Group leadership in an organization is a critical role which facilitates group discussion and the resolution of conflicts. The members of the two groups are involved in discussions which are aimed at making decisions that are crucial to them. The first group involves members of the politics of sociology department who are trying to decide which courses they should cut and add into their department. The second group involves a group of individuals looking to raise funding for a playground in the neighborhood for their children. A team leader influences the outcomes and the productivity of a discussion.
The intent of the discussion in the politics sociology group was not very clear. The members of the group could not agree on whether enrollment was a determining factor to the courses that should be taught by the department. The playground discussion had a more clear intent as all the members agreed on the need for a playground and the need to come up with funding for the playground. Most members from the ‘Politics of sociology’ discussion were unprepared for the discussion. Only two participants demonstrated preparedness; the teacher who suggested a course that the department could add and Ellen who suggested a course that the department could drop. In the playground discussion, only one participant, Aisha demonstrated preparedness by looking up reasonable budgets that the group could work with.
Participation in the political sociology department discussion was equal. All the participants had some input for the discussion. Only Georgia made the least amount of contribution to the discussion. In the playground discussion, there was equal participation, and every member of the group participated in the discussion. Members of the political sociology discussion were reluctant to adopt different views. Trevor refused to admit that enrollment was a determining factor, while Georgia remained adamant that the course culture of consumerism was a great course for the department. Steve was not sure that the Dearborn book would be a good course book even though he had handed down the book to the teacher who suggested the course. Members in the playground discussion were open to new ideas. Ray agreed to a lower budget than the one he had anticipated. Members of the group were welcoming to the idea of a bakery, and when a better idea to approach a foundation came up, they went along with it.
Members of the ‘Politics of Sociology’ discussion had a hostile climate. The discussion resulted in an argument, and members kept cutting each other shot. Certain members of the discussion felt as if they were being targeted in the discussion such as Trevor. The atmosphere in the playground discussion was an amicable one, and members were keen on learning each other’s names. Each member was given a chance to contribute without interruption except when the other member was supporting the speaker. Jokes were even shared in the discussion. The members of the ‘Politics of Sociology’ discussion were not productive as they spent a lot of time arguing and did not come up with a decision at the end of the discussion. The playground discussion was time-efficient and productive. Members of the group agreed on a budget for the group and how they were going to raise funds for the playground.
Strategies to increase productivity and outcomes include establishing a clear mission for the discussion. The group should also stay focused on the problem instead of dwelling on personal conflicts. Mediation to resolve group conflicts should also be used. Members of the group should practice listening . Prejudging members of the group as was witnessed in the playground discussion should be avoided as it hinders effective communication . To increase group cohesion in the ‘Politics of Sociology discussion, there are several aspects that can be improved. The leader of the group did not communicate the mission of the group effectively. The mission kept changing from time to time. The intended outcomes of the discussion should be included in the mission statement, and not how the group will achieve that as this might be upsetting to some members of the group. Messages should be constructed to demonstrate the benefits of the discussion to the team.
The issue with the playground discussion is that members of the group doubted the capability of one of their members. Being a new member of the group, she also sold herself short at the beginning of the discussion by saying that she was at the meeting only so she could meet new people. Her suggestions were not taken seriously at the beginning of the discussion, but later the group adjusted and started treating her as one of the group members. As a group, members of the playground discussion were good at brainstorming ideas. The group was also open to new ideas, and members participated actively in the discussion with each member contributing to the discussion.
The constructive conflict was a common phenomenon at the playground discussion. Members of the group adapted to the presence of a new group member, her contribution and her strengths. The group was guided by the mutual benefit of setting up a playground in their neighborhood . The interests of all the group member were balanced in the discussion. For instance, when the group first met, the group’s major purpose was to come up with a budget for the playground. After they had established a reasonable budget, the group’s focus shifted to how they were going to raise the 35,000 that they had agreed upon. Most members of the group were friendly to Betty; Aisha said it was nice to meet her, and Ray made an effort to make sure that he got Aisha’s name right.
Conflict styles employed at the playground discussion include the accommodating, compromise and collaborating conflict styles. Members of the playground discussion were accommodating to ideas from other members of the group. Even though Betty thought that the bakery idea was a good idea to raise money for the playground, she accepted the idea to approach a foundation. By so doing, she put the needs of the group above hers. Compromise was also used in the discussion. Even though Ray thought 35,000 was low for the playground, he was ready to compromise and let the group settle on the figure . Collaboration was also witnessed when Betty offered to contact Clark, who was a friend of hers and was an owner of the Clark Foundation, to see if they could assist with the funding of the playground.
