TPO 2 (integrated)

In this set of materials, the professor in the lecture repudiated what stated in the reading passage resting upon fallacious premises and used several points that are on the contrary to the idea that, assemblage a group of people into a team is the best way to approach certain projects and provides three reasons of support. However, the professor argued that the theory stated in the reading is inaccurate when compared to what happened in reality, and refutes each of the author's reasons.

The first point the professor used to disagree with the reading passage is that, actually the project did not move quickly when working in teams. According to the reading wider range of knowledge leads to greater resource of information, thus the work could done more quickly. The professor contradicted this point by acknowledging that, the group need many meetings for decision making and these will take the time of the project; in short, teams will progress slowly.

Furthermore, the reading passage claimed that by team working there would be a chance for some people to "shine". The professor's view did not coincide with that of the reading. He articulates that, virtually some members of the group will get free rides, while others, who had worked hard, will not receive much recognition, and the recognition went to group as whole.

Although the reading passage stated that, there is an opportunity for members to make risky decisions in teams. This seemed to be inaccurate as explained in the lecture. The professor pointed out that, some people are very influential in teams consequently if others have creative suggestions, they will be ignored by others. In other words, there would be no chance for the rest members of the group to make any risks.