Reflection of Groupwork for Self-Awareness

Reflection of Group have for Self-Aw beness substructure Coming together is a beginning Keeping together is get up working together is achiever.Henry FordThis report describes the successful applications programme of musing t all(prenominal)ing to promote critical self-awareness and improve both someone and ag convocation performance, in a assort project work legal opinion for MSc in International Business Management at LJMU.Boyd and Fales (1983) define reflection asThe process of internally examining and exploring an issue of concern, triggered by an visualize ,which creates and clarifies meaning in terms of self and which results in a changed conceptual perspective.According to the suggestions of Kolb learning cycle, i.e.Reflective observation (watching)Abstract conceptualization (thinking) combat-ready experimentation (doing)Concrete experience (feeling)The team members engaged themselves in reflective dress of Assimilating, Organizing, Implementing and Executing the as sessment on Burberry case study. (Jennifer Annoon, 2000)GROUP toy ANALYSISMany professional bodies and educational quality institutions now adopt that students have proven experience of working in groups or teams (Blease, 2006 in Kelly 2007).Hence forth we formed a group to invigilate the challenges and issues that the Trafford group was confronting. To compliment this, catholic youth council (1980) also stated that when examining the relative success and failure amongst group works, the selection process may be a key variable in establishing criteria for successful group work.1. GROUP make-upFor this particular assessment, the group was christened by choice and acceptance i.e. students were given the closeness to select a peer and subsequently on were clubbed with another team to form a clique. A group becomes a team when distributively member is sure enough of himself and his contribution to praise the skills of the others. Initially group was formed with low level of confl icts and high level of group cohesion.The initiation was receivable in 3 weeks the roles were assigned, norms were laid and work was divided as a part of group contract. Scheduled clashs were altered at unremitting intervals considering team members availability and preferences. The members in the group had 4 attributes namely activist, reflector, pragmatist and theorist. dear and Mumford linked Kolbs learning cycle with the personal attributes.4 MembersA(reflector)- reviewing and observationB(theorist)- developed thought process and conclusionC(pragmatist)- applied theory in practice with the existing ideasD(activist)- application through action in a new-fangled circumstance with new ideas.2. GROUP DEVELOPMENTEffective teamwork plays a live role in group development. The key factors which effect the group are conflict management, personality attributes, individual performance and time managementShaw and Barrett post (1998) explained group development and the creation of a productive working /learning with the help of a mold showing the effect of diversity and teeny group processes on performance. The model reflects that a successful group work requires open communication, symbiosis, effective conflict management discussion of strategy and the divert weighing of individual inputs into decisions.Bruce Tuckman (1965) developed a four stage model of group development. He labeled the stages forming, storming, norming, performing and ten years later added a fifth stage called adjourning.In the first week, our group was in the forming stage. Initially all members were confused and uncertain in assessing the assigned work. We did the large-mouthed Five Locater (Kelly) personality rise to assess the personality trait clusters of each individual in the team. This helped each member to analyze each other. Group contract helped us to overcome these barriers by defining the goals, establishing rules and acquiring acquainted to the task in hand. During the f irst week of discussion, time consensus was a big issue, as couple of members had their vocations. There was constant atoning of the catalogue, which had spilled the beans for a conflict. until now according to Maddux R.B., (1998) conflict is healthy when it causes the group to explore new ideas, test their standards and beliefs and stretch their imagination. When conflict is dealt constructively, heap can be touched to grand creativity, which will place to a wider choice of action and better results. other important aspect was that the group was to a greater extent into planning than execution (Schon, 1983). In the later part of the second week the group progressed well by understanding each other and got settled down as an appeased group.A whole brained approach for development and execution is an essential constituent to stimulated long term productivity (Eales-White,2005). This approach was taken by the group members by applying a variety of different learning abilities t owards greens objectives which was more focused and integrated, which helped in enhancing the Burberry case study. With a combination of formal and promiscuous practices group gained a potential competitive advantage while performing.3. vital EVALUATION AND REFLECTIONSGroup conflict is essential for a groups cohesion. It helps groups attain areas of common values provides group stability through shared beliefs, helps to balance the contravention between extreme ideologies and helps to clarify roles and structures frequently.If managed constructively, conflict can be a strong indicator of the groups effectiveness(Mary Holz-Clause, 1996)IssuesTime ConsensusOne of the serious overleap faced by the members during the discussions were meeting the time requirement. Although all had opined to meet on an agreed time. The attendance was really an impeding factor. There was constant atoning of the schedule which resulted in frequent feuds between the members giving rise to clouds of dis harmony amid group. crisp warThe transmission of information and exchange of meaning between both or more people is communication and lack of which can lead to ambiguous situations, where people may differ in the reception of mean meanings (Buchanan and Huczynski ).We were initially distracted by the pall of uncertainty that was prevailing due to profuse interpersonal misconceptions. The group was deprived of amiable and cordial surround as none were gelling together.The varied attributes and behavioural differences among the members of the group proved to be significance for the meetings but at the same time, differences in ideologies and perceptions lead to clashes. individualised CommitmentsAnother persistent worry was the prior commitment of the members. Couple of them were employed and we found it really challenging to have their presence in the meeting during the initial stages of the discussions. They had irregular shifts which aggravated the situation furthermore.Lack of AcceptanceMembers were in like manner much into there own findings that they gave less importance to others work.REFLECTIONSThe recurring issues had to be solved and the garbage can model (Cohen, March and Olsen, 1972) was used which suggests a scenario where decisions have a random element to them. For an effective decision to be reached, the problems and solutions had to come together. Bringing them together was a challenge. Developing the ability to identify relevant problems and seeking radical solutions by bringing the right people together at the right time. In order for them to reach the sometimes radical decisions that will be needed in often disruptive environment (Ian Brooks, 1999).ConclusionREFERENCEBROOKS, Ian and Cohen etal.(1999).Decision making.Organisational behaviour-individuals, groups and the organisation,Pearson Education.edi.5.p.32BUCHANAN, David and HUCZYNSKI, Andrzej(2004).chapter6Communication.Organisational communication- commitment and propaganda,Pearson Education.p.207CLAUSE Mary Holz.(1996), http//www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/wholefarm/ hypertext mark-up language/c6- 55.html, date accessed 23/03/08