Dynamics of Working in a Group

Name:

Tutor:

Course:

Date:

Dynamics of Working in a Group

Introduction

In most organizations or spheres of life, the accomplishment of a project requires the participation of many people. Having different skills and talents, each individual is assigned a specific role and expected to be productive. As such, the success or failure of the group depends on everyone’s input. Consequently, the variance in personalities may be an impediment to the attainment of team goals. In fact, team management has emerged as a taxing responsibility due to the need to exercise control over individuals with competing interests. However, despite the personal differences among squad members, the use of a compromise approach in conflict resolution was vital in ensuing the projects’ continuity.

Part 1 Self Analysis

As part of a 6-man team, initially, there was a collective level of trust, which aided interactions with fellow teammates. It was vital for me to believe in the capability of another person since that emboldened him/her to perform the said functions. In particular, it facilitated the development of friendships thereby allowing the exchange of ideas in accordance with the assigned mission. Furthermore, my extroversion tendencies helped to create stronger bonds with the other members. In fact, it improved the socializing skills of the group thereby ensuring that the group was motivated. By raising the morale of all participants, duties were accomplished on time thus submitting assignments on time (Franz 79). Similarly, since I was one of the most intelligent among them, it was visible that I had the inherent power to influence the choice of a leader. My strong work ethic helped to attract admiration from the peers and that raised the level of respect among them as well. Therefore, that enhanced my capacity and social standing in trying to identify a supervisor. The presence of a charismatic personality tends to be appealing to many people and causes reverence as well. Under such circumstances, other group members felt obliged to know my opinion regarding the choice of a superior to take charge of the group.

Likewise, a reduction in the emotional approach to issues limited the frequency of irrational decisions especially during moments of disagreements. For example, it was useful in eliciting a mild reaction to AJ’s controlling yet annoying behavior. During some rows in which the exchanges became heated, it was responsible for my calm demeanor and being restraint from making retaliatory attacks. Any slight provocation would have resulted in an escalation of the row thereby lead to a breakdown of the unit. Moreover, the organizational citizenship behavior displayed by me helped to make the team to work in unison. The reduction in future hostilities can be attributed to the cooperation extended to others within the group. In subsequent situations that could have turned physical, having this spirit of compromise was integral in avoiding fallouts hence ensuring that the group was intact.

            Similarly, I had flashes of negative perception for some members based on their earlier antics and this led to a derailment in some occasions. At such times, communication among people would be hampered especially when I turned up early at a designated meeting point and the rest were late. Such moments were filled with tension and that affected the interactions of the day since minimal teamwork activities could take place. Therefore, resorting to satisficing methods became the norm. Suggestions were made on how to tackle the mistake and commitments secured to adhere to the new rules. Additionally, the more we advanced on the group assignment, the more visible my role perceptions became. By showing extra interest into the mission, I was more attached to its cause and that forced me to be further involved. For instance, I had to turn the recorded interview into a Word document due to other people’s reluctance to do so. Having such a volunteer spirit created an imbalance within the team because it was an exploitation of an individual. In fact, this overworking scenario could have potentially led to the dissolution of the team due to an increase in alienation. However, this openness to experience helped to reduce the rate of confrontations. For example, by performing tasks that others were not willing to do, there were fewer complaints hence lesser chances for argument. I did the duties due to an appreciation of my own competencies lack of whining culture. However, the adoption of management by walking around persuasion ensured that people’s views were incorporated into the task I was doing. It was prudent to consult the members as it made them feel valued as well as offering a forum for alternative solutions to be raised. Integrating the feedback by building a consensus on various issues was a justification of everyone’s position too.

I too was instrumental in displaying conflict resolution principles during the few times that individuals got into heated exchanges. As an intentional response, it was aimed at reducing tensions among the participants while providing the victims with a chance to gain redemption. Therefore, separate, quick investigations would be conducted to ascertain the truth and a meeting organized at a neutral location. Thereafter, the parties would be forced to consider the session’s outcome as binding after which each member would be given ample time to air their grievances. Similarly, the accused would be added extra moments for rebuttals before a final decision was made in the presence of all group members. Having this mechanism ensured that the relationships remained stronger especially due to the potential of future collaboration on other projects and an increase in understanding of the proper work ethic requirements (Franz 113). Similarly, AJ’s self-serving aggrandizement of power was troubling as it threatened the unity of the team. More so, it almost caused divisions especially because he too had an annoying personality. Using a series of informal meetings with him, I was able to use countervailing power that ensured his transformation from a person obsessed with controlling others to one who is humble. The change in behavior was central to avoiding antagonistic actions and words that could have easily led to more confrontations. It was also a way of limiting the scale of his ambitions and awarding a more moderate person the responsibility of leadership in order to foster good friendliness. However, the placement of such a divisive figure would have inflamed tensions and derailed the completion of the projects. I suffered from Job Burnout as well stemming from the over involvement in group matters. The constant volunteering to do most of the neglected roles significantly increased the amount of workload I was to handle. As such, it placed a lot of pressure on my schedule, as I had to make lifestyle adjustments to meet the requirements of the various projects. Such conditions were emotionally exhausting and physically draining due to the limited time present for sleeping or engaging in other relaxation activities. Consequently, the cynicism that arose from such an experience proved integral in advocating for equal distribution of workload.

