Team Values and Norms
Each team should prepare a list of values (expected behaviors) and norms (expected levels of performance measuring those behaviors) against which they will assess themselves and their peers. This listing should be compiled in the first week of senior design, preferably before the first workshop. As the project progresses, the team may wish to revisit these values and norms to address issues that arise, but may not have been predicted at the outset. The faculty recommend that the first draft document be prepared by the DPM manager, revised with the student team and the project initiation meeting, and reviewed every 5 weeks during the progres of the project. The document should not be revised too frequently (such as weekly).
- Acceptable Meeting Behavior:
- All team members should show up to each and every meeting scheduled by the team, unless it is known at the time of planning the meeting that a team member will not be present.
- Absences are considered "excused" if and only if the absent team member notifies the Project Manager or Lead Engineer at least 24 hours prior to meeting time. Extenuating circumstances will be dealt with on a case by case basis.
- If a team member has 3 unexcused absences the team will notify the faculty/staff coordinator, and take appropriate actions.
- Team members shall be on time to all team meetings to promote timeliness and progress for the team as a whole.
- Team members shall bring all required materials to meeting to be productive. This includes the individuals bound engineering notebook, writing utensil and any assigned work from previous meetings.
- Team members present at team meetings should be actively involved in team discussions and should volunteer for assigned work periodically to aid in even distribution of work load throughout the team.
- Team members should come prepared to team meetings with all assigned work completed at a minimal satisfactory level. If work is not completed at a satisfactory level because of a misunderstanding in the assignment or a lack of resources the team member should show up ready to discuss any issues which will allow for the assignment to be completed at the next team meeting.
- Meeting Management:
- Overall the flow of the meeting should be run by the Project Manager primarily, and the Lead Engineer secondarily. This is because these individuals should know the overall progress of the team and any sub-teams.
- Deliverable Guidelines:
- All deliverable assigned to team members should be completed by the date stated at the meeting where they are assigned. The team member responsible should bring the deliverable and/or email the document to all team members for review. Team members can then give opinions and remarks regarding the deliverable for revisions.
- If the deliverable is not finished by the date assigned the Project Manager or the Lead Engineer can choose to add another team member to the assignment for assistance. On the date the deliverable is due, if it is not completed the team member responsible should give an update as to the status of the deliverable.
- When a team member brings a deliverable to a team meeting they should bring at least a single hard-copy of the document to pass around for other team members to review or present an electronic copy during the meeting.
Team Norms: Weekly Peer Assessment Rubric
Every team member will conduct a weekly peer assessment of their team-mates. The rubric below indicates how each team member will assess their peers. These 'Norms' reflect how each team member expects their peers to meet the team 'Values'. The entries in the table below represent a starting point, or example, typical of what other design teams have successfully employed in the past. Each team should modify or update their Norms each time the team Values are updated.
|Value||Unsatisfactory||Needs Improvement||Meets Expectations||Exceeds Expectations|
|Punctual||The team member has had one or more unexcused absences or tardy arrivals to a scheduled team activity. The team member is not notifying others of conflicts with meeting times, or has allowed other committments to impede the member's duties to this team. The team member is detracting from the performance of the entire team.||The team member has had one or more unexcused absences or tardy arrivals. The individual could and should have done a better job at notifying (in advance) a peer of the absence or tradiness. At the current time, the problem has not caused significant harm to the team, but this behavior needs to improve. It is not unusual for a team member to receive this rating a couple of times during the project.||The team member was prompt and present at every team event this week, or any absences were excused in advance. If there was an unexcused absence or tardiness, then the team-mates agreed that the reason disclosed after the fact was indeed unavoidable. For example, a member is in a fender bender on the way to campus, and was unable to contact a team-mate about being late. The absent member caught up with a peer as soon as practical, and informed them of the problem.||Not only is the team member always prompt and present, but the member clearly plans ahead for excused absences (such as job trips) and insures that the absence will not adversely affect the team's performance. The member notifies the team of heavy loads and external conflicts (such as exams in other classes) that COULD have an adverse impact on the team, and works with the peers on this team to make sure that the information flow from the member to and from the peers is smooth even in such cases.|
|Thorough||The team member has not completed the task assigned, or has submitted a response that is clearly insufficient. The work will need to be re-done by another team member in order for the team to move forward. Some of the work may have been done, but it was incomplete. The team member is detracting from the performance of the entire team.||The team member made some progress towards the task assigned, but not as much progress as should have been accomplished. The work may be done, but the other team member's have no way of checking the results, because the supporting documentation is incomplete. The team member is getting behind on the tasks that need to be completed. The team member needs to make up the missed work during the next evaluation period.||The team member has made solid progress towards the task assigned. The task is complete, and is well done, though it may need some additional work and refinement to be fully complete. The assignment may be incomplete, but the team member has clearly made a good effort towards getting the task done. In retrospect, this task may have been too much for the member to do in the time allocated, so the fact that the task is not done yet is not due to lack of effort by the member.||The task has been completed fully, and is in essentially finished form. The other team members can readily check the work submitted since the documentation is so clear. Not only is the work done, but everyone on the team recognizes that the task is complete with little or no need for additional effort.|
|Accurate||The work completed by the team member is unacceptable and does not meet the basic standards of engineering work. Engineering principles were not applied, or were grossly mis-applied. Basic elements of the engineering task were overlooked. The work completed must be re-done completely.||The work completed by the member contains many errors that must be corrected. While the basic approach to problem solving may be ok, the actual work completed needs to be largely re-done in order to be useful to the team. Some things were not done by the team member, that should have been obvious to complete.||The work completed by the member contains a few errors that must be corrected. The basic approach to problem solving is good, and the errors are relatively minor and could be readily corrected through normal peer review and checking. The work was corrected through consultation with the team members or faculty guide.||The team member completed the task with virtually no errors or omissions. The work was accurate, and can be easily scaled to other applications or tasks that the team may encounter.|
|Professional and Ethical||The team member has committed plagiarism, falsified data, ignored their responsibility as an engineer. The team member may have behaved inappropriately at a team event, or in a manner that reflects adversely on the team. The members' actions may cause the entire team to fail.||The team member has overlooked some references or consistently fails to cite sources and conduct individual tasks. The team member may have made some off-color remarks or been offensive to a team-mate or other individual. The team member needs to clean up his/her act.||The team member behaves responsibly and fully documents sources and collaborators on all work.||The team member is a role model for others, and behaves in a professional and ethical fashion even under very trying and difficult circumstances.|
|Committed||The team member is a burden to the rest of the team.||The team member is carrying less than their fair share of the work load.||The team member is carrying their fair share of the workload.||The team member is carrying more than their fair share of the workload.|
Peer Assessment Form
Every team member should complete a peer assessment form periodically. The member names fill in the rows along the left, and the Values in the columns across the top. Write the Norms of performance in each entry of the matrix.
Norm Assessment Scale:
- 4 - Exceeds Expectations
- 3 - Meets Expectations
- 2 - Needs Improvement
- 1 - Unsatisfactory
|Member Name||Punctual||Thorough||Accurate||Professional and Ethical||Committed||Overall Average|
|Member Name||Punctual||Thorough||Accurate||Professional and Ethical||Committed||Overall Average|
|Peer Assessment was submitted individually to Professor Slack.|