Small Group Dynamics - Term Paper Example

SMALL GROUP DYNAMICS Introduction Being part of small groups is a natural activity of human beings. Even in primitive conditions, humans join with others to fulfil two of the most basic needs- the need for mutual help and the need for socialization. A small group is two or more people who share a common definition and evaluation of themselves and behave in accordance with such a definition (Shaw, 1961). To be a small group, the members must also share some common goal toward which they are willing to work and make an attempt to articulate and accomplish through the process of communication. According to the Social psychologist Robert Bales (1950) the small group performs well than a larger group as each participant in a small group can remember each other participant's presence. Kurt Lewin (1943, 1948 and 1951) is commonly identified as the founder of the movement to study groups scientifically. He coined the term "group dynamics" to describe the way groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstancesThe social process by which people interact face-to-face is called group dynamic. Small group communication experts Isa Engleberg and Dianna Wynn (2003) have identified seven types of groups to which you can belong: primary, social, self-help, learning, service, work, and public. For the purpose of the study a group is selected which was appointed by the Government. The group is a public group, in which group members interact for the benefit of an audience. A problem solving group appointed by the government is analyzed in the following sections so as to understand the group dynamics and how television is used effectively for communication. Group dynamics- An Analysis There was wide spread fear among the public due to the outbreak of bird flu in many parts of the world. The government was doing its best to ensure the public that the poultry was safe to eat. But the public were reluctant. The poultry business was affected and many restaurants faced problems because of this. The government decided to do a live talk-show on the National television network, wherein the public can call and talk with the experts to clarify their doubts. The experts appointed by the government were: 1. Mr. D- He is a veterinary doctor. 2. Mrs. G- She is a doctor and works for the Health Department. 3. Mr. E- He is a representative for the Poultry Owners' Association. 4. Me, Ms. C- I represented the Hoteliers. The various dimensions of group process that are highlighted are as follows: Group history The members knew very little about the other members in the group and they did not know how to function as a group. The group had to, therefore, go through the all the stages in group formation. So the group was a "zero history group". They had one-week's time and so decided to meet every day before the D-day at 9 in the morning. The first step taken was the exchange of certain information about them or about people close to them such as address, phone, fax and email including their housemates, family, neighbours and friends and also their activities and habits. Groups and Relationships A small group is always influenced by the way how the group fits into its content and how the members balance their relationship both within the group and outside the group. There was very cordial and supportive relationship among the members. The members were engaged in the following activities: a) Problem solving- The members tried to find a way to alleviate the fear for poultry products among the public. Their task was to propagate message about the safety of poultry products in the country. b) Creation of identities- The members voluntarily decided to take up the following roles: Mrs. G- Coordinator and Leader (Shows the relationships between ideas) Mr. D- Initiator-contributor (Generates new ideas) Myself, Ms. C- Information-giver (Offers facts or generalization to the group) Mr. E- Recorder (Keeps a record of group actions) Mrs. G was a democratic leader; everyone had equal say in the group activities. c) Norms- The members decided to meet every day at in the morning, so that they can discuss about the recent developments in the world regarding the bird flu. It was decided that a presentation will be made during the talk- show. Mrs. G was chosen to do the presentation since she is a doctor and people will be convinced that there isn't anything to worry about. The proceedings of the meetings were taken down by Mr. E. d) Group Tensions- The group members may be pulled in several directions by their loyalties to themselves, to others in their lives, to the group, and to the organization. In our group also, there were some tensions. For instance, Mr. E knew that the poultry owners were not seriously concerned about the precautions to be taken, but instead he complained that the vaccines were not affordable. e) Interaction- A group's members must be able to communicate freely and openly with all of the other members of the group. In this group, the members were from various fields. So there were lots to learn from others. The means of communication used was Internet and Telecommunication (telephone). Small group development The group development usually takes place in the four stages (Tuckman, 1977). In the first meeting, the following are done: a) Forming- Each member introduced himself and gave a background on his or her past experiences. So in this stage, group members learnt about each other and the task at hand. b) Storming- The members try to express their own views about the problem and solutions in this stage. Everybody had a chance to define the task that faces the group. c) Norming- During the norming stage, group members establish implicit or explicit rules about how they will achieve their goal. Brainstorming was used to form an idea about the possible solutions and the ways to achieve them. Everyone was given a chance to make suggestions. Then the solutions to the problem in order to reach a consensus were discussed. d) Performing- Mrs. G started the session giving the outline on how they should help in mitigating the fear in the minds of the public. She explained the symptoms of the infection in humans and how it can be prevented. Mr. D listed out the precautionary measures that the poultry owners should take. Mr. E described the steps taken by the poultry owners to prevent the outbreak of bird-flu. Finally I gave them an idea about how poultry products are cooked in the restaurants to ensure that the meat is cooked thoroughly. Results of group formation As any group, this group also had its share of benefits and defects. They are as follows: 1. Benefits- The members came from different backgrounds and so a wide range of knowledge was available. Therefore the pooling in of information helped to get an over-view of the problem. This helped to improve the presentation. 