View Single Post
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 16-09-2007, 14:13
Rickertsen2 Rickertsen2 is offline
Umm Errr...
None #1139 (Chamblee Gear Grinders)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: ATL
Posts: 1,421
Rickertsen2 has a brilliant futureRickertsen2 has a brilliant futureRickertsen2 has a brilliant futureRickertsen2 has a brilliant futureRickertsen2 has a brilliant futureRickertsen2 has a brilliant futureRickertsen2 has a brilliant futureRickertsen2 has a brilliant futureRickertsen2 has a brilliant futureRickertsen2 has a brilliant futureRickertsen2 has a brilliant future
Send a message via AIM to Rickertsen2 Send a message via Yahoo to Rickertsen2
Re: Defining Leadership

This has been discussed in various forms before and the general conclusion has been that there is no right and wrong way to run a team. Your team should form a leadership structure that works for YOUR TEAM. There are many such structures work well and if you look at successful teams you will find that they differ in their leadership.

In the case of our team, we did not have a written structure anywhere but there was a system of understood rank based on experience and strengths. We usually had a team leader who was the final decision maker and arbitrator of disputes. He led the team in meetings, kept things organized and handled outside relations (sponsors, school, first, etc) most of the time. He also generally made final design decisions, which is a tough thing to do. Input is taken from everybody and everybody has their own ideas. In the end one must be chosen. A democracy is not always best here as. Under our team leader were a handful of trusted right hand men. These generally consisted of the founding members and a number of members who had demonstrated dedication, knowledge and insight. They led things such as electrical, fund raising, manipulators, drive train, weights, etc based on their specialties and interests. Everyone else was under these people. This was a general pattern but flexed at times. There were no inflexible roles. You would very often find members helping with other members jobs, and stepping up to higher roles when they had a good idea. This structure worked well for us, but might also have been responsible for the death of our team. The team leaders and right hand people graduated at once without entirely leaving the remaining people with the necessary skills to carry on our legacy.

My experience with student organizations, whether in college or high school is that they are not corporations. In a corporation they employees are not trying to squeeze in their work in their spare time between class, homework and having a social life. In a corporation everybody has a defined job title, a defined salary and defined superior. This sort of structure does not always work as well for a student organization. Here the members are participating entirely in their very limited spare time, and without pay. Students organizations require something flexible and dynamic but still structured enough to avoid chaos.

There is not wrong and right way to run a team. Just find something you are all confortable with.
__________________
1139 Alumni
Reply With Quote