teamwork sjb

7/21/2019 Teamwork SJB

1/5

Sam Boys Teamwork 33348684

Teamwork

A group is simply a collection of people with some common feature, even if it is only that they are

part of the group. Cassidy (2012) stated: A team is something more. It is a group with a common

goal or task, the pursuit of which requires collaboration and the co-ordination of the activities and its

members, who have regular and frequent interactions with one another. In most companies teams

play an important role in the operations. In construction, the site teams tend to be a project team,

who are only together for the length of the project, although frameworks agreements and strategic

partnering are now becoming more common. There may also be longer term teams involved in

construction work such as management teams, specialist teams and subcontractor teams.

Teamwork is particularly important in construction, as these smaller teams and other individuals

must be quickly assembled into a cohesive team in order to make the project work.

The formation of teams was studied by Tuckman (1965) (1977). Tuckman originally identified four

stages in the maturity of teams, subsequently adding a fifth. This model became known asforming,

storming, norming, performing and adjourning:

Table 1: Tuckman's model (source: Author).

Stage Name Group behaviour

1 Forming A number of individuals come together to form the structure of theteam, identifying roles and responsibilities, and getting to know each

other. There may be some degree of discomfort or anxiety as team

members try to make an impression and establish themselves within the

group (Mullins, 2010).

2 Storming During this phase, as the team members get to know each other more

they become less tentative, and are more vocal or forceful in expressing

their views. This can lead to disagreements and hostility, and a stormy

dynamic in the team. This stage can be productive however, as through

these discussions the team structure can be re-assessed and better

procedures can be instigated.

3 Norming During this phase the dynamic becomes calmer as members begin tosettle into their roles, and become conversant with the rules and

structures. This stage is important to demonstrate the need for

cooperation in planning and executing the groups task (Mullins, 2010)

4 Performing Stage four, the performing stage, is essentially the team reaching

maturity, and being able to concentrate properly on the task in hand,

and perform to its full potential. Not all teams make it this far, and can

become locked in the lower stages, eventually being disbanded.

5 Adjourning Stage five, adjourning, was added later to describe the adjournment or

disbanding of the team, either due to completion of the project, or due

to members leaving etc. Mullins (2010) advises that some team

members may feel significant feelings of loss, sadness or anxiety duringthis stage, particularly after long projects.

1


2/5


Meredith Belbin (1981) (1993) studied the roles of individuals in a team. Following years of empirical

research it was suggested that teams that are comprised entirely of extremely intelligent people, or

teams with many members with very similar personalities, do not perform as well as teams with a

more representative cross section (Mullins, 2010). Belbin identified nine team roles and suggested

that for a team to be successful a good balance of the roles was necessary. It was also noted that

each role type had a set of corresponding weaknesses that personalities of that type commonly

possess. These weaknesses were said to be allowable in order that the team could benefit from the

positive aspects of that team role.

Table 2: Belbin's Team Roles (Belbin Associates, 2012)

2


3/5


Belbin noted that team members are seldom strong in all nine team roles, but good examples of

each type of role would ensure a team that is adequate for any challenge (Mullins, 2010). This does

not mean that a team must consist of a minimum of nine members however, as members can cover

more than one team role each (Buchanan & Huczynski, 2010). Belbin further suggested that

individuals tend to adopt one or two team roles quite consistently, and it is possible to predict the

natural roles by means of a questionnaire and assessment (Buchanan & Huczynski, 2010). By means

of this assessment of staff, management can evaluate the team roles to compile the most successful

teams, or identify weaknesses and add members accordingly (Buchanan & Huczynski, 2010).

I have recently been involved in the formation of NOVUS Yorkshire, a branch of the Chartered

Institute of Building (CIOB) aimed at young and aspiring professionals. The committee has formedover a period of months, and we have the task of organising a series of useful events for our target

market, in order to build a base of members and raise the profile of the CIOB.

Looking back at the formation of our group it is possible to see Tuckmans model being played out.

