Collaborative Collapse

Working in a group is challenging for most people. However, I think it is particularly challenging for teachers. Why is this? Well, one of the appealing aspects of teaching for many is the aspect of being in "command and control" of the classroom. However, the days of being able to enter a classroom, close the door, and operate a classroom the way one sees fit, are over. Therefore, teachers must learn to collaborate.

Education takes many of it's cues from the business world. A quick Google search about business and collaboration indicates a dramatic shift in recent years from "command and control" style management policies to a more collaborative method of management. Why is this? Research shows that collaborative efforts yield a better product in a shorter amount of time. This has several implications for education. First, we are educating the workforce of tomorrow. They must know how to collaborate in order to be productive members of the workforce. Yet, how can we, as educators, teach them to collaborate if we ourselves cannot collaborate?

My collaborative experience for this course has been met with several issues which have presented a challenge to the efficacy and efficiency of the group. I began to reflect on the dynamics of the group in order to see if I could affect any positive changes. The first issue I have noted is a distinct "Me" mentality among members of the group (myself included). Just setting up a meeting time has been a challenge because, "I have to do this" and "I am taking this class and this class and this class" and "I can't believe these people think I can meet anytime they want." It would be far more productive to simply present a list of available openings. Most people are very busy and it's not a contest for who is the busiest. Complaining is a counterproductive waste of time.

Furthermore, expectation levels among the group are wide-ranging. Not everyone in a group is going to be a high-achiever. Just because one person strives for that A, doesn't mean that all members of the group are going to. Berating that lower-achiever or re-doing their work is detrimental to the group as a whole. A better way to manage that person may be to determine what their strengths are and to assign them that portion of the project. For example, if one person is a dynamic public-speaker, perhaps they should present a project. If one person is a good researcher, perhaps they should do the research. If another is creative, they should add the art work and creative effects to the project. As teachers, we understand that are students are going to have different learning styles. It's interesting that we do not apply this same philosophy to our colleagues. In education we refer to High-Achievers and Average Students. The business world refers to A-Players and B-Players. The following site provides great tips for managing both types of workers: http://changingminds.org/disciplines/hr/performance_management/b-players.htm.

Another issue in the group is an inability to delegate a job and trust the person to do the job. There is no point in delegating a job and then just doing it anyway because the delegatee did not do the job in the manner the delegator wanted it done. A better collaborative style would be to offer constructive feedback and encouragement in order to improve the overall work product.

Finally, a collaborative group needs a strong, consistent and present leader who can create a cohesive work environment.