Group Influence and Individuals Behavior - Research Paper Example

? Lecturer: Group Influence and Individuals’ Behavior Introduction Group dynamics have far reaching effects on individual future behaviors. These dynamics usually crop from group behavior. However, dynamics are specific and deals with high influences from small groups where the influences crop from a given consensus among the group members to behave in an accepted and co-ordinated way. According to Gary (1996), individual behaviors may or may not be shaped by the group depending on the level of consensus involved. Some people may abandon their personalities and be led by the group dynamics; from a silent introvert to a protester and extremely outgoing individual. Some of the activities that may create group dynamics are participation in theatre plays, cinema watching, football or drug taking groups. This paper is therefore based on the hypothesis “the characteristics of an individual over time are highly shaped by group norms”. In light of the same, the paper will ratify this theme as related to small group interactions and their effects on people. It will also show observed characteristics of individuals in a group over time and effectively outlining the effective experiences in the group’s behavior in a given time. Characteristics of the Small Groups The members of the group in focus here are characters in the school basketball team. To the extent the team has achieved, they are seen as celebrities in the school since the team has progressively increased knowledge of the school name as it has been on a winning streak in very many competitions. The team is made up of around ten players who have a very cohesive group. Not all of them however walk and act together off the field. In the field however, the level of team work is extreme and this gives the exact meaning of group work. At the beginning of the term, there was a varied characteristic of the members as some were inward individuals who never had the slightest sense for someone else. This information was obtained at primary levels on the basis of having been friends with some of them privy to these games and joining of the team. As a fan of the game, there has been a close following of the events of the team and how the members have evolved over the given time. Moreover, some were very poor keepers of time and never punctual at any event or even class. On joining the team at the beginning of the school session this term, each and every player was assigned a position and a role. This has been their contribution to the team. The team has developed a very functional; role differentiation that sees to it that all the members play a significant role in determination of the games that is being played. This is a team that is a collection of different individuals from different backgrounds. The coach must have assigned them a socio-emotional responsibility because the team has kept a very high moral fabric of itself. In the same way of maintaining a social fabric, the team has also developed group norms and values. These norms and values value created a value judgment on the team as not only being disciplined but also having acceptable social behaviors as rallying points for them. The communication patterns in the team have moved from a vague notion of merely general terms to a complex figurative language that is well understood on the court of play and pitch of practice (Gary). The communication has always been both decentralized and centralized. Centralized communication has mostly been used when they are on the court hence the developed figurative language. Being a public team, there has always been a decentralized in that there has to be continuous communications with the outsider spectators and cheering squads outside. So co-ordinated is the team that there are varied ways in which very outgoing members of the team are starting to behave. But even with all the communications and the concrete cohesive teamwork, there is the issue of status differentials. Apparently, all the players come from very different backgrounds. There is age, racial and economic differences in the team. In normal society developments, the people who come from high class families have been known to be preferred as opposed to those from the lower class family lines. What the team coach however has developed is a high level adherence to the rules regardless of the background of the team members. For the first time, one could see the different status individuals having time together outside the court over other issues. This has created some form of cohesion in them. Regardless of whether individual group members have these characteristics, the basketball team as a group has developed some characteristics that have kept it together. These characteristics may also be seen on the same players outside the team but as long as the group members are together. One of them is respect for the rules (Feigenberg, Field and Pande). The coach must have given them the best of the rules to follow. There are both spoken and unspoken rules but as long as the group members are together, then it is possible to certify the existence of these rules. The other fact is encouragement. This piece of writing may describe the team as the best. However, there are always times when everything is very low and they lose games also. During these times, there are those team members that break down and let their emotions flow. Over time, they have always been able to cope because they receive effective encouragement from the team members. Communication and commitment of the team members also describe their unity and ability to intertwine different appreciation levels yet maintaining their discipline as a team. This is experienced on and off the pitch Therefore, over the three periods of observation and integrations through interviews and watching the team play, the development of the different traits in individuals has been shaped differently and created itself from a relatively weaker to a more advanced level where the traits become Part of the group members. Evolution of the Small Group Evolution of the group took a long time as the coach had to select a like-minded and talented squad. The group developed through a process of phases and took quite a period to develop. At the end, there was a unified selection of individuals that had a common purpose. With reference to the readings that have been made, the best model to elaborate the development of the team is the Tuckman’s Stage Model. The five stages as explained in the model below best explain the formation of the group going by the three times that the observation was made (Tuckman). At the formation stage, all the members, some of whom I had very close relationship had individual characteristics. In the groups, the conflicts were very low since most of the players were strange to each other and group personality development was the key issue by the coach. Most of the group members used to exhibit lateness in attending the trainings while some were very secretive and never shared much. After practice, most of the team members would go home as individuals as there were not so many interactions. The group was navigating combined personality and agreeable neutrality was the norm. Some of the other characteristics seen in many of the group members were; emotional instability and sports indiscipline where one would want to retaliate on a rough tackle by the other (Forsyth). At the storming stage, most of the members of the team had started knowing each other and the need to dominate the team came up. It was at this stage that the coach chose a captain for the team. Apparently, the group had gone over the uncertainty of not knowing each other and the need to dominate each other brought chaos and misunderstandings. It was also at this point that primary observation to the group was stopped since I had other commitments. On the second observation, the coach had instilled a high sense of pride and confidence in the group and at the instance, the group had overcome all their uncertainties. Individuals were no monger secretive, punctuality had improved, emotional immaturity was clearly declining and conflicts had drastically decreased. This, according to group knowledge is what I came to learn as norming stage. This stage could also be intertwined with the performing stage in which most of the individuals had changed the way they behaved because of the lessons they learned in the groups. This was a closed group comprising of members that had come together for a reason. Performance therefore marked the epitome of the group membership and had all the members showcase what their real changed personalities were. At this level, there was a well-defined group character. At the adjourning stage, the group members showed the capability to interact rather separately than was normal. In this case, two or three members could be seen together as opposed to the ten members in the whole group. It was during this stage, the third stage in my view of the group that there was seen a changed group. Most of the group members had captured and embraced the need for physical fitness and hence some could be seen flexing their muscles as they walk. The need to look masculine set in. moreover, due to the popularity that the team had gained, there was a high female influence. Some of the group members would be constantly seen with female counterparts although it was never the case before they joined the team. Punctuality was particularly the most effective benefit that was gained from the group. One of my close friends, a member of the team would be picked and influenced to attend training earlier than he used to do. He was a chronic late comer but the team had influenced him otherwise. Conclusion Gary (1996), states that there is a high correlation between influence of a group and individual behavior. People would tend to turn into a totally different character when exposed to a certain group. In light of the thesis statement, I fully support the idea that group dynamics are the greatest creator of the characteristics of an individual. It can be seen that some of the team members were team members were chronic late comers where they became very time conscious about it. There are those that were absolute introverts and at the third primary observation were all walking around with girls because of the fame they had obtained in school team and possibly because some members of the team were doing that prior to this period. The characteristics of group members are therefore dictated by the group the person keeps. Reference Feigenberg, Benjamin, et al. Do Group Dynamics Influence Social Capital and Female Empowerment? Experimental Evidence from Microfinance . Print. Massachussetts: MIT, 2013. Forsyth, Donelson R. Group Dynamics. Print. New York: Thomson Learning, Inc., 2006. Gary, Johns. “Social Behaviour and Organizational Processes”.Organizational Behaviour: Understanding and Managing Life at Work. Concordia: Harper Collins College Publishers, 1996. Tuckman, B. "Developmental Sequence in Small GroupS." Journal of Psychological Bulletin 63 (1965): 384-399. Read More