{"id":83,"date":"2018-05-25T00:16:50","date_gmt":"2018-05-25T04:16:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/technicalwriting2ed\/chapter\/understandingteamdynamics\/"},"modified":"2026-05-22T13:05:37","modified_gmt":"2026-05-22T17:05:37","slug":"understandingteamdynamics","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/technicalwriting2ed\/chapter\/understandingteamdynamics\/","title":{"raw":"4.1 Understanding Team Dynamics","rendered":"4.1 Understanding Team Dynamics"},"content":{"raw":"Team dynamics depend on innumerable factors, ranging from the size of the team, its overall purpose, the individual skills of the team members, their goals, and levels of commitment. In general, however, we tend to categorized teams either by function or by performance. For example, in terms of function, a \u201ccross-functional team\u201d combines people with diverse areas of expertise (such as mechanical, electrical, and software engineering) to all work on connected parts of the same project, while a \u201cwithin-function team\u201d is comprised of people with the same area of expertise.\r\n\r\nTeams can also be categorized in terms of performance. Katzenbach and Smith in<\/span>The Wisdom of Teams[footnote]J. R. Katzenbach and D.K. Smith,The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High-performance Organisation, Harvard Business School, Boston, 1993.[\/footnote]<\/em>\u00a0describe 4 categories of teams based on how well they perform.<\/span>\r\n\r\n\"Pseudo\r\n

Pseudo Team<\/strong>:\u00a0 a group of people not achieving what you would expect, based on their individual potential. They tend to work as isolated individuals rather than as a cohesive team, lacking strong communication with each other and commitment to the team\u2019s goals. They either lack clear team processes, or do not follow them; team meetings lack focus and productivity; team members don\u2019t feel accountable to each other; and there is little or no attempt to improve.<\/p>\r\n

Potential Team<\/strong>: each team member performs at the level of the average team member, or maybe slightly above, developing some synergy and effective communication, but not reaching their potential as a team.<\/p>\r\n

Real Team:<\/strong> A small number of people with complementary skills and compatible commitment levels maintain accountability to each other, their team processes, and overall goals to achieve a successful outcome through a high level of synergy.<\/p>\r\n

High Performing Team<\/strong>: Few teams reach this level. A \u201chigh performing team\u201d exceeds the abilities of individual team members and can accomplish far better results together than they could individually. Team members bring out the best in each other and see the interpersonal aspects of the team as just as important as the tasks. They establish team synergy through strong communication, clear team processes, and commitment to the project and to each other's continual development. Building this kind of team synergy usually happens over time (and multiple projects) and takes consistent effort and commitment.<\/p>\r\nFor a team to reach this level of performance, all members need to focus not only on the success of the project, but also on effective team dynamics and personal growth. To set your team up for success, consider the following:\r\n

SIZE<\/strong>: You need to be able to meet and communicate regularly. Typically, smaller teams work more effectively than larger ones, but that will depend on the kind of project or task you are working on.<\/p>\r\n

SKILLS<\/strong>: team members should have adequate levels of complementary skills, and\/or a willingness to develop skills required to complete the project.<\/p>\r\n

PURPOSE & GOALS<\/strong>: all team members need to feel that the project is meaningful and important, and should have some agency in defining the purpose and goals. All team members must be able to clearly articulate the goals.<\/p>\r\n

PROCESSES<\/strong>: the team needs to have clearly stated processes and approaches to completing work that all members understand and agree with; work is allocate equitably and fairly to each team member.<\/p>\r\n

ACCOUNTABILITY<\/strong>: All team members need to feel accountable to each other and to the project, and the team needs to have mechanisms in place to ensure ensure accountability and to address lapses fairly.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

\r\n

EXERCISE 4.1<\/strong>\u00a0- Reflect on Previous Teamwork<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/header>\r\n

