rdfinchcov-blog

[rdfinchcov-blog]

Critical Analysis of ALL Project- Group Structure.

I was involved within the ALL Project on my University Course at Coventry University. For Stage 1 of the ALL project, myself and my team members were randomly selected and designated to GROUP 5. 

The Team:

The team has consisted of two parts, one being students from Multimedia Computing, and the other games technology. It is my belief that this integration of two different degrees of study while at times  has been chaotic, has also aided the design and implementation process of our ideas. However over the course of the project there has been issues with members joining and leaving the group. In contrast to this regardless I believe as a team we have worked without conflict and striven towards a common objective, and my thanks go out to each contributor left in the group.

Ryan-Declan Finch :  Multimedia Computing *

Peter Hujber:             Multimedia Computing *

Arvin Saundh:           Multimedia Computing **

Charan Shoker :        Multimedia Computing ***

Jeevan Kumar:          Multimedia Computing ***

Paul Albon:                                                Games Technology*

Rodrigo Vilas:                                            Games Technology***

Tomas Alexandre Franciso Goncalves:  Games Technology*

Miguel Alexandre Grilo Martins:             Games Technology*

* - Original Member of the group from week 1

** - Went AWOL- Not possible to be contacted regardless of attempts. Resolution taken; Informed lecturers proceeded as normal with project.

***- Joined the university or group late within the project, however contributions made to the team and individually have been highly valued.

Organisational method

We believed as a group unanimously that it could become a logistical nightmare keeping on task and connected with one another if we didn’t set out an approach for us to deal with anticipated problems, we devised the following: Delegate a team leader from each half of the group to act as a project manager to communicate and update the team on tasks and progress tracking for the game. 

Games Technology                                        Multimedia Computing

Paul Albon (Project Lead)                              Ryan-Declan Finch (Project lead)

Miguel Martins                                               Peter Hujber

Rodrigo Vilas                                                 Charan Shoker

Tomas Goncalves                                          Jeevan Kumar

It’s worth noting that at one point we were the largest of the groups working on this project, as every other week someone either left or joined the project we initially thought that this would aid us in some sort of advantage- It didn’t. We were either trying to pick up the workload from someone being absent or explaining and getting new members up to speed and assigning tasks or roles to prevent repetition of completed work or to develop on essential tasks.

From my perspective I believe that Peter would have made a far better project lead for the multimedia computing half than I had been, as he was very natural with the work flow and working with the others, while I value the experience I have taken from it, himself and I have discussed at detail what would we do in future if we were allocated to the same or different groups:

* Project proposal of Concepts and ideas from each team member.

* All team members to submit a strengths and weaknesses of skills relating to the project.

* More opportunities for time management and regular meetings to meet deadlines.

* Refer to the module briefs requirements in mind firstly then to develop the project proposal to align with this.

* Open Communication dealing with if team members are struggling, and needing help from either the team or staff.

* Project road map for other instances such as other course module deadlines or exams, some team members prioritised a week or a class session to prepare for an upcoming event, in which group time suffered as a result. If they can be anticipated early, a more practical development plan can be drawn out so when events like those happen, it minimises the disruptions at hand.

The Practical Aspect:

All members of the group quickly realised we were growing at a large rate, and repetition and miscommunication had to be minimised as soon as possible, so we decided on the following things when we got into mid development and started building the game project.

* The game was to contain 3 levels minimum and a 4th being available had we all met our target goals.

* Team members were allocated based on preferences on what they felt they could contribute the most to or felt they best understood. To a level (at this stage it was 3 2-man teams to each level to evenly distribute the work load) 

Initially**

“Forest Level”-  Paul & Tomas

“Castle Level”- Miguel & Rodrigo

“Water Level”- Peter and Ryan

** Charan had then joined the water level as myself and Peter were Multimedia so felt it was most appropriate as we could keep more in contact with him with minimal issues. 

** Jeevan had joined the project much later into development and was difficult on where we could reasonably implement him without letting his workload go to waste while affecting his mark, to my understanding he worked alongside the other two levels but focused on the Forest level, but due to his absences from the ALL project and other classes I haven’t had much contact with him other than through messenger channels.

On Another Post I will discuss the brief itself.

-Thank you for reading, submissions and questions may be left in my inbox and I will try to get back to you at the earliest opportunity.