CMST 340; Section 3
The group I was in proved to be successful because of the good grades we received on both of our presentations. However, there were times where I felt the group was not functioning as a group, while other times we were following a group structure very well. So, I will analyze those times, both good and bad, and show how they connect to what our class and text defines as a group. After that, I will then focus on some of my group members and as well as my role in the group.
When the group first was formed, we had primary tension. We had trouble talking to one another about what we were going to do, and getting to know each other. We had a number of suggestions and disagreements about where we should go and what we should do during our meetings. Some of us wanted to do something on campus, so that it was easy for everyone to meet. However, others wanted to go to a restaurant nearby, which was a different and more fun location for us to get to know each other. Finally, we decided on going to a coffee shop, on campus, and to play board games there. This really helped us with our primary tension, because we all got some laughs and a drink to enjoy. Also, it helped with some secondary tension as well, as we referred back to that first meeting, many times during the semester. This really was a good tension reliever for our group and helped us when it came to getting over the awkwardness of meeting new people. Getting to play games, use phatic communication, and enjoying our drinks was a good way for all of us to bond. It was one of the highlights of the group and helped us get off on the right foot. It really made us all feel together and like we were a real group.
Despite having a strong start, when it came to doing our first get together assignment, the group did not work well together. No one really stepped up to the plate when it came to who wanted to be leader, so Cody finally volunteered. He said that it would be a good learning experience for him, as he had never been a leader of a group before. Yet, the group had some troubles, most notably when it came to meeting together. I asked several times if we should be meeting *remove ,* weeks before our presentation was due, but no one really responded to my requests *remove ,* until the week of fall break. That’s when Cody really decided we should get moving on the project, as it was only a couple weeks from when we had to present. As he was leading, he seemed to take a style approach to leadership. He did a lot of work on the group *remove ,* when it came to making the power point, and it really seemed like he wanted the group to do well. He also seemed to take on the Structuration Theory *remove ,* in transforming our group from not doing anything, to being very focused and motivated to do well. The problem that came from this leadership style and theory is that the whole group did not seem to care about the project for so long, that they did not put much effort into it until the very last minute. Cody had wanted us to be prepared the day before the project was due *remove ,* so we could successfully rehearse, and be all set to present it to the class. However, I found out that I was the only one, who was really prepared, while the rest of the group was not. Cody convinced me enough to make me really get excited and prepared for the project, but it seemed as though no one else really bought into that, including Cody. Everyone else, including our leader, was not sure what they were going to say for the presentation and all of us were almost certain it would be a disaster. Luckily, they all tried really hard the day before the project was due, and we managed to get a good grade on the project. Still, I feel as though the Structuration and Style approach to leadership were not used as well as they should be and so our group did not function very well as a group. We should have met earlier and tried to get the project done