\r\n\r\nThink of a time when you had to work with others to produce or achieve something \u2013 a design, poster, presentation, document,\u00a0etc<\/em>. You might have been working on a school assignment, been part of a sports team, work team, a club, or a musical band. Briefly describe what the task was and then consider the following questions:\r\n
    \r\n \t
  1. What was the team\u2019s overall goal? Did you have a clear goal you all committed to?<\/li>\r\n \t
  2. What was your job within the team? Were roles clearly defined?<\/li>\r\n \t
  3. How were the jobs distributed? Was the workload fair?<\/li>\r\n \t
  4. How well did your team function? How would you categorize this team based on the types described above? (Group, Pseudo-team, Potential team, Real Team, or High Performing team)<\/li>\r\n \t
  5. Did anyone on the team hijack (take over) the project? Hitchhike (not contribute)? Isolate (work on their own and fail to communicate with the team?) What effect did this have?<\/li>\r\n \t
  6. Was the outcome successful?<\/li>\r\n \t
  7. Did your teammates teach you useful things and help you develop skills?<\/li>\r\n \t
  8. Would you happily work with those teammates again on another project? Why or why not?<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\nBecoming a member of a real or high performing team requires significant commitment -- to both the project and to your teammates -- as well as an understanding of team dynamics. The following sections provide some perspectives on team dynamics that you will likely come across in professional contexts to promote strong team performance and manage crises effectively; these include the GRIP<\/strong> model, the Tuckman<\/strong> model, the Lencioni<\/strong> model, the DISC<\/strong> model, and the Thomas Kilman Conflict Management<\/strong> model. Each of these models contains useful ideas that can help you design a strong team environment.\r\n

    GRIP Model<\/h1>\r\n

    Richard Beckhard's GRPI model,[footnote]R. Beckhard, (1972). \u201cOptimizing team building efforts,\u201d\u00a0Journal of Contemporary Business<\/em>, 1972, pp. 23\u201327.[\/footnote] originally developed in 1972, has been widely adapted in sports contexts as the\u00a0GRIP<\/strong>\u00a0model (see\u00a0Figure 4.1.1<\/strong>), outlining four interrelated components of highly effective teamwork:<\/p>\r\n

    Goals<\/strong>: everyone must fully understand and commit to the goals of the team, and of the organization. Everyone\u2019s goals must align in order to establish trust, make progress, and achieve desired outcome.<\/p>\r\n

    Roles<\/strong>: all team members must know what part they play, what is expected, and how they will be held accountable and responsible.<\/p>\r\n

    Interpersonal<\/strong>: constructive communication both requires and fosters trust and connection among team members, and helps to develop the sensitivity and flexibility needed to deal with conflict and make progress.<\/p>\r\n

    Processes<\/strong>: the team defines clear systems for decision-making, problem-solving, and conflict management. They also develop well-defined work flows and procedures to follow in completing the project.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_81\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"700\"]\"A Figure 4.1.1<\/strong> GRIP Model for establishing successful teamwork dynamics.<\/em>[\/caption]\r\n\r\n \r\n

    \r\n

    Apply the GRIP Model to your team<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/header>\r\n

    \r\n\r\nSet a strong foundation for your team's success by using the these GRIP principles to design some shared ground rules before you start your project:\r\n\r\nDISCUSS GOALS<\/strong>: All team members should explicitly discuss and agree on the team\u2019s goals as well as their individual commitment levels, to ensure they are aligned. Define some \u201cbig picture\u201d goals for your project, but also consider goals that each team member would like to achieve. For example, if one team member\u2019s goal is put in the extra effort needed to exceed expectations and achieve above average results, while another team member wants to simply produce work that is \u2018good enough\u2019, their goals and commitment do not align and this will lead to problems down the road if not addressed proactively.\r\n\r\nCHOOSE ROLES<\/strong>: Team members should discuss their strengths and weaknesses related to the team task (clearly, you will need to do some task analysis first to ensure you understand what the task entails), and decide on who will take on which roles. Team members might \u201cwork to their strengths\u201d \u2013 for example, someone who is very detail oriented might take on the role of editor; someone who has strong word processing skills might take on the role of document designer. However, you might also take a \u201cgrowth mindset\u201d approach, and choose roles that will allow you to strengthen weak areas, coach others, and build skills that you want to improve on. You might decide to alternate roles, so everyone has a chance to develop various skills. Consider how taking on roles integrates with the goals you have identified.\r\n\r\nINTERPERSONAL<\/strong>: We all have different ways of communicating, and sometimes miscommunication can happen without us realizing it. One person might find it helpful to engage in some off-task \u201csmall talk\u201d at the beginning of a team meeting as a kind of ice breaker or warm up, while another might find this annoying and inefficient. Discuss with each other what kinds of communication help to motivate you, and what kinds can trigger a \u201cshut down\u201d Determine how you can be sensitive to each other\u2019s communication styles and preferred workflows.\r\n\r\nDEFINE PROCESSES<\/strong>: Start defining some processes for how your team will communicate, make decisions, and ensure an effective workflow. For example, consider what communication channels your team will use for brief check-ins and questions, for more sustained collaboration and discussion, for sharing documents, etc<\/em>. Will you create agendas to guide your meetings? Will you take minutes to record the decisions and progress made at meetings? How will you share them?\r\n\r\nUsing this GRIP process at the beginning of your project \u2013 in the \u201cforming\u201d stage \u2013 will help to set your team up for successful collaboration. You can refine the work you\u2019ve done here and use it to create a Team Charter, as discussed in section 4.2 Project Management Tools and Teamwork Strategies<\/a>.\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n

