Over a period of ten years, he carried out extended observational research to determine which factors influenced team failure or success.
In fact, nine separate clusters of behaviour turned out to be distinctive and useful, with the balance required dependent on the purpose and objectives of the team.
[4] The Resource Investigator gives a team a rush of enthusiasm at the start of the project by vigorously pursuing contacts and opportunities.
A good Resource Investigator is a maker of possibilities and an excellent networker, but has a tendency to lose momentum towards the end of a project and to forget to follow things up.
[3] The Shaper is a task-focused individual who pursues objectives with vigour and who is driven by tremendous energy and the need to achieve.
Since the role can be a low-profile one, the beneficial effect of a Teamworker can go unnoticed and unappreciated until they are absent, when the team begins to argue, and small but important things cease to happen.
Specialists bring a high level of concentration, ability, and skill in their discipline to the team, but can only contribute on that specialism and will tend to be uninterested in anything which lies outside its narrow confines.
[5] Following the introduction of Belbin's approach to Team Role analysis in 1981,[1] an independent study of the psychometric properties of the instruments was published in 1993 in the Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology.
There have been several other scholarly studies of the validity and reliability of Belbin's approach over the nearly 26 years since the Furnham-Belbin exchange, most of which have used the inventory in its original form.
Both the Fisher, et al. (2001) and the earlier Broucek & Randall (1996) find that observational and factor analytical approaches yield five rather than eight role constructs.
Fisher, et al. go on to argue that this coherence of the five traits of teams is backed up by earlier research by Barrick & Mount (1991).
[12] The original research into the Belbin Team Roles was conducted with the old, copyrighted, eight-role version that was intended for an individual's own interest rather than for use as a tool.
More recent studies using normed data from Belbin's e-interplace system, such as that by Aritzeta, Swailes and Senior (2004)[13] have found higher correlations and reliability, as well as distinct analytical constructs using the online, normed, nine-role tool with observers added to give 360-degree feedback (enhancing construct validity by providing "real-world" data).
Smith, Polglase & Parry (2012)[18] applied the Belbin team role self and observer perceptions to a large cohort (145) of undergraduate students in a module assessed through two separate group projects.
Results showed a slight improvement in group performance compared with that of previous cohorts, with a significant increase in first-class grades.
No evidence was found linking group balance to performance; however, students recognized the value of their Belbin report when entering the job market.
However, where Belbin focuses on role-based behaviour, the Team Management Profile is a psychometric which measures work preferences.
The concept builds on the Group Roles model developed by Benne & Sheats in 1948,[22] taking a short-cut route to describing preferences when guiding others.
Similarly, the Roles Model follows the Mintzberg 10 management positions[23] – drawing in the most relevant elements when considering the mentoring relationship in detail.