Small group communication - Essay Example

Small group communication A small group is defined as a few people engaged in communication interaction over time, in face-to-face and/or computer mediated environments who have common goals and norms and have developed a communication pattern for meeting their goals in an interdependent manner (Cragan, Wright and Kasch 9). In the course of this semester we have had the opportunity to participate in small groups. The idea was to combine our ideas and generate plausible arguments on a number of issues as required by our instructor. The concept was not totally strange as most of us have been involved in group activities before hand. However, the difference was both the aim and the setting. Most of the group discussions in the past were largely informal and were held beyond the class confines. Furthermore, the participants voluntarily joined these groups and arbitrarily decided on the direction the group discussions should take. This perhaps explains why most of these groups never really achieved the goals one had envisioned. However, the class discussions were much more formal the participants had a clear goal and the instructor provided the assessment. This prompted everyone to be serious and actively participate. All the same, there were hindrances that downplayed the group’s efficiency. These shortcomings were not apparent at the time but have become clearer after understanding the principles and theories of small groups. In the following section, this study looks at the shortcomings that form a basis of the group’s critique. The feeling is by addressing these pitfalls the group would have been able to generate appropriate answers in a shorter timeframe. Additionally, the quality of answers generated would have been better as everyone would have been fully involved. An effective small group that would guarantee efficient results is one that has established clear roles for the small group members. Firstly, there should be a task leader. A task leader is probably one of the key people within the small group as he controls the direction of the group and initiates debate points. He is resourceful enough to know when a point has been exhausted and also has the ability to come up with debatable points whose answers contribute to the overall discussion. The other critical aspect for a small group is communication. The members of the small group should understand each other they should be able to discern information provided by other members. This ensures that no single point escapes. In totality, this contributes to a healthy group discussion and one that maximizes on the resourcefulness of all the members. Looking through the definition forwarded by the text it is possible to identify our class groups as small groups. A project team, as it was constituted to achieve a particular goal which was discussion of various academic topics. The intention of the project team was to improve our functionality in groups as well as integrate variable knowledge as presented by various group members. However, the only qualification as a small group only lay in the numbers and communication interactions. This was the only congruent aspect as our small group lacked a communication pattern. There were no ground rules that ensured the discussions remained focused on the subject matter. This was largely due to lack of a task leader. A task leader is defined as the person who emerges as the most qualified to lead a specific small group dealing with a particular problem (Cragan, Wright and Kasch 39). This type of a person lacked in our small group. The result was an uncoordinated group that engaged in debates far from the intended topics. It would take a long time to have the group members focus again on the topic of discussion. The greatest problem was that every time one of the group members seemed to take control of the group he was fast criticized and this again translated to a disorderly discussion. The text identifies that task leaders are not necessarily known at the inception of the small group. Rather, they emerge as the group continues all members should encourage and support this member (Cragan, Wright and Kasch 43). Unfortunately, the emerging leaders in our group were fast repressed and this made it difficult to have any one of the members determine the direction and control discussions of the group. This meant that the group took a lot of time to come up with the intended points. Another weakness apparent in our group besides the lack of a task leader was an imbalance on the participant’s roles. An effective small group is considered as one where there is a task leader, a social-emotional leader, a central negative who critiques the general view of the group, a tension releaser and an information provider. The information provider is the most shared role. It involves members of the group providing accurate information and objective data which helps the group achieve its primary role or solve its problem. Unfortunately, our group seemed to have most participants assume the tension releaser role as opposed to the information provider role. This meant that the group spent a considerable time laughing and engaging in idle talk as opposed to participating in the ensuing discussion. Lastly, the small group appeared to lack a perfect understanding. One member would contribute and attempt to explain his point of view but one would notice that not all of us understood the points or issues raised. This was the case a number of times and at the end there was a strong likelihood that several points had been missed. Even though the group reached a consensus at the very end, it was possible to read discontent among several members. This meant that their points had been ignored or had not been understood properly and this ultimately affected the quality of our group work. Going forward, it is important to recognize and acknowledge every member’s contribution as this is the only way the group can ensure it is fully inclusive. Such inclusion will improve the quality of our debate and will ultimately lead to better ideas and conclusions. All the same, there is hope that continued interaction and participation in these small groups will cultivate understanding across the group and communication will seize being a barrier as we will be able to fully discern each others thoughts and ideas. Works Cited Cragan, John F, David W. Wright, and Chris R. Kasch. Communication in Small Groups: Theory, Process, Skills. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2009. Print. Read More