Project Resource Planning Report - Semester 2, University Name

This report provides an in-depth analysis of a project resource planning assignment, focusing on the performance of a student team. It examines the team's effectiveness, highlighting instances of successful collaboration and areas for improvement. The report delves into the dynamics within the team, exploring how members communicated, shared data, and handled cultural differences. It identifies potential weaknesses, such as the absence of clearly defined goals and insufficient performance monitoring, and suggests strategies to enhance teamwork, including setting clear objectives and improving communication through one-on-one interactions and two-way feedback. The report also addresses potential issues like unclear roles, disengagement, and differences in talent, offering solutions to mitigate conflicts and foster a more productive environment. The student reflects on conflicts that arose, the level of communication within the team, and how communication could have been improved to achieve better outcomes. References to relevant literature are included to support the analysis.

Running head: PROJECT RESOURCE PLANNING
PROJECT RESOURCE PLANNING
Name of Student
Name of University
Author’s Note

1PROJECT RESOURCE PLANNING
Part 2
How the group performed
The group of which I had been a part, performed quite well. The members cooperated
with each other in an effective manner. This had made the process of data sharing an easy
one, the team leader had to convey a certain message or data to a single member and we used
to share it among ourselves (Murray, Coffee and Eklund 2019). A certain team member was
from different cultural background but the group members did not discriminate him or avoid
him in the project. We cooperated with each other and carried out the activities in an efficient
manner. Every member presented their views freely and others accepted it or tried to consider
while carrying out the project.
How they might have performed better as a team
Besides numerous positive points in our team, we also had some weakness that could
have been worked on in order to work better as a team. Some points that could have been
better include setting a goal before starting off with the individual activities (Salas, Prince
and Baker 2017). After we were allotted with our individual tasks, we had started working for
it, we did not invest time in setting the actual goal of the project, and due to this we had faced
numerous issues because team members carried out their tasks according to their
understanding of the project. The goals had to be set long with maintaining a certain level of
challenge, the goals should have been set such that the objectives of the project are fulfilled
after the completion of the project (Bowers, Oser and Salas 2018). The next mistake that had
been made and could have been avoided include monitoring the performance, this had been a
mistake from the end of our supervisor, due to lack of skilled member’s, our supervisor had
to help us without activities, we had concentrated in completing the project within time along
with maintaining good quality, this resulted in no time invested in the monitoring of

2PROJECT RESOURCE PLANNING
performance (Chiu, Owens, B.P. and Tesluk 2016). The next issues that had been faced
include occurring of conflict among the members, this must have been ignored or mitigated
such that the group would have been able to perform effectively as a whole. The next issue
which must have been avoided include the friendly communication among the members, we
had been very friendly with other and we spent most of our time gossiping with each other
regarding tips that were not relevant to the project (De Jong, Dirks and Gillespie 2016). This
had affected the performance of the team members.
Aspects that could rise problems
Some aspects that had the chances to rise issues are mentioned below
1. Uncertainty of roles: the culture where the responsibilities had been shared was very
difficult to get accustomed with, this is because some of the members had not worked
in a team before (Walter, Arnold and Curley 2019). Working with a huge number of
individuals had chances to create confusion on the individuals’ roles within the team,
this could have resulted in allotting similar responsibilities to more than one team
members and hence resting in repletion of tasks (Barnett and Weidenfeller 2016).
This could also give rise to elimination of numerous vital tasks.
2. Unclear goals: one of the reason for which serious issues could have been created
include unclear goals or no goals set. Setting incorrect individual goals or not setting
goals might result in effecting the productivity (Connelly and Turel 2016). This could
have been the chance in our project as well. We did not have proper goals set before
starting off with the project. This could have affected the outcomes obtained from the
project.
3. Disengagement: disengagement is a common issues that could have been faced by
almost all the members. This is because out team had disengaged when there had been
lack of vision or direction (Sousa and Van Dierendonck 2016). The team members

3PROJECT RESOURCE PLANNING
failed to understand what their roles in the project were, they were provided with their
individual activities without any goal of the team or how the project can be carried out
successfully.
4. Differences in talent: this one more aspect that could rise issue because there had been
some employees who had contributed more in the project and there were some who
could not contribute much because they had lack of expertise (Burke, Georganta and
Marlow, 2019). This difference in talent could result in conflicts among team
members. This is because there had been chances that some employees might be
slower and not much efficient compared to others. This might result in reducing the
overall productivity of the entire team.
Conflict that arose
The conflicts that arose within the team includes a situation where the strategies and
opinions of the team members did not match with each other. The team had numerous
employees belonging to different backgrounds and with different specifications, while
carrying out the project, we had to figure out certain strategies that could be used for the
purpose of performing the activities in an effective manner (Nakamura, Umeki and Kato
2017). In this particular stage, the team members had provided their own strategies and
opinions that could be used, but most in most of the cases they were different from in other. It
had been very difficult to use all the strategies and consider all the opinions or merge the
strategies for carrying out the activities (Cole 2017). We were supposed to select few of the
strategies for working effectively, but few member’s denied to compromise with their
strategies and refused to follow if their strategies were not selected. They considered that
only their strategies are effective compared to other. This conflict had imposed a serious
threat on the performance of the individuals along with affect ting the overall performance of
the project (Walter, Arnold and Curley 2019). In this case the aggressive members were to be

