Belbin, R. (1981) Management Teams

1
Belbin, R. (1981) Management Teams

• Could be seen as a functionalist someone who
  saw a team as made up of constituent parts or
  roles an organic group which needed all the
  roles filled to be effective.
• What follows comes with the necessary academic
  critique a health warning that because it is a
  good theory it will not always work providing
  the perfect balanced team is not a guarantee of
  results.
• Teams, especially in public services are not
  necessarily so focussed on the finished product
  focus often has to be on a quick solution that is
  only a temporary solution a means to an end.
• Public services are often involved in a product
  that is not going to be marketed they rescue
  someone or shoot someone in quick time
• Belbin (1981) does though provide a framework to
  understand a team particularly when a team is
  not functioning well

2
Not an exact fit for many

• Individuals
• Your own skills
• How you used them in the team
• Individuals could have a 'secondary' team role
  they could display
• In debates
• If no other team member had them
• Or people were missing on the day

3
Overall

• Absence of any role weakens the team
• Too many plants can mean too many ideas that
  are never completed
• Too many completer finishers and the team may
  lack inspiration
• Too many team workers and the team may lack the
  necessary dynamic of conflict to produce
  ideas/results

4
Team Roles

• Co-ordinator Ashley Dan Howard C
• Plant Lee
• Ashley DanShaper Katie Kerry
• Howard J Katie, Lee Kerry Phil Monitor-Evaluator
• Jason Implementer Howard j
• Resource Investigator Jason
• Howard CTeam Worker Phil
• Dan Completer-Finisher
• Specialist (added later).

5
Team Roles

• Co-ordinator James Will Danni
• Plant Alex
• Shaper Charlene Aaron Kayleigh
• Monitor-Evaluator Darren Ben
• Implementer
• Resource Investigator Nic Simon Matt Ben
• Company worker Charlene Andrew Aaron
• Team Worker Nic Adshana Darren Matt James Ben
  Kayleigh
• Completer-Finisher Andrew Danni
• Specialist

6
Team Roles

• Co-ordinator
• Plant
• Shaper
• Monitor-Evaluator
• Implementer
• Resource Investigator
• Team Worker
• Completer-Finisher
• Specialist (added later).

7
Coordinator

• Coordinates the efforts of the team to achieve
  its task
• Preoccupied with achieving the task
• Want to involve all members of the team as if
  they have the same motivation/preoccupation
• Good at recognising peoples strengths and
  weaknesses
• Active listeners, sum up peoples feelings and
  can articulate the groups views
• Not necessarily assertive people

8
Strengths - Weaknesses

• Mature
• Confident
• Clarifies goals
• Use individuals in the team effectively to
  achieve the recognised goal
• Can be manipulative

9
Plant

• The ideas person
• Source of original ideas
• Bring originality an ability to think outside
  of the box
• Likely to be intelligent
• Ignore details concentrate on the objective
• Uninhibited extrovert
• Can be prickly cause and take offence
• Can even switch off if their ideas are questioned

10
Strengths - Weaknesses

• Creative good at problem solving
• Need to be flattered
• Can loose sight of the objectives
• May just enjoy creating new ideas and this can be
  problematic when a task needs to be finished

11
Shaper

• Full of nervous energy
• Outgoing
• Emotional
• Impulsive
• Can be impatient
• Often seeking to prove they can be leader
• Quick to challenge
• Enjoy being challenged
• Have arguments but quick to forget
• Can be paranoid-see conspiracy where there is
  none
• Appear self-confident as a cover for self-doubt
• Compulsive
• Can be arrogant but they make things happen

12
Strengths - Weaknesses

• Dynamic
• Outgoing
• Challenging
• Tenacious
• Prone to outbursts
• Insensitive

13
Monitor evaluator

• Likely to be intelligent
• Serious lack charisma
• Dispassionate analysis
• Not an ideas person but someone who may stop
  dangerous idea hold the team in check
• Unenthusiastic - Do not get carried along
• Objective - Team should listen to them they are
  seldom wrong
• Can be too critical and negative - depressing

14
Strengths - Weaknesses

• Shrewd
• Objective
• Boring
• Lack drive
• Too negative

15
Implementer

• Effective systematic and methodical Practical
  organiser
• Identify the objectives puts the team on track
• Once decisions are made will chart the way to
  achieving it
• Sees the reality what can be done
• Will be phased/threatened by sudden changes
• Can be negative about new ideas (challenge the
  plant)

16
Strengths - Weaknesses

• Disciplined
• Reliable
• Efficient
• Inflexible

17
Resource Investigator

• Needs to be amongst the technology gadget
  person
• Works within and outside of the team
• Networker
• Relaxed sociable
• Salesperson
• Need to be motivated by others (within or
  outside)
• Enthusiasm can be of the moment
• Vital in keeping the team in the real world in
  touch with others
• Stable controlled
• May help to avoid group think (Janis 1972)

18
Strengths - Weaknesses

• Gregarious
• Good communicators
• Enthusiastic
• Easily bored
• Send too many emails

19
Team Worker

• Sensitive to emotional undercurrents
• Active internal communicator
• Know about the team and their private lives
• Loyal to the team
• Will support ideas rather than be innovative
• Counterbalance any friction (caused by shaper
  plant or monitor evaluator with attempts to
  achieve unity
• Can be a bit woolly as a result of their team
  perspective

20
Strengths - Weaknesses

• Keeps relationships going
• Interested in people within the team
• Non threatening
• Accommodating
• Can be indecisive because of desire to maintain
  unity

21
Completer Finisher

• Worries about what might go wrong
• Good at checking detail
• Attention to detail can make them loose sight of
  the objective
• A sense of urgency or importance about the work
• Can be impatient with any casual approach can
  find plant infuriating
• They are compulsive about meeting deadlines
• Can lower moral with their worries

22
Strengths - Weaknesses

• Thorough - Attention to detail
• Meet deadline
• Worrier
• Get bogged down in detail

23
Specialist

• A bolt on member of the team
• Accountant, IT, Designer, Statistician
• Comes in to do one job
• Focussed
• Unaware of the bigger picture
• Out of the politics

24
Strengths - Weaknesses

• Single minded
• Knowledgeable about their area
• Can only contribute in their specialist area

25
Overall

• Absence of any role weakens the team
• Too many plants can mean too many ideas that
  are never completed
• Too many completer finishers and the team may
  lack inspiration
• Too many team workers and the team may lack the
  necessary dynamic of conflict to produce
  ideas/results

26
Strengths - Weaknesses

• There can be a weakness in thinking that
  providing the right balance will actually produce
  the right result
• Although we can all recognise traits does
  anyone actually fit any individual role
• Is it more likely that we fit a number of roles
• However without the ideas people and the details
  people and the team people and the finisher,
  teams engaged in routine tasks are unlikely to be
  successful
• There may well be an argument that special teams
  need more of one trait
• In public service where the outcome is not always
  so clear then there can be a need for more
  different balances
• During quick time incidents - too many thinkers
  can bog down the process but a lack of thinking
  can result in wrong decisions
• The shooting of potential terrorists as opposed
  to the Stephen Lawrence murder

27
Bibliography

• Belbin, R. (1981) Management Teams why they
  succeed or fail, Oxford Butterworth-Heinnemann.
• Janis, I. (1972) (1972) Victims of Groupthink,
  Houghton Mifflin Company.
• Tuckman, B. (1965) 'Developmental sequence in
  small groups', Psychological Bulletin 63(6)
  384-399.

28
Co-ordinator
Plant
Shaper
Monitor-Evaluator
Implementer Resource Investigator Team Worker Completer-Finisher Specialist (added later).