Reflection 07.03.16

Today we had to present our progress to date to the rest of the group. We were able to clearly explain the hypothesis for the project, the organisation, design and development of the experiment, the data collection event, the data analysis and the start of the visualisation of the outcome. We met prior to the presentation to finalize the layout of the final folded poster and assign tasks for the visualisations. All in all we were able to present a fully rounded and almost complete project. The most interesting revelation of the day, for me, what seeing the way that the other groups worked collaboratively. Although there are 5 groups, only 4 attended, 3 of which did not have all there members. In fact our group was the only group will all members present. I realised that having a smaller number of group members had clearly made a difference in the progress and development of our project. Certainly organising larger numbers proves much more challenging and requires a strong leadership or ‘Art Director’ role. Luckily, our group has three organised and pro-active members. We have been able to organise an efficient and effective timetable, design an interesting hypothesis and experiment based on mutual interest within the group. But also, more importantly, are in the process of building a visualisation that builds on individual member’s subject specific skills. I think this is really the root of our success as a group.

There are more fundamental developments happening here too, which are not overtly evident. In being able to assign tasks, we are all reflecting on our own skill set, being challenged in our preconceptions of the skill sets and subject areas of others and being forced to combine skills which we may have considered to be singular. It may sound bizarre for visual creative people to think of their process as an island but I know that I certainly held painting in an isolated place, unlinked with the creativity of illustration practice, purely a visualisation process, static and unchanging. What this collaborative module has made me realise it that my creative process is not immovably linked with painting. That’s not to say that painting won’t always be part of my process, but the way in which it is connected is open for discussion, debate and change.

I wanted to look more closely at why our group works so well together. Tuckman (1965) theory of group development suggests, groups usually pass through several stages of development as they change from a newly formed group into an effective team. (See table below.)

http://nobaproject.com/modules/the-psychology-of-groups

Using Tuckman’s stages as a reference point I think it is evident that our group moved through the forming stage very quickly. In fact we had completed the forming stage after the sand pit event at the Bluecoat. In the storming stage where initial conflicts to ascertain a group hierarchy, did not really happen either. Although we had disagreements within the group about the finer points of the process of data collection, we were able to overcome them quickly with discussion. Actually the tight time frame for the project forced us to make decisions immediately. For us, the norming stage has been ongoing throughout the project. I think that is because not only are we members of a group in terms of the collaborative module but we are also members of other overlapping groups. So we are all studying an MA at LJMU, also Erika and I are both studying Graphic Design and Illustration. The overlapping of these groups is part of the reason we moved quickly through stages 1 and 2. Our social relationships will continue to develop throughout the rest of the course. Especially because our ultimate goal as individuals is the same. ‘We want to complete the course successfully.’ We are currently in the ‘performing’ stage and are actively focusing our energies on completing the publication. Once that has been printing, we will move to the ‘adjourning’ stage, which will include distributing the publication and evaluating the overall success of the project.

Some of the other groups feel as if they have stalled in their ‘storming and norming’ stages. Some groups have sub groups within them, where members from the same discipline have come together to form core group members. Some of the other groups have not developed a hierarchy within their group so decision making is a lengthy and tiresome process. Unfortunately a lot of decision making is needed in the development and design of content for the publications. Some of this difficulty is due to group numbers too. I certainly had not realised the importance not only of group members but also group size, the combination of both of these criteria has allowed us to form a cohesive and productive group.