During the Human Resource Management course this term, it was fortunate that worked with multinational students who came from China, India, Thailand, South Korea and Russia with different subject background, such as Accounting, Management, Engineering and Digital Media Technology. There were three students who had several years of real work experience, who were very helpful when we had some problems about discussing working style in different countries and different types of companies. Although some of them were talented and professional, there was a consensus among us: we do not need a leader in my team. As we worked under a fair position, we could identify other members’ ...view middle of the document...
In my team, A was quite similar to Plant. She was so clever and sometimes dominant. When we discussed in class, she was always the first one who spoke ahead of others and brought forward some unconventional ideas that were full of creativity and imagination. Conversely, she was seldom keeping in touch with us outside class, for example, when we had team working out of class, she was usually absent with some individual reasons. It was a kind of social loafing, and for a team, it was not a good sign. After several times of A were absent, some grumbles were occurred, and some members lost initiative.
Based on Belbin’s theory (2008:39), rather than standing out as innovator, Resource Investigator is notably adept at hunting resources outside the team and developing them.
Looking around my group, B and I just played the role of Resource Investigators. Both of us were enthusiastic and good at coordinating each member’s timetable, so we could have a proper time to have meetings or activities outside class. Different from A, B and I played a significant role in communicating with other members and other groups. We often talked with other groups’ members, asked their solutions about cases. Liaison works gave us the right opportunity to come back with some new propositions that could often reform our group plans. As a result, we could integrate strength of all proposals. I found that I could see things from a different perspective as a Resource Investigators, and it was really efficient that we could finish tasks and be done beautifully.
Co-ordinator is people playing as chairman to a certain extent. Fisher, Hunter and Macrosson (1998: 284) suggest that chairman know how to use the team’s combined human resources.
Similarly, there was an anonymous person, C, who played this role in my group. He was the oldest member with more than 10 years of work experience. He was steady and sociable, at the same time, since he was able to distinguish others’ abilities, particular task could be delegated to most suitable member. In addition, he was always responsible for his job (except for the managing change case study) and gave directive opinions to us. Thus, he gained the respect of other members in the group although sometimes he could be seen as manipulative.
In some cases, there is a kind of member who is the opposition of a person you might expect to make a good team player. He criticized, challenged, argued and opposed. It is shaper who encourages people to participate team working and try to make things done.
In my group, D was likely to be a Shaper. He was dynamic and thrives when we had some difficult tasks, in other words, he could work well under enormous pressure, but he often criticised us without thinking about our feeling. One observable example was that in managing change case study, our team’s performance was moderate, because C should have made presentation, but he did not...