The Nature Of Leadership - Research Paper Example

The Nature Of Leadership Table of Contents Introduction 1 Groups and group dynamics- definition 1 Group dynamics 2 Groups and group dynamics- performance 3 Groups and group dynamics- teamwork 5 Conclusion 8 Introduction Group Dynamics is a discipline of analysis involved with learning on the type of groups, in what manner they develop, as well as their impact on persons, other groups, plus society (Newstrom & Davis 2010. Most of the methods of Group Dynamics are widely utilized to advance training in humanoid relations, mostly for teaching debate -leading techniques. The purpose of this report is to demonstrate knowledge of groups and group dynamics. Groups and group dynamics- definition A group refers to an assemblage of persons who have relationships to each other that render them interdependent to particular significant magnitude. As so described, the phrase group denotes to a division of social individuals, which have a common interdependence property amid their integralassociates (Hogg 2008). Group dynamics denotes to a structure of psychological and behaviours processes ensuing in a social group (also known as intergroup dynamics), or amid social groups (similarly known as intergroup dynamics) (Lewin 2010). Intragroup dynamics are the fundamental processes, which bring about a set of roles, norms, relationships, as well as common objectives that illustrate a specific social group. Instances of groups comprise religious, military, political, work groups, sports teams in addition to therapy groups. Amid the affiliates of a unit, there exists a status of interdependence, via which the attitudes, behaviours, experiences, and opinions of every member are jointly swayed by the other unit members (Schaller 2008). Intergroup dynamics denotes to the psychological and behavioural relationship amid two or more factions. This comprises perceptions, opinions, attitudes and behaviours to one’s individual group, and those towards other group. Intergroup dynamics, in certain circumstances, is, positive, pro-social and beneficial (for instance, when numerous research teams operate together to realize a task or objective). In other instances, intergroup dynamics may create conflict (Hogg 2008). The college environmental club is an example of an intragroup dynamic. While a good example of an intergroup dynamic is collaboration amid the entertainment and journalism clubs. Leadership roles There exist two basic leadership roles within a group. One involves working to achieve the responsibilities the unit group has embarked on to do. The other role involves is constant development and maintenance of relations in the group. Therefore, there are two kinds of functions for leaders to participate in Relationship Roles and Task Roles (Irvin 2009). The leadership roles found in the environmental club is the tack role whereas the leadership role in the joint venture between Journalism and Entertainment clubs is relationship roles (Wageman 2009). Groups and group dynamics- performance Factors that affect group performance Factors that affect a group performance are cohesiveness and collaboration. Both collaboration and cohesiveness are recognized as co- elements of group efficiency and affective reactions of group affiliates (Hogg 2008) . The Hidden Agenda’ denotes to the emotional and social problems that arise while a discussion unit is working upon a problem. While surface agenda refers to the official tasks of a group (Dion 2007). Benefits of group decision-making a) Generate more solutions to a problem. b) "A Pool of knowledge, which results to new insights and ideas; process gain. c) Inappropriate solutions are further likely to be recognized and overruled. d) Possess a motivational outcome:  -inspires member to attempt and make upright decisions and attempt to execute them better. The members are more devoted to a verdict that they participated in and therefore, they are more expected to back its implementation. e) Affiliates benefit by attaining a better comprehension of the matters involved by taking part in discussion. f) The group learns on ways to make verdicts. g) Accessibility of information facts from a multiplicity of experiences. Disadvantages of group decision-making a) They are less efficient at quick decision making because suffer from process loss: discussions that are about coordination and social issues and this wastes time cause it prevents groups from focusing solely on their tasks. b) Communication problems: -emotional disputes that hurt morale and waste time -powerful and talkative group members may dominate discussion. -debates may get side pursued, disorganized and interrupted. c) Lack of pooling all the available knowledge and in its place focus on information that is Familiar to all the affiliates. d) Make commendations rather than a verdict (Reid 2009. A group decision-making that I took part in entailed, making a decision on whether students should engage in tutoring activities. The decision that the group made was that students should engage in deed take part in tutoring activities. The advantage of group decision-making is that everyone agrees on the verdict. In that it ensures that, everyone is accommodated for and no one is prejudiced. The disadvantage of group decision making is that at times people are afraid to speak out their opinions, which might be beneficial. Groups and group dynamics- teamwork Three requirements for effective team performance The group should comprise of persons with the skills, knowledge