INTROVERT ROLES
- Inward-looking people principally concerned with relations and tasks within the group.
Different roles are important at different times, and the effective team will be aware of who should be 'centre stage' at a given time. You can of course link Belbin roles to personality types, where you'll find common words like 'Extrovert' and 'Analytical', but Belbin roles can be are less definitive.
Benefits
- Improve team morale and personal motivation by understanding your role and the contributions you make to the team
- Improve your listening skills to better understand the viewpoints of other team members
- Increase internal/external customer satisfaction by leveraging the team to develop creative solutions while responding more efficiently to service demands
Expected Outcome
- Overcome the major obstacles to team effectiveness and learn the elements necessary to work together as a team
- Understand the task-oriented model of team-building and the four stages of growth
- Know the ten ingredients for a successful team and the ground rules that establish a safe environment
- Learn how to redirect unproductive competition into co-operation
A team can be considered to be effective if their output is judged to meet or exceed the expectations of the people who receive the output.
Our team consisted of a Chairman, which was an extrovert role. A Monitor Evaluator, Three Team Workers and a Completer Finisher which of course are all Introvert Roles.
The Chairman role is the most versatile role, but there are a wide variety of possible role permutations. These possible combinations are particularly important in allocating team members to roles other than their natural roles for the sake of achieving a better team balance.
Each of the roles contributes to the success of the team. The need for a Chairman is obvious, the need for an innovator may not be recognised for some time and a Completer may not be missed until small omissions have built up into big problems. So the ideal team would consist of:
- One or more Company Workers, Team Workers, Resource Investigators or Completers
As you can see from the above, the tam did not have a Plant or an Innovator in it and this reflected on some of the work which was being handled.
2.3 Group Dynamics
The dynamics of the team were made so radical changes were not put into place until each organisational practice and its effectiveness had been evaluated. Upon the completion of the evaluation, the group had to determine which policies and procedures had to be used to create the competitive advantage. Some of the procedures needed minor adjustments while some were made dysfunctional by future conditions out with the team’s control and had to be changed drastically. Overall the procedures used were constantly updated to match the companies progression.
2.4 Decision Making Process
The following five stages of group development show how the team’s process of decision making was made:
5 Stages of Group Development
Stage 1: Forming
In the Forming stage, personal relations were characterised by dependence. Group members relied on safe, patterned behaviour and looked towards the group leader for guidance and direction. Certain group members had a desire for acceptance by the group and a needed to know that the group was safe. They set about gathering impressions and data about the similarities and differences among them and forming preferences for future group meetings. It seemed to be the done thing to keep things simple and to avoid controversy.
The group had to attempt to become oriented to the tasks as well as to one another. The discussions centred on defining the scope of the task, how to approach it, and similar concerns.
Stage 2: Storming
The next stage, which is called Storming, was characterised by competition and conflict within the group; one person would say one thing while the other disagreed. As the group attempted to organise themselves for the presentation, conflict began to set in. Individuals had to change their feelings, ideas, attitudes, and beliefs to suit the group. Although conflicts may or may not surface as group issues, they did exist. Questions began to rise about who was going to be responsible for what, what the rules were, and what the criteria for the evaluation would be. These reflect conflicts over leadership, structure, power, and authority. Because of the discomfort generated during this stage, some of the members of the group remained completely silent while others attempted to dominate.
Stage 3: Norming
In the Norming stage, group members are engaged in active acknowledgement of all members’ contributions and solving of group issues. Members were willing to change their preconceived ideas or opinions on the basis of facts presented by other members, and they actively asked questions of one another. Leadership began to be shared, and cliques dissolve. When members began to know and identify with one another, the level of trust in their personal relations contributed towards the development of the group. It was during this stage that people began to experience a sense of group belonging and a feeling of relief as a result of resolving interpersonal conflicts.
The major task function of stage three was the data flow between group members: They shared feelings and ideas, gave feedback to one another, and explored actions related to the task. Creativity was quite high.
