Group dynamics creates solid and cohesive relationships within organizations or social friendship circles. In a social circle, each person has their respective skill sets and attitudes that make themselves stand out. It is not enough for any group just to know each other, and it is not enough for them to have their ways. Otherwise, then that specific group could be possibly be dancing with two left feet. What does this necessarily mean? Individuals within groups must know their strengths and weaknesses, in a way that friends and colleagues could use their assets to help one another. Hence, giving each group member a role according to personal strengths would create dynamics in addressing behaviors and responsibilities.
What are the different types of team roles in different groups? Originally, team roles are classified into action-oriented, people-oriented, and thought-oriented categories, but categorical roles are broken down to address the missing qualities in creating an all-around identity, and to avoid overlapping roles in a team (Belbin, n.d.; Merchant, n.d.). According to Belbin, there are nine types of team roles, but this paper will only identify and describe six important team roles. The first team role is a shaper/motivator, wherein it fits people who maintain a positive mindset despite the hurdles in overcoming a challenge. The second team role is the implementer, which shows creativity, resourcefulness and practicality in turning ideas into actual plans. The third team role is the finisher, which shows attention to detail and strives to minimize mistakes. The fourth team role is the coordinator, who guides his teammates in identifying their respective obligations. The fifth role is the monitor-evaluator, wherein a person tasked for this role must not make decisions in a hasty manner and think of the outcome carefully. The other role is a specialist, wherein they would prefer to make things work by adhering to their limited expertise. The six roles mentioned can be branched into a new role, depending on the objective and needs to reach a specific goal. Each role has their importance in the group’s operations, but the group roles mentioned in this paper are more common and traditional in most companies.
It is important to share roles between group members in order to determine their respective strengths and weaknesses while sharing responsibilities at the same time. Group members should assist one another. Likewise, guiding people is one trait a leader must possess. Therefore, group members are capable of being a “leader,” even if it is through their skills and ways of working things out. People may fill more than one role at the same time or over a period (Gilman, 1985). A member could select a much comfortable role, but one can either assume nearly identical roles at the same time. Depending on some circumstances, a group member may be forced/voluntary take another role in order to offset potential losses. Highly competent people can fill in multiple roles at the same time, signifying their dedication to their work and knowhow of a specific situation.
If a group member is capable of taking in multiple tasks and responsibilities at a specific time, then it may reflect that person qualities commendable of leading a group. Some group members within a group are judged by their respective performances. Likewise, a group member who possesses the expertise, and people-centric qualities are likely to lead the group. If that is the case, should group members rank each other according to intellect and traits? Ranking the roles according to importance may be likely if experience comes into play. However, members still share equal responsibilities in carrying the group into success. Group roles and responsibilities are directly proportional. Therefore, any member who has a lot of work to do could shoulder the burden as well. Bußmann (2013, pp.20-22) has a different perspective of ranking roles in groups of humans, and the rankings were based on the roles. Bußmann’s ranking of roles is the following: the leader, the favorite, the brave, the follower, the opponent, the scapegoat, and the outsider (Bußmann, 2013). There is a strong correlation between roles according to functions and ranking of roles. The outsider and the opponent can cause social conflicts within the circle while the rest are focused on task and sustainment roles.
As a young member of the group, I often play the role of a follower and a specialist. It is very difficult to take the burden and carry the group all by yourself, especially if management and leadership skills are still raw or lacking potential. When you are the follower of the group, all you have to do is to follow instructions and finish what needs to be accomplished. However, it might be socially difficult to be a limited to the follower's responsibilities as there is a need to produce and share more ideas for the benefit of the group. I enjoy the challenges and the puzzles of my scope of responsibilities, but it gets stressful once you try to exceed your limitations.
Being socially selective gets you torn between groups. When you are in a specific group, you are that kind of person. When you go to another group of people, you tend to be the opposite. The instructor was going to break down our class into four different groups. When our high school teacher selected me to lead a group of classmates, there was a feeling of excitement and fear at the same time. I have not led a group in a class project before, and I was content of being able to contribute more while not leading the group. Part of me took it as a challenge, but part of me does not want to take responsibility. As the days passed by, I slowly accepted my role as a leader. I worked together with my group on how we would play that part of a skit, and my members cooperated. I did not go out like a tyrant leader who just throws himself around his members. Instead, everyone participated, and we were able to perfect our moves and lines. Time came when our group was going to present the play. We were able to finish the play, and our professor commended our work well done. When I thought of leading a group, I always thought that being vocal would be more effective. I just treated my group mates as if I am working with them, and made sure that everything is equally distributed. Our acts of selflessness and cooperation between one another made things easier for our individual and collective efforts, as our group was able to accomplish something.
For a group to be more cohesive as a working unit, it must undergo challenges and trials in order to value the importance of solving problems. By analyzing and going through a set of problems in different situations, members in groups will find better strategies through communication. Active communication is always important in defining the group dynamics and capabilities. Each member must know their responsibilities and must cooperate in accordance to the plan. Each member had his or her contributing ideas and knowledge, and it is up to the members how the consolidation of ideas will take place. When members know their respective roles, the goals through collective effort will slowly materialize. Group members and leaders must need to know each other more often. From there, they are more than capable of working things out through identical ways.
References
Bußmann, U. (2013). Group Dynamics: The Nature of Groups as Well as Dynamics of Informal Groups and Dysfunctions (pp. 20-22). Anchor Academic Publishing.
Gilman, R. (1985). Roles In Groups. Strategies For Cultural Change, (9), 24-24.
Merchant, P. (n.d.). What Are the Nine Types of Team Roles? Retrieved December 11, 2014, from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/nine-types-team-roles-15566.html
