Matrix: A Successful And Solving Roles Of A Group Project

My group, known as “Matrix”, was comprised of students who shared a common goal; to produce a successful and effective debate for our group project. Although we shared a common understanding of what the product should be, we each had different ideas of how to produce it. There were instances when tensions arose due to minor disagreements of what actions should be taken to complete our task, however, we were able to use problem-solving steps in order to form a decision to appease the majority. Schwartzman (2014) maintains that there are six steps to solve problems as a group; define the problem or issue, establish criteria for solutions, identify solutions, evaluate solutions, choose the best one, and then implement or test it. Accordingly, …show more content…
Schwartzman (2014) elucidates on self-serving roles, such as a blocker, and explains how they may disrupt the group’s productivity and synergy. Frank was a blocker, albeit one with good intentions. Accordingly, Frank voiced every objection he felt regarding our topic, his role within the group, and how decisions were made. While this is not an inherently bad thing, he continuously rejected others positions after receiving rational feedback without providing solutions that would appease him. Although he did prevent the group from finishing our project as expediently as we wished, he also contributed as an initiator; Frank was the first person to message our group within the final days before our presentation to generate conversation and remind everyone to complete their tasks. Conversely, Jazma fulfilled what Schwartzman (2014) refers to as a compromiser, especially regarding her willingness to allow Frank to be the moderator in order to allow for the progression of our …show more content…
These rules originated from areas that we struggled with as a group in what Schwartzman (2014) refers to as the storming stage of group development; this is the stage characterized by confrontation, opposition, and conflict (pp 512). Initially, the most difficult aspect of group intercommunication was the lack of active listening between group members that led to misunderstanding between individuals. This is what caused the only prominent issue that our group endured. Schwartzman (2014) maintains that the willingness of others to understand our position lies at the core of active listening (pp 519). Conversely, I have always prided myself on my willingness to challenge my beliefs by engaging with people who are different from myself; this is how you become a better spokesperson for your cause. It was one of my greatest strengths within this group project, and allowed for an effective debate of ideas without involving character attacks that are so often seen in politics. But this group assignment made me realize that learning the positions of others just to be able to refute their logic is not the same as embracing our differences. In the future, I will strive to learn from other’s viewpoints in order to galvanize innovative thinking while striving to respect