Communication Competence In A Group

Have you ever had to communicate important information to a diverse group of people you share unique working relationships with? Carrying the responsibility of managing the day to day operation of a fifty five million dollar medical Distribution Company forces me into communication instances which require care and precision for effective delivery. As an Operations Leader, I am responsible for delivering information to a large group of diverse individuals serving several different employment roles. Even though the audience is not responding audibly, as the presenter, I must communicate through a through a transactional communication model, meaning that, “I must communicate simultaneously with my

One of the things that worked well in our group was the willingness of those in the group to listen to each other and entertain various viewpoints. I think that mutual respect is the key when working with groups. Each of us played different roles in the group: some of us were listeners, some of us were leaders, and some who were initially listeners became leaders as the group went on. Within our group we had different personality types and communication styles.

On a 5-point scale, where 5 is “extremely important” and 1 is “not at all important,” rate the following types of group competencies in terms of their importance for becoming a highly effective group member. Circle (or highlight) one number for each item.

Our group experience aligns with Bruce W Tuckman’s group development cycles. Tuckman’s first stage to group development is the forming stage, which members act cautiously with each other in order to understand the group's goal. Since group members were assigned at random, all members put in the effort to be cordial with each other. In the beginning, our group's climate was spontaneous. We had little to none primary tension as everyone was positive and encouraged each other to share their ideas for a product. When members were shy to put input in group decisions, I made sure to ask them for their opinion. For example, I noticed that I was contributing a lot of my ideas for possible products but group member Tony had yet to comment on his ideas.

In order for successful group work to be achieved, there are a number of aspects that need to be considered. In the first lecture we were told to expect conflict, this threw me at first, I usually run away from conflicting situations (I will get into why a little later). Although I did not like the concept of having to face and deal with conflict, the value did show, as we were told it would. McDermott (2002) suggests that conflict signals the group has begun to matter to participants, and groups are often more productive after the resolution of conflict. The second aspect that really stuck with me was group processes and development. Most of the groups I have been involved in so far throughout my degree,

the complexity of the group dynamics in the current era which makes these groups difficult to represent in a simple model. Furthermore, it fails to recognize that tasks benefiting the group and contributing to the group’s goal can and do happen at other stages than performing (Hall, 2010). Nonetheless, the model offers a useful framework for the group development through its applied perspective and common sense approach (Bonebright, 2010). The forming stage consists of orientation to the task at hand, gathering information on differences and similarities with other members of the group, desire for the acceptance, establishing communication methods and looking for guidance from the group leader (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977).

Being a position that requires communication can definitely be beneficial. I have been volunteering for nearly two years at a crisis hotline and have since felt my communication skills over the phone improve significantly. Interacting with people frequently also tends to ease people's worries when it comes to communication, so it is understandable that your communication competency is high, especially in a position of authority.

"Did we speak clearly to one another? Did we listen attentively to one another? Did we give one another constructive feedback?" Bjorkquist, B. (2011). Chapter 10 Evaluation: Improving Your Group's Performance. In <i>Interpersonal and Group Dynamics</i> (Second Edition ed., pp. 149-151). Toronto. The simple answer to all these questions would be a YES. When we had group meetings, facebook chats, texting chats, we all spoke to eachother in a very clear professional way. Every person spoke in a way that everyone could understand and if someone did not than we explained in a better way. We all listened when one person was talking and did not say anything until they were done. The best part was giving feedback to one another on ideas, written work ect. For example, when we were deciding on a topic, Amanda suggested that we sponsor a panda every month. Everyone liked it, but we gave feedback on how we could involve that idea to the community. Amanda took the feedback and we all came up with the idea to do animal testing. Without her giving us the idea about sponoring a panda, then we would have never been able come up with this idea. No group member was disrespectful when a idea was given, no matter how upsurred it was. Therefore, our dialogue was on the money with one

As a group, our goal is to work cohesively to complete our tasks. We also hope to do well on said tasks, while completing them in a timely manner. In addition, we hope to avoid “groupthink” in times of deliberation and planning. Going along with our goal to avoid groupthink, each of us hope to learn and expand our horizons on new perspectives shared by our group members. We can accomplish this through encouraging each other to show up to class as well as constantly acknowledging and validating everyone’ opinions. This will contribute to the team climate because we expect everyone to be open and respect other’s ideas, remain on task, and participate. Next, it is crucial that we establish and practice a laid-back, open, and fun environment for ourselves in which we still get the work needed to be done completed. Lastly communication is essential. Our group’s use of the GroupMe app, allows for constant communication between the members. Through the groupchat we created, each of us are able to notify group members if we cannot make it to class or a meeting, or if we are running late to either. We are also able to help each other with the individual tasks set for us to complete the assignment as

I noticed how abruptly Jules interrupted Lisa and continued to run the group meeting as if no other leader happened to be present in the room. This became the initial issue I notice in the group if given the opportunity I would have controlled the discussion differently by creating an agenda from beginning to end. The group leaders initiated the meeting with an introduction and statement of purpose. This idea is smart and helpful it gives the member an idea of the group’s purpose and a reason to continue to participate. The group collectively created norms for a sense of a safe atmosphere such as confidentiality, respect, and non-judgmental. I began to see the cohesiveness of the group formed when Lisa reviewed what she recently mentioned to a member that arrived late. Knowing that the group will remain with the same people can increase the connection among group members and

Place a checkmark next to those skills that you feel you need to work on.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;There are many things to consider when talking about working within a group. One of the major things is conflicts between the group’s members. People will always have conflicts among themselves and with others; it is just a way of life. One of the conflicts that occur within a group is Lack of Leadership, someone needs to be in charge and keep everyone else pointed in the right direction. Another conflict among groups is Group Roles; everyone needs to know where they fit into the puzzle and what is expected of them. Also everyone needs to have coinciding Schedules, that way you know the work is getting done. All of theses problems add up to one of the biggest issues in

When doing so the other group members were active listener, by using their whole body verbally and nonverbal. Like facing the speaker and giving eye contact and try to avoided interruption. The group also acknowledges the thoughts of the speaker by giving constructive feed back. Due to the effectiveness of the group communication, we were able to build trust, respect and understand the issues and make decision for effective change. We illustrate this by coming together as a group one again to accomplish the goal we initially wanted to accomplish. Since the first organization that we had chosen was incorrect, so we had to make the necessary changes to accomplish our goals. The other effective feature is the purpose of the group. Kozier et al (2010) stated that the effective group purpose is when “goal, task, and outcomes are clarified. Understanding and modified so that members of the group can commit themselves to purposes through cooperation” (p.401). For instance, each individual was assign a task and knew what was to be accomplished. As group we all decided to meet at suitable day and time which was beneficial to all team members, because we could commit to the group and focus on what needed to be achieved.

My feelings about the group process was a little mix at first but, at the end I felt like we actually brought it together. Beginning of the group member were all over the place and had no direction, when we were able to take a breather in just think ideas started to flow. I felt like that took the communicator to make it happen. By reinsuring the other group members that everything will go smoothly if we just don’t overthink everything.

In order to evaluate group climate and the level of trust present, we devised this tool (refer to climate tool). By using this tool, we specifically examined different aspects of what we considered “beneficial criteria” to effective group climate and “detrimental criteria” to effective group climate. The tool was divided into two sections in order to evaluate both good and bad displays of climate by individual members, as opposed to, simply measuring all positive aspects and not taking into account harmful communication. Team members were graded by subtracting their detrimental points accrued from their beneficial points. A maximum score would have been a 24.