As the semester progressed, there were a number of projects that were required to be completed in a team format. These group projects revealed much about the individual styles and personalities of each of the team members. It was very easy to see how people, in general, fell into the different categories as described in the DiSC session. I also came to appreciate my role in these groups as well as how other peoples styles (roles) would contribute to it as well.

    My DiSC personality profile pegged me as a strong D, with a developer pattern. My role in many of the projects fit very well with this categorization. I tended to try to push movement forward and take control when possible, in order to assure that my grade was not dependant on, what I felt might have been less than adequate work of others. I realized, however, that this approach to group projects might not have always the best approach and yielded the best outcome. There were occasions where I had to tone my drive down in order for others to have their opinions fairly represented and for their ideas to flourish.

    As I observed the class room when some of the group activities were taking place during class time, I also began to  notice several different styles emerging. There were some groups that there was clearly a conflict in direction or ideas, and, as a result, much arguing. There were other groups, however, that the converse was true. Many of the group members did very little, except talk amongst themselves regarding completely irrelevant topics,  and it appeared as though only one or two of the members was actually working on the problem.

    These groups operated differently because of (obviously) the makeup of their team. When you have two (or more) members of a group that have strong wills (high D profiles) and they are unwilling to see that there are other opinions than their own, then there will be strife within the group, or the other members will just turn away and let the dominant personality take over. When you have personalities that are high in the C or S categories, they will tend to overanalyze the issues and problems, leading to a lack of action.

    During the DiSC teaming session, our group had several high D profiles, yet we were fortunate to be able to work together and accomplish the task given to us, that of building a tower, with little internal strife. For the groups that had members which were unmotivated, again, it's all in the personalities. These types of liaise-faire personalities need a driving personality style in order to continue progress toward the ultimate goal as much as the strong willed profiles need more level minded members to reign in their enthusiasm sometimes. The only catch is that the dominant person needs to stop (or at least slow down) and look to others in their group for input. I had noticed a member or two in some of the groups that would just sit back and not put forth their ideas or opinions. Fortunately for us, there were a couple of other profile types in our group and our project came out very well. We were able to erect two towers and create a small village at the base of them that represented our "community"' and our group interaction.

    Another example of different types of personality interactions, one group project I encountered last year had a member (on a two person team) that would procrastinate until the very end, waiting till the last possible moment to derive their portion of the work that was required. I spent much of the semester poking and prodding this individual to get results from them, however, when an actual lab was presented to this individual, they seemed to have a greater (deeper) understanding of what was to be accomplished than I. I think that his personality was driven by the fact that he could skim over material and grasp it very well. This lead him to wait till the last minute to finish his homework, since, in his eyes, it was less than truly necessary.

    Lastly, I recall a team assignment for the MAE 412 class, again a display in the diversity of team interactions andpersonality styles. This team comprised of five individuals and, as a group we worked fairly well together. Myself and another "non traditional" student took the lead, pushing to hold design and build meetings, and two others worked on finding issues and solving problems concerned with the design (the last individual, as usual, did nothing). I remember several long Saturday afternoons working on our design, and much heated debate as to the correct path to take to build the catapult. It would have been helpful to have had the knowledge I have now  at that point so that, possibly, some of those conflicts could have been averted. In the end, though, we triumphed, and our design took first place. Our group, "G" hit the ceiling, something which had never before happened over the years that this competition had been held.

Send mail to scottm@buffalo.com with questions or comments about this web site.