Introduction Employees in most jobs will be required to work as part of a team (DEST, 2002), and experience in a team is usually an important criterion in the selection process carried out by employment agencies or human resource departments. Often a key question asked of the candidate is whether they have played team sports, or been in committees, or been in the debating team. What the interviewer is trying to find out is not (a) sporting prowess; (b) political savvy, or (c) public speaking skills (although these are usually important). The point is to see if the candidate can work effectively within a group of peers. Modern university courses attempt to foster team skills, usually by setting team assignments or projects. Training in interpersonal relationships is minimal and the assumption is that if a student has sufficient experience in working within a team, they will be good at working in a team. The effectiveness of this strategy is rarely measured. Recently it has been demonstrated that many students do not want to work in teams, and actively resent being forced to work with each other (Drury, Kay & Losberg, 2003; Waite & Leonardi, 2004). Sometimes team-based assignments have been set for tasks which would not normally be done by teams, possibly to reduce the marking burden for the academics. This behavior by the academics has been interpreted cynically by the students, who may be less than willing to undertake team-based assessment for tasks where team work is appropriate (Waite & Leonardi, 2004). This work attempted to determine the extent of satisfaction of students with their team work experiences in two Information Technology (IT) subjects, and to determine some of the factors which may be used as predictors of satisfaction with team work. Literature Review Previous research has identified a number of factors that are thought to impact on student satisfaction with team work. In particular, the duration of the project and the composition of the team appear to be important. While some aspects of these issues will be addressed in this paper, our main goal is to determine the factors influencing team work satisfaction within self-selected teams. To achieve this goal, the authors had to identify an instrument for measuring team work satisfaction, and in consequence--effectiveness (Hacker, 1997). The terminology used in the literature when referring to people working together on a common goal is inconsistent. Many authors use the term teams, while others use the term groups. We have chosen to define a team as group of people who are * working towards a common goal; * cohesive-i.e. knowledgeable of each other and each other's abilities and tasks; * cooperating to obtain a common goal; * sharing resources. This definition serves well for describing student teams bound by a common assessable task. We define groups as collections of people with common attributes (e.g. cohorts of students) but no common goal requiring cooperation. Where authors have referred to research on groups, but where the situation of the 'group' is consistent with our definition of 'team', we interpret the term 'group' to mean 'team' in our context. Ways of Measuring the Effectiveness of Team Work A brief review of the literature reveals different ways of measuring the effectiveness of team work. Performance measures may take the form of a summative assessment which involves comparing a team's design with a model solution (Porter & Lilly, 1996; Sargent & Sue-Chan, 2001). While many researchers have associated the measurement of team performance with the quality of a product or the achievement of some goal, other researchers have considered the socio-psychological aspects such as using Member Satisfaction as a measure of 'Group Performance' (Hacker, 1997). …
Read full abstract