The ‘Politics of Sociology’ discussion presented various issues. Members of the group seem to have preexisting issues. When Ellen mentions that the culture consumerism course was one of the courses to deliberate about, Trevor says that he had suspected that that was where the discussion was headed. The mission of the group is not clearly indicated at the beginning of the discussion. The mission sways from deciding on courses, to making the Department attractive and taking care of the needs of the students during the discussion. Members of the group were not prepared for the discussion as they had very few suggestions . Members of the group were disrespectful and kept cutting each other off instead of listening. The group performed very poorly in the discussion.
The competing style is dominant in the political sociology discussion. Ellen and Trevor seem to be in a personal conflict and are both trying to win the discussion . Trevor is adamant that the enrollment should not be relied upon as a determining factor for the courses that the department should teach. Avoidance is also palpable when Georgia is seen to support both Trevor and the teacher even though the two are in disagreement.
Steve is the leader in the group in the ‘Politics of Sociology discussion. He fails as a leader since his dominance and social participation is limited in the group . One of the roles of a leader is to initiate. The group leader fails to initiate the actual problem that the group had gathered to solve. The group members seem to deviate from this purpose during the entire discussion. It is upon the leader to return the focus of the group to the problem that the group intends to solve. A group leader is also expected to coordinate the ideas from the group members. The leader should identify connecting ideas and link them to come up with a solution . The group leader should also be in a position to summarize ideas from the group members. Instead, the group leader also goes along with the flow of the discussion without coming to any conclusion. A leader should also elaborate ideas from group members. The purpose of elaborating is to ensure that all suggestions are clearly understood by other group members, and good ideas are not ignored. To enhance the process of the discussion, the group leader should be in a position to release tension . When the group members have been at a discussion for a while and no ideas seem to come up, the leader can perform better by suggesting a break or throwing in a joke to release tension between group members. Gatekeeping also ensures that all members of the group are vocal. Silent members of the group might have some of the best ideas if prompted to participate. A leader should also encourage members of the group who have contributions by giving them a chance to elaborate more on their suggestion. A leader should act as a mediator when the conflict shifts from a problem-oriented conflict and becomes personal. A good leader is one who acts as a servant and listens to fellow group members.
Steve could have conducted the discussion more effectively by stating a clear mission for the group at the beginning which was focused on outcomes for the entire department, and ensured that the group remained focused on the mission . Steve could have prompted Georgia to voice her suggestions instead of allowing her to be quiet. Steve also failed to mediate the personal conflict that was ongoing between Ellen and Trevor. Instead of encouraging the suggestion from the teacher, Steve shrugs it off saying that he was not sure. Steve is also witnessed cutting off Trevor when he is expected to be a good listener.
In conclusion, team leadership plays a major role in the productivity and the outcomes of a discussion. The mission of the discussion should remain steady throughout the entire discussion. Members of the group discussion should be allowed a chance to contribute since quiet members are likely to be sitting on the best ideas. Positive conflict styles such as compromise, accommodating and avoidance should be adopted to ensure positive outcomes. Personal conflicts should be dealt with through mediation. Effective communication should be enhanced by listening and avoiding prejudgment of the speaker.
References
Board of Regents. (2014). Conflict Styles. Retrieved from University of Wisconsin: https://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/home/HideATab/LeadershipManagementDevelopment/ConflictResolution/AboutConflict/ConflictStyles/tabid/228/Default.aspx
Conflict Management. (n.d.). The Nature of Conflict. Retrieved from Conflict Management: http://www.cios.org/encyclopedia/conflict/Cnature3_destructive.htm
Hug, C., Masterson, J. T., & Beebe, S. A. (2004). Group dynamics. Boston: Pearson Custom Pub.
Huhman, H. (2013, August 5). 8 Ways to Build a Cohesive Team. The Huffington Post.
Trautman, K. (2007, December). Leadership for Today Managing Conflict Within Groups. Retrieved from South Dakota Cooperative Extensive Service: http://pubstorage.sdstate.edu/AgBio_Publications/articles/ExEx16015.pdf
