Small Groups

1483 WordsOct 6, 20136 Pages
In the essays, “Committees, Juries, and Teams: The Columbia Disaster and How Small Groups Can Be Made to Work,” and “The Hive” shows the ways to properly run a small group and how to get the correct and best results. The two essays also say what to avoid when working in a small group; for example how to avoid group polarization and why that is detrimental to small groups. The essay by James Surowiecki also explains to avoid a type of dictator in the small group, someone who is the main mouthpiece to the group and why that is a negative aspect to have in a small group. The two essays show the pros and cons of working in small groups, both authors show that if the people with in the group do not work properly together the outcome the…show more content…
Now the MMT group was all from similar backgrounds, similar educations, and similar employment, giving the team no diversity, no different way of thinking, which in the end did not have a positive effect on the small group. “NASA employees today are more likely to have come to the agency directly out of graduate school, which means they are far less likely to have different opinions.” (Surowiecki Page 478) Since the small group had no cognitive diversity they all thought the same way, there was no difference in opinion, so there was no new way of finding a way to fix the problem they were facing. In every small group there needs to be cognitive diversity, giving the topic of discussion a new way to being looked at or a different way to look at a situation. “.. diversity of opinion is the single best guarantee that the group will reap benefits from face to face discussion.” (Surowiecki Page 478) Making the outcome of the small group a positive one. Another topic that Surowieki emphasizes is the necessity of equality in a group. In his essay Surowieki talks about how important it is for every person in the small group to voice their opinion. There should not be just
Open Document