Definitional
Small group communication typically occurs in a group of 3-12 people and takes place during the interactions because of the presence of the group. There are several types of small groups there are casual or social groups which usually include friends, family, neighbors etc, there are also learning or education groups which come together in an attempt to teach or lean something about a given subject. There are also work groups which are groups designed with specific goals to achieve within the context of a job. Lastly there are groups that are considered self directed meaning that they are formed naturally, usually have minimal supervision, weak leadership and everyone is considered an equal within the group (Tubbs & Moss 388). In order for group communication to occur there obvious has to be the group present but they must also have a purpose, the group usually then functions in the following manor: interdependence develops over time, the way the group communicates eventually becomes predictable, there is an emergence of roles and norms, the group begins to serve its function, the group should be rewarding for each member and lastly all members consider themselves as contributors to the group to be considered “in” the group. One of the most important factors that needs to be considered when dealing with small group communication is the group think factor, this is when a majority decision is made by the group without seeking any alternatives. This usually results in a poor quality decision when the group is under pressure or has to deal with a strict time constraint. The negative outcomes of group think extend to: the group not seeking alternative solutions, the members aren’t critical enough of each other’s ideas, they don’t seek out an expert opinion if it is available and they do not have a contingency plan. Groupthink can often be foreseen by communication experts because the tend to use the following trend: illusion of invulnerability (they think they are stronger than they are), the members begin to rationalize all decisions, the group shares stereotypes that guide their decisions, exercise pressure on other group members and the last symptom is usually that all opinions are sacrificed by the stronger voice who’s opinions usually result in the group’s decision. To avoid groupthink the group must first decide who the leader could be, divide the group into smaller groups if necessary, bring in outside experts, throw in the devils advocate for the sake of argument and lastly they must have more than one group meeting. By avoiding groupthink the group will most likely function smoother as well as be able to reach a much higher quality decision resulting in better group cohesion as well. What it all really comes down to is that if a group truly wants to be effective they must approach their decision in such a way that ensures commitment to the decision by all members of the group (Tubbs & Moss 418).
Application
The application entry I have chosen to use fro Group Communication is a clip from the ABC show LOST. Although the clip does not appear to be group communication because only 2 people are talking it is an example of group communication. Before this actual clip started in this episode the group of about 9 was deciding whether or not it was appropriate to go out into the jungle at that time in search of Walt, a lost boy. The general censuses of the group is that they don’t really want to go because although it seems morbid, at this point they don’t think it is useful to look for him because he has been gone for so long. John Locke the bald man in the clip immediately takes on the role of group leader, by using propaganda saying that he saw Walt in a dream and that he needs to be saved it is much easier for the group to want to follow because they are emotionally touched by the group leaders experience. If John Locke had not taken the leadership position in this situation with the group most likely they would not have gone out to find Walt who is eventually saved. In all group situations a leader must emerge for the group to reach a quality decision, if this fails to happen the group may begin to travel down the path towards groupthink which will lead to a less quality decision.
Personal
For my personal application for Group Communication I am again going to relate this back to my theater experiences. As a stage manager I am constantly in a group communication setting, the cast sizes that I just recently dealt with was 9 actors with 3 faulty advisors and then separately a few designers. In my situation when dealing with group communication although it is not directly an education setting in a classroom I would consider college theater to be an educational setting. None of us are professionals yet and thus we are all still learning, this means that communication needs to be carefully worded so that no actors are offended by criticism but at the same time honesty is a big part of our job. When dealing with the cast I am the group leader (stage manager) dealing with all logistical aspects of the show, I did find it interesting that at the beginning of our experience I felt like it was a more formal setting and as the show went on and we became a much closer group, the setting became more casual and thus the communication varied. Our common goal is to put on a successful show which can be a stressful task, at times the group disagrees on common issues but in the end through mediation as the leader they are eventually resolved (hopefully by avoiding group think) and a successful show is put on stage.
No comments:
Post a Comment