Monday, June 22, 2009

Successful Collaboration

Power and Leadership
Leadership had an interesting trend.  When there would be a team evaluation at the end, leadership was usually shared.  When there was no known team evaluation, one person (usually the most concerned about grades) would take the leading position.  Naturally, the situation itself is very unique but for the most part, a successful team would share leadership with one declared mediator/"task setter". 

Dealing with Feelings
I have been lucky, and yet to encounter a group where feelings interrupted the progress and success of the group.

Involvement of Group Members
To be honest, there are times when some group members really aren't a positive edition to the group.  They are usually lazy, or their efforts just don't seem to benefit the group at all.  In these situations, I would just carefully try to find a way to add in their work to the whole project, in a way that didn't embarrass them or devalue the entire project. 

Understanding the Rhetorical Situation
This is a very important point to successful group collaboration results.  By connecting the project to current events and tailoring it to audience expectations, we usually got really great project response and results.

Collaboration on Revisions
When revisions were suggested for larger group projects, they were always discussed.  When we didn't agree with something a teacher/professor said, we would try to understand why she/he saw it as unfitting.  If the connection wasn't made, we immediately went and sought clarification.  Successful groups do not just blindly follow revisions.

Attitude Toward Supervisors' Comments
Like mentioned before, it is never a good idea to just follow revisions blindly no matter who it may come from.  In successful groups, we would always take comments and try to learn from it.  Naturally, if a group implements and understands a supervisors' comments, the group will have a higher chance of success. 

Attitude Toward Revision
While nobody likes being told that something they labored over isn't perfect, being told to revise something is always a learning avenue.  For example, a group of mine were putting together a presentation on a mock crisis situation.  We had rehearsed hours, and the written portion seemed perfect.  After an ungraded rehearsal to the professor, he said that we were lacking certain necessary elements in the presentation and that the written part wasn't directed to the correct audience.  Initial responses amongst the group were negative.  However, we all took a step back and realized that he (the professor) was right.  Needless to say, after revision, our presentation flowed smoother.

3 comments:

  1. Heidi, I also feel that if there is member of the group that is not fitting in with the culture of that partcular group setting it is best to find their one area of exertise in which they can feel admitted into the whole process of group communication. Sharonf B

    ReplyDelete
  2. Heidi- I agree that one should not follow through with revisions blindly because many times is produces a negative or mediocre result if not questioned or challenged. However, a problem exists in the workplace if a hierarchy is in place. Seldom, you face corporate politics and you don't have freedom to challenge certain individuals. I think it is a real problem for companies.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Everything that you mentioned is correct. Group projects in order to be successful need everyone working off the same set of goals and standards. I've been in good groups and bad groups. The leadership or lack off determines if the group will be successful or not. Personalities also account for success or failure. We as adults should be able to conduct ourselves in a orderly manner but because we are individuals we let our egos get in the way of rational thinking.

    ReplyDelete