Belbin Team Roles in Project Management

Revision as of 23:02, 25 February 2021

Developed by Zahra Al-Mosawi (S193938)

Abstract

Big Idea

Background

The Belbin Team Roles is a theory developed by Meredith Belbin in collaboration with the mathematician Bill Hartson, the anthropologist Jeanne Fisher, and the occupational psychologist Roger Mottram, following nine years of study [1]. The study was executed at the Administrative Staff College in Henley, which included yearly participation in three business games with eight teams per game, several meetings, observations, categorisations, records of different team members' contributions and psychometric tests. By analysing the study results, Meredith Belbin and his research team could find a connection between team members' various combinations of personalities and behaviours and the overall team performance. It became clear that it was the balance of behaviour rather than the intellect that enabled a team to be successful. The study also showed that companies with a mix of different people and different behaviours tended to be the most successful.

Eight distinct clusters of behaviour called "Belbin Team Roles" were discovered during the study [1]. Later on, an additional Team Role based on specialist knowledge was identified. According to Meredith Belbin, a "Team Role" is defined as "a tendency to behave, contribute and interrelate with others in a particular way.". As a part of the research, it was observed that various people showed characteristics of different Team Roles to varying degrees and that the best performing teams are the ones that had included all Team Roles. With the gained insight from the study, Dr Belbin developed the Belbin Team Role Self-Perception Inventory (BTRSPI), a test that measures behaviour and defines an individual’s role in a team. Today the BTRSPI test and the Belbin Team Roles theory are widely used by several companies to identify behavioural strengths and weaknesses in different workplaces. By knowing our Team Roles, we can assure that our strengths are used to our benefit and our weaknesses managed as much as possible. In some cases, that would mean being conscious of traps and trying to avoid them. A further description of the BTRSPI test and the nine Team Roles can be found later in this article.

The Theory in Relation to Project Management

Success in project performance is often linked to high-performing teams ^[1]. Therefore, project managers need to develop high-performing teams to achieve project success effectively and efficiently. The PMBOK® Guide confirms this statement by stating that developing a project team helps improve the people skill, technical competencies, the overall team environment, and project performance [3]. In this process, it is important to consider that different people have different characteristics and preferences regarding certain work and team roles. As the Belbin Team Roles theory is utilised as a tool to determine an individual's role in a team, it can be useful for project managers to assess these characteristics and preferences and build balanced teams where the right people are assigned to the right project roles and tasks.

PRINCE2 states that for a project to be successful, it must have a clear team structure with specified roles and responsibilities for the involved people and an effective approach for communication [4]. Understanding various people's behaviours and personalities and knowing how they influence each other can help project managers put together teams with defined roles and responsibilities and a potential for a good environment and effective communication. As people are the central part when developing project teams and making progress in the project, it is crucial to get an insight into how they behave and what type of characteristics they have when working with others. Here is where the theory of Belbin Team Roles can be linked to project management practices and act as a helpful tool.

Application

Belbin's Nine Team Roles

Belbin Team Roles can be divided into three categories depending on their main orientations; action, social, and thinking as listed below.

Action: Completer Finisher (CF), Implementer (IMP), Shaper (SH)

Social: Co‐ordinator (CO), Resource Investigator (RI), Team Worker (TW)

Thinking: Monitor Evaluator (ME), Plant (PL), Specialist (SP)

Descriptions of the Team Roles

Plant (PL)

Plants are innovators and inventors. They can be very creative and provide original ideas to encourage innovation. Most of the time, they prefer working on their own at a distance from other team members. They have a tendency to be introverted and respond intensely to criticism and praise. Oftentimes, their ideas may be radical and impractical. However, due to their originality and radical perspective on things, they are usually considered clever. Sometimes, they have difficulties communicating compellingly and presenting their ideas in a practical and relevant way.

Plants are most useful when conventional and fixed ways of working need to be challenged, and when there is a need for new solutions to solve complicated problems. They are usually required in a project's early stages or when a project is not proceeding. Since plants tend to put their time working on their own ideas, they might not be highly productive when in a team.

Resource Investigator (RI)

Resource Investigators are generally enthusiastic extroverts and communicating with people is a natural part of their personality. They are also natural negotiators and great at finding new opportunities as well as establishing new connections. Even though the RIs do not often come with original ideas, they are good at promoting other people's ideas. RIs are usually comfortable people and have a deep analytical sense and a passion for finding possibilities in different cases. However, their enthusiasm and excitement may fade away instantly if the other team members are no longer stimulated.

RIs are useful in a team because they are excellent at investigating and exploring ideas, improvements, and resources outside the team. They are also people with a natural ability to build external relations, participate in subsequent negotiations, think on their feet, and ask others for information.

Co-ordinator (CO)

Co-ordinators excel at helping others work towards common goals. They are mature, confident and self-assured, and like to delegate. In interpersonal relationships, they are quick to recognize personal talents and utilize them to achieve team goals. Although COs are not necessarily the smartest in a team, they are likely to have a broad view and perspective. COs are goal-oriented, and due to that, they can sometimes manipulate others to accomplish their individual goals. In some cases, COs tend to disagree with Shapers because of their opposing management styles.

COs do well when they have responsibility for a team of people with different skills and personal characteristics. They are better at managing colleagues of similar or equal status than they are at managing junior subordinates. COs usually believe in approaching problems calmly.

