctions of the teams, The team Group.com.

Tuckman, B.W. 1965. Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin 65, no.

6: 384–99.

Van Vugt, M 2006, 'Evolutionary origins of leadership and followership', Personality and
Social Psychology Review, 10(4):354-371.
Zaccaro, SJ, Heinen, B & Shuffler, M 2008, 'Team leadership and team effectiveness',
in E Salas, GF Goodwin & CS Burke (eds), Team effectiveness in complex
organisations: Cross-disciplinary perspectives and approaches, CRC Press.

Livingstone, D. & Lynch, K. (2000), “Group Project Work and Student-centred Active

Learning: two different experiences” in Studies in Higher Education, V25, No 3, October

2000, pp. 325-345. Taylor & Francis.

Lizzio, A. & Wilson, K. (2006), “Enhancing the effectiveness of self-managed learning

groups: understanding students’ choices and concerns” in Studies in Higher Education,

V31, No 6, Dec 2006, pp. 689-703. Routledge.

Volet, S. & Mansfield, C. (2006) “Group work at University: significance of personal

goals in the regulation strategies of students with positive and negative appraisals”,

Higher Education Research & Development Journal, V25, No.4, Nov 2006, pp. 341-356.

Routledge.