    The Tuckman Team Model<\/h1>\r\n

    \"Tuckman's Stages of Group Development,\" proposed by psychologist Bruce Tuckman in 1965,[footnote]B. Tuckman, \"Developmental sequence in small groups,\" Psychological Bulletin<\/em>, vol. 63, no. 6, pp. 384-399. Available: http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1037\/h0022100 : [\/footnote] is one of the most well-known theories of team development. It describes four stages that teams may progress through: forming, storming, norming<\/strong>, and performing <\/strong>(a fifth adjourning<\/strong> stage was added later). The stages move from organizing your team (defining goals, choosing roles, and developing processes) to collaborating on the results you are trying to achieve.<\/p>\r\n

    Although the stages appear linear, moving through them can be -- like the design process -- iterative and recursive. Teams may move back and forth through these stages, depending on events that may influence the team. For example, a new member may join an already established team, which will require the team to revisit the forming stage. Some teams can also stall in a stage and never fully realize their potential. Figure 4.1.2<\/strong> outlines these stages described in more detail below. While reading about each stage, you will note how crucial clear and constructive communication is at each stage!<\/p>\r\n

    .<\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \"A\r\nFigure 4.1.2<\/strong> The Stages of the Tuckman model of team development<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\r\nFORMING<\/strong>: During the team forming stage, everyone gets to know each other and tries to make a good impression. A fun team-forming activity can be a good way to help get to know each other and build trust. This is also a good time to create a set of shared expectations and guidelines in a Team Charter<\/strong> that defines how the team agrees to operate for the duration of the project. Team members should exchange contact and scheduling information and set up a communication channel. During this orientation stage, individuals start to establish preliminary boundaries and expectations of each other that will be explored more deeply in the storming stage.\r\n\r\nSTORMING<\/strong>: The\u00a0storming<\/strong> stage is the one most often characterized by group conflict. In this stage, the preliminary boundaries and expectations are tested as individuals learn more about each other\u2019s motivations, commitment levels, strengths, weaknesses, ideas, and strategies. This coincides with the \u201cbrainstorming\u201d stage of the design process, in which each teammate contributes ideas to help define the focus and trajectory of the project. It is important to recognize that conflict at this stage can be productive, if managed effectively. While you may be tempted to remain polite and accommodating to avoid conflict, this rarely allows the team to reach its potential in developing innovative ideas and approaches. Sometimes the best ideas are forged in the fires of disagreement and animated discussion where all team members feel safe to voice their diverging ideas and perspectives. However, it takes work to get to this place of \"safety,\" and some teams get stuck at this stage, reverting back to working individually and becoming a \u201cpseudo team.\u201d\r\n\r\nTo help get through this stage successfully, you might agree on brainstorming rules (\u201cno bad ideas!\u201d), use pros and cons list, designate someone as the \u201cdevil\u2019s advocate\u201d whose official role is to poke holes and argue against. Commit to valuing the diversity of opinions and approaches in your team (see 4.3 Managing Team Conflict<\/a> for additional tips). At this stage, team members may refine their goals and roles in the project. Learning to use a problem-solving approach to harness the constructive potential of conflict and compromise in this stage will help set your team up for a successful \u201cnorming\u201d stage where you start to really make progress.\r\n\r\nNORMING<\/strong>: During the\u00a0norming<\/strong> stage, conflicts have been largely resolved, team members have proven flexible and supportive, each team member knows their role and works on their part of the project, follows the designated team processes and guidelines, and all is going well. Team members might do some work independently in this stage, but frequently check in with teammates to make ensure an efficient and effective workflow. For example, you will want to make sure you aren\u2019t accidentally duplicating work or developing work that contradicts the work of other team members. If a teammate becomes ill and unable to meet a deadline, others agree on how to proceed. Group cohesion ensures that everyone is responsible for their task and accountable to the team; team members acknowledge and appreciate each other\u2019s contributions. Gantt Charts or Work Plans help keep everyone on track during this stage. Problems might arise at this stage if a team member has been absent and has not caught up, or if team members do not fully understand their role, team expectations, or the overall goal. If this happens, the team may need to revisiting the forming or storming stage.\r\n\r\nPERFORMING<\/strong>: Reaching the\u00a0performing<\/strong> stage is the goal of high-performing teams. This usually only happens when teams have worked together well on several projects, have established a synergy, and have developed systems that make projects go smoothly and efficiently. The first time a team works together, they might not reach this stage; \u201cperforming\u201d teams have established trust in each other, have well-defined roles and goals, and follow the strategies and processes they have chosen to achieve them. They can move quickly and efficiently, work interdependently, and understand how to best support each other when needed.\r\n\r\nADJOURNING: <\/strong>\u00a0At the end of the project, team members celebrate their achievements, express their appreciate for each other\u2019s contributions, reflect on what they have learned, and go their separate ways. If the team has successfully established trust and synergy, this parting can feel somewhat emotional (leading to what some have called a \"mourning\" stage).\r\n\r\nFigure 4.1.3 <\/strong>[footnote]Dlogo Nicoleti. \u201cModelo de Tuckman.png\u201d, <\/span>Wikimedia Commons<\/em>, <\/span>https:\/\/commons.wikimedia.org\/wiki\/File:Modelo_de_Tuckman.png<\/a>\u00a0.\u00a0<\/span>CC BY-SA 4.0<\/a>\u00a0.[\/footnote] depicts the trajectory of each team member during each stage.<\/span>\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_81\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"1024\"]\"Forming: Figure 4.1.3<\/strong>\u00a0Trajectory of team mates during each stage of the Tuckman team formation model.<\/em>[\/caption]For an entertaining overview, watch this video on the Tuckman phases of team development, as depicted in The Fellowship of the Rings<\/em>:\r\n\r\n[embed]https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=ysWWGf8VsOg[\/embed]\r\n

