“The pessimist complains about the
wind; the optimist expects it to
change; the realist adjusts the
sails.”
Martine van Gool
143083
9 November 2015
SINK OR SWIM
Ins and outs on the ship assignment
Summary
Ahoy! This is a journey through the process of the ship assignment, however mainly focussed on the
group process from the ship assignment as well as the group process within Imagineering. The report
will try to explain the differences and tries to reflect on the process and on the participant itself. First
it will explain the team roles and core quadrants involved in the group and briefly shows the
differences. Then it will go on to the individual contribution and reflecting and setting a goal: what
can I do better next time? It involves the own core-quadrants and Belbin-test-results related to the
reflection, and also will be shown fully in the end of this report.
Table of contents
Summary ................................................................................................................................................. 1
Introduction............................................................................................................................................. 3
The teamwork ......................................................................................................................................... 4
Individual role .......................................................................................................................................... 9
Critical reflection ................................................................................................................................... 15
Core quadrants ...................................................................................................................................... 16
Belbin Results ........................................................................................................................................ 17
Plant................................................................................................................................................... 17
Co-ordintor ........................................................................................................................................ 17
Introduction
Ai, ai, Matey! Today you are going on a journey through the process of making a Pirate ship together.
With the stunning pirate ship the group has created, I will sail you right through the process of
making it. With the captains’ telescope, we zoom in on particular parts of the process. It contains an
elaborate reflection on the one and only; me, myself and I, and the fantastic group I have had the
pleasure of working with during this assignment. Along the journey we will come to figure out how
we worked together as a team, relating to the core quadrants and Belbin test. Next to that, my own
role within the team will be reviewed and analysed, and last but not least a critical view on the
assignment itself. I will compare my own drawing on the ship to the one we drew with the team.
Concrete steps will be given to improve myself in the next group, reflecting on what went wrong in
this group.
The teamwork
A few things in the recorded assignment are clear in regards to the teamwork. Overall, what is clear,
is that everybody really wants to say something about everything. Next to that, although we seem to
be on the same page with choosing the ship, the reason why is different to everybody. For example, I
tried to get the group to ask the reason why by telling them my symbolical reason for the pirateship,
as shown in the video. “I think it should be a pirate ship because we have had some rough patches
along the way, just like a pirate ship would have”. There is a clear distinction between creative
thinking and more pragmatic. This can be seen in the video, whereas some of the others did not gave
a symbolic meaning behind the pirate ship. “I just like the details and it is pretty.” This has been the
same way in our Imagineering project. The difficult part about this is that everybody has their own
view and opinion about the meaning of a word.
To be honest, there is a very big difference between the way of discussing things in the ship
assignment and the group meetings for the Imagineering project. In this meeting, there was more
room for listening to each other and agreeing, instead of pushing own opinions like in the
Imagineering project. I think this has to do with the fact that I had I little fall-out to one of the groupmembers just before the assignment. Next to that, this assignment is very difficult because the two
are so different. I think that is because there was no room for discussing problems. Another example
of the pragmatic and the creative, I think: talking about problems versus pretending there are no
problems.
As we take a look at different team-roles, we have a clear division. Anja is a group worker and a
businesswoman, Danique a completer, Alisiya is the businesswoman and I am the co-ordinator and
plant. If we compare that to the clip, a few things immediately stand out. Although Anja is a groupworker, she is more focussed on giving her opinion than getting everybody involved and having their
saying. Danique is indeed what the test says and is focussed on results. This is in line with the
distinction between the pragmatic thinkers and the creative one, that we have established earlier.
What is also interesting, is that, although Alisiya is the businesswoman, she is somewhat quiet and
reluctant to give her opinion.
Relating to the team-roles, we have the potential to be a really good group, because of the division in
the roles, however, in regards to the core-qualities, there are some conflicts in the group that
complicates the teamwork somewhat. For example, in the double core-quadrant, which is on the
next page, we can see, on the lower level, my core quadrant, and on the top Anja’s. My pitfall, which
is being chaotic, is Anja’s allergy. We could have used this perfectly in our group, however could not
manage to use it for our benefit, which created friction. It did exactly what is should not do; create
allergies. We can see in Anja’s part of the core-quadrant, that she want to be really professional.
Unfortunately for us, there were different interpretations of ‘professional’. For example, for Anja,
professionalism means sticking to deadlines and be on time. For me, professionalism is about quality
of work. If this means I miss a deadline by a few hours or a day, that is fine, because we agreed to
setting deadlines early so there is room for error. Then we have her allergy, which is chaos.
