Friday, February 1, 2013

Conflict Mediation Project

Online Conflict as a Result of Misunderstandings
Regarding an Online Group Project - April 2010 by C. Cross, K. Hamilton and D. Plested

The Video



Where there is human interaction, there is inevitable conflict; as the Center for Conflict Resolution's motto states “because people see things differently.” Conflict occurs when a difference in goals, actions, and/or outcomes exists. Although the word conflict often conjures a negative connotation, not all conflict is bad; functional conflict results in necessary and positive change. Conflict that undermines performance is dysfunctional.  Langdon, Roberts and Judge report in Organizational Behaviour: Concepts, Controversies and Applications that evidence shows that the source of conflict relates to functionality. Their suggestion is that task-oriented, cognitive conflict occurs because of differences in perspectives and can lead to identifying solutions resulting in more alternatives and better decisions.  Affective conflict that is emotional tends to be dysfunctional and results in poorer decisions and less buy-in. (Langdon, p336) 

Conflicts may be of an interpersonal, intrapersonal, intergroup, or intragroup nature. Interpersonal conflicts are those internal conflicts that individuals experience; intrapersonal conflicts involve conflicts that develop between people; intergroup conflicts are between different groups, and intragroup conflicts are those that exist between members of the same group. People deal with conflict in numerous ways including gathering new information, participating in therapy, mediation, arbitration, negotiation, or litigation, fighting, running (flight), and simply avoiding. Conflict resolution methods utilize various techniques to encourage effective communication designed to resolve the conflict. A resolution that satisfies both parties is optimal. In their book Getting to Yes, Fisher and Ury suggest four principles to create win-win outcomes:

•   Separate the people from the problem. Avoid involvement in personality issues, stick to the  
    issues at hand.
•   Focus on interests, not positions. Identify what each person needs or wants to avoid
    unmovable positions.
•  Seek ways to achieve mutual gains. Avoid focus on one right solution; brainstorm solutions
    to meet both parties needs.
•   Use objective criteria. Focus on fair standards, norms, expert opinions to guide decision

Mediation is one of several types of conflict resolution that has been used widely by various entities from entire countries to individual students. Mediation requires the involvement of a third party to assist the conflicted entities in resolving the conflict. The mediator's role differs depending upon the types of mediation used. Four commonly accepted forms of mediation are evaluative, facilitative, transformative, and narrative. The mediator utilizing the evaluative method has some expertise in the subject of conflict which involves factual or legal issues and ignores any underlying factors contributing to the problem. The evaluative mediator has a different role than other mediator types in that he/she offers suggestions to assist in the resolution. The facilitative form of mediation is distinguished by the impartial role of the mediator; it is the most frequently used method of mediation. The transformative mode is similar to the facilitative form; however, its goal is empowerment and recognition to assist the participants in understanding the others position, not necessarily solving the issue. The fourth type of mediation is the newest; during narrative mediation, the parties bring their individual stories to the mediation where the mediator assists them in creating a new one. The narrative method of mediation attempts to not only resolve the conflict, but foster communication and allow the participants an avenue to improve their future relationship through storytelling.

The conflict between the participants (Alex and Pat) in the mediation which is the subject of this project is a conflict concerning actions and is both interpersonal and intragroup; that is to say, it is a conflict between two people who are members of the same group. Transformative mediation was utilized to help the participants recognize the others position thereby reaching a resolution acceptable to both parties, enabling them to modify their relationship for improvement which is important given that their working relationship will continue throughout the semester (and possibly beyond) (Foster 2003).  

Project Description 

Our group chose to work on a modern conflict that focused on a 21st century communication breakdown resulting from online communication and develop a video of the conflict using open source technologies. As a result, our project consists of the following components.

  1. A written mediation script (refer to Appendix C of the report).  NOTE: This is the script the mediator’s report is based on.
  2. A recorded audio (.mp3) file of our full script text (number 1 above) recorded live by the team members, Carla, Karen and Debbie.
  3. An abridged video script to keep the video under 11 minutes (for YouTube)  (refer to Appendix D of the report)
  4. Both a captioned and an uncaptioned video recording (links provided below).
·   NOTE: Because of problems in differing audio levels in the original audio .mp3 recording, the producers decided to use computer-generated voices in the movie. As per #2 above a recording of the full script is also provided. An .mp3 audio of the live voice recording is attached in Moodle and in each writer’s e-portfolio.

