Conclusion

3.5 0ur experience of working as a team has shown us that there is no such person as ‘the perfect team member’. We all bring skills and challenges to the group. No one individual can be sensitive and forceful, dynamic and patient, decisive and reflective all at the same time. The personality test and Belbin test showed us that we have plenty of talented members but maybe, as a group of self-selected garden design students, some characteristics were more dominant and some were lacking. Out of seven of us we have at least two whose dominant traits are those of shapers and at least another two whose main characteristics are those of plants plus one resource instigator. There is no-one who, even as a secondary trait, fulfils the typical characteristics of a chairman. Belbin (1981, p.80) describes a team made up of such members as ‘a formula for a talking shop in which no one listens, follows up any of the points, or makes any decisions about what to do.’ I think many of us would recognise that this was what was happening during the initial meetings. Fortunately, people have secondary traits which also come in to play when circumstances make it necessary. A number of people had the characteristics of team worker, company worker and implementer as secondary traits which enabled a more consensus-based approach to be successful to bring the project to a conclusion

PDMF Report - missing elements

1.1 Opinions as to whether the Fountain creates an appropriate atmosphere for a memorial are divided in the team. Some think that it is a beautiful and engaging construction that invites further exploration and contemplation. Others think that it is rather gutter-like, sits awkwardly in the space and does not encourage one to linger.

1.5 What worked: A Memorial Fountain has been built which has become a controversial talking point much as Diana’s life had been.
It is beautiful and accessible. It is more engaging than a traditional fountain or a fountain sited in the Serpentine would have been.
The way the stone has been cut to shape the water is very effective.
Surprises: That such experienced and high-calibre people could get the project management so wrong. There seems to have been an expectation that emotion, good will and good intention would get the job done when, in fact, those are not enough and may even be obstacles.
3.5.3 Carolyn’s lessons learnt
I can’t recall working in an artificially created team before. Where I have worked with others, it has been a self-selected group seeking to achieve a commonly desired goal. In this case, I think we made progress once we had clarified the outcome we were pursuing. Establishing a clear set of ground rules and expectations at the start would have made the early meetings more productive. In order to assign roles to team members who you don’t know well it is necessary to do, at least, some type of ‘get to know you’ process or a more formal team profiling.
4 References
Belbin, R.M. (1981) Management Teams: Why they succeed or fail. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann
ECHarris (2006)A report on the delivery of the project to construct the Diana Princess of Wales Memorial Fountain. London: ECHarris
City of Westminster (2010) Statues and Monument in Westminster. Available at: http://www.westminster.gov.uk (accessed 3/2/11)