Research in Engineering Education Symposium 2011 - rees2009

Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM) Página 691 de 957
foundation of thorough a priori understanding of effective team dynamics (not vice-versa).
In order to understand relationships between leadership abilities and effective group
membership abilities, we will discuss leadership abilities further, but not until after we
have addressed effective team membership abilities.
Individual contributions to effective design team performance
The above studies by Williams and Michialino, and earlier studies by Cowdroy [11] all
showed that individual contributions to effective design team progress and outcomes may
be defined in terms of seven differentiated individual abilities as follows (in approximate
order of importance to team effectiveness):
Ability to use multiple means of communication to convey ideas to other members
unfamiliar with the technology, or terminology of the respective member’s own area of
expertise. This includes use of technical and non-technical language, non-verbal (eg, signlanguage)
communication, drawings, computer graphics, photos, models, and examples,
often in various combinations, to communicate ideas across barriers of misunderstanding.
This was found (by Williams and Michialino) to be the most important factor contributing
to successful progress of any team. In addition to differences in technical knowledge,
experience and terminology between members, language and cultural differences have to
be overcome, and combinations of various means of communication was found to be a
primary strategy for achieving productive progress. Traditional reliance on drawings to
encapsulate all necessary information for understanding is therefore very unrealistic; so is
current reliance on computer graphics as the dominant means of communication of ideas
and details. This is a most important issue in relation to globalisation of design teams and
increasing reliance on electronic communication.
Ability to lead discussion when the dominant issue on the table at the time is within the
individual’s area of expertise; that is, when the member’s authority is “given” by the
dominant issue (ie: issue-based authority). In this respect it must be accepted that the
expertise of an individual member will be dominant at some times and of secondary or
peripheral concern to discussion at other times. This ability is closely related to one aspect
of leadership, as discussed later, as it requires both the ability to lead discussion at that
time, and the ability to have the respect of others towards the relevant individual’s
expertise. Ability to effectively lead discussion, even briefly, also incorporates particular
qualities of balanced self-confidence; that is, neither over-confidence nor underconfidence.
Over-confidence refers to autocratic, self-righteousness or domineering
behaviour, or claiming knowledge that the member does not have; under-confidence
refers to failure to apply the member’s knowledge and experience by failing to take
initiative to provide the rest of the team with necessary information about opportunities,
causes and effects within the particular member’s field.
Patience and persistence until the team as a whole understands the ideas the member is
trying to express, and patience and persistence to try various approaches to understand
what other members are trying to express. This ability is often closely related to ability to
use multiple means of communication. “If at first you don’t succeed, then try, try again” is
an old adage that applies here: if one means of communication or combination of means
Proceedings of Research in Engineering Education Symposium 2011
Madrid, 4 th - 7 th October 2011