and abilities, which match the prerequisites of the assignment. The group should have affiliates with the ability to symbolize the significant parts of the corporation and the authority to execute the group’s verdict. The group’s affiliates should have the needed group process expertise to operate efficiently (Brewer 2010). Development stages Forming: This stage ensues when the team runs into each other first. During this first convention, team affiliates are introduced to one another. They are also introduced to the task. Storming: During this phase, the team affiliates contend with one another for rank and for approval of their ideas. A lot of group instability is witnessed. Norming: In this phase, the members begin to operate more efficiently as a team. They o longer concentrate on their personal goals, but instead are absorbed on devising a way of functioning together (procedures and processes). Performing stage: During the "performing" stage, members are working at an extremely high level. The emphasis is on attaining the goal as a team. At this stage, the team affiliates have gotten to understand each other, have confidence in one another, and depend on each other. Adjourning stage: During the adjourning phase, the task is culminating and the team affiliates are relocating off into diverse directions. It is significant that members are capable of transferring the ideas that they have absorbed about themselves, others and the project, as well as participating in a group project back to their regular existences. This is achieved via the debriefing process (Anna 2004. An example of a teamwork experience involved working on a new process improvement project that was required to improve the way the company supports and manages its customer base. The team’s leader was Mercy who had 15 years as project manager. The rest of the members included Joshua 10 years different kinds of projects, proficiency in budget control and scheduling, Mary with 5 years’ know-how as an distinct sponsor on projects, solid programming background, certain experience in database development. John had 8 years’ experience operating on different projects, proficiency in management, problem solving and stakeholder analysis. Lucy had 7 years’ expertise on process enhancement projects, training in databases development, proficiency in management. Lastly, I had background in database management. First, stage (Forming) Since no one had worked with each other, the team leader suggested we meet face to face. The team members got to know one another and what the project entailed. Project work initiates (Storming) The project was off to good start until arguments begun. Everyone had an issue with Joshua who had put up project schedule without consulting the rest of the team. Lucy and I had an argument on who should spearhead the database development process. Eventually, the team leader intervened by convening us to a meeting. She made decisions that tackled everybody concerns by delegating roles effectively and wisely. Everything is going Efficiently (Norming) By this stage, we had worked for almost three months. Though there was a few disagreements and agreements we worked together and supported each problem solving, decision making, information sharing and ensured that rules devised for the team were adhered to. Substantial advancement is made (Performing) At this stage, we were working very effectively. We supported each other and depended on the group entirely for decision-making. Mercy- the team leader acclaimed our efforts and the team was content by the advancement it had made. Time to Conclude (Adjourning) The project concluded. It was a massive success! The internal client was content, and there was an improvement on the company’s management on how it supported its consumers. Member teams had to relocate to other projects. Conclusion Group dynamics may be beneficial in apprehending decision-making conduct. Group dynamics can aid in creating operative therapy methods. They can also assist in following and learning the emergency as well as popularity of fresh ideas and technologies. Another lesson I have learnt from working on this project is that teamwork is mostly beneficial but it at times limits team members from exhausting fully all the available resources. Lastly, teamwork requires people with skills and knowledge concerning a certain subject and this could discriminate those who are under skilled. References Anna, T 2004, The Nature of Leadership, Sage Publications, Inc. Brewer, M 2010, "The Social Self, On Being the Same and Different at the Same Time,Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Reid, A 2009, "Parameters of social identity". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, OUP Oxford. Dion, K 2007, "Group cohesion, From "field of forces" to multidimensional construct, Group Dynamics, Theory, Research, and Practice. Hogg, M2008, "From I To We: Social Identity And The Collective Self", Group Dynamics, Theory, Research, and Practice. Irvin, D 2009, The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy, third edition, Basic Books Lewin, K 2010, The Research Center for Group Dynamics at Massachusetts Institute of Technology,Palgrave Macmillan. Newstrom, John & Davis, Keith (2010) Organizational Behavior: Human Behavior at Work, McGraw-Hill Schaller, M2008, Evolutionary Approaches To Group Dynamics,An Introduction Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice. Wageman, R 2009, Interdependence and Group Effectiveness,Administrative Science Quarterly. Read More