Research performed by Dr. Meredith Belbin on team interactions produced findings that a team succeeds or fails mostly based on types of behaviors of the individuals and their ability to combine them. During the 1970s, research performed on teams found that individuals tended to identify into certain clusters of behavior when relating to others and contributing to the team which affected overall
. performance and effectiveness. The different team contributions became defined as different "Team Roles". Belbin's research determined that nine different roles exist: Plants, Monitor Evaluators, Co-ordinators, Resource Investigators, Implementers, Completer Finishers, Teamworkers, Shapers, and Specialists. Plants were labeled as such because an individual "planted" into a team was able to find solutions to problems in unconventional and creative ways. Coordinators were needed to delegate assignments to help the team focus on the overall objectives to maintain a sense of structure. Resource Investigators helped to provide knowledge on the opposition and prevented the team from becoming too inwardly focused; they also worked with external parties to help the team succeed. Implementers were used to carry out workable tasks with high degrees of efficiency. Completer Finishers were ideal for nearing the end of a task because they would check for errors, perform quality control and make sure the work was high quality. Teamworkers were diplomatic, promoted working together and helped the team to stay together by maintaining versatility and being able to complete various aspects of the work for the good of the team. Shapers were the people in the group that challenged everyone to keep going, maintained the momentum and prevented the team from losing their focus. The Specialist had strong knowledge in a key area but also overly prioritized their area of expertise over the overall progress of the team. Belbin found that team success was dependent on having balance in these areas of team roles. For example, when there was no Plant on the team, there was a lack of ideas to push forward, but too many Plants on the team caused bad ideas to overshadow good ones and wasted time. Without Shapers, the team missed deadlines. With too many individuals acting as Shapers, fighting would ensue. Each of the roles also had an identifiable but "allowable weakness"; this area of weakness could be covered by a different role. For more information, see http://www.belbin.com. More Reference Links: http://www.belbin.com/rte.asp?id=8 http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_83.htm