4PROJECT RESOURCE PLANNING
handled by the project leader and he collected everyone’s’ suggestion on the strategy that
could be used, later he selected few of them and we were told to follow them without any
more conflict.
Level of communication within the team
The level of communication that existed within the team is the honesty and openness
level of communication, this is because we had been honest with each other and we were
open as well. We had shared our backgrounds and many more details in order to know
ourselves better (Barnett and Weidenfeller 2016). Besides this, we also had some team
members whom we already knew, this had increased the level of comfort among each other
and we felt free in discussing regarding our opinions and thoughts regarding the ways by
which the project could be carried out.
How the communication could have been improved
In order to improve the communication process, there are numerous steps that could
be followed by the team. The steps that could be carried out are as follows
1. Having an interaction that one on one: having one on one interaction with team
members would allow the leader to gain knowledge regarding the personal goals that
an individual wants to achieve through the project, it would further provide more
knowledge regarding the expertise of a certain individual (Connelly and Turel 2016).
At the time of these interactions, the expectations as well as needs are to be set, the
project members must be informed regarding the project demands and necessities.
2. Carry out two way feedback: feedbacks are important for carrying out a two way
communication (Sousa and Van Dierendonck 2016). A process of two way feedback
allows a team leader to know regarding the thoughts of the employees, it would
further provide knowledge regarding the loopholes that exist within the team and

5PROJECT RESOURCE PLANNING
hence get suggestions on how they can be mitigated. The feedbacks are important for
the purpose of generating results where the aim is strengthening the progress of the
project along with meeting the organizational goals (Burke, Georganta and Marlow
2019). This would provide the employees to represent their own concerns and
comments.

6PROJECT RESOURCE PLANNING
References
Barnett, R.C. and Weidenfeller, N.K., 2016. Shared leadership and team
performance. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 18(3), pp.334-351.
Bowers, C.A., Oser, R.L., Salas, E. and Cannon-Bowers, J.A., 2018. 12 Team Performance in
Automated Systems. Automation and human performance: Theory and applications, p.145.
Burke, C.S., Georganta, E. and Marlow, S., 2019. A Bottom-Up Perspective to
Understanding the Dynamics of Team Roles in Mission Critical Teams. Frontiers in
Psychology, 10, p.1322.
Chiu, C.Y.C., Owens, B.P. and Tesluk, P.E., 2016. Initiating and utilizing shared leadership
in teams: The role of leader humility, team proactive personality, and team performance
capability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(12), p.1705.
Cole, G., 2017. Making corporate social responsibility appropriate and effective: The
importance of communication. Annals in Social Responsibility, 3(1), pp.65-67.
Connelly, C.E. and Turel, O., 2016. Effects of team emotional authenticity on virtual team
performance. Frontiers in psychology, 7, p.1336.
De Jong, B.A., Dirks, K.T. and Gillespie, N., 2016. Trust and team performance: A meta-
analysis of main effects, moderators, and covariates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(8),
p.1134.
Murray, R.M., Coffee, P., Eklund, R.C. and Arthur, C.A., 2019. Attributional consensus: The
importance of agreement over causes for team performance to interpersonal outcomes and
performance. Psychology of Sport and Exercise.

7PROJECT RESOURCE PLANNING
Nakamura, H., Umeki, H. and Kato, T., 2017. Importance of communication and knowledge
of disasters in community-based disaster-prevention meetings. Safety Science, 99, pp.235-
243.
Salas, E., Prince, C., Baker, D.P. and Shrestha, L., 2017. Situation awareness in team
performance: Implications for measurement and training. In Situational Awareness (pp. 63-
76). Routledge.
Sousa, M. and Van Dierendonck, D., 2016. Introducing a short measure of shared servant
leadership impacting team performance through team behavioral integration. Frontiers in
psychology, 6, p.2002.
Walter, J.K., Arnold, R.M., Curley, M.A. and Feudtner, C., 2019. Teamwork When
Conducting Family Meetings: Concepts, Terminology, and the Importance of Team-Team
Practices. Journal of pain and symptom management.