2. Problems faced- The members didn't want to share personal information such as their phone numbers. The next problem was conflicts in the group. The members disagreed on the preventive measures used. This caused stress amongst the members. It was seen in the initial stages only and I was able to be a good "compromiser" and solve the problems and disagreements. So finally the group was able to reach to a consensus on what they should say to the public. The next step was to prepare a presentation. Presentation Making a presentation is difficult than writing a paper. And if a group is involved, the process becomes more cumbersome. The presentation was prepared taking into consideration the major factors such as: Audience- The public was the audience. The presentation had to be simple as well as clear, as the public may find it difficult to understand the complex technical part of the issue. The group had to educate the public on the preventive measures taken by the government. Purpose- The aim of the presentation should be to change things. The presentation should be able to overcome the fear of the public. So, the D-day arrived and the presentation was started by Mrs. G, as she was a doctor and could be able to influence the public. She talked on the effects of bird flu and the preventive measures needed to be taken by the public, for instance they have to cook the meat thoroughly so that the virus will be inactive. Later on Mr. D informed the public about the actions taken by the Government to prevent the spread of the virus and about the vaccines available. Mr. E briefed on the preventive measures carried out by the poultry owners such as maintaining high levels of hygiene. I stressed on the need for hygiene in cooking poultry and directed on the various ways of cooking the meat. The public had the facility to call and clarify their doubts. Most of the people were concerned about whether they will get sick even if the meat is cooked. So the chat show was very interactive and interesting. Television- a means of communication Television is a powerful medium of communication. It can be linked with other mediums such as telephone and instant messaging. Here, the chat show was telecasted live over a national television station and the public send questions and comments through email or Instant Message. The television proved to be the most effective medium of communication. The final verdict The performance of the group was indeed excellent. The group was able to persuade the public to use poultry products provided they take care, whether it is in handling the birds or cooking the meat. Small group and communication model Small group communication, as defined by Bebe and Masterson, is a group of three or more people who share a common and specific purpose for meeting. According to Bebe and Masterson, around 93 percent of emotions are communicated nonverbally, which means that only seven percent of communication comes from what you say. Group communication comprises four types of talk: problem-solving talk, role talk, consciousness-raising talk, and encounter talk (Cragan & Wright, 1999). Here the group is involved in "problem solving talk". Theories influence the way we think, interpret our world, and the actions we take. We develop theories about our environment to help organize and interpret our experiences. The communication among the small group in question can be related to the Structuration Theory. Structuration means studying the ways in which social systems are produced and reproduced in social interaction. (Giddens, p. 25). Giddens defines structuration as "the structuring of social relations across time and space, in virtue of the duality of structure" (p. 376). According to Structuration Theory, group members interact according to particular rules, and group members also produce those rules through their interactions. Structuration refers to the processes group members employ as they work together. Structures both produce a system (in this case, the group) and are outcomes of a system. The group had decided to meet every day at 9 in the morning. This is a rule that the group produced as an outcome of group interaction well as an instrument for producing the group. Conclusion Functioning in a small group is not an easy matter. It demands effort from leaders and members alike. Effective problem solving groups will move through stages in their searches for solutions. Beginning with the task of defining the problem, they will search for possible solution, evaluate them, and finally choose the best alternative. Each of these steps requires discussion, give-and-take, and decision making. Decisions may be made by several means: by the leader, by majority vote, by parliamentary procedure, and by consensus. Conflicts may arise in the group process, but by appropriate measures, conflict can be handled productively. Alertness and diligence will avoid the problem of groupthink and contribute to the best decision making possible. Good small group work allows us to address problems we encounter, discover solutions, and create positive relationships. The April 2006 press release of the American Psychological Association comments on the improved performance of groups to, "the ability of people to work together to generate and adopt correct responses, reject erroneous responses, and effectively process information." The success of small groups is because "the group members combine their abilities and resources to perform better than the best of an equivalent number of individuals on the highly intellective complementary group task." References 1. American Psychological Association. (2006) "Groups Perform Better Than the Best Individuals at Solving Complex Problems," APA Press Release. 2. Bales, R. F. (1950), Interaction process analysis. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley, p. 33 3. Beebe, S. A., & Masterson, J. T. (2003), Communication in small groups: Principles and practices, 8th ed. Allyn & Bacon: Boston. 4. Cragan, J. F., & Wright, D.W. (1999). Communication in small groups: Theory, process, skills (5th Ed.).Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. 5. Engleberg, I. N., & Wynn, D. R. (2003). Working in groups: Communication principles and strategies (3rd Ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 6. Giddens, A. (1984), The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Berkeley, University of California Press 7. Lewin, K. (1947), Frontiers in group dynamics, Human Relations 1, p 5-41. 8. Lewin, K. (1948), Resolving Social Conflicts: Selected Papers on Group Dynamics. New York: Harper & Row. 9. Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. A. C. (1977), Stages of small group development revisited. Group and Organizational Studies, 2, p 419- 427. 10. Shaw, M. E, (1961), Group Dynamics Annual Review of Psychology Vol. 12, January, p. 129-156. Bibliography 1. Bormann, Ernest G. (1990), Small Group Communication: Theory and Practice. Harper and Row Publishers: New York. 2. Bormann, Ernest G. (1996), Effective Small Group Communication 6th edition Burgess Intl Group. 3. Burton, G. Dimbley R. (1988), Between ourselves. British Library Publication Data. 4. Burton, G. Dimbley R. (2001), More than words, 2nd Edition, Routledge. 5. Forsyth, (2006), Group Dynamics, 4th Edition, Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. 6. Fujishin, R. (2001), Creating Effective Groups: The Art of Small Group Communication, Acada Books. 7. Giddens, A. (1986). The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. University of California Press. 8. Guetzkow, H and Collins, B. (1964), A Social Psychology of Group Processes for Group-making. John Wiley & Sons: New York. 9. Hartley, P. (1997), Group Communication, Routledge. 10. htpp://www.businessballs.com/ viewed on 7th October, 2008. 11. Littlejohn, S. (1992). Theories of Human Communication (5th Ed.). Wadsworth Publishing: California. 12. The Art and Science of Communication: Tools for Effective Communication in the Workplace, John Wiley and Sons Ltd May 2008. Read More