    Lencioni Model<\/h1>\r\nIn his 2005 book,\u00a0The Five Dysfunctions of a Team, Patrick Lencioni, [footnote]P<\/em>. Lencioni, Five Dysfunctions of a Team<\/em>, New York, NY:\u00a0 John Wiley and Sons Inc., 2002.[\/footnote]\u00a0outlines<\/em>\u00a0five common problems teams experience that impact their effectiveness:\r\n

    Lack of trust<\/strong>:\u00a0 if team members do not trust each other, they are unlikely to feel safe enough to speak honestly, take risks, or ask for help. A lack of trust means a low level of comfort that makes it difficult to communicate, commit, and perform effectively as a team<\/p>\r\n

    Fear of conflict<\/strong>:\u00a0 avoiding conflict can lead to an artificial \u201cpeace\u201d at the expense of progress and innovation, or it can lead to unaddressed dysfunction that undermines the team. Shift the mindset to see conflict as a normal part of teamwork that, if managed constructively, can enhance productivity.<\/p>\r\n

    Lack of commitment<\/strong>:\u00a0 having insufficient control or ownership of team processes and decisions can lead to a lack of commitment, where team members fail to complete their assigned work or meet deadlines, do not follow through on decisions or tasks, and let their teammates down, ultimately affecting the success of the whole project.<\/p>\r\n

    Avoidance of accountability<\/strong>: if team members do not feel accountable to all other members of their team, they are less likely to care about not letting each other down.<\/p>\r\n

    Inattention to team results<\/strong>:\u00a0 when team members focus on their own personal goals instead of project goals, they lose sight of the expected results that actually measure the success of the project. Not focusing on the results during the process means that no one is actively planning how to improve those results.<\/p>\r\nLencioni designed a \u201cpyramid\u201d showing how each \u201cdysfunction\u201d connects to and builds upon previous ones.\u00a0Figure 4.1.4<\/strong> illustrates how to proactively address each of these issues, first and most importantly by establishing trust among all team members. Establishing trust, as the crucial foundational step, allows the team to move up the pyramid and manage conflict effectively, achieve commitment, create accountability and focus on team results.\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_206\" align=\"alignnone\" width=\"1024\"]\"A Figure 4.1.4<\/strong> Proactive steps for preventing the dysfunctions described by Lencioni[\/caption]\r\n\r\n \r\n

