Team 13 Project 1: Project Charter, First interview, and Team Debrief

Amy Richey, Nastasha Cox, and Peter Gavura

Arizona State University

OGL 343: Social Processes of Organizations
Dr. Margaret Allen
February 6, 2021
Part I: Team Charter
Purpose
This team has been designed to work together to learn and implement the aspects of
team communication and decision making as part of OGL 343. We are given the
opportunity to work together and evaluate the skills of each member.

Goals
The general goal of the team is to facilitate a complete understanding of how team
members work together, and to understand the behavior dynamics within a team by
completing required assignments in a timely manner. Our ultimate goal is to obtain a
satisfactory grade in this class signifying we have met all learning objectives outlined in
the syllabus.

Member Roles and Responsibilities

Team Member Roles/Responsibilities

Amy Richey Proofreader

Rotating: scribe, timer, meeting facilitator

Assignment 1: interviewee, submit assignment, team

charter

Nastasha Communications coordinator

Cox
Rotating: scribe, timer, meeting facilitator

Assignment 1: interviewer, note taker, interview report

Peter Gavura Editor

Rotating: scribe, timer, meeting facilitator

Assignment 1: interviewer, note taker, team debrief

Milestones
February 7, 2021 - Completion of Team Assignment 1
February 21, 2021 - Completion of Team Assignment 2

Ground Rules
This team will meet every Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday at 7:00 pm PST via
Zoom for approximately one hour. Group norms and ground rules:

● Meetings will start and end on time

● Decisions will be made unanimously
● All members of the team must be present for each meeting
● All assignments will be turned in by the due date listed in Canvas
● Each team member will participate and put forth effort equally
● Each member will be treated with respect

Individual and Team Expectations

● Utilize adopted team communications channels to collaborate with members e.g.
Canvas discussion, Google Docs, Microsoft Teams, Zoom
● Respond with thoughtful feedback/comments/constructive criticism in a timely
manner
● It is expected that all members will meet deadlines by 11:59 pm the day before
an assignment is due so as to give time for proofreading and editing before
submission of assignment

Potential Barriers and Coping Strategies

● Personal or social disagreements, or relationship conflict, will be resolved via
Rusbult’s active and constructive behavior (Thompson, 2018, pp. 212-213). We
will discuss the issue and strategize ways to combat the issue in order to move
forward.
● Disagreements involving the team assignment, or task conflict, will be handled by
Thomas’ conflict mode of collaboration. In order to do this, we will need to
increase our concern for oneself as well as concern for the other person
(Thompson, 2018, pp. 209-210).
● If there is a disagreement on the amount of work assigned to each member, or
process conflict, the team will use a rights-based argument that focuses on a
standard of fairness (Thompson, 2018, p. 216).

Signees
Amy Richey 2/2/2021 Nastasha Cox 2/5/2021 Peter Gavura
2/6/2021

Part II: Interview

Section intentionally left blank due to personal information
Part III: Team Debrief
Team Performance Rubric
Using the scale below, evaluate the effectiveness of your team.
1= Strongly Disagree 2= Disagree 3= Agree 4= Strongly Agree

