Journal Entry # 1 / Business Execution
-------------------------------------------------
Tuhina Rathi / Waitan

Dynamics Shared by the team, which worked:

Identifying Goals

We shared a very strong co-ordination where the team goal was concerned. Each one of us worked individually towards understanding the team’s and individual’s goals. We clubbed both the goals and made one common goal for the entire team and that worked really well.

Knowing each other:

It is extremely important for each member of the team is to know each other well. Our team was a very friendly team and no one had any issues with each other. We were very professional at the same time, and didn’t bring informal moments into team meetings. Every meeting began with a chat for 15 to 20 minutes before getting into the seriousness of work, and that, worked as a stress buster.

Avoiding conflict:

Normally, it is always a petty mistake to just make an assumption that every team member’s task would be the same and would have a same weightage. We avoided conflict by effectively communicating our goals and planning an agenda. We also identified our mission, tasks and goals in comparison with the team’s mission, tasks and goals.

Respecting each other’s opinions:

As a team, we always let each person speak his/her part. Also we respected each other points and views politely. Upon a disagreement, we would all agree to seek another way out to any issue that called for.

Listening to each other:

Each member of the team tried their best to listen to each other without interrupting anyone, while he/she spoke. At times some of the team members interrupted each other in order to prove their point and to be heard, however, some other members would effectively avoid the situation by permitting the speaker to speak till he/she wanted, and at the same time would politely ask the interrupter to wait for his/her chance.

Distributing the duties:

Though our team didn’t have a leader, yet we were quite effective in splitting the work in a fair manner. If there weren’t enough work to be distributed among all the team members, we would have one member to compile everything together, format it and submit it. This way, no one complained of unfair work distribution.

Punctuality:

Our team was very strict with punctuality. There were initial problems getting every member in time, for the meetings, however, later it was sorted out. As a team, we became more flexible in accommodating every member’s appointments and pre-plans. Sometimes we would even continue without some of our members and later give them the brief and outcome of the meeting.

Communication:

Even when there was absenteeism from some of the team members, as a team, we made it a point to communicate effectively through emails, Skype and phone. This enabled every team member to remain updated about the advances of the meetings.

Dynamics, which didn’t work:

Assumptions:

There were certain times when some of the team members would just assume things that didn’t really exist. If a team member wanted to leave early, some of the other members would just assume the reason. This would, in turn, make them unhappy because they think that it was unreasonable to leave early. It is never helpful to assume things at all. It is always better to talk things out.

Timings:

As a team, all the members preferred to start the meeting very late ( as late as 10.30 pm ) most of the times. It eventually went till 3 or 4 am. Even when some of the members would find it difficult, they would just follow the team.

Seriousness:

Most of the team members were young and immensely energetic. Sometimes the meetings would deviate and it would take a lot of time to get the team back on track.

What could have been done better?

I truly believe that our team was a very efficient team, however with little improvements, we could have done better. We could have avoided assumption by maintaining transparency among each other. By talking and by sharing, transparency can be maintained well.

As a team we should have also understood that, time, is the crucial factor for performance. It was clearly the poor meeting time, which triggered repeated meetings and low productivity. Best meetings are the ones which are held during professional timings ( 9am to 6pm ). Timings such as 10.30 pm or 11 pm could only be left for urgent situations.

We could have appointed the oldest team member as the leader of the team. This could have evaded the subject-matter deviations. This could also have evaded the non-serious moments, the easy-going attitude and the carelessness. By this was we could have made our performance better than what we had.