Learning Team Member example essay topic

Team B was a small group of people with interchangeable skills who found themselves responsible for a common purpose and goal. Learning Teams can get more complicated projects done at a more rapid pace than an individual assigned project because decision-making is more effective in a team environment. Our team was some what complex. We were a successful group of people who were cooperating, critiquing, communicating and reporting to a forum.

Our team did not just happen. We were formed then molded. (Kreitner, Ki nicki, 2004) states: So what is this first and most important step for creating effective teams? It's called "Chartering".

Chartering is the process by which the team is formed, its mission or task described, its resources allocated, its goals set, its membership committed, and its plans made. (p. 410) The formation developed in four stages. The first was the Forming stage otherwise known as the "Ice Breaking Stage" in which we were uncertain about our roles and who to trust (Stewart, Manz, 1999). During this stage we had a group discussion and a member became prominent to take the leader position. The following stage was Storming which is a time when members learn about ground rules discussed then confirmed by the leader. This is the stage where I learned that I was responsible for writing Example #1 and the date my part had to be turned in. The third stage of our development was Nor ming, a stage of working together to reach our goals.

In this stage Team B moved their individual turn in dates back a day and team members picked up additional tasks as the project had clear dead line dates. We became more aware that we were going to have less time for editing than we normally planned for. Lastly, the Performing stage is focused on solving any problems that arise. This stage is critical for getting the project done on time and completing the goal. Our team had a few problems toward the end.

One problem that arose was a member did not have any references in his writing. The requirement was that he have two. The team had an additional task to complete. Our last problem during this stage was when the team decided not to use a member's material and wanted his sample completely changed.

This put much more pressure on the individual to get his work done and as a snowball affect it put more pressure on the editing team. Our team had a sense of unity that went through developmental stages. The importance of the stages is that it focused on the team and not on individual personalities (Stewart, Manz, 1999). Our team leader managed us well and we as a team were on friendly terms. Our team members were always on the same page and in return we had good participation which led to a well working team. Although the four stages concentrated on the team and less on the individual each team member had his or her own issues.

As a member of the group I asked myself "What's going to be my job?" and "What are the others going to think of me". There were group issues as well "Can we do the project right" and "Who is going to be in charge " (Stewart, Manz, 1999) In order to get these questions and ideas organized Team B members begin to fall into certain roles. There are three roles that took place. The first general role was what was expected of us after given a position. For example, I was designated for Sample #1 I was expected to have two references in correct format and the sample had to be a page minimum. I was a worker bee for the main body of the paper.

Secondly, there were task roles which more specifically concentrate on member's talents. For example, I was good at research and enjoyed free writing. Therefore, I was designated a research and writing task. The last role that every team member participated in one way or another was the maintenance role. Our leader took on the maintenance position of the Standard Setter and Consensus tester.

She through discussion made sure that the standard was being met and that everyone had an agreement of different aspects of the paper. I took on the role of Volunteer and offered whatever was needed. Another member took the role of Encourager and Tension Reliever he was saying "good job" and "We are going to make". The last member took on the role of Gatekeeper and Listener. She listened and made sure everyone had a chance to be heard.

Each Learning Team member played a different role and it was important for them to perform his or her duties in order to get max cooperation between each member. Through these maintenance roles better relationships developed and improved morale of the team. In order for our team to develop into a well performing team we needed to have and maintain certain characteristics. We had seven characteristics that are described as: Purpose, Empowerment, Relationships and Communication, Flexibility, Optimal Productivity, Recognition and Appreciation, and Morale. We had sense of direction, meaning and a goal that we all had to meet. All team members knew their job and participated to find the best way to attain our goal.

In order for us to be successful we had to have discipline. This meant setting ground rules and deadlines as quickly as possible. Our Team had a quick realization of good communication. Team members spoke freely of their opinions, thoughts, and feelings.

Trust was gained quickly between us". Trust creates the pathway to open communication" (Parker, 2004, p. 174). We listened to one another and gave honest feedback. One of my favorite characteristics Team B had flexibility. This team identified and used the strengths of each team member. Other members took on new roles and tasks when needed.

We had trust to speak our opinion even though it may have been harsh. Towards the end we worked harder and adapted our schedules to meet our goal. Good teams produce results. We fixed our problems through mutual respect and conversation. Deadlines and standards were met. I felt a sense of accomplishment.

Individual task accomplishments were rewarded by team members. This encouraged performance and raised the confidence of each individual. (Parker, 2003) When the project was finished everyone congratulated and appreciated one another. I felt I contributed to something successful and had a feeling of importance. The project was over and Team B had good morale. We successfully finished something that in the beginning was full of doubt.

We all were optimistic about the future and felt confident about working on our next project "The Learning Team Presentation". When the team project was over I found there to be some true advantages of working in The Learning Team that led to our success. I truly enjoyed the ability to be able to share and compare ideas between each other. For example, we shot back and fourth different names for the title. Instead of a few ideas from one person we had several to pick from.

Furthermore, I felt that each one of us was there to support the other during a tough challenge. I believe support was there for a personal non-school related issue if someone had one. Team members gave it their best realizing that people were depending on them and looking at their work. Otherwise known as peer pressure. This was good pressure that brought out the best in everyone. Lastly, the team environment brought an atmosphere of group decisions.

We communicated our ideas and opinions then made a decision. During the course of the project the team hit barriers. We had conflict, but never vicious or violent actions as someone may thinks when he or she hear the word "conflict". Never the less if our team was going to be successful we needed a way to resolve our disagreements. It was going to be unavoidable for our team not to have any conflict. The question was we going to use it positively or negatively?

Out of the five strategies that we became familiar with through the learning's we used two of them. The first, Collaborative is "Trying to find a solution in which the needs of both or all parties are completely met". Secondly, Compromise definition is "Trying to find a middle position in which all parties give a little to gain something". Through these two strategies the conflicts turned out to be a positive addition.

Our team was not afraid of it; therefore more ideas and thoughts were able to reach out for a group decision. We were a group of people with a vision working towards a common goal. The building of our team was complicated. We negotiated roles and tasks according to our strengths and interests. We worked well together, but far from perfect. Through varies conflicts ideas were exchanged and meaningful productivity resulted (Porter, 2003).

Good communication resulted from trust and respect. All members shared an equal participation which made it easier for each individual to contribute to the success of Week 3.