Group Selection/Composition

As an assignment for ENC 3246 in the Fall of 2008 students in the class were divided into groups to perform a workplace ethnography study. Eric Beavers ,  Aaron Crowl , Blane Martin and Cecil Thornhill were selected to form the Tampa Engineering group as they  all lived in  the Tampa area. The Tampa Engineering group combined individuals with differing life histories, ages, and class standings (from a graduating Sr. to a Jr.).  The group elected to study Alltel as the subject of their project for the course.

Group Organization

The group met for the first time in class to organize itself and select a firm to interview for the project. The working style of the group was determined by mutual consent and formalized via a written contract agreed to by all members of the group. Decision making for the group was based on consensus and voting. While the personal and meeting styles were casual, there was a formal list of processes and procedures and deliverable assignments selected by majority vote.  For each phase of the project the group partitioned oversight of the tasks and review of the deliverables to specific members. These duties were rotated over the course of the project so that tasks were shared equitably.

Group Conflict and Resolution

The Tampa Engineering Group had members with very different personal approaches to assignments. Several members were more formal and others to a more relaxed approach to scheduling time for assignments. As deadline pressure grew this led to concerns about timely delivery. These issues were resolved through discussion of the concerns directly between the group members. Each individual in the group was able to deliver assigned tasks on time, and after exchanging concerns and seeing actual performance, most of the tensions from differing styles was reduced. The group was able to resolve all the differences that arose via communication and compromise and never has to resort to formal conflict resolution techniques.

Lessons Learned

Each group member came into the group experience with different expectations about working styles. The biggest challenge for the group was coming to terms with the fact that people with different styles of work can all trust each other to perform where formal deadlines are involved. As each conflict was resolved, and required materials got delivered on time and in good form, the group members came to trust each other and function as a team. After some experience of each others performance the team members also developed a feel for how to most efficiently partition tasks to play off each member’s strengths. Developing an understanding and respect for each member’s different approaches gave the team as a whole valuable experience in forming productive relationships with diverse co-workers.