XXX
*GROUP NOVA*
3/3/2016
ASSIGNMENT: GROUP ANALYSIS PAPER
1. Group Roles: Identify the various roles assumed by group members. Discuss the
distribution of task, maintenance, and self-centered roles.
a. Did any type of role predominate (e.g., task, maintenance, or self-centered)?
In the kick-off, we all commenced with the presumption that we were a great
team, because of the high level of maintenance in our function because we get along
with each other perfectly and were friends. Sadly after a few weeks the dominating
function turned out to be self-centered, since everyone started to put individual needs
before group goals, disrupting the group efforts and some members kept this until the
end of the project, at least they considered that the project was terminated after a while.
But according to me and few others, the project did not still end and will continue even
after we go back and collect feedback from the others. Unfortunately it wasn’t until it was
too late that we came to realize that adapting a task-oriented function would be the most
useful and help us to get the job done and promote the group goal, but in the last phase
where we prepared and did our presentations, we gave importance to maintenance and
task and I believe we did a good job and learned a lot from it along with our little ‘brother
& sisters’.
b. Did any specific role or roles predominate (e.g., opinion giver, harmonizer, deserter)?
c. If there was an imbalance in roles, describe what the group did or did not do to create better balance.
As I previously stated almost everyone had maintanance roles in the beginning,
but unlike productive roles as opininion givers or avaluators most came out to have
passive roles as observers, recognition seekers and mostly followers dominated. I
personally tried to be an opininon giver and even gatekeeper, but couldn’t have the
role gor too long. In the self-centered phase, which is the weeks between the 4th and
the third from last people were mostly aggresors or blockers, with no production, but a
lot of hassle. We should have said “a little less conversation and a little more action”, but
sadly we had “çok zikir az fikir”. Fortunatlely with the help of our teacher, we came to
1/12
XXX
*GROUP NOVA*
3/3/2016
realize that we had to do something concrete and therefore adapted task roles before it
was too late. We adopted implementer, completer, coordinator and initiator roles,
created a better balance and finally we had relatively good results.
2. Influence and Leadership: Identify the member(s) who assumed leadership or exerted the
most influence.
Leadership can be defined as “the ability to make strategic decisions and use
communication effectively to mobilize group members toward achieving a common
goal”, but sadly even though we had able bodies, there was no one to exactly match this
depiction in our group.
a. Did your group appoint a leader or did a leader emerge?
No member was able to use any type of position power in the group because of
the lack of authority. Therefore personal powers as persuasive and charismmatic power
came to play very little, but this wasn’t enough either. At the start I was somewhat a
Designated Leader, with leading the preparation of our mission & vision poster and
determining the rules along with giving ideas regarding the schools to choose. But in
time I lost my power and Erhan became an Emergent Leader with gradually achieving
leadership by helping the group achieve its goals.
b. Using one of the theories discussed in the textbook, describe and analyze the leadership in your group.
c. Which members were highly influential? Which members had little influence? How did different levels of
influence affect group outcomes?
I commenced with the idea that ‘Leaders are born, not made’, and adopted the
Trait Theory assuming that I was the perfect match, but although I had Self-confidence
and trustworthiness, my lack of humility and tolerance of frustration avoided me to
become a leader. Than Erhan rose to the non-official and even non-existent leader
position in our group and proved the Situational Theory right; that leaders are made,
not born and that effective leadership occurs only when there is an ideal match between
2/12
XXX
*GROUP NOVA*
3/3/2016
the leader’s style and the group’s work situation, referring to Fiedler’s contingency model
of leadership effectiveness. But still because of low membership readiness there was a
lack of communication along with the absence of influence from anyone heartbreakingly.
d. Was there rivalry or a struggle for leadership? If yes, what effect did this have on other group members
and the group as a whole?
Since the very existance of any real leadership position was not avaliable, no rivalry was seen.
3. Participation: Analyze differences in the amount and quality of member participation.
a. Did conflicting personalities create any problems for the group?
Ofcourse there were no cultural of ethnical diversity there were no barriers to
understanding either, therefore not too many conflicts occured. Also every member was
confident and were comfortable participating in group discussions, weren’t afraid to
express ourself at meetings. Also low apprehensives helped overcome problems too.
b. Who were the high participators and who were the low participators? c. Who seemed engaged and
interested or disengaged and disinterested? What effects did these have on members and the group?