Final Videos: Captioned YouTube link:
                   Uncaptioned Vimeo Link:

Mediator’s Report

1) Title: Online Conflict as a Result of Misunderstandings Regarding an Online Group Project
2) Dates: The recorded mediation sessions took place on March 16th, 19th, 21st, 2010.

3) Scenario and Participant Descriptions:

Three online college students are assigned by Professor Kathy Mot to work together to complete a team project which will make up 40% of their final grade. The three members Alex, Pat and Casey are students in Professor Mot’s online course and are trying to establish a working relationship online. Casey and Pat have worked together previously in another course and have met face-to-face. Alex is new to the program and has had no prior working relationship with any of the other students in the class. Alex has never met anyone, including the professor, in person, although they do all live within commuting distance of the university. A conflict has developed primarily between Alex and Pat. Prior to the mediation session very little is known about the personal characteristics or lives of the disputants as Professor Mot, via the course’s learning management system, did not ask students to post photographs of themselves or include an introductory activity in which the students might get to know one another better.

Intervention Request:

Alex and Pat engage in a series of escalating and increasingly angry emails with one another regarding their project. (Refer to Appendix A) Ultimately, Alex and Pat both separately email Professor Kathy Mot complaining and asking for help to solve the conflict.  Since both students live close to the University, Professor Mot asks the two students to come to her office to discuss the issue. In the meantime, she decides it would be appropriate to post a clarifying “friendly reminder” to the Team Discussion Group in the learning management system (Refer to Appendix B)


The students arrive in Professor Mot’s office and are surprised to find out that they are both young women. Following introductions and an explanation of the mediation ground rules (See Appendix C, Stage I) the students each tell their side of the story:

4) Summary Disputant #1 (Pat):

Pat’s Story (Refer to Appendix C, Stage II):

Pat relates her frustration to Professor Mot by describing what she perceives as her and Casey’s inability to create any real communication with Alex. She also feels that Alex is not contributing positively or significantly to the project. Her frustration reaches its highest point when she receives what she perceives to be an offensive email from Alex which she uses to explain her frustration.

5) Clarifying Questions/Disputant #1 (Pat)

Professor Mot restates Pat's perspective and asks for confirmation of its accuracy. (Refer to Appendix C, Stage II p. c2-c3):

6) Summary Disputant #2 (Alex):

Alex’s Story (Refer to Appendix C, Stage III)

Alex apologizes for any part she played in the misunderstanding and explains that this is her first class in the online program, and she feels as though she is struggling. As well, she feels she is an outsider and that other students, especially Pat and Casey, are already really good friends. Alex goes on to explain the reasons why she has not been able to respond promptly to Pat’s emails. These include a computer crash as well as a number of personal issues she is having to deal with including: she is the primary caregiver to both her daughter and her mother (who is currently hospitalized), she has a demanding full time job, and she is feeling overwhelmed by the challenges of both the coursework itself and the difficulties in figuring out what is expected in the course. Finally, she is concerned that Casey and Pat are constantly ignoring her and putting her down and that they have narrowed the topic so much that Alex doesn’t even understand what they want her to do. She explains that she doesn’t want to be the boss but she doesn’t want to be told what to do either.

7) Clarifying Questions/Disputant #2 (Alex)

Professor Mot Professor Mot restates Alex's perspective and asks for confirmation of its accuracy. (See Appendix C, Stage III p c3-c4):

8) Solutions:

When both students are finished, Professor Mot also restates the conflict as she understands it from both of their points of view and then asks for suggestions (From Appendix C, Stage IV p c4-c5):

Professor Mot probes both students for suggestions:
  1. Alex asks if Pat could possibly email or text her.
  2. Pat suggests they all agree to check their messages at least twice a day, and acknowledge that the message is received and let everyone know when they can get to the request.
  3. Pat suggests they use Google docs to avoid having to send message aback and forth
  4. Alex suggests they try video conferencing.
  5. Pat suggests that since they all live near one another they could get together face to face sometimes to work on the project.
  6. Pat also volunteers since they will be talking and seeing one another that they could review the upcoming assignments.
  7. Pat hints that maybe the learning management system is a little confusing and could be improved.

