We also went to the offices of local companies for fund raising in the teams of two members with rotating partners. This practice helped me analyze the behavior of individual members along with their strengths and weaknesses. Furthermore, I also observed how individual group members had an impact on the overall campaign itself.
Reflection: During these group meetings and fund raising sessions, I noticed that every person among us had a different persona and a varied way of handling situations in hand. Where me and my younger peer who was also a student attempted to come up with ideas that were dynamic and robust but risky, group members that were employed, were tempted to follow a pre-determined plan. Same was reflected in their communication styles as well. Our group leader who was an experienced social worker was highly persuasive mainly because of his experience and passion towards his work. On the other hand, younger members of our group possessed highly energetic approach and provocative communication styles. This strength enabled us to deliver some extraordinary presentations and gather handsome amount of funds. Furthermore, other team members from corporate background had a subtle and calculated approach towards their deliverance. This mannerism created balance in our teams and allowed us to secure more leads.
Generalization/ Principles/ Theories: Careful analysis of our group dynamics made me aware of the processes in which small groups operate. I realized that in small groups the role of the leader becomes more important since processes are rather informal. Also, the level of interaction between team members is highly influenced by their personal traits. I also learnt that small teams tend to have more reliance on the equilibrium between communication styles of its group members. Usually in such groups, workers from different background have more opportunity to communicate and transmit their messages through formal and