Everybody knew I can be chaotic. Instead of helping me with it, her interpretation was that I should
be ‘professional’ and not be chaotic, so get over it. In my dictionary this is not the meaning of
professional, and I have been chaotic all my life, so ‘just getting over it’ is a task I could not manage
on my own.
structured
professionalism
Creative
chaotic
messy
too controlling
more organized
The same happened in the next double core quadrant. In which Danique is on the lower half, and
mine is on the top-half. I have to be more organized, however being too controlling is one of my
allergies. I cannot stand people to tell me what to do, especially when I do not think they are right.
And since there was already a bit of trouble between me and Danique, I tried to help her by telling
her my opinions and going against the stream, however this was not really appreciated and got her
upset more.
creative
chaotic
pefectionist
deligate/too
controlling
more
organized
laziness
time
planning
Again, we could have used this for our benefit, however due to already caused friction, did not really
talk it through. The friction came from the two types of thinkers, I think personally. As said, in theory
the composition of the group would be near perfect and we complement each other on both
strengths and weaknesses. However putting it into practice was for this group very difficult. I think
this is because there was a lot of strong personalities and a lot of opinions and different definitions to
qualities, and different interpretations of the assignment. In particular one of the group. On the one
hand, I admire her drive to do what she thinks is right. On the other hand, because she was
convinced she was always right, there was no room for listening to others and I felt unappreciated.
More on this will be in another chapter.
At the end of the clip, we divide roles that are present on the ship.
Danique turned out to be the radio-person, due to her structured habits. Anja is considered to be the
doctor, because of her ability to take an objective look at other people’s work. Alisiya is the engineer,
because of her understanding of the project, however in the group-assignment she did not really
speak out that much. My role was the seagull, for my ability to look objectively at a situation and
react accordingly.
When looking at the project of Imagineering, the roles given to everybody do fit. When looking at the
process during the assignment, it could fit, however, as I said before, there is a difference. In the clip
that is also mentioned briefly in the evaluation. Due to the fact there is no clear description of the
project, we have to figure it out ourselves. The big difference is with Imagineering, the project is
described differently, and therefore everybody has their own interpretation and opinion on how it
should be. This caused, in the project, a bit of friction, however in the ship assignment caused for a
bit more cooperation and listening to each other.
In addition I would like to put in two e-mails, one I received from my teammates Aliciya, Anja and
Danique. The other is my reply to this e-mail. Note that this e-mail was sent by the end of the term,
while the problem had been from the start of the term. I have made many attempts to fix this
problem tirelessly, until I became fed up with it. This was the point that the rest of the group sent me
this e-mail. You can imagine I got a bit angry.
Hello everyone,
Because tomorrow is not going to happen with that not everyone can make it. I set up this
email to tell you what has been going on.
So to start off. Today we had a meeting with Jessica and Frank about our group. That, to be
honest, it’s not going great. And that is something that is been bothering Alisiya, Danique and
me. For the past week at least, we have been working as hard as possible to do the work of
five, with three. And the main reason is that it’s just not working. And I would like to address
in this email what is bothering us. So I am going to address both Martine and Niels, and both
tell what is it exactly that is been bothering us.
Martine, first of all the way you write is really good, and looking at your grade, you must
understand Imagineering. But the work you deliver, is not always the way we thing it should
be, and if we say something about is you are not willing to changes it. Furthermore, if there is
something that you needed to do, it takes a long time before we actually receive this part. And
sometimes this means that we have to put our parts on hold. Then when we have a meeting,
we have the feeling that you are not really motivated, or willing to work, as you are on your
phone a lot, and you don’t really give your opinion.
Niels, you are willing to work and the work you deliver is good and on time, but we are mostly
concerned about your ideas of the next two weeks, because, you want to change your course,
and we are wondering if you are really that motivated as would be needed. And of course you
can’t do anything about wifi being out and everything. But we don’t know how much you are
able to offer us in the next weeks.
And we wanted this mail to ask you, how motivated you are, and what your plan is on being
more involved in to the group, and help with the group work. Because how it’s going now, it’s
not going to work and we are sadly inclined to, unfortunately, expel you from the group.
Because there is already the possibility that we won’t pass this project, if it’s going the way it’s
going. We need to be more focused and motivated.
PLEASE REMEMBER TO RESPOND BY EMAIL!