9) Restatement of Resolution Package:

Professor Mot types the suggestions on her laptop and restates what they have discussed (From Appendix C, Stage V):

The group is going to meet this week to discuss how the project will be divided up and organized.
  1. The three of you will use text, phone communication, Google docs, and video conferencing to communicate with each other
  2. Everyone in the group will check their text messages at least twice a day and let each other know that you’ve received the message and when you think you can action the request.
  3. If something is really urgent you will call each other on the phone. Since you all live so close to one another, you may additionally try to schedule some face to face sessions.
  4. Pat and Alex will have a weekly conference to review the upcoming assignments.

Professor Mot asks if this is correct and upon getting agreement says she will email them the document and asks Pat to forward it to Casey (Appendix C, Stage VI).

Finally, Professor Mot seeks agreement on what they will do if this situation happens again (Refer to Appendix C, Stage VII):
  1. Pat suggests (Laughing now) since they now know how to get a hold of each other they will just call.
  2. Alex agrees to be more honest, if she is floundering.

10) A Narrative Critique of the Mediation
Alex and Pat's conflict is rooted in misunderstandings predictable and typical of relying solely on the use of online communication rather than face-to-face or telephone interactions as well as a lack of cooperative learning skills. Some of the comments communicated through their emails led each woman to develop erroneous beliefs about the other. Pat created a picture of Alex as an older man who wanted to exert little work, yet yield unearned power in the group. Alex believed that she was being excluded because of what she believed to be a previously developed relationship between the two other group members. Without the benefit of body language and facial and intonation cues, each woman fed on her misconceptions until the situation became unbearable for both of them.

Upon arriving at the mediation session, Pat is surprised to find that the other member was, in fact, a female; nonetheless, Pat began the session clearly frustrated, bordering on angry. Alex, on the other hand, felt that she was being excluded and unfairly targeted; she was so pressured by her personal struggles and the problems of the group that in the beginning of the session, she found it difficult to avoid being sarcastic and defensive. Although these factors presented challenges for the mediator, establishing the rules of the session early and enforcing those rules by reminding the participants of them throughout the session allowed the mediation to lead to a successful resolution.

Mediation Follow-up Requirements...How to Avoid Problems Before They Begin:

The mediation was successful, so no improvements to the mediation process itself are recommended. The misunderstandings, however, might have been avoided. As the growing body of current literature regarding online courses indicates, creating a successful online course requires meticulous preparation. During the mediation “Pat” hinted at problems with the learning management system. The following are recommendations that an online facilitator can implement in order to improve the quality of an online experience and avoid common communication pitfalls:

In order to enhance the students’ sense of belonging the online teacher should personalize her distance classroom by having students complete and post a profile sheet including pictures, hobbies, interests and information they would like to share about their family or job. The instructor should also provide a welcome letter and some background information about her experience, interests, family and hobbies. If at all possible the instructor/facilitator should arrange to hold an on-site face-to-face meeting in order to provide opportunities for students to develop and grow their personal relationships. It is also critical that the online instructor monitor online behaviour and address problems immediately. It is up to the instructor/facilitator to ensure that language that would not be tolerated in a face-to-face environment (such as insulting, racist, ageist, or sexually derogatory comments) also not be permitted in an online environment (Schweizer, 1999).

