INDIVIDUAL PROPOSAL: GROUP COMMUNICATION Submitted By: Marcellus Barrus Salt Lake Community College Elements of Effective Communications

- COMM-1010-008 November 5, 2012

Table of Contents
OVERVIEW PROJECT DESCRIPTION GROUP ASSETS
Asset: Productive Group Asset: We felt we belonged.

3 4 5
5 5

GROUP LIMITATIONS
Not following the assigned roles Absence of key group members

7
7 7

RECOMMENDATIONS CONCLUSION WORKS CITED

8 9 10

Overview
Our group looked into coming up with a solution on what university to choose when we have completed our education at Salt Lake Community College. Even though there are multiple choices and solutions, we felt that we had come up with the best solution for the majority of students. It was easy, actually. Working as a group made the tasks not as difficult. We shared the responsibility in getting things done. Using the reflective-thinking sequence (Adler and Elmhorst 248), we were able to go step-by-step in figuring out the best solution. Even though we had succeeded in coming up with the best solution, it wasnt always a smooth process. I noticed two places where things broke down. Things did become a little more difficult when we didnt follow the assigned roles of group members. I also noticed a breakdown when group members did not attend the scheduled meetings. I would recommend that we stick to the roles and if needed, reassign the roles when we figure out people dont fit the roles that have been assigned. I would also recommend that we have backup roles for when individuals dont show up for a meeting.

Project Description
Even though Salt Lake Community College is a great institution, it is only provides attendees with an associates degree. All students attending Salt Lake Community College that desire a bachelors degree or higher must choose and attend a university capable of a four-year degree. We are a task group comprised of seven students in COMM 1010 known as Group One. Our assignment was to apply the reflective-thinking sequence to recommend a solution for graduating and/or transferring students in choosing a university capable of providing a bachelors degree or higher. Our group met five times and discussed each step of the reflective sequence. We integrated information from the text in all our discussions. We encouraged critical thinking and participation of every member. Its important to find a solution to this problem. Each of us, with thousands of other students from Salt Lake Community College, will be face with the problem of which school to apply to and attend after graduating from Salt Lake Community College. The decision of choosing the correct school will impact each student and their family for the rest of their lives. If we can find a solution for the members of our team, we may be able to help students of Salt Lake Community College now and in the future in making the correct choice of which university to attend. Of all the possible solutions we proposed, our recommended solution is the best well rounded university in Utah that matched the criteria specified. Our groups process showed some multiple strengths and some weaknesses, which I will analyze in the following pages.

Group Assets
When we met for each meeting, I noticed a couple of things where we excelled. One, we worked and were productive when we were together. Two, we felt like we belonged.

Asset: Productive Group

The Group Process Variables Associated with Productivity are as follows. (Adler and Elmhorst 260) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Members are clear about and agree with group goals. Tasks are appropriate for group versus individual solutions. Members are clear about and accept their formal roles. Role assignments match ember abilities. Level of leaders direction matches the groups skill level. All group members are free to participate Group get, gives, and uses feedback about it effectiveness and productivity. Group spends time defining and discussing problems it must solve or decisions it must make. Members also spend time planning how they will solve problems and make decisions. Group uses effective decision-making strategies that were outlined in advance. Group evaluates its solutions and decisions. Norms encourage high performance and quality, success, and innovation. The group contains the smallest number of members necessary to accomplish its goals. Group has enough time to develop cohesiveness and accomplish its goals. Group has cooperative orientation. Periods of conflict are frequent but brief and the group has effective ways of dealing with conflict.

The items listed above are characteristics of a productive group. Comparing the list to our group meetings and the tasks that we had, I would have to say that we were a very productive group.

Asset: We felt we belonged.

The second asset of our group was the fact that we felt like we belonged. In other words, our group had cohesiveness. Cohesiveness can be defined as the degree to which members feel

themselves part of a group and want to remain with that group (Adler and Elmhorst 263). Reflecting back now, I realize that a couple of times we were there for each other. When somebody needed time off, others stepped up to take part of the extra load. We had many members with different backgrounds and beliefs. I dont think that at any time, any of us felt like they didnt belong. Because of this, I felt that we, as a group, were able to make better decisions to accomplish our goal.

Group Limitations
As much as I would like to think that our group was perfect, we werent. I noticed two areas where we were lacking. The first area was not following the assigned roles that were set up. The second area in which we were lacking was when certain key members were unable to attend a meeting.

Not following the assigned roles

In one of our first meetings, we went over the roles of our group. We had individuals take on the roles of team leader, proofreader, devils advocate, just to name a few. I noticed that things did not go as smoothly when we did not assign tasks according to the groups individual strengths and roles. I believe it hurt us in the end when we were finalizing the report and a couple of individuals had to put in the extra effort to pull things together. I dont remember our devils advocate ever speaking up and give us a different perspective on our thought processes. When it came to proofreading, each member of the group went over the rough draft of the report and reported back with any changes. I think that this hurt us a little because we counted on other people in the group to find where we needed to make changes and didnt put in effort to find the changes ourselves. I noticed that when the team leader didnt show up for a meeting, the meeting that we had wasnt as productive.

Absence of key group members

I also noticed that when key members of the group did not show up for a meeting, things fell apart. This specifically happened when our team leader didnt show up. He was the one that knew were we had left off. He was the one that had the notes from our previous meetings and knew where we needed to go. Without the team lead, our meetings turned into a social gathering with no real direction. Also, when key group members do not attend meetings, they themselves fall behind and are unsure of what happened when we gather together for our next meeting. This results in unclear direction. Time was wasted as we caught them up on what was missed and slowed us down, because we relied on them to have results returned to us when we met.

Recommendations
I have never participated or experienced a group project like this. It was definitely a learning experience. If I had to do this over again, I would make sure that there was a back up to our key members as well as the key roles. This would solve both of the problems mentioned above. If we would have had an assigned second in command, I think the meetings without the team leader would have gone better. Instead of winging it, we would be able to turn to number two to get things done, questions answered and tasks assigned. The team lead should also have involved more the individuals of specific roles better to fulfill their tasks. This comes down to organization as well and having a full understanding of the systematic problem solving (Adler and Elmhorst 248) process.

Conclusion
This was a learning experience for everybody. As a group, we worked through and came up with a solution for our problem. It was a team effort. I mentioned to our group after we got our grade for the project that we didnt do to bad for not knowing what we were doing. When we started, we didnt know what we were doing. Now that we have finished, we have a better understanding of the process and how things should go. Are we ready for the real world? I would say that we have a good foundation. Every problem will be different. Every group will be different. Every solution will be different. We at least know the process now and have a good understanding on how it works. Instead of flying by the seat of our pants, we actually know the process that we can follow and knowing is half the battle.

Works Cited
Alder, Ronald B., and Jeanne M. Elmhorst. Comm 1010 - Communicating at Work. 10th ed. N.p.: McGraw Hill Learning Solutions, n.d. Print.