The role played by each member within the group were different and explaining it in terms of Belbin 's team role summary descriptions, I believe I played the role of 'resource investigator '. The reason being, I felt that I was outgoing, enthusiastic and communicative. My other group members I believe there was a mix. In other words one member played the role as completer/ finisher and the plant. In this sense I believe this was one of the main reasons why we complimented each other rather than having conflicting roles. Teamwork in this particular task was straightforward and we had no problems in terms of participation and contribution. Having said that there was also no 'social loafing ' within my team, as Latane et al., 1979 argued was a problem in teams, whereby people were louder individually than they were in groups (chapter 6, pg. 180). Rather I felt that everyone had an equal …show more content…
In other words we had clear goals in mind, so when it came to communicating with each other it was clear. Also within my team, we all exchanged information to help each other and it can argued that we achieved our goal by clear understanding, clear dialogue as well as a clear agenda but mainly due to the fact that we worked collectively and had strong cohesion within the team. This is further supported by research by Wu & Xiao 2011; Peterson 2012) who claim that in order to be successful, members need to employ open dialogue and have clear agendas. Reflecting upon this, it can be argued that this supported us to achieve our goals and present successfully. Also being able to reflect will not only allow me to improve myself but also embrace these disciplines in the future in order to enhance my performance.
REFERENCES:
• Belbin, M.R. (1981). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail. Oxford: Butterworth- Heinemann.
• Belbin 's team role summary description cited in King, D. & Lawley, S (2013). Organizational Behavior. Oxford: Oxford Press • Ellis, S. 2012, ‘Intellectual teamwork: social and technological foundations of cooperation’, Journal of Sociology, vol. 32, no. 6.
• DuPont, A. 2013, Communication in