Greetings,
Alisiya, Danique and Anja
Dear Alisiya, Danique and Anja,
First of all I would like to thank you for sending this e-mail. I have been trying to make things
right for a while now, however I feel my effort in this had been disregarded a few times
already. This because I have the feeling things have been going wrong for a while already, and
now have reached it's boiling point.
This made my motivation, as you say, decline indeed.
To say that you have been doing the work of five, with the three of you, is not fair, if you ask
me. I have been putting a lot of effort in it, however you said that I should not. I have the
feeling you (and i'm not pointing at one of you in particular) cannot let go of your own ideas
on how something should look like, and therefor want to do it yourselves. We differ a lot on
opinions and how things should look, however you are not ready to listen to what I have to
say, or at least that is how it feels to me. This has caused me to feel very disrespected, and
therefor, to make things easier, I decided not to give my opinion anymore as much as I like,
because it caused a few uproars already in the past.
I really feel like it had been the three of you against the two of us from the beginning on,
which also made me sacrifice my effort. I can understand that you want it to go great, and
therefore want to control the project, which I admire, however the way that that has been
done does not suit me very much and caused a lot of irritation with me. To say that the work I
deliver is not as it should be, is a matter of opinion, and as I said, it is not really fair for you to
say that I did wrong. That and the irritations that have been going on affected my decision to
change it the way YOU think it should look like. we can always discuss this, ofcourse, but just
saying it's wrong is not working.
Furthermore I did made an effort to change things if I thought you were right, so to say that I
did not change things at all is not really fair aswel.
I would also like to add that the same goes for you sometimes. If something needed to be
done it was not done at all and being forgotten, which caused some delay in my work. To close
off, I have the feeling you talk about the project and things you do without me being
informed. This has caused friction as well as it did miscommunication.
And last but not least, I really appreciate the effort on trying to make things right again and
give me the opportunity to clear my side of the story. You do not have to agree with me,
however I would like this to be an opportunity to get to work and finish this project together,
and get a kick ass grade. I hope I made myself a bit clear, this was a looooong story. However I
wish we could now continue working together respectfully towards each other.
I hope we all can think about how we want to make this work, not just me adjusting to what
you want. And of course I hope you have a nice evening.
I will see you in school, maybe we can talk about it there!
I put in these e-mails, to get the problem more clear and to emphasise, that after these e-mails were
exchanged, nothing changed. We continued to work on the project like there was no problem at all
and disregarded everything that has been said. What this emphasises is that that part of the group
just did what was asked for by our teacher, but handled it in a way she had not implied. The thought
behind sending this email as to talk our problems out, not blaming each other and never talk about it
again. I was afraid this was going to happen, as proven by one of my last sentences “I hope we can
ALL think about how we want to make this work, not just me adjusting to what you want.” Because
that was what has been going on the whole project. Although I was a bit frustrated by this email and
the accusations, I thought, in my definition of ‘professional’, to respond accordingly. What I did
wrong is that, although I kept my cool, I played the game they were playing. I was defending myself
and pointed the finger back at them too. This is not like me, and I would not normally respond like
this. Well, I would in the same fashion, but I would never point the finger back, because that does
not solve a problem. Even so, I still felt unheard and ignored, because nothing has happened
afterwards. And also of course since it was three against one, with one other that could not care less
(Niels).
Team vs. Me
In this chapter I will compare the roles given to each other during the assignment and the eventual
ship and a drawing I made for myself, on how I think the ship should look like. I will first explain this,
and later on compare the two.
In this drawing you can distinguish five red figures, but I will first talk about the lay-out. The ship is
partly drawn and made out of wood, so partly, it still represents a pirate ship, for the same reason I
chose the pirate ship in the first place: it going though rough patched on its journey with mutiny and
fights and discussions. Only a part of the ship is drawn, since there was no clear distinction on ‘the
bigger picture’ during the Imagineering project, since there was so much difference in opinion and
views.
Now for the people, there is one red figure that has been detailed out more. The captain. The one
who wants to call all the shots. The one closest is the one holding the map, trying to figure out what
everybody should do and helping the captain. Then there is the one with the mop, just minding her
own business and doing what is told. Then we have a somebody on the outside of the boat. Trying to
keep his head up. This person is Niels. The meaning behind this is that he is trying to help, in his own
way. Maybe in the drawing he is trying to clean the outside of the ship. However the Captain rather
would see him drowning because of his ways, and just leaves him hanging/swimming. And then you
have me. The bird in the sky, who is more a burden to the captain than an addition to the team.
