• Home
  • Business
  • Teamwork reflection and evaluation(LGBT Discrimination in Philippines workplace)

Teamwork reflection and evaluation(LGBT Discrimination in Philippines workplace) Essay Example

  • Category:
    Business
  • Document type:
    Assignment
  • Level:
    Masters
  • Page:
    2
  • Words:
    1208

Reflection on the Teamwork

Lecturer’s Name

Business

Contents

3Observation of the team process

Teammates’ behaviour 3

Challenges the team came across 4

Contributions the teammates made to overcome challenges 5

Lessons from the teamwork experience 6

References 7

Observation of the team process

A team is usually a good concept, especially where team members are vibrant and actively involved in the task at hand. However, the team takes some time before it can settle and before members can feel part of the team. Ours was no different. We had to go through the process of bonding to make sure that we were able to come up with a good team environment.

The team had to organize several meetings in which candid discussions would take place and also to ensure that we got comfortable with each other. Humor was always allowed in the discussion process to help ease any tension that may have been there since the group members were not as familiar with each other.

The team also needed to remain motivated at every moment; the team leader came in handy in this aspect (Petri & Govern 2012).

Teammates’ behaviour

Team acted with respect towards each other. They were always punctual on meetings apart from limited occasions in which there would be a good reason.

The warmth reception of ideas was not always the case, in the initial stages; the team would find it difficult to create a good and healthy environment for discussion.

The behaviour of team members was commendable. The level of tolerance by each member made it possible to achieve far much than would have been possible had we focussed on the few rough edges that we experienced.

Challenges the team came across

The very first challenge that the team faced was communication. Three members of the team are Chinese, and the fourth is Canadian. The Chinese would have a problem expressing some concepts since English is not their first language. Some important information would, therefore, be lost in the process of interpretation. It is always easy for persons to express ideas in their first language but might find it difficult to translate those ideas into another language while giving the idea the same touch (Van Nes et al. 2010). As explained by the CAGE distance framework, the challenge of language would be associated with the distance between our cultural diversities as a result of coming from different countries.

Another challenge was the cultural diversity and ideological differences (Kottak 2011). Having two countries involved, the cultural diversity would be evident. According to Hoftede’s culture dimensions, people from different countries would exhibit different cultural practices. It is also the case that different people would exhibit different traits such as individualism depending on their country of origin. Such presents a problem when a person from a country with high levels of individualism is placed in groups. The positive contribution would only be possible where all the members agree with a certain concept or belief. It would, therefore, be hard to ensure that everyone was on board. The issue with diversity is that every individual have that which they value more than other values (Sperber & Sperber 1996).

The other challenge involved time. Members of the team had to sacrifice some activities to come up with a suitable time for everyone.

The last and the most difficult challenge were coming up with proper solutions for the fight against the discrimination of LGBT in the Philippines. The team had a hard time trying to figure out ways in which we could come up with ideas and mechanisms that would help reduce or eliminate discrimination in a country where the belief of the people was quite different (UNDP & USAID 2014). The team, therefore, had to come with a good research on the culture and the law of the Philippines to draft a workable mechanism that suits their context (Ocampo 2011).

Contributions the teammates made to overcome challenges

The members conducted thorough research to ensure that we understood our challenges and knew exactly how to solve them.

On communication, the members engaged themselves on materials that would help them communicate effectively in English. Utilising effective communication guides came in handy.

On diversity, Concepts such as the MBI model was used to try and bridge the differences between the team members. We had to first understand each other’s differences and communicate them among ourselves. After that we resulted in communing up with ways to try and solve the differences by ensuring that every member participated effectively and further, by building on each other’s ideas.

The CAGE framework and the Hofstede’s culture dimension helped us in understanding how coming from different nations brings about cultural differences. With that in mind, we were able to come up with solutions that were accommodative to all by ensuring that we maximised on the positive values of each member of the team.

On mechanism to approach our venture, the members were actively involved in the research on culture and behaviour thereof. The same helped the group be able to find out the best way of addressing discrimination that has been cited as a common problem (Grant, Mottet & Tanis 2011). Research was also dedicated to finding the most influential platforms that the team could use to advocate against the discrimination of LGBT.

Lessons from the teamwork experience

The team work helped a lot in understanding cultural diversity and how to respect each person’s belief. It also helped in learning how to communicate effectively in a group setup. The teamwork was also very effective in conducting proper and effective research. The team work was also important in giving us some insight on how to work under pressure.

Where there is limitation of time as was our case, one gets to learn how to plan effectively to ensure that every moment is accounted for. The teamwork therefore helped a lot in learning how to manage my time.

As a result of the challenges we faced, the team got acquainted with helpful concepts such as the CAGE framework, MBI model and the Hofstede’s cultural dimension. These concepts were very helpful in understanding how we would solve our differences as a team and also knowing how to apply the same in the venture since we were to look at a population with different cultural practices. The sensitisation of the elimination of discrimination on LGBT depended on how we would understand the culture of the Philippines.

References

Grant, JM, Mottet, LA & Tanis, J 2011, Injustice at Every Turn: A Report of the

National Transgender Discrimination Survey, National Center for Transgender Equality & National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, <http:// endtransdiscrimination.org/PDFs/NTDS_Report.pdf>

Kottak, C P 2011, Cultural Anthropology: Appreciating Cultural Diversity, McGraw-Hill, New York

Ocampo, MB 2011, ‘In The Workplace: Discrimination In The Workplace Absent An Anti Discrimination Law’,Philippine Law Journal, vol. 86, pp. 190–232

Petri, H, & Govern, J 2012, Motivation: Theory, research, and application, Cengage Learning, Boston

Sperber, D & Sperber, D 1996, Explaining Culture, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford

UNDP & USAID 2014, ‘Being LGBT in Asia’ The Philippines Country Report, Bangkok https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1861/2014%20UNDP USAID%20Philippines%20LGBT%20Country%20Report%20-%20FINAL.pdf

Van Nes, F, Abma, T, Jonsson, H, & Deeg, D 2010, Language differences in qualitative research: is meaning lost in translation? European journal of ageing, no.7 vol. 4, pp. 313-316.