In an online classroom the instructor/facilitator’s organizational, procedural and administrative roles are of vital importance. These roles involve setting the agenda and discussion objectives, establishing procedural rules and decision-making norms, and facilitating the interactions with strong leadership and direction. (Berg,1995). At the beginning of the course the instructor should make suggestions to the students concerning how they can manage and make the best possible use of the time they devote to the course. As students cannot see the teacher it is especially important for the online instructor to make their presence felt. by responding promptly and effectively to student posts (Varvel, 2001). Varvel goes on to caution that  Whatever takes a lifetime to create can be destroyed in an instant. Therefore, an online course facilitator needs to constantly be on the lookout for situations that can disrupt the learning community... The most important item an instructor can keep in mind is that the disruptive student may not realize s/he is causing a problem. Not all situations are intended to be disruptive or confrontational.”  (Varvel, 2001)
Varvel outlines 11 types of disruptive students and potential instructor responses (Varvel 2001):
Instructor Response

1) The Know-It-All
1. Give him/her the opportunity to "save face"
2. State that while alternative explanations exist, the course will be following the one that you have presented.
3. If the problem persists, acknowledge the student's valuable input and knowledge, but to provide comments constructively and non-disruptively while maintaining focus on the main topic of the discussion.

2) The Mutineer
1. Note the complaint.
2. Ignore any hostility to maintain your composure.
3. Address the issue.
4. Remove student if absolutely necessary.

3) The Lagging Belligerent Student
1. Although the student may be angered by falling behind, ignore emotion and be supportive.
2. Offer advice.

4) The Attacking Belligerent Student
See the Mutineer above.

5) The Controller
1. Restate guidelines for all discussion forums as well as guidelines for student posts.
2. Respond quickly to any posts that might present themselves as the only answer and ask for alternatives.
3. Pose questions directly to other students.

6) The Staller
1. There can be many reasons why a student's postings are continually not on time. The first step is to determine the reason(s).
2. Based on these reasons try to come up with a solution that will help the student to catch up and remain with the course.

7) The Must-Have-An-A Student
1. Be firm.
2. Be objective.

8) The Non-Participant
1. Encourage the student.
2. Pose questions directly to other students.
3. Inquire individually about possible reasons (see staller above).
4. Suggest techniques such as managing time and printing messages to help enable the student to participate.

9) The Overloaded Student
1. If a student is consistently posting, yet for some reason is receiving little student feedback, prompt for this feedback through directed questions regarding the student's posts.

10) The Concerned or Anxious Student
1. Determine nature of concern (is it a privacy issue or anxiety over student feedback).
2. Reassert purpose of classroom discussion.
3. Encourage participation and be supportive.
4. Plug any security leaks if they pose a concern.
5. Suggest helpful techniques to student such as managing time, printing messages, waiting to absorb materials before composing responses, etc.

In this online scenario, providing and building prior knowledge about the nuances of online behavior and online learning could also have prevented conflicts.  The professor should have clearly articulated her course and assignment expectations and provided conflict resolution guidelines for the students prior to the implementation of group work. For example, had pictures been posted and introductory activities had been included in this online course, perhaps the original misunderstandings would not have developed (certainly the gender confusion misunderstandings would have been avoided). Through the introduction, Pat (and the other team members) could have gleaned information that would have prevented misconceptions and promoted greater understanding of one another. Additionally, some instruction about online etiquette (i.e. netiquette), working cooperatively, and/or team building exercises might have prevented some of the group's discord. Through the netiquette training, the participants could have learned to develop new communication strategies that would have compensated for some of the limitations of online communication.

Finally, information about group work and team building exercises would have armed these women with the skills necessary to work cooperatively and effectively as in cooperatively designing a plan for their project (thus, avoiding the basis of their conflict). The combination of netiquette and team-building information may have not only helped the participants to avoid the conflicts, but may have assisted them in dealing with any conflicts that arose. This mediation session provided all of the participants (including the mediator/professor) with useful information to modify their behavior in the future. The group members gained greater understanding of one another, the limitations of online communication, and skills necessary for making decisions as a group; and the professor is now armed with information to improve her next online course.

The Making of
Conflict Mediation  2010

Cross-Hamilton-Plested : The MOVIE

Planning and Research

To begin the project the team members Carla Cross, Karen Hamilton, and Debbie Plested decided to first watch and read all of the related materials provided in the conflict lesson. The members also did more individual research into conflict management prior to meeting. After looking at the scenarios given, the members felt that it might be more advantageous to look for a scenario that related more closely with the group’s own interests. The group looked for common interests and decided that a communications conflict that involved language, technology and misconceptions would be interesting. A case scenario was found that involved an online conflict among members assigned to a team project in an online course. The scenario was adapted to include in-person mediation between the two students with the teacher as mediator.