Maybe because he is shitting all over the freshly-cleaned deck, messing up everything the captain
and his mateys’ wanted. I do not really want to name everybody, however to reflect on it and explain
maybe I have to. The captain represents Danique. The one who wants to call the shots. Probably she
has been in more bad groups, which made her decide to take the lead. She wanted everything her
own way, the one way she is convinced would work. Admirable if indeed you have had bad grades in
other groups. However, not willing to listen to others is in my opinion not a way to ‘lead’ the team.
Her leadership qualities are not the ones I would define as leadership skills. However, since she
wants to be in the army, I think she would make one of the best sergeants in Dutch history some day
with the qualities she defines as leadership skills. However, in an Imagineering project, the way I see
it, she would be one of the worst. The way I know Danique, Imagineering would very difficult for her.
She is pragmatic and everything has to be in perfect logical steps, and she is not creative at all. In the
beginning of the project she said that herself, so I thought, back then: perfect! I am and I hate
research. She can do that, I will do all the vague creative stuff that comes with Imagineering.
Unfortunately for me, this did not turn out that way.
Then on to the next! The one holding the map. This represents Anja. She likes to think of herself as
very creative, however in the project I did not see that at all. Not in the way I am creative, at least.
She teamed up with Danique. She kept covering for her on things she said I did wrong, whereas she
did the same. As I already gave the example before, both were very focussed on pinning me for what
I did wrong, according to them, but also ‘professionalism’ meant something different to each of us.
Deadlines for me are not that strict. So yes, sometimes I wanted to perfect what I wrote, so it took
me more time and I missed the deadline. However, I am still waiting on a mind-map Danique would
make I week three of the project. Whenever I would bring that up, because we really needed it in the
project, Anja would jump in and change the subject. That’s one of the reaons I chose her to be the
‘right hand’ of the captain.
Alisiya is the one holding the mop in the drawing. She was mostly just minding her own business. I
think she was mostly misinformed and confused about the communication, and was left out of a few
things too. I think sometimes she had no idea what was actually going on. She was just providing the
tasks she was given and kept quiet. As we can see in the video she was not agreeing with the whole
pirate ship idea at first, however did not really want to talk about her opinion, even though I tried.
And this time I tried. In the assignment there was room for me to speak. Whereas in meeting for the
Imagineering project there was really not.
Then we have Niels. I did not really talk about him so far, since he was not joining the project
anymore right after the assignment. Me and Niels where often left out of everything. So I put him in
the picture as the one on the outside of the ship. He and I were more often on the same page as any
of the others. We had more of the same definition and understanding of the project. He tried to be
left out of the trouble and just do his parts, however the rest of the team mostly had some trouble
with him too, one way or the other. Being late, missed deadline, wrong notification. It didn’t really
matter actually, as long as they could blame him for anything (although they did the same) they
would do it. I felt for him at some point. Just because we had different definitions. It is a pity nobody
would ever talk.
Then there is me! The pretty bird! I was the one shitting on all the plans and being a pain in the ass.
At first. I like the description Niels gave me: my ability to just stand back from a distance and
objectively react accordingly to the different situations. I do tend to do that, indeed. However
normally that would work as a benefit whenever there is a small problem the team could not figure
out right away, but not in this team. However in this drawing it is as said: I felt like a burden to the
captain. But for me it was a dilemma. I really wanted to have the team work together, but I also
wanted a good grade. Now I know the team all had different understanding about the project and I
already said I hate the fact that people push their own opinions. So I am not saying my understanding
of the project was right, I just also wanted to have a say in it and discuss, so we could together figure
out a way that works best. However the captain was not really willing to do that for the reasons
mentioned above. So after pooping on the captain’s head a couple of times, getting everybody upset
in the process, I decided to give up. The goal was more important than the process, and that was just
getting a report. It did not really matter anymore how it was written, how we get to where we were,
what it was about. So I just kept flying alongside the boat, adjusting some sails when needed. By this
time Niels already drowned, by the way.
I just realised that I did the same thing during the assignment as I did during the project. At some
point, I gave up. After repeatedly trying to get everyone to give their opinion about the symbolical
reason on why to put something on the ship, which I failed, I gave up. In my understanding this was
the whole scope of the assignment, the symbolic. Why a pirate ship? You want lifeboats, why do you
want lifeboats? But then again, the understanding of the assignment differed too much. It didn’t
really matter to me anymore if the ship had sails, or an anchor, or three floors or sixty. The answers
were still “because it is pretty” or “because that’s just the way it is”.
