Ideological Competence in Group Dynamics
Small Group Communication
In a small group, A strong ideological competence can help group members realize the existing framing. The communication reflects group members’ thoughts, which are consistent with member’s ideology. The difference in ideology would lead to a diversity in group’s communication. A cooperative argumentation can promote the common understanding of the group members (Engleberg). However, an adversarial framing can cause bias in the discussion (Kadlec). When talking about a social issue, person with constrained idea tend to be more conservative, valuing the procedural fairness. The person would argue that the higher social welfare would encourage the laziness. In contrast, the person …show more content…
Meanwhile, a constructive conflict may become a destructive conflict (128). For example, if a group member disagrees with one of the approach suggested by another group member, the member may attribute the statement of the one who raise this suggestion to his or her motives, according to the Attribution Theory (129). Instead, the one who raises the suggestion may just believe the approach is consistent with the group value. Hence, an affective conflict may happen since group member starts to doubt each other.
Small Group Facilitation Efforts In order to help the group members have a successful deliberation, the facilitator needs to be unbiased and moderate to the topic. When the facilitator’s mind is already enveloped by his value and belief, the facilitator may utilize the role to, intentionally or unintentionally, manipulate the discussion towards a direction he or she prefers. In addition, according to the textbook, an effective facilitator should draw people out and help everyone feel heard (337). If the facilitator does not have a strong competence of recognizing the effect of the preexisting preferences (171), he or she may ignore the one who has a different voice. Lacking the diversity, the group may suffer the group think, since no one can be aware of the absence of different …show more content…
Therefore, whether the group members can successfully make a decision is determined by their competence. The influence of ideology competence cannot be omitted. In addition, the communication is the basic tool for the group members to make a good decision. With the framing bias, the discussion cannot be productive (Kadlec). Thus, the group members cannot convey their message without being affected by the disturbing bias. Moreover, to make a good decision, the group has to engage in the analysis of problem’s nature. A well functioning group can understand the problem’s nature without being affected by the ideological bias. Instead, if the group members suffer from the their ignorance of the existing difference in their value, they may interpret the problem in different aspects and cannot achieve a common ground. Thus, a consensus decision is not possible for such group (Engleberg). Last but not least, a good decision would only appear after a successful deliberation, while a successful deliberation needs a strong facilitator and active participants. The ideology competence helps both the facilitators to perform their roles and participants to contribute their knowledge and resources to hold a productive
Small Group Communication
In a small group, A strong ideological competence can help group members realize the existing framing. The communication reflects group members’ thoughts, which are consistent with member’s ideology. The difference in ideology would lead to a diversity in group’s communication. A cooperative argumentation can promote the common understanding of the group members (Engleberg). However, an adversarial framing can cause bias in the discussion (Kadlec). When talking about a social issue, person with constrained idea tend to be more conservative, valuing the procedural fairness. The person would argue that the higher social welfare would encourage the laziness. In contrast, the person …show more content…
Meanwhile, a constructive conflict may become a destructive conflict (128). For example, if a group member disagrees with one of the approach suggested by another group member, the member may attribute the statement of the one who raise this suggestion to his or her motives, according to the Attribution Theory (129). Instead, the one who raises the suggestion may just believe the approach is consistent with the group value. Hence, an affective conflict may happen since group member starts to doubt each other.
Small Group Facilitation Efforts In order to help the group members have a successful deliberation, the facilitator needs to be unbiased and moderate to the topic. When the facilitator’s mind is already enveloped by his value and belief, the facilitator may utilize the role to, intentionally or unintentionally, manipulate the discussion towards a direction he or she prefers. In addition, according to the textbook, an effective facilitator should draw people out and help everyone feel heard (337). If the facilitator does not have a strong competence of recognizing the effect of the preexisting preferences (171), he or she may ignore the one who has a different voice. Lacking the diversity, the group may suffer the group think, since no one can be aware of the absence of different …show more content…
Therefore, whether the group members can successfully make a decision is determined by their competence. The influence of ideology competence cannot be omitted. In addition, the communication is the basic tool for the group members to make a good decision. With the framing bias, the discussion cannot be productive (Kadlec). Thus, the group members cannot convey their message without being affected by the disturbing bias. Moreover, to make a good decision, the group has to engage in the analysis of problem’s nature. A well functioning group can understand the problem’s nature without being affected by the ideological bias. Instead, if the group members suffer from the their ignorance of the existing difference in their value, they may interpret the problem in different aspects and cannot achieve a common ground. Thus, a consensus decision is not possible for such group (Engleberg). Last but not least, a good decision would only appear after a successful deliberation, while a successful deliberation needs a strong facilitator and active participants. The ideology competence helps both the facilitators to perform their roles and participants to contribute their knowledge and resources to hold a productive