List of Group Norms (October 16th, 2017)
Brainstorming Group Norms
Brainstorming Group Norms
- Treat each other with dignity and respect
- Be transparent: avoid hidden agendas
- Be genuine with each other about ideas, challenges, and feelings
- Trust each other
- Managers will open up a space where people have information and are comfortable asking for help
- Team members will practice a consistent commitment to sharing all information
- Listen first: don't be dismissive
- Practice being open-minded
- Don't be defensive with team members
- Give your team members the benefit of doubt; start clean in investigating issues
- Support one another, be bro's
- Prioritize the group over personal desires
- Do not use any material from the group project to slander, attack, or threaten another group member
- Be open, communicative, and authentic with team members
- Do not falsely claim any circumstances; the team will deal with it together
- Present problems in a way that promotes mutual discussion and resolution
- It is normal to be wrong, but thoughtful decision making is expected
- Recognize that this is something bigger; take responsibility
- Practice humility
- Stay committed
- Report bad news; expect problem solving, not retaliation
- Be prepared for meetings and deadlines
- Strive for improvement and success
Finalized Group Norms
- Listen to each other's ideas
- Consult the person who generated the idea before deleting or criticizing it
- Ask for agreement before performing an action
- Think and speak out aloud about your thoughts
- Try to be constructive rather than destructive to ideas
- Questioning are for improvements, not criticisms
- Complete the jobs that you are assigned to
Assigning Jobs (October 19th, 2017)
Arthur Chen:
- generate ideas
- organize information and data
- create Prototype 1 and test it out (taking a leading role)
- make presentation
Darren Chiang:
- generate ideas
- refine and revise ideas
- create Prototype 2 and test it out (taking a leading role)
- make presentation
Team Calendar (October 19th, 2017)
October 9th, 2017
Ideate for methods and criteria.
October 13th, 2017
Develop prototypes.
October 15th, 2017
Testing of Prototype 1 begins.
October 18th, 2017
Testing of Prototype 1 ends.
October 19th, 2017
Collect data and revise Prototype 1 into Prototype 2
October 23rd, 2017
Testing of Prototype 2 begins.
October 29th, 2017
Testing of Prototype 2 ends.
October 30th, 2017
Begin working on presentation.
Peer Evaluation (November 3rd, 2017)
Partner: Arthur Chen
Arthur was a very supportive, cooperative, and accommodating partner throughout the entire project. There was not a single instance of negativity working with him, and he went beyond duty to give me motivation in this project. His wide connection of friends facilitated our Discover process, however, Arthur's conduction of the interviews were limited. To further elaborate on such, Arthur doesn't allow the clients to branch further from answering the interview questions for insight, and instead systematically shreds through the list of generated interview questions. No other issues really occurred.
Arthur was more adept at regulation and rules (group norms and such) than I was while I generated a larger portion of ideas and prototype directions.
Reflection (October 27th, 2017)
Describe
The team was overall very cooperative, supportive, and understanding to its members. We split up the brainstorming and ideation process before coming together to analyze and organize the ideas. This was the case for both ideation and defining group norms. However, a majority of the ideation ideas and direction was mine while a majority of the group norms was defined by Arthur.
Think/Feel
I feel a little disconnected from the whole thing. Everything happened so fast in such a short time frame.
Evaluate
There were not enough activities, time, or depth in the project to really determine several things. First, no group norms were really broken, so it was difficult to access the response to it. Second, we didn't yet have a defined documentation process for collaboration, nor did we really have a recorded agenda for the meetings (we just agreed until next time).
Envision
I do not believe that collaboration will become a major point in the class of "Innovator's Space." Groups are not big enough and projects are not expansive or complex enough.
Plan
For the next project, I plan to find a better documentation method for collaboration artifacts.
Peer Evaluation (November 3rd, 2017)
Partner: Arthur Chen
Arthur was a very supportive, cooperative, and accommodating partner throughout the entire project. There was not a single instance of negativity working with him, and he went beyond duty to give me motivation in this project. His wide connection of friends facilitated our Discover process, however, Arthur's conduction of the interviews were limited. To further elaborate on such, Arthur doesn't allow the clients to branch further from answering the interview questions for insight, and instead systematically shreds through the list of generated interview questions. No other issues really occurred.
Arthur was more adept at regulation and rules (group norms and such) than I was while I generated a larger portion of ideas and prototype directions.
Reflection (October 27th, 2017)
Describe
The team was overall very cooperative, supportive, and understanding to its members. We split up the brainstorming and ideation process before coming together to analyze and organize the ideas. This was the case for both ideation and defining group norms. However, a majority of the ideation ideas and direction was mine while a majority of the group norms was defined by Arthur.
Think/Feel
I feel a little disconnected from the whole thing. Everything happened so fast in such a short time frame.
Evaluate
There were not enough activities, time, or depth in the project to really determine several things. First, no group norms were really broken, so it was difficult to access the response to it. Second, we didn't yet have a defined documentation process for collaboration, nor did we really have a recorded agenda for the meetings (we just agreed until next time).
Envision
I do not believe that collaboration will become a major point in the class of "Innovator's Space." Groups are not big enough and projects are not expansive or complex enough.
Plan
For the next project, I plan to find a better documentation method for collaboration artifacts.
Comments
Post a Comment