So I am going to put a picture of the ship the team made, but I still can’t give you the reason why the
ship is the way it is. Or maybe I can: “because, well, that’s just the way a pirate ship is”.
I can, however, tell you why I wanted the mermaid so badly, which I drew at the bow.
Not my best drawing ever, but still you can see it’s a mermaid, right?
I drew a mermaid because I thought it was symbolic for pointing at the right direction. And by this
time I desperately wanted our team to all face the same direction. I think I did mention it shortly in
the video, but I remember also saying because it was pretty. If that’s the way I could get it, sure.
The difficult part of this now is comparing it. But like said, there is no symbolic reason to any of the
components of the ship I believe, other than I just mentioned on the mermaid. The roles we gave
each other were very carefully chosen. Although it crossed my mind to give Danique the Captain title,
as I did in my own drawing, the meaning of captain would be different. It would mean in the
assignment that she did the right thing. And I would not grant her that. In my own drawing it just
means she really wanted to call all the shots and tell everybody what to do. And during the
assignment she was really persistent she did not want the role of captain and said she did not control
everything. I think this was because she was still pretending for the video we were a perfect little
group.
Individual role
Now, back to me. Throughout the clip, at some points, my body language changes. Sometimes, if I
did not agree or everybody began to talk, I sat back and was more quiet. This relates back to my role
given at the end of the assignment; the seagull. This was given to me by Niels, for my ability to look
objectively at a situation and react accordingly. I was listening to what everybody had to say, mainly
because I did want to sit back and see/hear what happened. Also because, according to my corequadrant, I am easily irritated if, through my experience and/or own opinion (which you can see in
the appendix, and will be explained more then). What I have to do then, I think, is relax, take a
breath and step back. I do not want to force my opinion, but I can try to be objective and also
substantiate my point.
Belbin team-role
Also, when looking at my own team-role, which is a plant, I am more introvert and creative and
solving problems, which is consistent, I think, with the role given to me as a seagull. The test-results
of the Belbin also values me as a co-ordinator, which states I know what is going on in a project and
like to figure out who is good in what. This I almost opposite to my plant-status, however is logical
when looking at the Imagineering project. Why? Although I like to keep the team together and make
it work to everybody’s best abilities, there is a big difference in understanding of the project and the
multiple definitions and opinions on what to do. I have tirelessly made effort in pointing this out, but
there is only so much a person can take. I don’t like confrontations, and every time I tried to get the
team back together and look at who is good in what to make the team work, I got ignored.
I do not like to be pushed around and told what to do (which is in my core-quadrants. The difference
in understanding is because of the pragmatic and creative minds in this particular group, and
although this, as already said, can work perfectly in the benefit of the group, it worked against us. I
failed to do my job as a coordinator, which I actually was in other groups, however strong
personalities, due to my plant-status, do not suit me well when it is turned against me.
When looking at the ship assignment, although I was not the chairman, I tried to have everybody’s’
opinion and ask around if someone was quiet. So that is consistent with my role as a co-ordinator.
When looking concretely at my role in the team, I caused more trouble this time than I normally do
solving problems. This because I failed to have the groups ’personality traits working together. I do
not like to be pushed around and told what to do, so I tried solving it discretely, because I also do not
like confrontation and really like the group working together in a good environment. The way I
handled it told me a lot about myself, also that I am very stubborn.
At some point in the project I gave up. Since my opinion and views caused friction and complication,
in favour of the group, I decided to just agree with everything they said and to do what was told me
to do. This, for me, caused more irritations, however I knew it was for the better, since it did help.
However, in the per evaluation in the end, feedback was that I should give my opinion more,
ironically. But also this helped me to, next time this happens, figure out a way to make it work, not
only for the group, but also for myself.
Concrete: next time in such a situation, try to have the group discuss their talents more and reflect
that on the project. Figure out a way to have yourself and the group happy, so that the atmosphere
and the project eventually will be better.
I figured out that you cannot work with everybody. I learned that sometimes I have to be a bit
stronger, and put my feet down. I am really not good at that, although I want to be. It is funny that I
know I can do this, whenever anybody else is in trouble. However when this happens to me, I tend to
get scared. Standing up for everybody else, except for me, has been a part of my life ever since I can
remember. This is because I put everybody else’s’ happiness before that of myself.
I have had worked in groups where there was friction, however that never involved me and it always
got solved by the team. I have never been in a situation like this, and as said, you cannot work with
everybody. What I learned from this is that it is OK to just step out of it. This team made me really
unhappy, while Imagineering is the course I like best from the whole ILM programme. I will try to
solve this again if it ever happens, however I will not put as much effort in it a I did now. If it does not
work, it does not work, and that is okay.
