Bashing through a brick wall
As part of our department’s effort to implement a “design centric curriculum”, I had to take a module which required us to work in groups to design a solar panel prototype for industrial use.
My course mate, Zack, whom I have been on good terms with, asked me to join him and a few other friends on the project. I agreed, and after the first meeting, I was voted the group leader. I quickly split the task of researching the project topic amongst us, and arranged to meet up the following week.
The following week, at the meeting, Zack surprised all of us when he started showing us graphs. It turned out that he had, on his own, carried out a day long experiment. He had even prepared power point slides to explain the experiment. At the conclusion of his slides, I realized the experiment was totally irrelevant to our project, and that he had jumped straight into the experiment without setting out any experiment objectives. I had then ventured to ask him politely about his intentions of the experiment.
He quickly turned defensive and insisted it was crucial information. Fortunately, I was backed up by another member, who pointed out some of the major flaws of the experiment. At this point, Zack clearly looked infuriated, and accused us of ignoring his valuable contributions, and claimed we didn’t respect him by questioning him. He refused to listen to any explanations and left the room in a huff.
Given that my group is still at the vital brainstorming stage, what should I do as a group leader to get him involved?
Hi Ho Zong:
ReplyDeleteYour post is clear and concise.
On the topic of the post, I feel that Zack was too sensitive towards the remarks that were made by the group. You should let him cool down for a day or two before you look for him for a talk. During the face to face meeting, you could utilize the cheese burger approach to persuade him to accept the fact that his experiment was irrelevant to the project. This would first allow you to acknowledge the effort that he had put in and would make him feel more appreciated. After that, you could explain to him the direction that your group would be taking for the project in order to justify the rejection of his experiment. I believe this would allow him to understand the position that your group was coming from and accept the rejection of his experiment more readily. Finally, you could ask him to design another experiment for the project to make him feel involved in the project again. Ultimately, once you had done your part, it would be up to Zack to think of the big picture and get himself involve in the project for the benefit of him and the group.
With regards,
Kar Liang
Dear Ho Zhong,
ReplyDeleteBasically, I agree with Kar Liang that letting him cool down first is very important. The cheeseburger method should also be used in the talk. In addition to this, I think talking to him in private is also very important. At the beginning of the conversation, you may want to emphasize his passion towards the project and encourage him to continue with this passion. Other than explaining to him again the direction of the project, you can also express your willingness of helping his a way to implement his experiment into the project. You may ask him his initiatives and direct him to find out that the experiment does not go with the project very well by himself. If along the way, you find his understanding of the project direction does not coincide with the group's, it would be a good time to explain to him again. In this way, he would feel less disrespect. Finally you can help him to modify the experiment or initiate another experiment (as Kar Liang has suggested) for the project. Hopefully, in this way, you could solve the problem with Zack.
Cheers,
Cangming
Hi,
ReplyDeleteSorry I forget to mention another thing: you may also want to explain the situation to your fellow group members so that your friend would not feel embarrassed in the rest part of the project. After all, his motivation is very good for a team project.
Cheers,
Cangming
Dear Ho Zong
ReplyDeleteYou should allow Zack some time to cool off, as Kar Liang mentioned, before approaching him privately to talk about the project.
During the conversation with Zack upon meeting him in private, you should apologize to him for not acknowledging his enthusiasm and that the group appreciates the effort he put in for the experiment. After this, you should list out the objectives of the project to let him have a clear picture of the data needed to support the project. Next, bring in the experiment data that was submitted by him several days ago and analyze it with him on the spot. This will let him understand how the experiment data is irrelevant to the project.
With all these clarifications made, give him some time to think through what you have said. Nevertheless, before you end off the meeting with him, remind him that the group appreciates his effort and all he need are proper directions when conducting future research.
Regards
Chung
Hello Ho Zong,
ReplyDeleteZack appears to me as someone who is individualistic. He overlooked the point of the project being a team effort. It is significant for Zack to realise that teamwork entails each person in the team to put aside his or her individual needs to work towards the larger group objective.
Zack had been sensitive; he jumped to conclusions and stated that the team did not value his contributions. A softer approach, as opposed to being forthright in stating the irrelevance of his ideas will be suitable. You could commend on his enthusiasm in the project, but add that he should have considered the opinions of the rest of the members. In addition, an open discussion with the team on the ideas Zack proposed might be able to avoid the adverse reaction from him. Thereafter, during the brainstorming stage, you should deliver on this expectation of your team; by making sure that suggestions put up are indeed considered fairly. This way, Zack might feel more convinced of his role as a supportive member, functioning within a team.
In this case, understanding the emotions of Zack and reacting to his emotions appropriately is important. The other members should not be quick to pass judgement on the ideas from Zack. Although the ideas proposed may have been irrelevant, the emotions of Zack should be considered as well.
Regards,
Jerina
Hi Ho Zong,
ReplyDeleteI am pleased to note you have given the background, stated the problem and asked for a response.
You said you are on good terms with him so that should count for something.
Your classmates have correctly pointed out that you should approach him when he has cooled down, understand his emotions, acknowledge his efforts and refer to the meeting notes for clarification of the aims of the project.
Well, was it based on your experience? Could you share with us how you resolved it?
Regards,
Happy
Hi all,
ReplyDeleteThank you for all the very useful comments regarding the conflict. In reply to Ms Goh's query, this conflict had indeed happened last semester, and to defuse the tense situation, I had, on the following day convened a meeting. The allowance of a day was to allow all of us to cool down.
I did exactly what was suggested by Kar Liang and Cangming, and that was to acknowledge his enthusiasm to the project, and pointed out that his enthusiasm for collecting experimental data and doing calculations is his strength. We all then agreed that he would be placed in charge of all future experiments as well as lead the group in matters pertaining to calculations.
Finally, I then led the group in producing a Gannt chart. With this Gannt chart on hand, none of us would now need to jump the gun and can now pace ourselves nicely till the conclusion of the project. The project went without a hitch since then and our group is now into the second phase of the project.
Below are some of my thoughts on the above comments:
Kar Liang, Cang Ming: Thank you for both your posts, I was pleasantly surprised that the course of action the both of you had recommended was largely similar to mine, and would most probably have led to a similar resolution of the conflict.
Wing Tai: It was an interesting way to resolving the conflict, but from my personal friendship with Zack, I understand him to be one who is highly defensive, and can only be persuaded into agreement by popular opinion. Explaining to him in private could have been an exasperating and unfruitful encounter. Secondly, at the second meeting, he had actually realized and agreed reluctantly that the objectives of his experiment were not relevant to our project, and thus eliminating the need for any further analysis into his experiment. Nonetheless, thank you for your post, it was definitely a plausible suggestion.
Jerina: Understanding the emotions of others, and reacting appropriately is indeed vital in resolving conflicts, and I will certainly bear this in mind and work towards resolving any future conflicts amicably.
Thank you once again for all your comments.
Best regards,
Ho Zong