I have had 2 quite different experiences of teamwork on H817. The first was when we produced a joint end-product early in the course. There is no doubt that mutual performance monitoring, back-up behaviour, adaptability and team orientation were very much in evidence. Funnily enough, I don't think we can be said to have had a leader, though different people took the initiative at different points.
Everyone was very adaptable - the direction and nature of what we were producing changed quite a bit as the project developed. There was no one who was so fixed on a particular approach that disagreement arose. For me, this adaptability was the crucual factor - people were ready to change course following discussion
On the MOOC a group of 4 of us actually produced an OER. We seemed to agree quite quickly on the overall topic though it took a while for the different parts of the content to emerge. There was not so much need for adaptability so most time was spent producing materials. Again, there was no official leader but one member got close to that role by virtue of the amount of work she did.
Both collaborative experiences worked because we trusted each other.
Comments
New comment
Hi John,
I liked your reflection on the role of adaptability in the success of our last task.
I agree that it played a significant role, and was a very successful mechanism in the last group task. It is certainly an asset when working collaboratively.
I am not sure that it would be enough on its own though - I thought the adaptability was more successful because there were a few key people suggesting and then taking charge of the tools and processes we used to get things done - they relied on a minimum feedback and buy-in strategy, instead of trying to get the whole group to agree, and then drove the process to ensure some measure of success ... what do you think?
Thanks for the insightful post.
Regards,
Priya
New comment
Priya makes a good point that pragmatism may have negated some of the views. It wasn't assessed so actually did it matter that if we all really bought into what was produced? Could that lead to a different result this time?New comment
Hello Priya and Nicola, I'm already finding that the dynamic of a group of 4 is different from the much larger group at the start of the course. Whereas then, there wasn't really a master plan, it seems more important this time round to decide the goals at the start, rather than just letting them emerge. Also, the earlier collaboration didn't seem so full on - you could go away and come back a day or two later and slot back in. Maybe we are still at the 'storming' stage when there is likely to be more confusion and uncertainty but at the moment the structure of this block is quite hard to get your head round - at least, that's what my head is telling me.
I remember thinking at the start of the earlier collaboration that some of my colleagues seemed amazingly able and erudite, but I was reassured to find that some of my contributions were well-received. I'm hoping the same will apply this time round!