Embrace Flexibility & Group Work
With Laura Escobar-Ratliff and Matthew Moore
While having a structured plan is important, it’s equally crucial to remain open to change and adapt to new circumstances. Unexpected challenges—such as shifts in schedule or personal commitments—are inevitable. Being a successful doctoral student and scholar is as much about dedication as it is about managing setbacks. In fact, I would argue that you will learn from both equally. This does not mean that you should not set goals and just improvise as you go along. Au contraire: setting goals is a necessary step in any worthwhile endeavor. However, the best-laid plans are the ones that allow for mistakes and setbacks. Embracing flexibility allows you to approach these situations with resilience and creativity.
When your week does not go as planned, when you fall sick, or have an especially stressful week at work, having some time buffers built into your schedule may be the difference between persevering or wanting to quit. If you cultivate adaptability, you’ll be better equipped to navigate the complexities of your DSW program while maintaining your focus on long-term goals.
Group Work
We have all had to work with difficult people and experience some friction in professional or social relationships caused by differences in personality, values, and culture. It is unlikely that our DSW journey will be any different. It is also unlikely that you will get along with every person in your cohort. So, how do you navigate group projects and small group discussions with people you consider difficult or whose personalities clash with yours? There is no one-size-fits-all approach here. Just like personality typologies do not paint a holistic view of a person, pre-packaged strategies for working harmoniously with everyone are bound to be flawed. However, there are some common archetypes you should be prepared to engage with.
Common Graduate Student Archetypes
The Know-It-All: This archetype tends to dominate the discussion because they think they have the answer to every question or issue. They are often knowledgeable and can provide valuable insight, but their tendency to dismiss others’ viewpoints and to overshadow others can cause friction and frustration in teammates.
The Slacker: This archetype tends to contribute the least to the group’s goals or efforts. They might show motivation and offer some perspective, but often, their ideas are not followed by actions, as they rely on other members of the group to pick up their slack. The slacker often misses deadlines, does the minimum required, and may seem oblivious as to why other members of the group feel frustrated with them.
The Last-Minute Doer: Procrastination is the name of the game for this archetype. Their tendency to leave tasks to the last minute can significantly increase the collective stress level of the group. Although they may work well under pressure, their hasty approach can lead to questions about their level of commitment to the project and their respect for teammates.
The Type-A: For this archetype, organization, control, and competitiveness are signature characteristics. They tend to take charge, dominate decision-making conversations, and push for efficiency and, at times, impossibly high standards. Type A has strong leadership skills, which can be very helpful for the group, but their interpersonal style is often intense, overwhelming, and abrasive.
The Negative Nancy (no offense intended if your name is Nancy): This archetype seems to always have something to complain about. Their pessimistic outlook tends to focus on potential problems, which can project doubt about the group’s ability to complete the task at hand and dampen creativity. Although they often contribute their fair share to the group, their scarcity and problem-focused mentality can affect group morale and standards.
The Go-With-The-Flow: This archetype is often underestimated. Characterized by a laid-back, easygoing attitude, this archetype brings flexibility and adaptability to a team. However, they tend to avoid confrontation and prioritize group harmony over group goals, which can negatively impact the direction, quality, and thoroughness of the work being done.
Understanding these archetypes can help you navigate group dynamics and foster a collaborative environment. When difficulties arise, you may be able to draw from your own experiences in leadership or direct client services to figure out ways to cope with differences and find common ground. If you don’t have much experience in leadership roles or have negative ones, you may turn to the scholarly literature on effective collaboration and conflict resolution. For example, a review of the literature on team collaboration by Kauffeld & Lehmann-Willenbrock (2016) indicated that teams that engage in open dialogue tend to have better collaboration and misunderstanding mitigation. Similarly, in a meta-analysis of studies examining trust in leadership, Dirks and Ferrin (2002) found that trust is an essential component in collaboration and cooperation. Additionally, research on conflict resolution demonstrates that conflict resolution strategies that integrate negotiation and collaborative problem-solving strategies tend to be more effective than other conflict resolution styles, such as competitive and accommodating (Thomas, 1992).
A note from Laura Escobar-Ratliff, DSW Program Director:
All social workers, even those with a private practice, must engage in group work via teams, committees, consultations, etc. Whenever I talk with students regarding their frustrations or resistance to group work, I draw these parallels. Some disconnect from practice when they become students and lose sight of the skills and abilities they already have to work through and within differences. It’s important for students to own their power to navigate challenges with colleagues in class or group work, not acquiesce power to the instructor to “fix it.”
A note from Matthew Moore, Associate Dean of Academic and Student Affairs
How do you demonstrate group project leadership skills and engage individuals with varying levels of commitment? I think we all know group work will forever be both a necessity and a challenge. Research indicates that teamwork is essential in higher education as it helps students develop critical leadership skills, including project planning, decision-making, and effective communication. One way students can exhibit leadership skills is through systematic playing and execution of group projects. A structured approach not only allows students to practice leadership but also encourages them to take ownership of their roles within their team, which, in turn, increases their commitment to the project objectives. Engaging individuals with differing levels of engagement may be difficult, but it can be achieved through recognizing and leveraging the diverse strengths of team members. This is particularly important in complex projects where diverse perspectives can enrich the problem-solving process and lead to innovative solutions.
