The project as Jigsaw Puzzle

The other day, working with an Action Learning Set who had a project to sort out, I was struck by a metaphor. Not literally struck, you understand, but metaphorically struck. And it seemed to me it was a very useful metaphor for the way groups work on joint projects. See if you agree.
Choosing the puzzle. Everyone has their preferences. Some like big scenes, some like small pictures. There are preferences for people and places, for movement and still life. Some like the historic puzzle, and some the futuristic image. Some people, not really fans of the jigsaw, or perhaps new to the game,
go for puzzles with big, easy to handle pieces. Others, perhaps with more experience, or simply for reasons of masochism, prefer the huge "thousand piece" puzzles, with their small, intricate pieces.
In determining the group puzzle therefore, all the players will put their cases, and a great deal of time will be spent determining which is done. Sometimes this will be by a process of consensus, sometimes a dominant player will take the lead, and others will acquiesce, later only giving "assent of convenience" to the activity. After all, they wanted "the one with the dogs", and the special shaped pieces! The danger is that during the activity, this disagreement will re-surface, and possible attempts will be made to put the selected puzzle back in the box - even if partly completed - and select another one.
Strategies for doing the puzzle. These include such basic issues as whether all members work together, all the time, or whether each "takes a section". Do the group divide the task into activities like sorting and placing, or do they all contribute as and when they can? are some people better at sorting, some at placing? If the later, does that mean it's OK for them to go off to the pub in the quiet moments?
Coherence. How do the team make sure one of the group is not quietly working away on the same pieces that another of person needs? Are the group going to assign some members to do the edges, the sky, the sea, and other features, or is the plan to group together pieces by colour and texture first, then see where they fit in ? What is the protocol for connecting pre-assembled sections and pieces ? Is it OK to force them into place, or may sections have to be taken apart in order to get them into the space they are needed in? How do people feel about their work being broken up and re-assembled?
Distribution of work. Is there enough work to go round? After all, the table is only so big. Many hands may not necessarily make it go faster, there will be times when one player sees that another has the pieces he wants. What is the protocol for combining these pre-assembled groups of pieces ?
The big picture. Who is going to direct, to oversee the progress, who, if you like, is going to keep looking at the box and making sure the individuals all have contributions that fit logically into the big picture on the lid? And who is responsible for making sure it all stays steady, and in place? Most of all, who is watching the clock?

Of course, with a project, unlike a jigsaw, the final assembled work will be capable of distribution. It does not need to be taken apart again ! But equally important, it needs people to look at it, and admire it. And that won't happen if there are big, obvious pieces missing that you only noticed at the end.....