Part 2 Team Analysis

The team was quick to conduct goal-setting activities upon its formation although there implementation was lackluster. As such, this behavior can be attributed to the initial excitement that befalls a group while its slow progression is a reflection of the burnout that occurs from close interactions. The more the members came into contact and studied each other’s personality, the easier it was for them to form opinions about themselves. As such, one’s strengths and weaknesses were studied thereby allowing individuals the opportunity to draw comparisons and make a decision about their level of involvement. Furthermore, shallowness in the scenario-planning phase led to a lack of proper response to lateness and other mistakes committed as there was no clear contingency plan for dealing with character flaws. It was a significant oversight because the group ended up postponing jobs or performing them hurriedly moments before they were due. In fact, this outcome was stressful and resulted in the frequent altercations among members. However, the insightful experience showed the importance of making preparations and anticipating certain challenges.

Similarly, there was an element of expectancy theory through the assessment of each other’s work ethic. As a group, we had projected a timely submission of all materials and even opined that the presentation would have been superb. Nevertheless, this was pegged on the condition that everyone did his/her duty extremely well As such, the desired outcomes were conjured after the consideration of everyone’s roles. Additionally, emotional labor was evident as the six individuals attempted to make their interactions civil despite having rival personalities. Therefore, most members were proactive in addressing one another with respect and tried to downplay the flaws witnessed. By so doing, the affinity to chaos was minimized and the team endured an extension of its lifespan (Schermerhorn 85). Moreover, members learnt to suppress the halo effect in order to avoid being judgmental. It was vital to do so because that ensured that people did not make rash decisions based on the observation of a few flaws from colleagues.

Furthermore, most of the individuals in the team displayed some form of conscientiousness that was helpful in carrying out the project. As such, they were careful in their decision-making and the exchanges that followed were intelligent. In addition, a majority of them were dependable hence could be trusted to perform their tasks with minimal supervision. The level of self-discipline was high as well thereby facilitating the completion of numerous assigned tasks. However, a few of them were a bit lazy and this hampered the timely conclusion of group activities. For instance, Hakim reneged on his promise to prepare a PowerPoint for presentation by the team. Having such assurances temporarily provided members with a relief to indulge on personal matters. Nevertheless, it was shocking top discover that no PowerPoint had been prepared thus forcing the team to hastily draft one that resulted in a poor classroom appearance. Subsequently, verification of individual tasks was deemed necessary to maintain the team’s original momentum of success. Therefore, there was a period when mistakes could be attributed to the self-serving bias of a few individuals in which favorable outcomes were justified by internal factors while failures were blamed on external ones.

Fewer brainstorming sessions were held as well due to the overriding opinion that each member knew what was required of him. In most instances, people were assigned different roles and everyone charged with producing a working draft. Such a technique was time consuming as it lengthened the time for deliberations and resulted in the duplication of actions. Nevertheless, the team exhibited a respectable level of civility towards one another due to the closeness and intellectual reverence that existed among the members. Therefore, people were quick to help in the conclusion of any task especially when someone had pressing personal commitments. For example, the group conducted a scheduled interview during Fernando’s absence as he had gone mum visiting. By displaying the norm of reciprocity, in most cases, cohesion was achieved and that was integral in creating a sense of belonging. Sometimes, emotional contagion was visible through the mimicking of a colleague’s facial expression in order to make the meetings friendlier. While the projects were serious in nature, such banter and other displays of affection served to raise the morale of participants and forge closer relationships, vital in the buildup of networking contacts.

In addition, the exchange of ideas mirrored the constructive conflict model in which everyone had a right to his opinion. Gaining a diverse range of options was crucial in the development of execution plans for the various projects undertaken. During such encounters, individuals could make their points known without victimization from any quarters. By so doing, the group benefited from the multiple reasoning paradigms (Schermerhorn 212). However, there was a poor implementation of the equity theory by the uneven awarding of jobs. Some of the members of the group were lazy. For example, Chris was one of them. Therefore, the laziness of a few people resulted in the burdensome distribution of responsibilities among the rest due to the strict handing over deadlines that had been set. As such, some people were overworked and this tended to be a source of strife within the team. In fact, victims complained over the unfairness of the practice because it affected the productivity of the association. Consequently, it was deemed an unethical action that violated the rights of other members since their input was minimal yet they benefited from the grades assigned to the group by the instructor.

Conclusion

Involvement in a group project requires the development of interpersonal skills due to the constant interaction among members. For example, proper communication skills have to be displayed for ease of understanding each other as well as preventing unnecessary escalation of tensions. Such scenarios were evident throughout the semester as our team worked on varying projects. In most instances, the difference in personalities did not affect the functioning of the group as members restricted themselves to the job at hand. While the assigned tasks were always completed, sometimes delays occasioned by personal commitments were common. Consequently, the rush to conclude the tasks became a source of conflict as individuals apportioned blame thereby facilitating the rise of tensions within the association. Nevertheless, conflict resolution mechanisms were used to quell the disagreements. By so doing, members had better interactions and displayed enhanced teamwork that resulted in the accomplishment of the set projects.

Works Cited

Franz, Timothy. Group Dynamics and Team Interventions: Understanding and Improving Team Performance. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub, 2012. Print.

Schermerhorn, John. Management. Hoboken, NJ: J. Wiley, 2008. Print.