Evaluating Team Performance - Essay Example

Reflections on My Participation Word Count: 1000 I. Introduction This is a general overview of how I think everything progressed with our in-class project with regard to evaluating performances on the team. Here I will discuss: my collaboration and contribution to the group efforts; team collaborations and interactions; my strengths and weaknesses; and finally, further possible areas of discussion. II. My Collaboration and Contribution My contributions, group interactions, and areas and strategies which could improve consist of the following comments. My contribution to the project was ensuring that an emergency loan was put in place in our module of the game. As far as the group was concerned, we had a practice session that concerned borrowing practices. We tried to get the best score out of all the groups participating in this module. We were able to get our financial resources that we needed. As needed, we changed some facts and figures regarding the research and development. Our perceptual map had to be updated. Then, at the next stage, we examined finance, production, and marketing. These were tougher problems to handle including the production schedule. Also, marketing was a major component of the project. Emergency loans became necessary. Our projected sales budget was a bit off, so we had to adjust that as well. We had to make several changes individually and as a group to complete the project. The emergency loan was arranged by Michel and Jessica, my team members. The end result was that we obtained 40% of the market shares. The results were impressive. Strategies to improve upon in the future would include having more excellent, coordinated teamwork and to be more organized. Careful calculations are more desirable than being able to do the job quickly as long as good results are found. Sometimes one needs to work hard at a task which takes longer time to yield statistically significant results. III. Team Collaboration and Interactions Overall, for rounds 2 and 3, we worked together as a group. We followed all the necessary strategies, many times discussing the possible outcomes before making decisions and implementing our strategies. Our focus was concentrating on managing both the high-end and traditional segments. We discussed the low-end segment briefly and manipulated the figures regarding production, in order so that we as a group could profit more from our share of the market. Luckily, as a group we were able to strategize to the point where we increased our share of the market even further, turned a profit, increased sales, and consequentially increased our stock prices. In the second round, we manipulated the numberof human resources in order to more accurately reflect the needs presented to us. Our group interacted very well and had successful communication strategies throughout the entire process. Round 3 was more focused on Niche Differentiation. Additionally, we tried implementing a revolutionary new strategy: differentiation with product lifestyle focus. So, next, then as a group, we created a product to be used for the following year. The results were somewhat disappointing in these rounds. We came in last place, especially with regard to profits and market share. After class, our group reconvened to discuss our efforts, concluding that we erred in the areas of production, marketing, and development. Mistakes, as we learned, are acceptable—but teams must learn how to work those problems out together as a unit. Hopefully in round 4 our team will have better results. IV. My Strengths and Weaknesses These are my observations as to my strengths and weaknesses in the project. In my peer evaluation, the highest marks I received were for: 1) having a willingness to listen to, and consider, the ideas of others; and 2) leadership, i.e., providing some type of direction in the project. I learned that my ability to listen to others as well as delegate tasks as a leader are two things I am very good at doing. I did not know this before. My main weakness, for which I received my lowest mark, was that I was not a deliberate, structured, systematic, iterative decision maker. This shows that I have a tendency to think in a circular manner versus a linear progression. I have definitely improved as a team member by at least an entire half of a point by the end of the three rounds. From the first to the second round, I had marked improvement in coming to class on time, being prepared, and being ready to contribute to the decision making. I drastically improved my listening skills from the first round to the second round, but in the third round they were not as proficient as the second round. I made drastic improvements in helping others understand what their abilities were so that they were performed in a timely manner. I also dramatically improved in both the second and third rounds from the first round in working hard to become sufficiently knowledgeable of all aspects of the simulation. My collaboration skills were obviously effective, and I held high expectations for my team. My expectations were met, as both my team members worked tirelessly to aid the project. My input was seen as very important and I felt valued in the group. Overall, I felt that I performed very well. V. Further Possible Areas of Discussion Areas for possible further improvement could include allowing other members of the team to take on more responsibilities. Sometimes I felt as though I was burdened with several stressful elements of the project. To continue to improve as an effective team member, I hope to be able to develop and nurture the leadership skills which I did so well with in the first round. I implemented changes in the group dynamic by focusing everyone on the tasks at hand that had to be performed, and made sure that the changes came to fruition. The outcomes I expected were to definitely improve my leadership abilities as it related to this module, and I feel I’ve successfully achieved that goal. There will always be room for improvement. VI. Conclusion Here the following elements were reviewed: my collaboration and contribution; my team collaboration and interaction; my strengths and weaknesses; and further possible areas of discussion. BIBLIOGRAPHY Aiken, Michael, Lewis A. Ferman, and Harold L. Sheppard. Economic Failure, Alienation, and Extremism. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1968. Goetz, Stewart. "The Choice-Intention Principle." American Philosophical Quarterly 32 (1995): 177-85. The World of Learning. 47th ed. London: Europa, 1997. Read More