Discussion: View Thread

Dear All,

I have the following situation that would appreciate your
comments/suggestions.

I have recently been challenged that the following situation can not be
classified as a TEAM.

I try to examine learning issues among members in construction project
teams of which members come from different organizations (occasionally some
members can come from the same organization) and different professional
backgrounds. For example, an architect from Company A, a services engineer
from Company B, a structural engineer from Company C, a surveyor from
Company D, an owner from Company E and so on so forth. They only come
together for a specific project with a specific timeframe.
1. Can I call this a team?
2. Are there past research/publications referring to these kind of
multidisciplinary team settings where the team will disband when the
project completes. Of course, people may work together again in future on
other projects.
3. Can learning be built up through this type of "temporal team"?
4. If I want to study the learning interaction among these team members,
should I study it as a longitudinal study or can I study it like a
snapshot, i.e. as critical incidents?

I would appreciate very much you insights into these issues. Please e-mail
me privately your responses.

Thanks and regards.

Patrick Fong

__________________________________________________________
Patrick S.W. Fong
Assistant Professor
Department of Building & Real Estate,
Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
Hung Hom,
Kowloon,
HONG KONG.

Tel: +(852) 2766 5801
Fax: +(852) 2764 5131 or 2764 2572
E-mail: bspafong@polyu.edu.hk
Website: http://home.bre.polyu.edu.hk/~bspafong/

Sure, you can call that a "team," but then not all teams are the same. A
tennis doubles team, for example, has quite different characteristics of
interdependency between members than does, say, a soccer team or a rowing
team. Your situation is much like airline crews that come together for
short time periods and then typically disband. Take a look at Charles
Margerison's research on cockpit crews and other "teams" within Australian
Airlines, and I think you'll find it quite interesting and relevant to your
research. Hope this helps.

Best,

Larry

At 08:32 AM 5/5/99 +0800, you wrote:
>Dear All,
>
>I have the following situation that would appreciate your
>comments/suggestions.
>
>I have recently been challenged that the following situation can not be
>classified as a TEAM.
>
>I try to examine learning issues among members in construction project
>teams of which members come from different organizations (occasionally some
>members can come from the same organization) and different professional
>backgrounds. For example, an architect from Company A, a services engineer
>from Company B, a structural engineer from Company C, a surveyor from
>Company D, an owner from Company E and so on so forth. They only come
>together for a specific project with a specific timeframe.
>1. Can I call this a team?
>2. Are there past research/publications referring to these kind of
>multidisciplinary team settings where the team will disband when the
>project completes. Of course, people may work together again in future on
>other projects.
>3. Can learning be built up through this type of "temporal team"?
>4. If I want to study the learning interaction among these team members,
>should I study it as a longitudinal study or can I study it like a
>snapshot, i.e. as critical incidents?
>
>I would appreciate very much you insights into these issues. Please e-mail
>me privately your responses.
>
>Thanks and regards.
>
>Patrick Fong
>
>__________________________________________________________
>Patrick S.W. Fong
>Assistant Professor
>Department of Building & Real Estate,
>Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
>Hung Hom,
>Kowloon,
>HONG KONG.
>
>Tel: +(852) 2766 5801
>Fax: +(852) 2764 5131 or 2764 2572
>E-mail: bspafong@polyu.edu.hk
>Website: http://home.bre.polyu.edu.hk/~bspafong/
>__________________________________________________________
>

Dear Patrick

I have always thought that a team is only a team if all members are
'rewarded' or 'judged' together as a group for the same outputs, for
example the success or failure of a project or a game.

If some members of a group can 'win' while others 'lose' this is not
a team. If they work on non-connected outputs they are not a team.
if there is no dependence within the group they are not a team.

Others can contribute to the goals of the team but not be a part of
it. Some can be rewarded for team success but not be a part of it.

Hope that this helps.

Regards
Dave Stewardson
ISRU {Industrial Statistics Research Unit}
MMME {Department of Mechanical, Materials and Manufacturing Engineering}
Stephenson Building
University of Newcastle upon Tyne
Tyne & Wear
England
GB - NE1 7RU
TEL 00 44 191 222 8513
FAX 00 44 191 222 8600

Patrick ... on what basis did the challenge state
that the situation was not classified as a team?
Frances


