Presented at the Asia-Pacific Conference on Computer-Aided Qualitative Research 24-25 February 2011, Macau SAR Organised by: Merlien Institute For upcoming conferences, please visit: http://www.merlien.org

1. Developing successful strategies for
working effectively in teams using QDA
software
Brainstorming Workshop
25 February
1:45pm to 3:15pm
Dr. David Kirkham
CAQRA 2011
Macau

2. Team working with CAQDAS
Brainstorming Workshop
Key objective is to brainstorm in groups to derive good
practices for working effectively in teams, given a large
qualitative research project
Secondary objective is to brainstorm the potential effects of
team dynamics upon the project
“researchers ought to take a more direct approach to the study of issues
in group dynamics” (Wasser & Bresler, 1996)
Four areas for discussion
Project planning
Data collection
Data analysis
Writing up and reporting results
Five groups to address the given tasks and questions
Share the results in a 3 minute presentation
CAQRA 2011 Macau

3. Timings
10
20
Brief
20
Brainstorm
Present
Conclude
40
CAQRA 2011 Macau

4. Group Tasks
Project planning (Group 1/2)
Define criteria for deciding on a software
package to support the analysis
How to communicate effectively while working in
teams
Data collection
How to organize and conduct data collection in
team projects. How to set up the team project
using CAQDAS .
Data collection and analysis (Group
3/5)
Special considerations for teams when working
with multimedia data
CAQRA 2011 Macau

5. Group Tasks
Data analysis (Group 4)
How to develop a common coding system when working in
teams
Assessing the issue of inter-rater reliability:
For which purpose and aim should it be used?
How to organize the team work so that IRR can be
assessed and in what way
Writing up and reporting (Group 3/5)
How to organise the process of writing up the results of the
analysis and putting together a report
CAQRA 2011 Macau

6. Some Thoughts on Teams
Dynamics, threats and opportunities
CAQRA 2011
Macau

7. Characteristics
What defines a group as a team is the
requirement for interaction
“The crux of teamwork is for the team members to use a
collection of processes, strategies, and actions that allow
them to effectively and efficiently perform” (Stout et al., 1997: 169)
A team is a group which has a common goal, the pursuit of
which needs collaboration and coordination, but there needs
to be regular and frequent interaction, a team identity, and
the right combinations of skills, knowledge, perspectives and
interests (Kakabadse et al., 1988)
“This is the power of the team mind: to create
new and unexpected solutions, options and
interpretations, drawing on the experience of
all the team members to generate products
that are beyond the capabilities of any of the
individuals” (Klein, 1998: 245)
CAQRA 2011 Macau

8. Dialectic of collaborative research
“uniquely innovative ideas are
synthesized and fresh insights into the
world emerge”
“conflict and frustration result from
clash of wills, competing ideologies
and imperfect theoretical frameworks”
“the challenge is for the teams to stay
together long enough for the team to
grow”
(Tripp-Reimer, et al., 1997)
CAQRA 2011 Macau

9. Team development
CAQRA 2011 Macau

10. Team membership
Homogeneity?
“Living in a shared culture will provide us a basis
of common referents” (Klein, 1998: 218)
Recruiting in one’s own image
Using traits which indicated introvert/extrovert
and stable/anxious, Belbin found that a team
composed chiefly of stable extroverts performed
better overall
Heterogeneity?
An heterogeneous group is more likely to
question members’ judgements and is likely to
be more creative (King, 2002)
CAQRA 2011 Macau

11. Belbin’s Work
Many years of behaviour analysis and
personality tests
People observed working in groups
Categories of behaviour used was recorded
People don’t use all categories equally
Behaviour falls into limited number of roles
Preferred roles linked to:
Reasoning ability
Personality characteristics
Personal values
CAQRA 2011 Macau

12. Role +ve features -ve features
Plant Creative, imaginative, unorthodox, Poor managing people
solves difficult problems and in communication
Resource Extravert, enthusiastic, Loses interest once
investigator communicative, explores initial enthusiasm has
opportunities, develops contacts passed
Coordinator Mature, confident, trusting, good Not the most clever or
chair, clarifies goals, promotes creative member
decision-making
Shaper Dynamic, outgoing, highly strung, Prone to provocation
challenges, pressurises, finds ways and short-lived burst of
round obstacles temper
Monitor- Sober, strategic, discerning, sees all Lacks drive and ability
evaluator options, judges accurately to inspire others
Team worker Social, mild, perceptive, listens, Indecisive in crunch
accommodates, builds, stops friction situations
Implementer Disciplined, reliable, conservative, Inflexible, slow
efficient, ideas > practical actions response to new ideas
Completer Painstaking, conscientious, anxious, Worries unduly,
search out E&O, delivers on time reluctant to delegate
Specialist Single-minded, self-starting, Contributes on a narrow
dedicated, provide K or special skills front
CAQRA 2011 Macau

13. Belbin Team Roles
Shaper
10 10
Team Worker 8 Plant
9.7
6
4
3.7 8.7
Completer 2 Resource Investigator
5 0
5.3 8.3
Implementer Specialist
5.7 6.3
Monitor-Evaluator Coordinator

14. Successful Teams
Not the best people to produce the best
team
All striving, ambitious, high-fliers rarely get beyond
‘storming’ stage
Trying to establish dominance
Getting own ideas accepted
A team of prima donnas – the think-tank approach –
regularly failed in Belbin’s experiments
Effective team made up of range of people
with a variety of roles
Teams have to come from who is available
Encourage people to take on a variety of
roles and be more flexible
Identify which roles the team lacks and take one of them
on
CAQRA 2011 Macau

15. Virtual Team Working
Individual research
activities
CAQRA 2011 Macau

16. The Information Hub
CAQRA 2011 Macau

17. Actions
Form five groups
Assign each group a topic
Each group nominates one person who will
present the outcome of the discussion in 3
minutes
Group specification:
4 or more researchers (peers rather than RAs)
Same department: same institution: same country:
different institutions in different countries
Presentation of results and discussion with
the other groups at 3:05pm
CAQRA 2011 Macau

18. Results - Q1 + Q2
CAQRA 2011 Macau

19. Results
CAQRA 2011 Macau

20. Results
CAQRA 2011 Macau

21. Presented at the Asia-Pacific conference on
Computer-Aided Qualitative Research
24 & 25 Feb 2011, Macau SAR
For more information about our upcoming conferences
Please visit: http://www.merlien.org
CAQRA 2011 Macau