Building and Managing Successful Teams – Team Decision Making

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1.05 Characteristics of Effective Teams
Advertisements

What You Don’t Know About Making Decisions article by: David A. Garvin and Michael A. Roberto Harvard business Review  Presentation by:  Liz Farricker.
1.05 Characteristics of Effective Teams
Agenda Introduction/Syllabus Review Introduction/Syllabus Review Exercise Review Exercise Review Discussion/Comparison of Lists Discussion/Comparison of.
Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education
Team & Teamwork. More Than Meets The Eyes! 3 Design Group  Engineering projects require diverse skills  This creates a need for group (team) work 
© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Problem Solving & Decision Making II: Deciding & Implementing © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies,
A Module of Purdue University’s LeadingEdge Program
What is Teamwork & Team Building Team work : Concept of people working together as a team. Team Player : A team player is someone who is able to get.
Preparing Faculty to Conduct Educational Research: What’s SoTL’s Role Ruth Streveler, Nancy Chism, Marilla Svinicki and Karl Smith POD Conference, October.
Constructive Academic Controversy: The Art of Arguing to Enhance Learning Workshop for Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Karl A. Smith Engineering Education.
Three levels on which to measure team effectiveness Task how well do we achieve our targets? Process could we improve how we work? Feelings how do we feel.
Introduction to Team Building Presented by Margo Elliott Momentum Performance Solutions 6 September 2001.
TOGETHER EVERYONE ACHIEVES MORE
High-Performance Teamwork Karl A. Smith Engineering Education – Purdue University Civil Engineering - University of Minnesota Preparing and Supporting.
HANCOCK CENTRAL SCHOOL INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP TEAM SEPTEMBER 14, 2012.
Teamwork 101.
Teamwork Dr.Ihab Nada, DOE. MSKMC.
Develop your Leadership skills
Team Building.
Constructive Controversy & Decision Making Karl A. Smith February, 2012.
June 2002USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service1 Critical Meeting Elements: Preparation to Minimize Conflict.
Leadership Understand leadership.. A Thought About Leaders Warren Bennis, Ph.D. said, “Managers are people who do things right, while leaders are people.
Constructive Controversy in Graduate and Professional Courses Karl A. Smith Engineering Education – Purdue University STEM Education Center/Civil Eng –
Working in Groups Decision-making processes. Why work in a group? Working in groups is a vital part of every job Groups are more productive than individuals.
High-Performance Teamwork Karl A. Smith Engineering Education – Purdue University Civil Engineering - University of Minnesota -
Authored by Andrea White, PhD for the C3 Initiative.
Why Teams?. Teams Outperform individuals acting alone or in groups Outperform individuals acting alone or in groups Often necessary to lead deep and lasting.
Ms. Eberhard HGD – Spring What is teamwork? A joint action by a group of people, in which each person subordinates his or her individual interests.
LEVEL 3 I can identify differences and similarities or changes in different scientific ideas. I can suggest solutions to problems and build models to.
Team Decision Making Karl A. Smith University of Minnesota January 2005 Engineers Leadership Institute Minnesota Society.
Teams and Team Issues ENGR 300 Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering University of Bridgeport, CT
Project Management MOT 8221 Karl A. Smith Constructive Controversy & Decision Making Spring, 2002.
Team Decision Making Karl A. Smith Engineering Education – Purdue University Civil Engineering - University of Minnesota -
Cooperative Learning and Problem- Based Learning: Working with Teams Karl A. Smith Engineering Education – Purdue University Civil Engineering - University.
Building and Managing Successful Teams for Cooperative Learning Karl A. Smith Engineering Education – Purdue University Civil Engineering - University.
EENG 4910/4990 Engineering Design Murali Varanasi September 02, 2009.
Team Building Presentation. How does a Team Work Best? A Teams succeeds when its members have: a commitment to common objectives defined roles and responsibilities.
Team Decision Making Karl A. Smith Engineering Education – Purdue University Technological Leadership Institute/ STEM Education Center/ Civil Engineering.
History and Philosophy of Engineering Education ENE 695M Karl A. Smith Constructive Controversy.
Team Decision Making Karl A. Smith Engineering Education – Purdue University Civil Engineering - University of Minnesota Preparing and Supporting Students.
Chapter 6 Working and Writing in Teams Copyright © 2010 by the McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Objective 7.02 Understand team building.
Small Group Communication
Working and Writing in Teams Module Eighteen Copyright © 2014 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Leadership & Teamwork. QUALITIES OF A GOOD TEAM Shared Vision Roles and Responsibilities well defined Good Communication Trust, Confidentiality, and Respect.
Copyright © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Slide 1 Working in Groups PART FOUR.
AG Leadership Fall Semester Test Review. Unit 1 Terms Ethics- behavior or conduct that is morally correct; following principles of fairness, honesty,
Engineering design is the process of devising a system, component, or process to meet desired needs. It is a decision-making process (often iterative),
Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Team Decision Making Karl A. Smith Purdue University/ University of Minnesota Engineers Leadership Institute Minnesota Society for Professional.
Teamwork. The Advantages of Teams Customer Satisfaction Product and Service Quality Speed and Efficiency in Product Development Employee Job Satisfaction.
Workshop on Leadership for Effective Teams, December, 2000 * Based on The One Minute Manager Building High Performing Teams Leadership for Effective Teams.
Foundations of Group Behavior Week 6 lecture 11,12.
1.05 Characteristics of Effective Teams
1.05 Characteristics of Effective Teams
Team Decision Making Karl A. Smith Nanyang Business School
High Performance Teamwork
High Performance Teamwork
Team Decision Making Karl A. Smith Nanyang Business School
Team Decision Making Engineers Leadership Institute
1.05 Characteristics of Effective Teams
FIE 2009: Special Session Holly Matusovich, Virginia Tech
Innovation in a Team Environment High-Performance Teamwork
39 studies (41% Higher Ed), meta-analysis
Panther Prep North Central High School
Objective 7.02 Understand team building.
Objective 7.02 Understand team building.
1.05 Characteristics of Effective Teams
Objective 7.02 Understand team building.
Presentation transcript:

Building and Managing Successful Teams – Team Decision Making Karl A. Smith Engineering Education – Purdue University Civil Engineering - University of Minnesota ksmith@umn.edu - http://www.ce.umn.edu/~smith/ Michigan State University College of Natural Science Workshop September 2009

Teamwork Skills Communication Listening and Persuading Decision Making Conflict Management Leadership Trust and Loyalty

Decision-Making Approaches Objective Deterministic Stochastic Multiple Ranking AHP SMART MAUT Single B/C LP Optimization Decision Tree (EV) Simulation

Team Decision Making – Ranking Tasks Typically “survival” tasks First was Moon Survival, “Lost on the moon” developed by Jay Hall for NASA in 1967 Many survival tasks available – desert survival, lost at sea, winter survival, … Individual followed by team ranking Different decision-making conditions in each team

Team Member Roles Observer/ Process Recorder Task Recorder Skeptic/Prober 5

6 Action Name 1 Name 2 Name 3 Name 4 Total Contributes Ideas Describes Feelings Encourages Participation Summarizes, Integrates Checks for Understanding Relates New To Old Learning Gives Direction To Work 6

Postdecision Questionaire How understood and listened to did you feel in your group? Not at all 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 – 8 – 9 Completely 2. How much influence do you feel you had in your group’s decision making? None 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 – 8 – 9 A great deal How committed do you feel to the decision your group made? 4. How much responsibility do you feel for making the decision work? 5. How satisfied do you feel with the amount and quality of your participation in your group’s decision making Dissatisfied 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 – 8 – 9 Satisfied 6. Write one adjective that describes the atmosphere in your group during the decision making

Team Decision-Making Process How Individual Mathematical Consensus Iterative – H, M, L Both ends toward the middle Assumptions/Biases Family/Friends News Youth Geographic location

Methods of Decision Making (Johnson & Johnson, 1991) Decision by authority without discussion Expert member Average of member’s opinions Decision by authority after discussion Majority control Minority control Consensus See Table Summarizing Characteristics – Smith (2007), p. 46

Johnson, D.W. & Johnson, F.P. 1991. Joining together: Group theory and group skills. Prentice-Hall

Choice of Decision-Making Method Depends On: 1. The type of decision to be made. 2. The amount of time and resources available. The history of the group. The nature of the task being worked on The kind of climate the groups wishes to establish The type of setting in which the group is working Johnson & Johnson, 1991

Characteristics of Effective Decisions: The resources of the group members are well used. Time is well used. The decision is correct, or of high quality. The decision is put into effect fully by all the necessary members' commitment. The problem-solving ability of the group is enhanced. Johnson & Johnson, 1991

Two Approaches to Decision Making Garvin & Roberto, 2001 Two Approaches to Decision Making Garvin & Roberto, 2001. Harvard Business Review, 79(8), 108-116. Advocacy Inquiry Concept of decision making A contest Collaborative problem solving Purpose of discussion Persuasion and lobbying Testing and evaluation Participants’ role Spokespeople Critical thinkers Pattern of behavior Strive to persuade others Defend your position Downplay weaknesses Present balanced arguments Remain open to alternatives Accept constructive criticism Minority views Discouraged or dismissed Cultivated and valued Outcome Winners and losers Collective ownership

A Litmus Test (Gavin & Roberto) Multiple Alternatives Assumption Testing Well-defined Criteria Dissent and Debate Perceived Fairness Gavin, David A. and Roberto, Michael A. 2001. What you don’t know about making decisions. Harvard Business Review, 79 (8), 108-116.