Small-Group Speech Performance Analysis - Essay Example

Small Group Speech Performance Analysis The small group represented here is of a workgroup. The communication that happens within the group is in two forms – the formal communication and the grapevine (which is the informal discourse). The group is comprised of six individuals, all of whom have close contacts with one another and have developed this group through forming strong associations and relationships. The manner in which they discuss different events, ideas and other matters is of particular significance. This is because the group takes into consideration the collective strengths of one another and tries to downplay the weaknesses and shortcomings that exist amongst their domains. This group has the task to oversee a meticulous department at the workplace. What this suggests is that the group performs only a particular task and it does so, on a consistent basis. The six individuals get in touch with one another whenever the group seems incomplete and undertakes all the tasks and actions to make sure all work gets done in an easy and amicable manner. There is complete harmony amongst the group members who are giving an impression through their work realms that they have oneness within their ranks, and that they will put work on the top most priority more than anything else (Michaelsen 2002). This is the reason the group is appreciated by other departments within the organization and they are hailed for their unity and the manner in which their work performance is measured over a period of time. There seem to be no issues that emanate within this work group, which is a depiction that this group means success more than anything else. The six group members comprise of the Executive Assistant, the Deputy Capacity Manager, the Capacity Manager, the Assistant Capacity Manager, the Capacity Executive and the Capacity Senior Executive. This department deals with building the Capacity department within the said organization and hence all the six individuals have a very direct role at building the department as they work for the overall successful basis of the department on a proactive basis. The leader within this group is the Capacity Manager who is indeed the boss yet deals with the remaining five members in a very humble way. This is the reason why the group members have a very calming influence on one another and no one retorts to saying “Sir” or “Madam”. They take the maiden name of one another – one more sign which suggests that informal respect exists within the workgroup. They believe in respecting each other because this brings complete respect for their own workgroup in the long run. On a more informal note, they hang out together on nearly all occasions. They have lunch at work together and thus their interests are very closely tied. One can witness quite a few parallels amongst these six members, all of whom like to give in their best on a constant basis. They believe that work ethics should not be disturbed by petty politics and rubbish talk, as their work domains do not allow them to see anywhere else (Galbraith 2000). They mean business when they are at work. On a fortnightly basis or sometimes even on a monthly basis, these six individuals within the workgroup go out to watch a movie or hang out at a favorite restaurant where the expense is shared by one individual. This goes on until all the six members have paid one time each. The small group tasks that shall include the problem solving and support for the group in terms of anomalies that arise every now and then are easily taken care of by the leader who is the Capacity Manager. This individual makes sure that the problem is encountered, then understood and analyzed and later on resolved in a way that all the six group members are satisfied with. This means that the workgroup is basically ‘one’ when the decision is taken and hence they stick with what they have suggested. There is complete harmony within the related ranks, and for this matter a number of efforts are incorporated time and again. This is one of the major strengths that exist within the organization’s realms and more so within the workgroup’s undertakings. The leader holds responsibility for all the tasks and undertakings, and thus ensures that success will rule the roost of any such discussion that might arise within the future which takes into consideration the risks taken by the workgroup under the aegis of the organization that they work for. There are a number of examples on offer within this workgroup as well. What this implies is that the group members work along hand in hand and make sure that any pending work is taken care of and the entire Capacity department remains one step ahead of the other departments within the organization. This is also suggestive of the fact that small roles and tasks are assigned to individuals within this workgroup so that they know exactly what is asked of them and how they will conduct themselves within the future domains (Fink 2002). These are important pointers that become the basis of success for the department in the long run, and all-out efforts are undertaken by the leader to motivate and encourage the other workgroup members from time to time. The workgroup works for the betterment of the organization and indeed the Capacity department is something to learn from earnestly. It is the manner in which success is being envisioned within the department that makes one realizes the true potential of the six employees who are working under the same aegis. It would be correct to state that the department is filled with strengths left, right and center. It is up to the organization to realize the intensity of success which can be calculated within the reigns of the Capacity department and how it can be turned into successes which will be exponentially increased, within the future. All said and done, this small workgroup bestows its success on the shoulders of the top management of the organization which has strongly believed in it for a period of time and will continue to do so in the coming days as well. Works Cited Fink, L Dee. Team-Based Learning: A Transformative Use of Small Groups. Praeger, 2002 Galbraith, Jay R. Designing the Global Corporation. Jossey-Bass, 2000 Michaelsen, Larry K. Team-Based Learning: A Transformative Use of Small Groups. Praeger, 2002 Read More