Stage 4: Performing
In the Performing stage, people began to work independently, in subgroups, or as a total unit with equal facility. Their roles and authorities dynamically adjusted to the changing needs of the group and individual within it. At this point the group became most productive. Individual members had become self-assuring. Members were both highly task oriented. There was unity, group identity was complete and the group morale was high. The task function became genuine problem solving, leading toward optimal solutions and optimum group development. There was support for experimentation in solving problems and an emphasis on achievement.
Stage 5: Adjourning
The final stage was Adjourning, which involved the termination of task behaviours and disengagement from relationships. A planned conclusion usually included recognition for participation and achievement and an opportunity for members of the group to pass on any comments they had of their colleague throughout the simulation.
2.5 Communication Skills
The Communication skills in the team to be begin with were very strained. The Chairman figure in our group tried to bring the others into the conversation and invite their ideas and opinions. Basically only a couple of people knew each other from past experiences and this, to start off with, showed. Eventually after a couple of group meetings people began to get to know each other and started to feel at ease with one another. This bonding began to show when the team started producing very interesting and fact based work. Overall everyone got on apart from a few minor conflicts of ideas, but this did not prevent the team from carrying out their work.
2.6 Time Management
Time management was shown throughout the simulation by all members of the group. Even when someone could not make the arranged meeting, another was delegated or that person/s was kept in touch via text messages. Once the group met up on the next appointed meeting date, that person/s were brought up to speed on what events took place at the previous meeting. At the end of the project, everyone had mentioned Time Management as one of his or her most improved skills.
2.7 Different Management Styles
Management Style describes the way in which managers set about achieving results through people. It is how managers behave as team leaders and how they exercise authority. Below are ways in which the style of a manager can be described:
- Autocratic
- Impersonal
- Participative
- Informal
- Laissez-faire
The group used Participative management style throughout the simulation. This is where decisions made by the leader of the group were shared with the team by such means as prior consultation.
3.0 Students own attitudes and behaviours within the simulation
3.1 Own Skills
During the simulation my attitude varied throughout. At some points I was more than happy to offer my advice and opinions. On other occasions I found myself falling into a ‘I don’t care’ phase. This was mainly due to others non-involvement in the discussions and meetings. It was not until towards the end of the simulation, that everyone began to pull together and work more effectively, mainly due to the sudden sense of the deadline looming.
I found that through the simulation I could generate ideas and became more communicative with people I did not think possible to do so with. My own time management skills were proven to be more than adequate as I found myself making sure I attended all of the meetings so as not to let the team down.
My listening skills were put into practice whilst paying attention to other members opinions. I always tried my best to listen to what everyone had to say. I listened to their questions and avoided interrupting them.
My communicating and negotiation skills were greatly improved, particularly my negotiating skills. When tasks were being given out I negotiated to handle ones which would best suit my skills more than others. This was picked up on by the team and eventually everyone knew which tasks to undertake. This also began to fit in with the team member’s belbin profiles.
My communication skills were improved through the negotiating process and also by interacting with the members of the team.
My planning skills were put into practice when group tasks were handed out and a deadline had to be met. I had to plan thoroughly in what way I was to carry out the task. This worked effectively as all deadlines were met and the team ran on schedule.
4.0 Conclusion
Overall the simulation provided the team and myself with a great insight into what it is like to work in a group situation. To begin with, things did not run too smoothly, this was mainly caused by confusion as to the team members not thinking their belbin profiles suited them. This caused the team to work ineffectively. Towards the end of the simulation however, everyone realised that the profiles given to him or her were accurate and they can now see that.
I was a Team worker in the group and this suited my characteristics well. I believe I worked to the best of my abilities for the group and helped them achieve a certifiable grade for the presentation. At some points through the simulation, I believe I brought stability and calmness to the group.
This project has given me a great insight as to what it will be like in the future if I am to work in a project-orientated atmosphere.
5.0 Bibliography
Title Author Publisher
Organizational Behavior Stephen P. Robbins Prentice-hall, Inc 1989
Entrepreneurship and the Thomas W. Zimmer Prentice-hall, Inc 1996
New venture formation Norman M. Scarborough
Entrepreneurship and the D.J. Storey Croom Helm Ltd 1982
New firm