At my first meeting there was a distinctly tentative air, with everyone being very polite and

professional, with very little laughter or joking. The meeting was held in the board room of a large

main contractor. Discussion was about the aims and structure of the group, and I recall being

uncharacteristically reserved. It is quite easy to see the parallel from this description with Tuckmans

formingstage.

Despite our initial reticence we managed to agree upon a format for our first event, and suggest a

venue. Our next meeting was held at the proposed venue, a bar in central Leeds. The more relaxed

atmosphere enabled the team to emerge from the reserved, polite, formingstage and progress to

the storming phase. While there were no arguments as such, discussion definitely became more

animated, and more ideas were brought to the fore. Ideas for the details of the task were discussed,

and roles assigned, giving more clarity of purpose. I think that the choice of venue for the second

meeting enabled the team to move out of the uncomfortable forming stage more quickly than we

might otherwise have done, and the relaxed atmosphere calmed the waves of the stormingphase to

some extent.

The team continued to communicate by email in the run up to our first event, with each person

accomplishing their pre-arranged tasks. Our Chairperson facilitated the process and the team

seemed to work quite harmoniously. The next time we met was the evening of our first event. The

event was a success, and the team was pleased with the way that it functioned. I think everyone in

3


4/5


the team felt proud of what we had achieved in such a short time, and commitment to the team was

cemented. I think at this stage we were moving from the storming phase to the norming phase.

We have had one meeting since our first event, and I think the team is still in the normingphase. The

team is definitely working more harmoniously, with decisions coming more easily, and everyone

understanding their roles and responsibilities. The team makes big decisions by group agreement,

but some smaller decisions are made independently and reported back to the committee. We are

now organising our next event, and hopefully we will be able to move on to the performing phase

with a little more experience and practice.

I have recently undertaken a Belbin self-perception inventory questionnaire in order to predict my

natural Belbin team role. The results indicated that I was primarily a Monitor Evaluator (see table 2

above). I think that this is a fair assessment of my role in the NOVUS team so far. I think I do havethe ability to weigh an argument and judge accurately, and I can appear to be a little reserved in

group discussions, but this tends to be because I am assessing the different angles. I do also have to

work hard on maintaining drive and forward momentum. My second choice team role was found to

be Team Worker. Again, I think this is quite a fair assessment, as I do try to cooperate and be

diplomatic as far as possible, and I definitely have a tendency to avoid confrontation if possible.

It was also quite easy to see the contributions of a Coordinator in our Chairperson. Having a little

more experience of committees and events management, she was confident and welcoming, and

did a good job of clarifying our objectives and keeping the discussions on track. It is a little more

difficult to assess the other team members based on our limited time together, but I suspect that

team roles will emerge, and it may be a good idea to do a formal Belbin questionnaire in order to

identify any shortcomings in the team and develop the committee further. It is easy to see how

Belbins theories can be useful to management in selecting and developing teams. Belbin argued

that:

The assessment, selection, placement and guidance of individual employees by

management is the way to improve team effectiveness. Once management knows

employees team role preferences, it can use them to compose teams in which all

the required role preferences are represented. (Buchanan & Huczynski, 2010, p.

341)

4


5/5


BibliographyBelbin Associates, 2012. Belbin Team Roles. [Online]

Available at: http://www.belbin.com/rte.asp?id=8

[Accessed 22nd March 2013].

Belbin, R. M., 1981. Management Teams: Why they Succceed or Fail. London: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Belbin, R. M., 1993. Team Roles at Work. London: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Buchanan, D. A. & Huczynski, A. A., 2010. Organizational Behaviour. 7th ed. Harlow: Pearson

Education Ltd.

Cassidy, A., 2012. Team Effectiveness. Bradford: University of Bradford.

Mullins, L., 2010. Management and Organisational Behaviour. 9th ed. Harlow: Prentice Hall.

Tuckman, B. W. & Jensen, M. C., 1977. Stages of Small Group Development Revised. Group and

Organizational Studies, 2(3), pp. 419-427.

Tuckman, W. B., 1965. Development Sequence in Small Groups. Psychological Bulletin, Volume 63,

pp. 384-399.

5

teamwork sjb

Documents