Performance Matrix for Group Work: Differences in Decision Making and Personality Types

This article discusses the performance matrix for group work, differences in decision making, and personality types. It also covers the steps taken to assign roles, conflict resolution, and ethical challenges in decision making.

INDIVIDUAL
Performance Matrix
Member Name/ID Maximum Teamwork
Mark (%)
Average Participation
Score (1-5)
1 A (mine) 15 5
2 B 15 4
3 C 15 5
Differences in team member decisions
The group consisted to three members thus there were three different personalities with different
decision preferences. Our group leader was member C and his task was to send reminders on the group
objectives and timelines, otherwise all members were equal since all decisions were made by
discussions and mutual agreement. The team leader showed the characteristic of compromising his own
preferences and instead considering the preferences of the other members when making a group
decision. All member had different preferences, I however found it difficult compromising my
preference in decision making but was forced to do it for the purpose of the group achieving its
objectives. The members had an issue with some of the decisions I had made based on the solutions we
had to hold a meeting to discuss and come to a common ground. I was forced compromise some of my
decisions and adopt the group members’ decisions.
Personality types
My personality type has always been strong I guess that is why is seemed difficult to compromise some
of my decisions. I noticed that member B at some point was easily swayed during decision making thus it
is my conclusion that he is more trusting thus easy to manipulate his preferences. However, member C
seemed to stand hard on his ground when it came to defending some of his decision but could give in
when he was convinced that the other members’ decision was better. All these three unique
personalities merged perfectly and ensured the success of the project. The greatest win was
understanding each other’s personalities and decision making approaches and appreciating their
uniqueness.
Steps used to assign roles and Conflict resolution
Every member of the group was assigned a unique role, there were various steps that were used during
the assignment of roles. First the roles were identified by all members, individual strengths and
preferences of each member were noted, the magnitude of work required to accomplish the roles was
noted, the time required to complete the roles was noted, then through a discussion between all
members roles were assigned based on these factors to ensure equal job assignment. Member B ‘s
tasks were to define the problem, situation analysis, sense making , and developing the
Introduction, member c was tasked to formulate potential solutions, select between solutions,
and develop the table of contents. My task was Decision making based on solutions,

Implementation of decisions, Testing, Team Feedback on decisions, Giving Recommendations,
Conclusions and Referencing. This tasks were assigned based on the individual strengths and
preferences. All members had the clear instructions to communicate always in case they
needed help in their task and to follow the set timelines and guidelines.
There was conflict during the assigning of the tasks since members wanted the less committing
tasks but it was resolved by pointing out the fact that each task performed in the project was
for the benefit of all and ensuring the success of the whole project. Any conflict that came up
during the project was resolved by a group meeting where a unanimous decision was always
arrived at to guide the whole group.
Steps taken to ensure ethical challenges in decision making were met
At the commencement of the project the relevant ethical principles were identified and given to all
members to read and understand them. The best practices for the project were identified and given to
all members. Instructions were given to all members to follow keenly the ethical principles in making the
project decisions. For example during the deciding of which members to consider redundant the
members had a clear instruction to arrive at a decision with clear justification. This will ensure that the
whole project report is deemed trustworthy. Every member was required to apply evaluation and critical
thinking before making a decision while avoiding any conflict of interest. All members were expected to
be righteous and moral to their own conscience and serve the project interest.
Overcoming conflicts
- To overcome hidden profile all group information was shared in the presence of all the three
members and anyone who did not understand was encouraged to seek clarity in order to ensure
we were all at per.
- To overcome social loafing all members were assigned individual tasks and were directly
answerable to the group thus every member worked hard to ensure that they complete their
task effectively and on time.
- Cascading distortions of information was avoided by ensuring all the information shared in the
group was factual. All information shared was reviewed from more than one reliable sources
and clarity was sort from the professor where necessary.
- To overcome groupthink the group set up clear objectives which were to be followed during
decision making the objectives were not meant to please anyone but to ensure that the project
aims were achieved and in the given timeline.
- To overcome power plays, each individual member of the group was notified that they were
responsible for the success of the group and their individual efforts mattered a lot. No individual
was given the sole power of decision making but all decisions were made unanimously.
- To overcome virtual communication stresses the group created an online group where group
information could be shared and any questions asked.