I also realise I really need to work on communication. I think a lot of frustrations on both sides was
just misunderstanding each other. The different personalities made it clear for me that not
everything is as logical for somebody else as it is for me, so sometimes it takes a bit more time to
explain. I always try to look at thing from all sides, tend to pretend to be the person I am talking to;
would she understand if I said this? She looks at it this way, can I figure out a way that works for both
of us?
I always try to understand somebody else, and not be prejudices or biased. But I do tend to get very
irritated if I cannot explain myself, while it is so very logical or clear to myself and the other person
just can’t understand. I realise this is my problem, it has been my problem for a long time. And I am
not at that point frustrated with the other person, but I am with myself. And I do project that on
others. Of course this creates only more frustration and miscommunication, but I am working on it!
Critical reflection
As already mentioned in the group evaluation, the ship assignment was different that the normal
meetings of our group. This way of assessing our performance helped our group to look at our other
meetings as well. We agreed that the way of the meeting was more pleasant than our other
meetings. This was because everybody was a bit uncertain about the assignment and wanted to
listen to each other. In the clip it really reflects the different approaches of the team members, which
also resembles the group meeting for Imagineering, however problems or differences were handled
differently. The problem of our team was that we did not really face our problems or talk about
them. So it is still not really clear what really went wrong, so I can only speculate, as I did in this
report. That is what makes it very difficult to put the finger on the sore spot, so to speak. I do must
say I had kind of a revelation re-writing this report, like I had with the description of the ship. That I
just gave up whenever I failed to express myself clearly or wasn’t listened to. During the assessment I
had with you about this reflection report, I noticed that I was right about this symbolic meaning to it.
I think if done properly, this assignment can be a real eye-opener to everybody in a team, because in
a subtle way everybody can be honest about the group and its members. However makes it very
difficult for teams like ours.
Core quadrants
I already talked about the core quadrants a bit in this report. The giving-up-part that I talked about
was I think due to me being ‘good-natured’. What I mean by that is that I really want to keep the
peace, want everybody to be equal and feeling comfortable. This is why my allergy is pushy people.
People telling anybody what to do. It makes relationships in whatever kind unequal, but it is also the
reason why I am easily pushed around. I can be very stubborn, as long as everybody is happy with it.
If not, I will sulk in my own head and get over it, but it makes me very unpleasant, which we see
happening during the project. I think the creative one speaks for itself. And I think it is a very
common one for creative people. I have yet to meet an artist who was very organized. (not that I am
an artist, I am just chaotic and a tad weird and want to have an excuse) but it really makes me
anxious for people who want to control me. What I see happening in other groups is that in
comparison, I have a lot of experience in teams and real-life. If then something does not go the way it
should be, or people are slow, have a total different understanding, I am easily irritated. I have done
it a thousand times and it always works. I should realise those people are still learning, and I was in
their shoes as well at one point in my life and relax. But then people who do not want to hear what I
have to say about it and still go their way, even though it goes wrong, so people who are closedminded, are allergies to me.
Creative
too
controlling
Chaotic
organized
Experienced
Good
Natured
Closed
minded
Pushy
easily
irritated
Naive
Relaxed
easily
pushed
arround
Belbin Results
The outcomes of the Belbin test were as followed:
Plant
Is the creative thinker of the team. Innovative and original. A free spirit who needs space to
fantasize about new and surprising solutions to complex problems. Plant is not always practical and
sometimes misses what others require from him/her.
Character: An Introvert, thinker, daydreamer, philosopher.
Likes: Intelectual challenges, creativity, peace and wuiet, space and recognition.
Contribution to the team: creativity, innovative ideas. Solves difficult problems
Pitfalls: being too unrealistic, thinking without acting or practical results
Co-ordintor
Is the natural coordinator of the team. He/she looks after procedures, helps team members clarify
intentions and summarizes what everyone wants. He/she has a nose for talent and knows how to
utilize people to their full potential. Coordinator trusts others and delegates easily but sometimes
has a tendency to leave too much work to others.
Character: Natural coordinator, calm, tolerant, positive, open-minded and curious
Likes: procedure, progress and decisions, combined efforts, setting goals, togetherness
Contribution to the team: clarifies goals, structure discussions, creates unity, takes decisions.
Pitfalls: slightly manipulative to reach goals.