In overview, there are two theories, Belbin (1981) 9 team roles model and Tuckman (1965) lifecycle of teams, shown that how to design teams for best creative and high-quality-reaching production. Moreover, what is the application during the team conducting itself illustrating afterwards. 2. Two theories analysis and application 2. 1 Belbin’s 9 Team Roles Model One of the most important theories of teamwork is 9 Team Roles Model (Belbin, 1981) which Belbin (1981) identified Plants, Resource investigators, Monitor Evaluators, Co-ordinators, Implementers, Completer Finishers, Teamworkers, Shapers and Specialists (Belbin, 1981).
There is no perfect person but the perfect team before he developed this theory (Belbin, 1981). He also mentioned that ‘a team of six was found to be the most suitable for enabling a management team to tackle a complex problem’(Belbin, 1981, p. 116), meaning that there are some of the team members would have to perform as more than one role (Fisher et al. , 1997). There is, however, no scheme of power and control exploring in this well established team roles theory.
It can not measure the power and control to form a group of subjects, whose functions are already recognized. That is to say, a forecast should be conducted regarding their attitude to the team from a consideration of each Belbin team role. If it is possible, then the validity of using Belbin’s 9 Team Roles model could have been built (Fisher et al. , 2000). In terms of the 9 team roles, it is still debatable though the 9 characteristics can be clearly defined one from another. It definitely looks like in vain to discriminate between implementer and complete-finisher roles in practical.
Therefore, HR managers or specific trainers could take individuals with their strong preferences as exchangeable when it comes to the contributions to the team works (Senior, 1998). As regards resource investigators, the framers of teams should investigate the profiles of each individual to avoid the possibility of too much overlapping roles in a team, especially it would not work effectively on programs if there is more than one resource investigator with a shortage of other strong personality such as shaper and implementer (Senior, 1998).
Besides, it should be balanced by more than one teamworkers arranging with a strong shaper. Although shapers would carry out the task along, there is still the requirement for other team members to cooperate helping finishing the works (Senior, 1998). In depth, it can be seen that it is beneficial if there are more than one shaper instead of only one in the team. It is undoubted that the more practical opinions in a team the better in terms of reality. There is, moreover, a limitation of this team roles model which neglecting distinct natural personalities of individuals.
The likelihood of dislike each other may happen in the beginning; on the other hand, some of the team members may uneasy to get along with and work with. These can make the task procrastinate to be finished even they play every role mentioned in the team roles theory. In addition, there is no consideration about the interpersonal relationship in Belbin’s 9 team roles model (1981). Finally, in practical, while the project execution, it is constant changing in team activities whilst there is no description in the theory. 2. 2 Tuckman’s Lifecycle of Teams
Another significant model of teamwork development procedure is that of Bruce W. Tuckman (1965), the lifecycle of teams. In this model, he shown what the stages of building a team and how this group works through the life cycle to become an effective team. Tuckman divided this process into five steps, namely: forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning (Feltham, 2012). At first glance, team members are polite and welcoming each others in Forming. People do not want to offend others because they intend to be accepted in the team.
As the team decides how to work together, team member may discuss about setting the regulations and roles. Moving to the second stage, storming, there are more ideas and thoughts openly expressed in the team. Besides, conflict may also happen easily during this time. Team members may compete for the positions and the challenge. In Norming, team members start to feel the sense of belonging in the team. Each team member realizes own role and responsibility. There is an agreement among team members about the norms and expectation of the achievement.
In terms of the fourth stage, Performing, until achieve this stage, it is eventually rely on the successful sequences through the previous stages. Team members understand obviously about what and why they are doing. The linkage among each person is strong. They can deal with the problems quickly and effectively. The last stage, Adjourning, is related to the end term of the teams. It can be carrying out successful accomplishments, yet there might be stressful due to the dissolve problems (Feltham, 2012). 2. 3 Application
With respect to practical utilizing, it should be clearly defined who acts as. Besides, it is also noticeable that exploring the suitable roles depends on each team member’s personality in the stage one from Belbin (1981) 9 team roles model. During the team-working time, individuals who present the stronger preference, such as coordinator, shaper, completer finisher and implementer based on Belbin (1981), should evaluate which stage are the team in Tuckman (1965) lifecycle of teams as well as push the team to go forwards.
Take the stage two, storming (Tuckman, 1965), for example, if team members come up with too much ideas and enjoy discussing the creative opinion too detailed, it not only waste time on the task which is not so important but also reduce the time for the following stages. Under these both theories, people are easily able to realize the time management and decrease the possibility of getting stuck in one stage. There is no doubt that the pusher is significant in a team, however, everyone should also have the thoughts of acting a teamworker.
Despite there are other roles, teamworkers are the spirit of a team because they are the conductors who follow the rules and finish the assignments. 3. Conclusion As it become visible throughout the teamwork, the user of the teamwork is experiencing a challenge and chance depends on how people use it. Although, however, there are some of the limitations in both two theories, it is undoubtedly that it is still worth choosing them to apply in practical. Thus, while facing with any kinds of tasks happened, teamwork can be the most effective and efficient choice.