As a group, we participated in four task type activities, first being CSI in which we were asked to work together to find who was to be arrested for murder. Second, we had a word generation task through the word hypoallergenic making a list of words individually, then making one team list. Third, we performed a task making an origami frog. All team members had to be finished with the frog before the team was complete and no member could touch the other member’s frog. Lastly, we completed a translation task of a French worksheet and answering four questions after a paragraph of French.
Reflecting back on the tasks it was clear that some groups had advantages over one another in the different tasks. If a group has a team member who paid close …show more content…
During CSI if groups would have worked as teams rather than individuals they could have also realized that their debriefing sheets were different. This could have been accomplished with one member reading their sheet and the others following along, easily catching the differences. During the word generation task, groups who had more members had an advantage because more team members led to more words being produced. However, the teams with four members were still competitive because the more group members there are the more possibility for repetition. If groups would have established a process before proceeding with the word generation through delegation of specific letters of the alphabet more words could have been produced with less repetition. During the origami frog tasks each group could either work as individuals and then help each other after finishing. Our team did not move on to the next step until each member has full comprehension of the step and has it completed this led to a quicker build of …show more content…
No task type is best for every activity. CSI was an example of compensatory tasks, these tasks are used best when a complex problem is established and there is a need to combine individual-level ideas and preferences into an improved group-level product. These tasks however, take more time, pay, and have a larger potential loss due to processes which leads to other task types being chosen by managers if possible. Word generation was an example of an additive task, businesses that function on an additive task level have each individual worker doing their job without require the synergy of other workers in the organization. These tasks are established well when delegated individually but performed in a group because most individuals tend to work harder when those around them are also working hard leading to social facilitation. This keeps social loafing out of the question due to many individuals striving to complete the task at hand and keeping each other motivated. Origami frog was an example of a conjunctive task, in most tasks there is going to be one part that is more difficult than all the rest, if these projects are assigned then the member who gets the hardest part is considered to be the weakest link because they are holding the group back from completing the task as a whole. It is not their fault that their part of the task is more difficult, this is just how a conjunctive task is, however
Reflecting back on the tasks it was clear that some groups had advantages over one another in the different tasks. If a group has a team member who paid close …show more content…
During CSI if groups would have worked as teams rather than individuals they could have also realized that their debriefing sheets were different. This could have been accomplished with one member reading their sheet and the others following along, easily catching the differences. During the word generation task, groups who had more members had an advantage because more team members led to more words being produced. However, the teams with four members were still competitive because the more group members there are the more possibility for repetition. If groups would have established a process before proceeding with the word generation through delegation of specific letters of the alphabet more words could have been produced with less repetition. During the origami frog tasks each group could either work as individuals and then help each other after finishing. Our team did not move on to the next step until each member has full comprehension of the step and has it completed this led to a quicker build of …show more content…
No task type is best for every activity. CSI was an example of compensatory tasks, these tasks are used best when a complex problem is established and there is a need to combine individual-level ideas and preferences into an improved group-level product. These tasks however, take more time, pay, and have a larger potential loss due to processes which leads to other task types being chosen by managers if possible. Word generation was an example of an additive task, businesses that function on an additive task level have each individual worker doing their job without require the synergy of other workers in the organization. These tasks are established well when delegated individually but performed in a group because most individuals tend to work harder when those around them are also working hard leading to social facilitation. This keeps social loafing out of the question due to many individuals striving to complete the task at hand and keeping each other motivated. Origami frog was an example of a conjunctive task, in most tasks there is going to be one part that is more difficult than all the rest, if these projects are assigned then the member who gets the hardest part is considered to be the weakest link because they are holding the group back from completing the task as a whole. It is not their fault that their part of the task is more difficult, this is just how a conjunctive task is, however