Wiki contents


2019 Learning journals
2018 Learning journals
2015 Learning journals
2014 Learning journals
2013 Learning journals

Blog updates

Recently Updated

Recent updates

Recently Updated

All updates

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Having a sour taste in my mouth from team assignments last semester, this week I became increasingly anxious as Thursday’s class drew near and our teams would be revealed. This together with the readings got me thinking, what went so wrong last semester? Why was it such a torturous experience?

Perhaps if I had the knowledge gained from these readings then, my experience could have been greatly improved. This is not an exaggeration but looking back now, I was doomed from the start. There were very little criteria that we could self-select our teams on, the lecturer simply announced get into teams of fives. For me this ended up being the people around who turned to me with a smile saying, “want to be in a group together?” not knowing anyone else in the class I felt obligated to accept as people seemed to have already formed groups of their own. Those groups I became a part of at the beginning of the semester never transitioned to a “real team” (Katzenbach & Smith, 1992). Katzenbach and Smith (1992) describe a team as a small number of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose, performance goals, and approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable, we were nothing of the sort. The imbalance in the skills and differences in goals, purpose, and approach made us a dysfunctional group just barely getting by.

This experience has made me come to appreciate the week in how teams were formed based on the Mike’s bikes CVs, and the readings itself as maybe now I should be on the same page as my team members. The initial group meeting on Thursday has left me feeling optimistic about the work ahead that maybe for once I may enjoy it, and the company. I am appreciative of the one team member that took charge in establishing team expectations, essentially creating a team contract for us to abide by. Having the common purpose and goals sorted out, as the weeks go by I hope to have a completely different experience to last semester in an actual “Team”. Time and hard work can only tell if this concept of “high performance team” (Katzenbach & Smith, 1992) will materialize. But I have a good feeling that it will.


Katzenbach, J. R. & Smith, D. K. (1992). Why teams matterMcKinsey Quarterly, (3), 3—27

Oakley, B., Felder, R. M., Brent, R., & Elhajj, I. (2004). Turning student groups into effective teamsJournal of student centered learning, 2(1), 9--34.


  1. Hi Natasha,

    I really enjoyed reading your journal for this week. Not only have you clearly explained the purpose of the mikes bikes cv, but you have also included a well thought out reflection of past team work and why it failed, with reference to this weeks reading. As I am finding this very difficult to fault, the only thing I could suggest is to maybe in text reference the second reading listed at the end of your journal as it seems you didn't already.

    Hope this helps a bit! (smile)



  2. I really enjoyed your journal this week! You have clearly followed Daudelin's structure and in doing so have very effectively demonstrated your learning for the week. I love the bit about teams leaving a sour taste in your mouth, they certainly have for most people! You have effectively related your own experiences to this week's reading to create a really good reflection. The only improvement i could suggest is that i noticed you mentioned the second reading in your reference list but couldn't find reference to it in your actual reflection? Overall though a very good job!