The Team Management Experience at Kepplewray - Essay Example

? Kepplewray Project inserts his/her s Department’s Project work has often been associated with teambuilding as it has the power to bring together a diverse set of individuals who interact, set goals and accomplish tasks together to complete that project. In much the same way, the Kepplewray project has proved to be an effective team management exercise which has developed various skills in its participants and has taught us several lessons. The team management experience at Kepplewray shall now be explored in depth. Teams have been traditionally defined as “dynamic, emergent and adaptive” units that are rooted in systems involving multiple levels (Kozlowski & Ilgen, 2006). The Kepplewray project also required us to form teams that adapt to multiple situations such as climbing on uneven rocks, aiming at the right target and jumping into the water. As part of this project, all team members were required to engage in activities such as Ghyll Scrambles, Rock Climbing, Abseiling, Canoeing, Archery, Mountain Walking and Tree Climbing. However, this project was not merely a venue for recreation but also a venue for learning team management with diverse members as it brought together both disabled and non-disabled individuals. One of the first steps in this project was that of building a team. This is necessary to enhance the effectiveness of the team, satisfy members’ needs and enhance work conditions (Brawley & Paskevich, 1997). Tuckman has explained the stages of team development as forming, storming, norming and performing which occur as the team sets goals, expands, faces challenges, tackles issues and finds their solutions and delivers the output (O'Connell & Cuthbertson, 2009). Although Tuckman suggests storming to be the most difficult stage, performing proved to be the most difficult stage in our case (Scholtes et al., 2003). While forming a team, identifying the issues (in this case the problem of climbing up steep rocks and canoeing in fast waters) or setting mutual goals was not a problem, executing tasks such as abseiling was. At the very least, group dynamism was weak as some individuals lacked energy and vitality to take up challenges owing to fear. It is believed that successful coaches possess the quality of creating and developing a vision that incorporates the differing levels of ability amongst group members as well as varying motivations, perceptions and personal characteristics (Desjardins, 1996). Good visions have the power of enhancing the emotional commitment of group members and uniting them around a task (Stevens, 2002). Since our group also contained individuals who were either disabled or obese, our coach set realistic targets and assigned certain activities such as abseiling only to those individuals who were not obese. This way group conflict was minimized. Cohesion has primarily been defined as social cohesion (the extent to which team members “like each other” and task cohesion (the extent to which members work together to achieve common objectives) (Hodge, 1995). Although social cohesion was weak at first, as time passed a positive environment was created as members got to know each other and started interacting. Task cohesion was also reflected in instances where one of us got stuck while climbing the mountain which urged one of my friends to assist that person so that he could catch up with us. Role acceptance also generates significant challenges for the team. Furthermore, role clarity and role acceptance are generally interrelated (Weinberg & Gould, 2011). One of the major issues our team faced was who will do what? There was a lot of ambiguity initially; however, right before the activities were to start the coach clarified everyone’s roles which enhanced our team’s cohesion. Although everyone would be a part of the activities, someone had to lead the team and coordinate with the coach. While climbing for instance, one of the leaders was supposed to be behind the team and one was supposed to head in front. This presented a challenge as few were keen on leading since it would require taking up additional responsibility. Ultimately, however, one of my friends and I volunteered and the issue was resolved. Time has been a critical component of all activities including Ghyll Scrambles where one wrong move could result in severe injury. Furthermore, time management was critical when teams were given challenges of completing specific tasks within a given time frame. For instance, when arching, each member was allowed only 30 seconds to hit the target. Also, a mini competition was held amongst teams as in the case of rock climbing where each team was allowed a total of 30 minutes to reach the rock’s top. Although this gave us an adrenaline rush, it kept the competitive spirit alive in us as we vowed to make the opponent team lose. Strategy building was another critical task as each team had to come up with a winning strategy for the games. Research suggests that this requires developing a Plan A which is the primary plan, and a Plan B which is a supporting plan in case Plan A fails (Byatt et al., n.d.). To this end, our team devised a Plan B in case if targets were missed. This is because some team members were disabled which put constraints on attainable targets. Disabled individuals were included in the team as part of Kepplewray’s policy of providing equal opportunity to all individuals (Kepplewray, 2013). Towards the end of this project several unanticipated outcomes emerged. For one thing, team chemistry was developed which could not be defined. Team chemistry is often referred to by theorists as an indescribable process that is embedded in the communication amongst team members and cannot be controlled by the coach. In our case, the team had become like a family; there were individuals of all ages ( as old as 50 years) and had different personalities with some being aggressive, fearless, adventurous and other being timid and composed. Towards the end, however, even the timid ones had been transformed as they became more comfortable with taking risks as part of a team. To conclude, the Kepplewray project which entailed various activities including Ghyll Scrambles, Rock Climbing, Abseiling, Canoeing, Archery, Mountain Walking, Tree Climbing and team challenges taught us how to achieve team cohesion, manage time, accept roles, plan for contingencies and develop a positive environment for work. We successfully transitioned to Tuckman’s fourth stage of team development- Performing which, in itself, was an accomplishment since most teams do not seem to go beyond the storming stage. In addition to providing us with a valuable team experience, this project concluded with unanticipated results including the development of a team chemistry which helped my team succeed in most of the competitions. References Brawley, L.R. & Paskevich, D.M., 1997. Conducting team building research in context of sport and exercise. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 9, pp.11-40. Byatt, G., Hamilton, G. & Hodgkinson, J., n.d. Team Sports and Project Management. [Web] Available at: HYPERLINK "http://pmicie.org/images/downloads/Articles/57__sports_and_project_management_final_distribute_21.pdf" http://pmicie.org/images/downloads/Articles/57__sports_and_project_management_final_distribute_21.pdf [Accessed 25 June 2013]. Desjardins, G., 1996. The mission. In J.H. Salmela, ed. Great job coach! Getting the edge from proven winners. Ontario: Potentium. pp.69-100. Hodge, K., 1995. Team Dynamics. In T. Morris & J. Summers, eds. Sports Pyschology: Theory, Applications and Issues. Brisbane: Wiley. pp.190-212. Kepplewray, 2013. The Kepplewray Centre: About us. [Online] Available at: HYPERLINK "http://www.kepplewray.org.uk/about/index.html" http://www.kepplewray.org.uk/about/index.html [Accessed 25 June 2013]. Kozlowski, S.W.J. & Ilgen, D.R., 2006. Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7, p.77–124. O'Connell, T.S. & Cuthbertson, B., 2009. Group Dynamics in Recreation and Leisure: Creating Conscious Groups Through an Experiential Approach. Illinois: Human Kinetics. Scholtes, P.R., Joiner, B.L. & Streibel, B.J., 2003. The Team Handbook. 3rd ed. Madison: Oriel Incorporated. Stevens, D.E., 2002. Building an effective team. In J.M. Silva & D.E. Steven, eds. Pyschological Foundations of Sport. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. pp.306-27. Weinberg, R.S. & Gould, D., 2011. Foundations of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 5th ed. Illinois: Human Kinetics. Read More