    DISC Model\r\n<\/strong><\/h1>\r\nDISC theory, developed in 1928 by Dr. William Moulton Marston (who also, as it happens, created the Wonder Woman<\/em> comic series!), has evolved into a useful model for conflict management that predicts behaviours based on four key personality traits.[footnote]W. M. Marsten, Emotions of Normal People<\/em>. Keegan Paul Trench Trubner and Co. Ltd., 1928; republished London: Routledge, 2002 [\/footnote] The names of these four traits have been variously revised over the decades, so you might find different terms used in different contexts, but they are often described as Dominance<\/strong>, Inspiring, <\/strong>Supporting<\/strong>, and Conscientious<\/strong>.\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_81\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"1024\"]\"Circle<\/a> Figure 4.1.5\u00a0 <\/strong>DISC Profile outlining the key characteristics of Dominance, Inspiring, Supporting, and Conscientious personality types.\u00a0<\/em>[\/caption]\r\n\r\nIndustries often use DISC assessments in professional contexts. Having some insight into your teammates\u2019 personality traits can help when trying to resolve conflicts. General characteristics of each trait are as follows:\r\n\r\nDominance:\u00a0<\/strong>direct, decisive, ego-driven, problem-solver, and risk-taker; likes new challenges and freedom from routine; driven to overcome obstacles.<\/span>\r\n

    Strengths<\/em>: great organizer and time manager; challenges the status quo; innovative<\/p>\r\n

    Weaknesses<\/em>: can be argumentative, disrespectful of authority, and overly ambitious (taking on too much); can be blunt, stubborn, and aggressive<\/p>\r\nInspiring: <\/strong>enthusiastic, persuasive, optimistic, trusting, impulsive, charismatic, influential, and emotional.<\/span>\r\n

    Strengths<\/em>: creative problem solver; great cheer-leader, negotiator, and peace-maker; a real \u201cpeople person\u201d<\/p>\r\n

    Weaknesses<\/em>: may be more concerned with popularity than tangible results; lacks attention to detail<\/p>\r\nSupportive: <\/strong>reliable, steady, predictable, friendly, good listener, team player, empathetic, easy-going, and altruistic.<\/span>\r\n

    Strengths<\/em>: dependable, loyal; respects authority; has patience and empathy; good at conflict resolution; willing to compromise.<\/p>\r\n

    Weaknesses<\/em>: may resist change; sensitive to criticism; difficulty prioritizing<\/p>\r\nConscientious: <\/strong>has high standards; <\/em>values precision and accuracy; analytical and systematic; even-tempered, realistic, and logical; methodical; respect for authority; cautious and compliant.\r\n

    Strengths<\/em>: great information gatherer\/researcher; able to define situations precisely and accurately; offers realistic perspective<\/p>\r\n

    Weaknesses<\/em>: can get bogged down in details; needs clear boundaries, procedures, and methods; difficulty accepting criticism; may avoid conflict or just \u201cgive in.\u201d May be overly timid.<\/p>\r\nYou might recognize yourself in one of these descriptions, or you might have characteristics of 2 or more \u201ctypes.\u201d Having the team consider where they might fall in this typology can help you assign roles based on your strengths, and give you insights into how to resolve issues.\r\n

    Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Model<\/h1>\r\nThe Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Management model[footnote]K. W. Thomas & R. H. Kilmann, \u201cThomas\u2013Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument,\u201d Tuxedo NY: Xicom, 1974.[\/footnote] is used by Myers Briggs among others for understanding and managing conflict. This model, shown in Figure 4.1.6<\/strong>,\u00a0 outlines 5 main conflict styles or \u201cmodes\u201d (competing, collaborating, compromising, avoiding, <\/em>and collaborating<\/em>), and places them in a matrix with two dimensions: Assertiveness<\/em><\/strong> (the degree to which one tries to meet their own needs) and Cooperativeness<\/em><\/strong> (the degree to which one tries to meet the needs of the other team members).\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_207\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"1024\"]\"\" Figure 4.1.6.<\/strong> Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Management model[\/caption]\r\n\r\nEach approach can have both positive and negative impacts:\r\n

    Collaborating<\/strong> requires high level of both cooperativeness and assertiveness, but often leads to the best results. However, this may require persistence and effort for team members to successfully persuade each other and achieve consensus.<\/p>\r\n

