Task Group Development
This is an excerpt from the paper...
The purpose of this paper is to analyze the communication processes and the stages of development of my task group during the completion of an assignment. The task group (Group Five) consisted of four members. Our task was to prepare a paper on the pros and cons of the topic of providing compensation to organ donors. The communication and collaboration of the group during the six face-to-face meetings were also documented. Most significantly, the analysis of the communication and development of my task group within the context of small group communication theories such as Eric Berne's Transaction Theory and group development theories such as Fisher's Model will be presented in this paper. The four stages of group developmentùentering, encountering, engaging and endingùwill be used an organizational framework to discuss the small group communication and development of my task group. During the entering stage of the group development, also known as the forming stage of Tuckman's theory or the orientation stage of Fisher's Model, group members meeting each other for the first time are primarily concerned with overcoming their discomfort with one another. In this phase, the group members are engaged in establishing boundaries and group norms for communication (cited in Egolf 102-3). In contrast to this theoretical description, my task group did not experience a high level of awkwardness with one another because three of the four members were close friends who had known
. . .
ch member's responsibilities helped the groups visualize the step-by-step completion of the task.
The high level of unity of my task group can also be explained by Egolf's discussion of compatibility. According to Egolf, group members are compatible with one another when they either have similar skills and behaviors, or the aforementioned aspects that complement one another. While individuals who share the same dispositions and skills tend to get along with one another, those who complement one another in task skills and behavior are also likely to cooperate with one another. Since each of the members has their strengths in a different area, there will be minimal competition between them over possible roles within the group (137-8). Within my task group, both the similarities and the complementarities of the skills, predispositions and behavior of the group members were crucial in building cohesion. Three of the four members not only shared similar predispositions and behavior, but also complementary strengths and interests. Therefore, they were able to collaborate with one another without difficulties and derive benefits from the knowledge of one another. The remaining member was also accepted because of her knowledge o
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Aubrey Ellis, Janis Groupthink, Contrary Egolf's, Tuckman's Theory, Fisher's Model, Adult Mode, According Egolf, Unlike Tuckman's, Group Five, , cited egolf, stages development, effective communication, stage development, interpersonal conflicts, tuckman's theory, cited egolf 102-3, positive attitudes, communication development, task group, egolf 102-3, ellis cited lyle, communication development task, aubrey ellis cited, principles effective communication,
Approximate Word count = 2444
Approximate Pages = 10 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Task Group Development
|