How did Norms show up in our group dynamics?
Context: The team was formed randomly across our insight groups as closed our Intensive 1 session and we were assigned a number (group 3). We were assigned our research area “Norms” on Nov 23rd 2013.
So, what happened next?
Irena initiated a team group in Yammer and this quickly became our default for communication. We found that using yammer was very effective to set up calls, assign tasks, overcome time zone challenges, etc. For discussion on how to proceed, decision making and debate, our preferred communication method was conference calls.
Our first team call took place on Nov 26th 2013, just 3 days after being assigned our topic. We did not plan an agenda for this call and it was very organic in nature. We discussed how we wanted to proceed as a team and each of us had assignments by media to complete before our next call. Also, without being overt, we had the roles of note taker, time keeper, scheduler and planner covered. We assembled our research findings into a google doc. in preparation for our meeting with professor Ann Feyerherm on Dec 9th 2013.
After some direction from Dr. Feyerherm, we assigned the topics by self-nomination. We planned our approach and timeline to meet with the demands of the holiday schedule and agreed to check in’s on yammer. Our guideposts that were established to help us be effective included the use of technology, open discussion and dialog, healthy, respectful debate, trust in each other and holding each other accountable. It was a highly collaborative process, so yammer as a social connection site proved very valuable.
Moving from individual knowledge to group collective knowledge and layout of our research was perhaps the most challenging. Over time, we selected the method of delivery (weebly) after curating the content in google docs, powerpoint, and various yammer threads. Each of us demonstrated different skill sets/expertize and interests as the project evolved.
So, what norms helped us be effective?
· Our use of yammer as a social and sharing platform
· Our use of Sarah’s conference number to connect live and have discussions
· Our volunteering for assignments based on skills/expertize and interest (huge thanks to Irena for her web design)
· Our calling upon each other, if we did not equally share POV’s
· Our summary of calls and action items in yammer
In conclusion:
Over a period of 6 weeks, we…
1. Formed with some direction at the end of Intensive 1.
2. Stormed through our sharing of ideas through live discussion and social yammer threads.
3. Normed by supporting each other.
4. Performed by self-delegation or nomination aligned to skills/expertise and interests.
So, what happened next?
Irena initiated a team group in Yammer and this quickly became our default for communication. We found that using yammer was very effective to set up calls, assign tasks, overcome time zone challenges, etc. For discussion on how to proceed, decision making and debate, our preferred communication method was conference calls.
Our first team call took place on Nov 26th 2013, just 3 days after being assigned our topic. We did not plan an agenda for this call and it was very organic in nature. We discussed how we wanted to proceed as a team and each of us had assignments by media to complete before our next call. Also, without being overt, we had the roles of note taker, time keeper, scheduler and planner covered. We assembled our research findings into a google doc. in preparation for our meeting with professor Ann Feyerherm on Dec 9th 2013.
After some direction from Dr. Feyerherm, we assigned the topics by self-nomination. We planned our approach and timeline to meet with the demands of the holiday schedule and agreed to check in’s on yammer. Our guideposts that were established to help us be effective included the use of technology, open discussion and dialog, healthy, respectful debate, trust in each other and holding each other accountable. It was a highly collaborative process, so yammer as a social connection site proved very valuable.
Moving from individual knowledge to group collective knowledge and layout of our research was perhaps the most challenging. Over time, we selected the method of delivery (weebly) after curating the content in google docs, powerpoint, and various yammer threads. Each of us demonstrated different skill sets/expertize and interests as the project evolved.
So, what norms helped us be effective?
· Our use of yammer as a social and sharing platform
· Our use of Sarah’s conference number to connect live and have discussions
· Our volunteering for assignments based on skills/expertize and interest (huge thanks to Irena for her web design)
· Our calling upon each other, if we did not equally share POV’s
· Our summary of calls and action items in yammer
In conclusion:
Over a period of 6 weeks, we…
1. Formed with some direction at the end of Intensive 1.
2. Stormed through our sharing of ideas through live discussion and social yammer threads.
3. Normed by supporting each other.
4. Performed by self-delegation or nomination aligned to skills/expertise and interests.