    Compromising<\/strong> can seem a bit easier to achieve, but by definition, it \u201ccompromises\u201d the quality of the final product. Everyone \u201cgets a little\u201d and everyone \u201cgives a little;\u201d everyone may feel somewhat happy, but also a bit unhappy with the final result.<\/p>\r\n

    Competition<\/strong> can drive excellence, but within a team, keep in mind that competition usually results in \u201cwinners\u201d and \u201closers\u201d \u2013 and this does not make for a constructive team.<\/p>\r\n

    Accommodating<\/strong> can also be a useful approach if someone feels very strongly about their position and there is no harm in giving them the win. However, this should not come at the expense of something you also feel strongly about that could have really helped the team.<\/p>\r\n

    Avoiding conflict<\/strong> can sometimes be a wise choice, if the issue is a small one and the outcome does not have a significant impact. The old adages \u201cdon\u2019t sweat the small stuff\u201d and \u201cpick your battles\u201d apply here. However, in many cases, avoiding a problem will not make it go away, and indeed, it may well get worse, leading to significant consequences. Consider the \u201ccost-benefit\u201d analysis of avoiding vs engaging with the conflict to solve the problem.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

    Applying the Models<\/h1>\r\nClearly collaborating with others can have its challenges! But consider the pros and cons of individual vs teamwork when working on a writing-intensive project:\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n
    <\/td>\r\nIndividual Work<\/strong><\/td>\r\nCollaboration<\/strong><\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
    Choosing a Topic and Approach<\/td>\r\nYou are in control of the topic and approach; you have to make all the decisions, and you have to complete all the tasks yourself.<\/td>\r\nYou must negotiate the focus of your work and the approaches you will use, but you share the work of making these decisions, relying on more than just your own knowledge and skills.<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
    Task Analysis<\/td>\r\nYou have to make sure you understand all the assignment instructions, project requirements, and evaluation criteria, as well as remember due dates, etc.<\/td>\r\nTeammates may interpret assignment criteria and project requirements differently, resulting in discussion and questions, and ultimately stronger task understanding. Teammates remind each other about due dates and requirements.<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
    Research<\/td>\r\nYou are solely responsible for devising research questions, choosing research methods, finding and integrating all the research needed to support your project, and citing sources properly.<\/td>\r\nYou have a team to brainstorm research questions, compare approaches, divide up the work of reading and synthesizing sources to support your project; you have other eyes to spot citation errors and research gaps that need filling.<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
    Writing<\/td>\r\nWriting on your own makes it easier to maintain a consistent \u201cvoice\u201d in terms of purpose, style, and tone,<\/td>\r\nCollaborating requires the team to be aware of each other\u2019s different styles, and aim for a consistent overall \u201cvoice\u201d<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
    Critical Thinking<\/td>\r\nYou are solely responsible for coming up with and refining ideas, evaluating source material for credibility, constructing persuasive arguments that will appeal to your intended audience, etc<\/em>.<\/td>\r\nTeammates can bounce ideas around, give each other feedback about choices and help refine ideas. They might have more nuanced ideas about what might appeal to (or offend) your intended audience. You might have different perspectives that will require negotiation.<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
    Document Design<\/td>\r\nYou make all the design choices, and it\u2019s relatively easy to be consistent. But you are limited by your own word processing skill level and awareness of design choices.<\/td>\r\nWhen collaborating, you have to ensure that everyone uses consistent design features so that the document doesn\u2019t end up in chaos, but you have more skills to draw up to enhance the look and readability of your document.<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
    Reviewing<\/td>\r\nWhen reviewing and editing your own work, it can be easy to miss errors. Also, you know what you mean, and it can be hard to see where expression might be ambiguous or confusing to other readers.<\/td>\r\nTeammates understand your purpose in writing, and can spot your mistakes more easily. They can indicate when something you\u2019ve written could be more clearly articulated. You can learn techniques by seeing how others revise and edit their own work.<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
     \r\n\r\nAccountability\r\n\r\n <\/td>\r\nYou are only accountable to yourself, so you can work at your own speed and determine what quality you want to aim for. If you procrastinate, no one else is affected.<\/td>\r\nBeing accountable to others makes you more likely to complete work on time, or even early to ensure time for peer review. However, one team member\u2019s poor work habits or low commitment level can negatively affect the outcome of the project.<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<\/tbody>\r\n<\/table>\r\nIdeally, students can learn a great deal from their teammates \u2013 the more diverse the team, the more opportunities to learn! For example, your teammates can help you\r\n