The Loose Association of Wargamers

Firstly, apologies for getting all serious but I thought this might be of some interest.

I was chatting with some one interesting & knowledgeable & relatively sane over at TMP. There are still several such members over there....well, two at any rate.
We were talking about group dynamics & I mentioned Belbin's group role concept. He'd never heard of it though it's certainly old news for me.

https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_83.htm

I don't think it a perfect explanation of how a group (eg a wargaming group) functions but it provides some insights. I am something of a 'completer-finisher' which explains the large number of painted & based figures & armies I own & the (at the moment) 45 unpainted figures I have awaiting attention.

This is probably old hat to you chaps as well, so apologies if I'm wasting your time.

donald

As someone who would, if pressed, have listed Belbin as one of the Hobbits in LotR, I actually found that rather useful - thanks.

There is nothing in Donald's post to contradict the possibility of Belbin being a hobbit.

I thought it was the manufacturer of some of the more exclusive adult toys that Purps likes to buy

I have used, and been exposed to, Belbin. As far as it goes, it’s ok to the point of being obvious. Some of the problems arise with the way it is implemented - I’ve seen assumptions made that people only fulfill one role at any one time or need to be squeezed into roles for which they are patently unsuited (usually because of recruitment difficulties). There’s also the point that people need to fufill different roles in the course of a project/career and if Belbin characteristics are assigned on a ‘permanent’ basis it can be quite damaging.

There was an offshoot of Belbin that assigned personality types based on vehicles. I recall being categorised as a Submarine/Bulldozer!

LT, was it Purp’s Belbin that you used? Or did you get your own? Did Purps expose his Belbin to you?

It's really just another Myer-Briggs construct. Yes it is true that people adopt certain characteristics partly based on their own preferences, but they also respond to the others they work closely with, and they will adapt and change depending on comfort level, motivation and a range of external stimuli. So yes, as an exercise at a point in time, it can be interesting and useful, especially in getting people to think about the patterns they adopt, but as a management tool it's much too cookie cutter to be especially useful. It's the kind of thing that stupid people learn in an MBA course, and actual leaders do instinctively.

My eyes glaze over when things like Belbin, Maslow and Myers-Briggs appear in the title of a mandatory training seminar at work. Apparently I'm a Plant, possibly a nice little shrubbery with a two-level effect and a little path running down the middle...

Have the Knights Who Say ‘Ni’ found you yet?

I'm in negotiations with a chap called Roger.