According to the Hersey-Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Model, when we
evaluate our member readiness (the extent to which group members are willing and able
to work together to achieve a common goal), couldn’t go too beyond the selling stage
and moderate readiness. So participation was not too high. But as the behavioral and
situational theories show, in extreme and urgent situations we always participated
greatly. For instance before the Jeopardy question sessions, everyone participated
highly in order to get points and I would consider by self a high participant there, as I
was the one to get the right answers and didn’t get too much credit for it. I also prepared
at least 12 questions every two weeks for Jeopardy. As for low participation, I would
point at some very obvious people and some ‘hidden low participators’. For instance
Yasemin clearly showed no participation in the progress, but helped out a little towards
the end. On the other hand XXXX always moaned as if she did anything, but did
nothing, completely nothing concrete. She had only about 10% participation in the
Jeopardy questions. Regarding the school / real-world team presentation, she only went
to one school in İncek one time and once to the Bilkent Emlak Bankası School. She
needed to do “a little less conversation and a little more action”. In the final phase
3/12
XXX
*GROUP NOVA*
3/3/2016
XXXXX put some effort and prepared little presentations. XXX worked a lot to get the
permissions and to help the school in the east. XXXX promised to do presentations in
the school, but failed to do so. I, have firstly tired to do a proper mission-vision poster,
then prepared for the jeopardy every two weeks, visited the school three times and
finally prepared a very succesful and loaded presentation, spending a few weeks on it,
with multiple trips to psychologists and ‘danışman’s, even paying for some tests and
making a vast research and doing a well prepared presentation as a result.
4. Group Communication: Analyze how well your group communicated with one another.
a. Which members were models of effective group communication? Describe the communication
strategies and skills they used.
b. How effectively did you and your group listen to one another?
I personally believe that ‘there is no I in group.’ We at first regarded ourselves a
strong group and assumed that we would communicate greatly. This didn’t turn out to
be true, but we had some good ways to communicate.
We tried to adopt team talk to a certain extent. We used it to work together to achieve
group goal and build stronger group relationships. We tried to use the pronouns we, us,
and our when referring to the group and its work, shared express rather than individual
needs and of course used our first names in communication, to brake the ice .
Sometimes offensive language and ‘argo’ along us boys were a trouble disturbing the
girls, but we managed to overcome the trouble. Also my use of sarcasm was considered
a ‘verbal abuse’ so I stopped.
c. How effectively did you and your group use verbal and nonverbal communication?
The use of nonverbal communication was important for us, along the way
between ourselves and in our final presentation. It is mentioned that the behavioral
elements of messages other than the actual words spoken, and as we learnt nonverbal
communication is actually the majority. According to Albert Mehrabian spoken words
contribute a mere 7 %, where from the voice tone is 38 %, and from the facial
4/12
XXX
*GROUP NOVA*
3/3/2016
expression contributes by a large 55 %. So in our nonverbal communication process, we
used, personal appearance, facial expression, eye contact, vocal expression, physical
expression and finally environment. We used all these ways to express our feelings and
ideas in the group, but most importantly, as it was seen, I personally tried to apply these
specifically in my presentation.
d. How well did your group resolve disagreements and conflict?
I can not really decide rather if it was a good thing or not that we actually didn’t
hace much conflict to resolve. According to the Classical Theory, conflict is to be
avoided. But in the behavioral and contemporary theories that we should adopt, conflict
is a must and considered natural. It creates new ideas and therefore innovation. It is also
regarded to keep the group alive; therefore we had quite a living dead group.
e. To what extent did the members of your group behavior ethically?
No one crossed the line of ethics, and were beahaving in a nice manner. No one
had any hidden agendas or conflicting ideas. Mutual respect was essential and ethical
behavior was adopted all along.
f. If you were to work with this group again, what communication strategies could you use to improve
group performance?
I would say that no certain type of communucation was our problem, but the lack
of willingness to communicate created a problem for us. Next time we should be more
organized, a designated leader, with capable qualities and more willing members a
needed. Motivation was missing since there was no leader to create it, so we could not
create synergy in our group. But in the end we lived up to our name, Nova; “A Star that
suddenly erupts into an object of great brilliance, becoming visible from where no star
had been seen before, then gradually fades to its original intensity”.
5. Evaluation of Service Project:
5/12
XXX
*GROUP NOVA*
3/3/2016
1. Did the group plan and prepare well to perform a service for the community?
Our group lacked a certain leader, to motivate, help communicate and point us
the way. Very dissapointingly, planning and preperation phases of our group was very
weak. We did not start producing anything concrete until there was only three weeks to
present. But Deniz and I felt the responsibility to act before it was too late, and went in to
a very demanding and thorough preparation period.
2. Did the group found a way to address a need?
We believed that it should be the mission of every sane adult to lead and inspire
younglings. If we are not there to shed light upon their path, they are bound to be lost in
the eternal abyss of the cruel academic and professional lives. We did our best to
educate these kids and show them a clear way to choose their future path clearly and be
successful in life.
3. Did the group provided evidence that they had performed the service?
We have the graditudes of the young students and teachers in the Bilkent Emlak
Bankası Public School. Also our teacher was there and watched the presentations along
with recording it via a camera.
4. Did all group members contributed for the service project?
Unfortunately only the half of our group met this goal, and solely prepared and
presented in the project. XXX gave brief information regarding some occupations and I
have tried to show them a clear path to walk and emphasized the importance of
choosing their future carrers wisely.