To discuss the project, the group members decided to have an online conference. One member recommended trying the free video conferencing application called DimDim . In the meeting, the members discussed how they would approach the project.

Before moving to the script writing stage, Carla, Karen, and Debbie decided to complete a Conflict Management Style Assessment ( see ) to reflect on their own personal conflict styles. The group discussed what style of mediation the project would adopt. The members felt that the best approach would be to have an unbiased moderator who would allow the participants to create their own solutions to increase the possibility of a win-win scenario. The moderator would clarify the ideas of each side providing a seven-stage structure to facilitate communication and solutions.

The next step was to discuss which part each would play in the mediation process. Debbie decided to play the role of mediator, Professor Mot; Carla decided on the role of Pat, and Karen decided upon the role of student Alex. The group chose names for the students that could be either male or female. The team wanted to create a scenario where one of the students would come to the meeting to discover that she had mistakenly believed that the other student was a male.

Script Writing Stage

To produce the script the team prepared a template that had seven stages of conflict mediation. To begin the writing of the script, the template was sent to the first actor/writer to create the first character’s dialogue. After the first character’s dialogue was written, the template was sent to the next member to write the next character’s dialogue. This process continued until all had agreed on the final script. See Appendix C here for full length script). Group members then decided to meet in Elluminate v-Room to record the scenario.

Recording the Mediation

The group met inside Elluminate v-Room to find the best way to record the script. After several different attempts, it was decided to record the script with a Macintosh computer using Audacity while passing the microphone from character to character. The recording was paused after each section to make sure that a decent recording was done and to save the audacity file to ensure a crash did not occur. Recording the first section was the most difficult while the group struggled to find the best method. Once the initial issues were worked out, the following sections were recorded smoothly.

Editing the Audio Script

The member who recorded the audio then edited the audacity file adding a short few second musical bumper introduction from Law & Order (fair use) creating a final 15 minute audio. (Final audio file link )  The members approved the audio version, but also decided that a filmed version might be better if it were a bit shorter. To create a movie, it would be necessary to add titles, end credits and brief segments to explain the stages.  For the video script some dialogue was shortened and only the major details were included. See Appendix D for the video script –file called MovieMediationScript.doc)

Pre-Production Filming Discussion

The members met online again to decide on how best to render the movie. Originally, the members were going to use the application Xtranormal  ( ) to film the scenario. Recently, however, Xtranormal stopped offering its premium option and creating a scenario with more than two characters would be difficult. Some of the options they previously had in the application were no longer available. The members went off to research other animation programs. In her research, Carla found MovieStorm ( ) and sent a link to the other members. Movie Storm in combination with other programs seemed like the most interesting option.

Investigating Applications for Filming

After investigating MovieStorm further, it was found to offer some significant options. The program allows users to create customizable sets and characters; it offers many different character gestures, movements and interactions, and it also allows a filming stage where the user decides on cameras and camera angles for the scenes. Visually the program would fit the requirements. Audio can be imported into the program, but its audio is not sophisticated, so it was decided that the best option would be to create scenes in MovieStorm, import the scenes into iMovie and then in iMovie do the audio and video editing.

Audio Considerations

When trying to use the audio produced by the group members, it was found that the sound and levels between the characters were uneven. If the members of the group lived in the same area, the best alternative would be to re-record the audio in-person. Since the group couldn’t do that, the decision was made to recreate the audio using computer-generated voices. By doing this, the generated audio style would match the animation style. Macintosh computers have an option that renders text to speech but the voices given are not the best quality. To overcome this, a search was done to find better quality voices. The company AssistiveWare ( ) had a number of different voices that were downloaded to enhance the project.

Let the Animation Begin

Now that the main applications were decided upon, the next stage was to begin the animation in MovieStorm.

Set Design

MovieStorm offers many different stages and objects. To show an equal relationship between the mediation group, three similar comfortable chairs were chosen and placed in a semi circle around an inviting fireplace. A desk between the moderator and the students could separate the group. The colours chosen in the scene were warm and inviting to enhance a positive mood. When the characters come to the scene, the mediator would sit to the right and the two students would sit beside each other to highlight the idea that they are not against each other but together beside each other. In the background a light piano soundtrack will be playing.