Team 13: Amy Richey, Nastasha Cox, Peter Gavura Team Performance: Score

Preparation 4
Research, reading, and assignment complete

Attendance 4
On-time and stayed for duration

Participation 4
Contributed best academic ability

Interpersonal Relations 4
Positive and productive

Between Meeting Communication 3

Initiated and responded appropriately

Effective Use of Technology 4

Used multiple forms of technology for virtual meetings
and communication

Overall Performance Score 23/24

Discussion Prompts
What has the team learned about working virtually from this team assignment?
As a group, team members have committed to join this team and to participate in the
team using virtual tools, both synchronously and asynchronously, to support
collaborative productivity (Osland, Kolb, and Rubin, 2001). They have shown their
commitment through professional communication and communication of personal
needs. The team has learned that they can work effectively as individuals and as group
members in a virtual setting, which takes trust and flexibility. To remove potential
triggers for conflict, the group set up a team charter to frame their virtual collaborative
relationships and tasks. As a result, the team has high intragroup trust, which may help
them from experiencing relationship conflict, the most detrimental type of conflict on
outcomes in group settings, at later stages in their team project (Thompson, 2018, p.
201). While there is always a concern that social loafing may occur, team members
have established several procedures in the virtual environment to combat this
(Thompson, 2018, p. 233). They have communicated their availability, use digital tools
that are accessible to all of them, specified their communication cadence, had their
webcams on while meeting so they can see one another, and assigned individual tasks
in a real-time collaborative environment with a revision history and timestamps, so all
team members have to contribute to the group.

What does the team need to do to improve our overall performance?

To improve future performance, the team can regroup and level set on where
communications will be occurring between meetings. There is currently minute
inconsistency in an understanding of what the instructor needs to see (e.g., Canvas
discussion forum) and where most of the communication is happening (e.g., Teams,
tagged comments on Google Docs). There have been a few instances where
communication has occurred in the Canvas discussion forum thay may have been
better suited for the Teams discussion. This caused a delay in replying. Another area for
improvement is to maintain an agenda for items to be discussed outside of the Teams
chat and to summarize any critical details or decisions that may need further context
that could have been lost in the Teams chat. Lastly, the team can take some time to
reflect on this process and openly dialogue about what went well for each person and
what was challenging and determine group strategies to prepare for those challenges in
the future.

What elements of the Team Debrief evaluation did the team do well?

Overall, with a score of 23/24, this is a strong, cohesive team. Based on the Factors
that Affect Intragroup Trust, this team aligns on most factors. This includes being a low-
risk group of individuals who have come together with similar interests in the success of
the group; demonstrations of care for one another’s family situations, schedules, and
contributions to the team project; and with open conversations and consistent
behaviors, they carry out individual tasks with competence and requests for feedback to
improve the overall deliverable (Thompson, 2018, p. 201). While meeting, this group is
expressive and nonevaluative. Team members are encouraged to share their ideas
without criticism or a fear of criticism (Thompson, 2018, p. 228). With such limited time
and specific deliverables, the group does tend to focus more on clarifying what needs to
be done and how to do it than anything else.

With all three team members having demanding schedules and responsibilities, this
team consistently demonstrates preparedness, participation, and interpersonal
relations. There was an effort by the group early on to decrease work-family conflict
(WFC), which is a conflict between work -- or in this case, this course -- and team
obligations and their role and responsibilities within their own family (Thompson, 2018,
p. 209). To help alleviate some of this stress, the group communicated their needs,
such as their daily schedules and agreed to meet at times that are the most convenient
for the group. By dividing up tasks based on interest or strengths, team members feel
personally accountable for their ideas and contributions and are more productive than
when it is unknown who did what (Thompson, 2018, p. 238). Prior to meeting, the team
deliverables are templated. Conversations on Teams prior to meetings have both
clarifying and open-ended questions. The group has open-minded teammates who ask
for feedback regarding their individual contributions. Gray areas are addressed as part
of an iterative process where the team examines their deliverables as a whole instead
of in a silo. This creates a more cohesive final product and provides teammates to learn
from each other and see the bigger picture, which can be challenging on tight deadlines.

What elements of the Team Debrief evaluation does the team need to improve and
how will that be completed? What is your plan for improvement?

Being highly reflective, the team met on February 6th, 2021 and discussed the debrief
and outlined the murky waters of the between-meeting communication category. The
team agreed that communication would occur in Teams, on tagged comments on
Google Docs, and on the team’s meeting agenda and not in the Canvas discussion
forum. Each of the designated areas is purposeful for the team and will close
communication gaps by removing the Canvas discussion forum as the weak link.
 References
Osland, J.S., Kolb, D.A., and Rubin, R.M. (2001). Organizational behavior: An

experiential approach (7th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Publications. ISBN:

13-9780130176103

Thompson, L. L. (2018). Making the team: A guide for managers (6th ed.). New York,

NY: Pearson.