6. Self contribution and evaluation:
6/12
XXX
*GROUP NOVA*
3/3/2016
a. How many meetings did your group hold during the semester? How many of them did you attend?
c. How many times did you visit the school that the service was given by your team?
I wrote down on the mission-vision and goals poster that we were to have regular
meetings in every two weeks, but there were no formal meetings held as a whole, but
we discussed the situation of the project each time we saw each other. Also I visited the
school once with XX twice with XXX and once as a group.
b. Did you offer any ideas to the group that were implemented? If so, what are they?
The whole presentaion was based partially on my idea, that it would be
wise to tell these students about the importances of choosing their carrers.
d. What were your specific contributions to the service project? Please explain as detailed as possible
e. Overall, how would you evaluate your performance, contribution to your team, communication with your
team mates? What were your missing qualifications, if you had any, and your strengths in this project?
What things would you do more, if you were to work in a project like this in the following years?
I, have firstly tired to do a proper mission-vision poster in the 3rd week, then
prepared for the jeopardy every two weeks, as I was the one to get the right answers,
prepared at least 12 questions every two weeks for Jeopardy, visited the school three
times and finally prepared a very succesful and loaded presentation, spending a few
weeks on it, with multiple trips to psychologists and ‘danışman’s, even paying for some
tests and making a vast research and doing a well prepared presentation as a result.
In my presentation I prepared the guideline below:
Hayatınızın dönüm noktasına yaklaşıyorsunuz. Önemli kararlar sizi ve ailenizi
bekliyor.
MESLEK SEÇERKEN NELERE DİKKAT EDİLMELİDİR ?
Kişilik nasıl tanınır?
Hedefler
Kişisel Hedef Koyma İşleminin Faydaları
Azim, İstek ve Çalışmanın Önemi
Öğrencinin Görevleri.
7/12
XXX
*GROUP NOVA*
3/3/2016
7. Evaluation of the Group members in terms of their contribution to
the service project: Please fill out the forms for each member of the group
seperately
Team Member: XXX YYYY
1. This member demonstrated an understanding of the neccessities of the service
project.
5
4
Excellent
3
2
Average
1
Poor
2. This member interacted effectively with other members and contributed significantly to
the project.
5
4
Excellent
3
2
Average
1
Poor
3. This member listened to others and was courteous to all group members.
5
4
Excellent
3
2
Average
1
Poor
4. This group member used effective leadership skills when needed.
5
Excellent
4
3
Average
2
1
Poor
8/12
XXX
*GROUP NOVA*
3/3/2016
5. This group member communicated effectively (i.e., spoke intelligibly using appropriate
vocal, verbal, and nonverbally behavior).
5
4
Excellent
3
2
1
Average
Team Member: ZZZZ QQQQ
1. This member demonstrated an understanding of the neccessities of the service
project.
5
4
Excellent
3
2
Average
1
Poor
2. This member interacted effectively with other members and contributed significantly to
the project.
5
4
Excellent
3
2
Average
1
Poor
3. This member listened to others and was courteous to all group members.
5
Excellent
4
3
2
Average
1
Poor
4. This group member used effective leadership skills when needed.
9/12
XXX
5
*GROUP NOVA*
4
Excellent
3
3/3/2016
2
Average
1
Poor
5. This group member communicated effectively (i.e., spoke intelligibly using appropriate
vocal, verbal, and nonverbally behavior).
5
4
Excellent
3
2
1
Average
Team Member: AAAA BBBB
1. This member demonstrated an understanding of the neccessities of the service
project.
5
4
Excellent
3
2
Average
1
Poor
2. This member interacted effectively with other members and contributed significantly to
the project.
5
4
Excellent
3
2
Average
1
Poor
3. This member listened to others and was courteous to all group members.
5
Excellent
4
3
Average
2
1
Poor
10/12
XXX
*GROUP NOVA*
3/3/2016
4. This group member used effective leadership skills when needed.
5
4
Excellent
3
2
Average
1
Poor
5. This group member communicated effectively (i.e., spoke intelligibly using appropriate
vocal, verbal, and nonverbally behavior).
5
4
Excellent
3
2
1
Average
Team Member: CCCC DDDD
1. This member demonstrated an understanding of the neccessities of the service
project.
5
4
Excellent
3
2
Average
1
Poor
2. This member interacted effectively with other members and contributed significantly to
the project.
5
4
Excellent
3
2
Average
1
Poor
3. This member listened to others and was courteous to all group members.
5
Excellent
4
3
Average
2
1
Poor
11/12
XXX
*GROUP NOVA*
3/3/2016
4. This group member used effective leadership skills when needed.
5
4
Excellent
3
2
Average
1
Poor
5. This group member communicated effectively (i.e., spoke intelligibly using appropriate
vocal, verbal, and nonverbally behavior).
5
Excellent
4
3
2
1
Average
12/12