Choosing and Customizing the Characters

Professor Mot

For the Professor Mot character, an older stylish English woman was chosen.

Student Alex

For the character Alex, a younger character was chosen who would seem to be in a similar age group to student Pat.

Student Pat

For the character Pat, a character who looked like she could be Alex’s friend was chosen.

Animation: Gestures, Movement and Interaction

Now that the scene was set and the characters chosen, next was to animate the characters to produce the various scenes in the movie. Rather than watching the tutorials, a trial and error process lead to learning how to make the characters gesture and move. Not all gestures acted as said, so much more editing was done in iMovie.

Direction and Filming

After a scene was completed, the program moved to the film stage where cameras were chosen. Upon completion of the scene, a movie without sound is rendered and brought into iMovie. Some basic scenes were created so that they could be reused in different parts of the movie.
iMovie- adding sound, editing scenes
Once animations were created they were imported into iMovie where audio voices, sound effects and music were added.  To create the voices, first the character’s voice was chosen in Macintosh system preferences; audio recording in iMovie was started; then the character’s text was highlighted resulting in the Mac system speaking the text. For each voice and scene this technique was used to produce all the dialogue in the movie. In Photoshop, pictures were created to separate the scene stages. A picture taken outside of the CTER College of Education building during orientation was used. The picture of the symbolic brick wall provided the backdrop for the mediation stage text to be placed. Titles and credits were added to the beginning and end of the movie and some scenes had text added to note important points being made. The few second intro and bumper music from Law & Order were added throughout. ( A few seconds of music fit under the fair use allowance). The closing music was used with permission of the artist. A final rendered 11-minute version of about 35MB was produced.

Sharing the video

Because the movie was just over 10 minutes in length, it was uploaded to Vimeo. With Vimeo, users can upload longer videos that stream easily, avoiding unnecessarily long wait times to download an entire video. The final video is posted here Vimeo does not allow movies to be captioned.

Captioning for the completed video

In most schools and colleges today, it is necessary to have a captioned video. To that end, we also produced an open captioned (subtitled) version of the movie. To caption the movie, a program called MovCaptioner by SyncriMedia  ( ) was used. See the captioned version here in YouTube. 

*Although YouTube says their maximum time length is 10 minutes, it was discovered 10 minutes 59 seconds can be uploaded


Berge, Z. L. (1995). In The role of the online instructor/ facilitator. Retrieved Apr. 1, 2010, from
Burgess, H. (1997). Transformative mediation summary. Retrieved from
Kraybill, Ron. (2000). Adult personal conflict style inventory. Retrieved from
Cohen, Stephen. (July 20, 1994). Focusing on interests rather than positions: Conflict resolution key. Retrieved from
Conflict resolution. CTER Wiked. Retrieved from
Falikowski, A. (2007). Mastering human relations, 4th Ed.Toronto: Pearson Education.
Feenberg, A. &  Xin, C. Facilitation. Textweaver: Solutions for online education. Retrieved from
Fisher, R. & Ury, W. (1991). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in (2nd Ed.) New York: Penguin.
Foster, K. (2003). A study in mediation styles: A comparative analysis of evaluative and transformative styles, Retrieved from
Hamilton, K. (2003). Communications: Interacting with others-Conflict Management. Retrieved from
Hansen, T. (Sept 2003). The narrative approach to mediation. Retrieved from
James, M. & Rykert, L. (1998). From workplace to workspace, The International Research Centre. Retrieved from
Johns, G., Saks, A. (2008). Organizational behaviour: Understanding and managing life at work. Toronto:  Pearson Prentice Hall.
Langton, N., Robbins, S. & Judge, T. (2010). Organizational behaviour: Concepts, controversies, applications( 5th Ed.) Toronto: Pearson Education
Li, Q Li (2004). Knowledge building community: Keys for using online forums, University of Calgary, TechTrends, Springer. Retrieved from
Mayer, R.E. (2008). Learning and instruction. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education.
Mediation (2008). Conflict resolution center.
Nagao, A. & Page, N. (2005). Narrative mediation: An exercise in questioning asking. Retrieved from
Resolving conflict in online teams, Royal Roads University, BC. Canada. Retrieved from
Robbins, S. P., and Langton, N. (2003). Organizational behaviour: Concepts, controversies, applications. Toronto: Pearson Education.
Schweizer, H. (1999). Designing and teaching an on-line course. Needham Heights, Ma: Allyn & Beacon.
Varvel, V. E. (Mar, 2001). In facilitating every student in an online course. Retrieved Apr. 1, 2010, from
Zumeta, Z. (Sept 2000). Styles of mediation: Facilitative, evaluative, and transformative mediation. Mediate.Com website article.

