Team roles and management
Allocation of tasks within a group depends on factors such as; project being undertaken, the size of the group and the professional qualifications as well as the skills of individual members in a particular group (Forsyth, 2009). Having the knowledge of the required activities to be undertaken in our group, and considering the number of individuals present in the group, the group embarked on sorting out the tasks and allocating the tasks to group members based on their skills and qualifications. Individuals were therefore required to carry out multiple tasks but in succession in harmony with other members. The members of the group though had to deliberate to arrive at an agreement that particular individuals within the group agreed and were actually the appropriate individuals to carry out those tasks.
In the first approach, the group undertook task partitioning which differs from task allocation. Task partitioning involves splitting the entire task into component parts then distributing the parts to individual members required to accomplish that particular task (Pycraft, 2000). The focus is usually on the task rather than the individuals required to accomplish that task. Task allocation on the other hand involves allocating different tasks of a given project to the appropriate individuals in a particular group. The Focus in the latter is the individuals. Focusing on the individual is favorable since the group was able to select the appropriate members of a each particular task as opposed to just randomly distributing tasks.
The peer review form had four sections. Each section had a rate of 1-4 in which 1 represented failure in a particular section while 4 implied success in a particular section. The four section were team player, helps group excel, communication and preparation. Of the four, I received fairly good ratings in communication and preparation in which I scored a 2 and three respectively and performed dismally in the section of being a team player and helping the group excel where I scored a 1 in both. Group participation much as it requires individual members to specialize in the areas they are best suited in also requires flexibility in that one can manage other tasks fairly well in case one is called to do so (Forsyth, 2009). I particularly performed dismally in being a team player since I rarely take criticisms and consider my ideas to be the absolute truths. In helping the group excel, I failed since I was unable to stay motivated till the end of the project. The project appeared monotonous to me at a particular time.
In rating my group members, I focus on individual performances rather making generalizations (Wood, 2009). There were three of us in the group. The first individual rated excellently in being a team player and in helping the group excel. He scored a 4 in both sections. He performed above average in communication and preparation scoring a 3 out of a possible 4 in the two. The other group member was excellent in communication, preparation and in helping the group excel while was above average in being a team player. I can essentially conclude that he was the best based on the ratings in our group.
Reference list
Forsyth, D. R., 2009. Group dynamics. 5th ed. Connecticut: Cengage Learning.
Pycraft, M., 2000. Operations management. Cape Town: Pearson South Africa.
Wood, T. J., 2009. Interpersonal communication: everyday encounters. 6th ed. Connecticut:
Cengage Learning.
