There are multiple aspects of team performance to understand the strengths and weaknesses of group work. First, the team should choose the optimal size to operate (Andersson et al., 2017). The evaluation of the size (20) got quite fewer points than the threshold of the high index. Despite the assigned rating and its meaning, I believe that our team’s capacity is optimal since the team not only successfully performs and accomplishes the tasks but also works together efficiently. Our mutual understanding, openness in discussions, and fruitful interactions save much time, which can be dedicated to achieving the group’s aim instead.
Considering the levels of complementary skills, my objective assessment gave our team 20 points, which is a high mark. Our team’s main strengths are the knowledge of its members and readiness to contribute to the teamwork. Each of us is ready to explain and educate others if needed. The improvements that could be implemented are the development of the team members’ resources and abilities to enhance the group’s potential. I think that each of us could work on the skills of conflict management. Despite the minimal instances of disputes in our team, I believe that such experience can prevent their possible arousal.
Moreover, the evaluation of the purpose should be accomplished to understand the strength of the group. The team’s quality and the importance of the assigned aims decide the urgency of the team’s performance (Salas et al., 2017). We received 28 points for this criterion, as I am convinced that our goal carries benefits for society and demonstrates the values of each member rather than highlights only one of them. I made such conclusions from the observations and feelings I perceived during the shared work and discussions together. Everyone in the group strives for the accomplishment of our intention as it demonstrates their individual motives.
The number of points for the specificity of goals (29) is close to the high level. As it was mentioned with the previous factor, the team strength and the efficiency of their work can be identified adequately from the specificity and advantage of their aims. Even though teamwork could be motivated by personal ambitions more than by the group goal, it is partially correct only. The members value their personal aims, but they understand their contribution to the accomplishment of the common purpose and its effect on the achievement of their objectives (Andersson et al., 2017). This situation is essential for the team as it ensures our work’s productivity as long as it is implemented for collective results.
The clarity of the plans is as crucial as the specificity of the goals. It ensures the total understanding of the role of each member and their actions (Salas et al., 2017). Fortunately, our team has succeeded in discussions and subsequent postulation of clear plans and approaches. I evaluated our performance in this factor as 28, which accounts for a high level. Similarly, the sense of mutual accountability in our team is developed. I believe that during the first days of our shared time, we had excellent team-building activities. Later, such experience helped to enhance the trust and responsibility among all the team members. Moreover, despite the differences in performance and critical skills, the members’ personalities and values are close to each other, which undoubtedly contributes to fruitful work.
References
Andersson, D., Rankin, A. & Diptee, D. (2017). Approaches to team performance assessment: a comparison of self-assessment reports and behavioral observer scales. Cognition, Technology & Work, 19, 517–528. Web.
Salas, E., Reyes, D. L., & Woods, A. L. (2017). The assessment of team performance: Observations and needs. In A. von Davier, M. Zhu, & P. Kyllonen (Eds.), Innovative Assessment of Collaboration: Methodology of Educational Measurement and Assessment (pp. 21-36). Springer.