On Wed, 5 May 1999, Patrick S.W.Fong wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> I have the following situation that would appreciate your
> comments/suggestions.
>
> I have recently been challenged that the following situation can not be
> classified as a TEAM.
>
> I try to examine learning issues among members in construction project
> teams of which members come from different organizations (occasionally some
> members can come from the same organization) and different professional
> backgrounds. For example, an architect from Company A, a services engineer
> from Company B, a structural engineer from Company C, a surveyor from
> Company D, an owner from Company E and so on so forth. They only come
> together for a specific project with a specific timeframe.
> 1. Can I call this a team?
> 2. Are there past research/publications referring to these kind of
> multidisciplinary team settings where the team will disband when the
> project completes. Of course, people may work together again in future on
> other projects.
> 3. Can learning be built up through this type of "temporal team"?
> 4. If I want to study the learning interaction among these team members,
> should I study it as a longitudinal study or can I study it like a
> snapshot, i.e. as critical incidents?
>
> I would appreciate very much you insights into these issues. Please e-mail
> me privately your responses.
>
> Thanks and regards.
>
> Patrick Fong
>
> __________________________________________________________
> Patrick S.W. Fong
> Assistant Professor
> Department of Building & Real Estate,
> Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
> Hung Hom,
> Kowloon,
> HONG KONG.
>
> Tel: +(852) 2766 5801
> Fax: +(852) 2764 5131 or 2764 2572
> E-mail: bspafong@polyu.edu.hk
> Website: http://home.bre.polyu.edu.hk/~bspafong/
> __________________________________________________________
>

In a message dated 5/4/99 8:37:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
BSPAFONG@POLYU.EDU.HK writes:

> together for a specific project with a specific timeframe.
> 1. Can I call this a team?

Yes, so long as they share a specific goal for the duration of their
association, they are (or should be) a team. If the chance of
dissassociation at the end of the project means that a group cannot be called
a team, than no group can be a team, for any group can dissolve at the end of
the season.

Patrick:

I think the goal of the owner on a construction project it to build a
team that will work for him. Being in the construction industry on the
owners side, I think it is the owner that has the most to gain or lose
from a project where the goals and the objectives of the team are
shared. Got to have the "Win-Win-Win-Win- . . ." situation. Without
it, the owner, is going to be the one that will lose. (And will not
even realize it.) That is a the problem with construction projects.
They are generally one of a kind, and the variables of contracting are
only done once for the specific project. (No basis of comparison.)

I think the most difficult aspect of developing the team is a
recognision of the two different personality types that generally have
to come together to make the project happen. The architect, The artist,
The dreamer, and the General Contractor, the technician, the practical
person. These two generally don't mix by nature of there
personalities. It is very important to get them to understand there
strengths and there weaknesses and what there responsibilities are. If
they work as a team and help each other. The owner benefits.

Again, if the owner can develop a win win situation, this is usually
down with the contracts, then the project will succeed. The owner must
also responsibily assign risks to the appropriate parties that are best
for dealing with those risks. If I make a contractor responsible for a
risk that is say burried under the ground, I am going to be charged a
premium for assigning the risk to him. I as the owner am better off
accepting that risk and be prepared for the costs.

I hope I haven't rambled to long. I hope this helps.

Mark Klosinski

Patrick S.W.Fong wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> I have the following situation that would appreciate your
> comments/suggestions.
>
> I have recently been challenged that the following situation can not be
> classified as a TEAM.
>
> I try to examine learning issues among members in construction project
> teams of which members come from different organizations (occasionally some
> members can come from the same organization) and different professional
> backgrounds. For example, an architect from Company A, a services engineer
> from Company B, a structural engineer from Company C, a surveyor from
> Company D, an owner from Company E and so on so forth. They only come
> together for a specific project with a specific timeframe.
> 1. Can I call this a team?
> 2. Are there past research/publications referring to these kind of
> multidisciplinary team settings where the team will disband when the
> project completes. Of course, people may work together again in future on
> other projects.
> 3. Can learning be built up through this type of "temporal team"?
> 4. If I want to study the learning interaction among these team members,
> should I study it as a longitudinal study or can I study it like a
> snapshot, i.e. as critical incidents?
>
> I would appreciate very much you insights into these issues. Please e-mail
> me privately your responses.
>
> Thanks and regards.
>
> Patrick Fong
>
> __________________________________________________________
> Patrick S.W. Fong
> Assistant Professor
> Department of Building & Real Estate,
> Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
> Hung Hom,
> Kowloon,
> HONG KONG.
>
> Tel: +(852) 2766 5801
> Fax: +(852) 2764 5131 or 2764 2572
> E-mail: bspafong@polyu.edu.hk
> Website: http://home.bre.polyu.edu.hk/~bspafong/
>

Subject: Is this a team?

As far as I can recall from the various definitions that I have come across
three things must be in place for a collectivity to be called a team. They
are:
1. Mutual self-awarness
2. Mutual interdependance
3. A common goal or goals

If the original question is trying to get at the difference between a group
and a team, good luck! I, somewhat arbitrarily, determine the difference
between a group and team to be in the quality of the collective process. A
team is collectivity that show process gains while a group is a collectivity
with either process losses or no process effect.

George E. Dodge
Institute for Leadership Research
at Texas Tech University