Appendix A

Transcript of Online Discussion Postings Prior to Mediation

Alex’s Post
This is just an observation, and is not meant to offend anyone. We need to try to get more organization which can be the hardest task of the whole project. With my schedule it is almost impossible for me to complete any request on the same day. It is evident that there are personality issues, but we need to put them aside and move forward if we expect to make this a true group effort. I have accepted my shortcomings, but I am only one-third of this group. Let’s evaluate ourselves first and then we can move forward as a team.
The fact that we have limited our project is going to make it even more difficult, in my humble opinion, not to duplicate effort.

If it is agreeable to the group, we need to set a timetable and definite assignments. If the two of you want to work on the gathering of the data I will be willing to pull it all together. If someone else wants to do that part that’s fine also. The bottom line is, let’s stop working against each other and start working together. We aren’t given much time and that makes it more difficult to learn each others strong and weak points but we have to make the best of the situation. Contrary to popular belief, I am a team player and don’t try to be a superstar. As a matter of fact I don’t like being in the spotlight. I better get off of here, I just heard the thunder again “it’s back”, but I’m confident that we can pull together and become an excellent team.

 Pat’s Response to Alex
You know I am going to try and be very civil here and just say I have been trying to get you to participate and contribute something concrete since last Monday, and you haven’t done so. Dropping in and saying “sounds good to me” doesn’t cut it, Alex. Read back over the e-mails, and find out how many times you didn’t respond to specific requests or how many days you didn’t say anything at all. Casey and I are also busy – have very busy schedules and still manage to contribute to this paper and the fact that you didn’t is not our fault but it becomes a team problem. I agree that we need to get on with the project in hand so let’s do it.

Alex replies back to Pat
One of the things that I don’t like about this medium is how easy that it is to be misunderstood. My concern was not about the limiting of the topic, but of the way we would approach it. Being in the minority here and having lived with three women for over 25 years I am not about to argue. The problem as I saw it was that when I made a suggestion it was questioned, which I have no problem with. I do not have an ego problem and I do not have to be the lead person. Can’t we all just get along?
Tell me what you want and when you want it. Once again, ladies, I apologize.

Adapted from a case scenario by Shahron Williams van Rooij, Professor, University of Phoenix
Presentation, League for Innovation, Oct. 2005.

Appendix B

Friendly Reminder posted by Professor Mot to the Team Discussion Group

Like any face-to-face working environment, the online environment requires collaboration, cooperation and constant communication. Looking at your postings over the last week or so, I note some significant challenges in establishing a firm team dynamic. In order for your project to be successful, you need to communicate clearly and daily, until your project plan is firm, roles/responsibilities assigned, and next steps discussed and agreed upon. That is why, as I note in my TIPS message, it is always wise to have alternative forms of communication (phones, messaging, etc) in the event life events interfere with posting to the online Team Room on any given day.

To reiterate what you already know, your Final Project is a team effort. However, your deliverables have both an individual grade and a project grade. The project grade is based on the quality of the deliverable itself. The individual grade is based upon member contribution to the production of that deliverable. Only when all contribute their fair share ON TIME and with content/scope agreed upon by team members COLLABORATIVELY will the final deliverable be a quality product.

Premise adapted from a case scenario by Shahron Williams van Rooij, Professor, University of Phoenix
Presentation, League for Innovation, Oct. 2005. Script written by Carla Cross, Karen Hamilton & Debbie Plested, 2010.

No comments:

Post a Comment