Team Worker (TW)

Team Workers have a friendly and sociable character and are generally helpful and caring to others. They have a remarkable ability to be flexible and adapt to different situations and people. TWs are empathetic, diplomatic, and usually good listeners. Due to these traits, they tend to be popular among their colleagues. Their desire to establish peace and avoid conflict can make them indecisive when making difficult individual decisions. TWs perform well when circumstances are tense, and people feel not cared for and unappreciated. This is because of their ability to solve interpersonal issues. Since TWs have few opponents and are willing to listen to others' views and suggestions, they can rise to leadership positions.

Monitor Evaluator (ME)

Monitor Evaluators are serious and cautious people. They tend to make decisions slowly and prefer to think things through carefully. They usually have high critical thinking ability. They also have a remarkable ability to make astute judgments that consider all factors. If a team a good ME, they are unlikely to make intuitive and careless mistakes. MEs act on facts and logic rather than emotion when weighing options. However, they are often considered hypercritical and sometimes also regarded as slow and boring.

MEs are ideally suited to analyzing problems and assessing solutions and suggestions. They are excellent at weighing up the pros and cons of different options. Their ability to regularly make high-quality decisions is likely to make them highly respected in a leadership position.

Shaper (SH)

Shapers are very goal-oriented people with high drive and energy. They drive themselves and others and are inclined to conquer challenges by utter determination. They are likely to be very assertive and highly directive leaders. Shapers strive to be competitive and win in most cases. They usually grow in companies because they achieve results and because many people are fascinated by them being bold and decisive managers. However, SHs can be both argumentative and aggressive.

In general, SHs are seen as excellent leaders as they generate action and excel during tense circumstances. When quick and effective action is required to overcome challenges or project progress is very slow, SHs work well and are very useful.

Implementer (IMP)

What distinguishes the Implementers is their practical approach and their higher degree of self-control and discipline. They are usually loyal to the organization and willing to work hard to assure that things are done as prescribed in a systematic manner. They tend to be seen as people who do not seek personal agendas and self-interest. On the other hand, IMPs can be inflexible when it comes to accepting new ways of working, especially if they are radical or impractical.

Considering that IMPs are reliable and have a potential for application, they are regarded as valuable in an organization. As they have a sense of what is feasible and relevant and work efficiently, IMPs usually succeed in what they do. While many people prefer the tasks, they like to do and disregard things they dislike, an IMP instead does what needs to be done systematically and relentlessly.

Completer Finisher (CF)

Completer Finishers pay great attention to detail, continuously strive for perfection, and correct mistakes. CFs are considerably introverted and do not require much external stimulation compared to most people. One can trust CFs to perform to the highest standard and to complete their work on time. However, the combination of aiming for perfection and meeting deadlines often generates anxiety, and CFs are prone to be unwilling to trust others to do their work to their own high standards. The CFs are especially valuable where tasks need close focus and a high degree of precision. They are well suited to circumstances where accuracy and high standards are essential. Most likely, CFs also expect the same high standards from the people around them, establishing their own micro-culture where excellence is the only appropriate standard.

Specialist (SP)

The Specialist Team Role frequently causes confusion. This is because the term "Specialist" is usually referred to as an individual with technical knowledge and expertise. However, the Specialists, as defined by Belbin Team Roles, have some particular features. The main characteristic feature is their love of learning. They see education and the gathering of knowledge as the primary purpose for their existence. Most likely, SPs would be perceived by peers as an expert to whom one can turn to for help and guidance. However, they would typically avoid participating in social or unstructured meetings and discussions. They can also be slightly relentless when the validity of their knowledge or area of expertise is questioned.

While SPs may not necessarily be considered natural team players, it will be advisable for teams to engage the SP to enable in-depth research. As leaders, they are respected for their in-depth knowledge and can be used as mentors to increase others' professional competencies.

Belbin Team Role Self-Perception Inventory

The Belbin Team Role Self‐Perception Inventory (BTRSPI) is a test based on a questionnaire that measures an individual's behavioural characteristics when working in teams rather than on personality. Personality is, however, seen as one factor that can have an impact on behaviour. Other factors are values and motivations, external influences, experience, role learning and mental abilities. Most personality traits are considered relatively fixed, while behaviour can more easily change and adapt to changes in any of the factors that impact it. For that reason, it is expected that Team Role preferences may evolve, for example, when changing work role or environment or when something life-changing occurs.

The Preferred, Manageable and Least Preferred Roles

The BTRSPI test analyses a candidate's Preferred, Manageable, and Least Preferred Roles. The Preferred Roles are the ones in which the candidate fits naturally and feels the most comfortable. Manageable Roles are the ones that the candidate can have when needed for the team's advantage. Simultaneously, the Least Preferred Roles are the ones that the individual does not fit naturally in and does not feel comfortable in.

Construction and Function of BTRSPI

The BTRSPI measures nine Team Roles and includes a scale known as "Dropped Points" (DP) that looks at candidates' assertions and not on their Team Role contributions. The inventory is divided into eight distinct sections. Each section contains a heading and ten assertions, one for each Team Role and the last for DP. The headings indicate a work-related scenario or circumstance which the candidate can identify with. The main idea behind that is to ground the defined behaviours in a familiar sense of work and encourage candidates to think about cases from their own experiences. An example of heading could be: "I believe I could make positive contributions to a team because:"

Candidates are asked to allocate ten points in each section of the inventory when completing the BTRSPI. If a person identifies equally with only two assertions, five points should be given for each. If four of them are relevant, but two are more relevant than the other two, the allocation of points could be as follows: 3, 3, 2, and 2.

After completing the test, the candidates will receive an individual report where the combination of Team Roles they display are identified. Included in the report is also advice and guidance on using the strengths of the Team Roles in a work environment.

Application in Practice

Limitations

Annotated Bibliography

Books

Articles

Websites

References