Newspaper article source
The link to the newspaper article above is taken from The Financial Times on October 11, 2009. It shows us the climate talks between a group of world leaders at Bangkok. This group of people are discussing about the details of a climate deal that is to take place in Copenhagen later in December this year. However, this climate talk between the group was not efficient, evident by their lack of progress in their discussion.
Group communication is something that everyone partakes in at some point or another in their lives. So what are some of the main characteristics of group communication?
Firstly, we see interdependency between the members of the group. In the newspaper article, the members of the group count on each other to cooperate with one another to attain shared goals – to improve the climate of the world.
Secondly, there is obviously interaction between the group members as seen by the talks they engage in. Without this fundamental interaction, members would not be able to communicate ideas and information across to the others.
There are also shared behavioural standards where members are expected to behave in a certain way. The members involved in the climate deal for example, are expected to carry out and uphold certain climatic actions and failure to do so could lead to arguments and perhaps even getting “kicked out” of the group.
Sometimes, people communicate in groups because they want to tap on this larger pool of energy and resources. With this, they are better able to meet their own interpersonal needs such as cost-savings and a better climate to live in in this case. Plus, with common goals, it is easier to garner support and commitment from members of a group, which makes working towards the goals an easier one.
The problem with group communication is that there will almost always bound to be disagreements between members. In this instance, the developing and developed countries are in disagreement because both of them feel that the other party is not doing enough. Perhaps they feel like they are being “cheated” as they have done their part and the other has not. Although they are both working towards the common goal of slowing down climate change, there are arguments over how each handles the process of doing so.
So the question I am curious about is: Should group members be more concerned over fulfilling one’s individual needs or the group’s needs?
The natural instinct is for humans to serve one’s own needs over others’ first. Perhaps most can only truly help others after one’s needs have been met. If we are dissatisfied over our unmet needs, how can we be in the right frame of mind to cater to others’ needs?
However, sometimes achieving the group’s needs first actually promotes a more conducive environment for members to help one another meet individual needs.
Having said all that, I feel that whichever way, as long as both the individual and group’s needs are met at the end of the day and everyone’s contented, anything goes. There are different ways to go about doing things but there is one thing everyone should work towards: understanding the many approaches available and satisfying both our individual and group’s needs eventually. This is what I call effective group communication.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hey val I do agree with you on the point that as long as both group and individual needs are met, anything goes, but looking at it in further detail, I think we would want to look at the urgency for these needs and sometimes these needs can always coincide with the group's needs.
ReplyDeleteIf I had a simple need of feeling that sense of satisfaction that comes from accomplishing a certain task or project, I could achieve it easily by joining any group with a desired goal in mind.
But of course, things are not so simple and a person doesnt set his/her personal needs as vaguely as that. I think doing well for our degree would be a good example, where we all want to do well, and this could be achieved either way, but like your post said, we choose to do it in groups because through communication with one another and being part of the group, we can tap on this larger pool of energy and resources and work together to achieve our goals.
I agree with asajahfkjhanationsimplystares on the group synergy which we bank on each other's strengths to achieve our goals.
ReplyDeleteAs for your question,"Should group members be more concerned over fulfilling one’s individual needs or the group’s needs?" I believe it depends on what their needs are. For instance, a group of lil girls wanting to reach for a cookie jar and their crying and yelling have disturbed the maid at home. The maid could take the cookie jar down for the lil girls to stop crying and she herself could enjoy the cookies and stop them from yelling too.
What I'm trying to explain here is similar to what you said in your entry. As long as both the individual and group needs are met at the end of the day, anything goes!
hello valley!
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with you that when two or more people work together, disagreements are bound to happen. Like how even best friends or couples do not see eye to eye all the time. Like you were saying, it might be due to one feeling like the they have been "cheated" and deserves more credit than they have received.
Therefore I feel that communication is one of the key essentials for the needs of an individual or a group to be met. With that, the workload can be evenly distributed and the chances of each individual doing what they are good at is higher. Giving a better result at the end of the day. There are also other important skills like the understanding of the other persons and their methods of working as well as the need to compromise. Which I think is quite tough but not impossible!
Like you questioned, "Should group members be more concerned over fulfilling one’s individual needs or the group’s needs?", would it be possible for one to visualise and set their personal need in such a way that it fulfills the needs of the group at the end of the day?
I suppose as long as the needs of both are met at the end of the day anything goes. As long as the end result is what everyone one wanted and worked towards? However, if we wish to maintain good interpersonal relationships shouldn't the process matter as well?
haha an awesome thought evoking entry on an issue we cannot avoid in life!
Hi val!
ReplyDeleteI think that group communication on a global level, like the one from the article, involves political issues,which makes communication a whole lot more complicated as opposed to one of a more personal level.
Regarding personal benefits, I agree with you that everyone is governed by self interest and they ultimately work towards fulfilling their own needs. Hence, being part of a group has its advantages and disadvantages and we require largely on good communication to mitigate the the consequences of communication problems.
An in depth analysis on the group communication in the article!
ReplyDeleteLike you said, everyone would partake in group communication at one point of their lives unless they happen to be stranded on a deserted island from the time they were born. Thus, a kind of order has been developed in which we act a certain way when we communicate in a group of 5 to 7 people for certain reasons which you have clearly stated in your entry.
To answer your question on whether members should be more concerned about individual or group needs, I personally think it ultimately depends on the tast at hand and how beneficial it is. For example, the group in the article's task pertains to the climate which affects people all around the world. Hence, the group's needs should be met instead of a single person's need to tap on the group's resources. If the goal is to help people globally, I would think putting the group's needs over an individual's is more appropriate.
Also, I think it is very true how groups get into conflicts because they feel they are not reaping the benefits they should for all the work they put in. Humans tend to be quite calculative at times and if they feel they are at a disadvanatge they are likely to raise objections and thus create conflict.
I'm just wondering: if a team cannot come to a unanimous conclusion at the end of a meeting, does it mean that group communication was ineffective? Conversely, if a team does come conclude with quick, identical decisions at the end of a meeting, does it then prove the success of group communication?
ReplyDeleteWell, I think it's very possible that in the former case, it could be a group of opinionated individuals, who believe in the right of free speech and expression of ideas. If this were so, I would condone their supposed failed outcome of a lack of agreement, because there was definitely exchange of ideas.. To a certain extent,I might even call it cogent communcication because the aim of interaction was met.
In the latter case, if the unanimity was due to compromises made by relenting group members, who allowed personal beliefs and reasons to be swayed by popular opinion, then would it really be conclusive communication? Won't it just be a case of the 'follow the leader syndrome' without much valuable autonomy?
So, perhaps effective group communication can be apparent whether or not a conclusion is agreed upon at the end of a meeting...
hullo Val! What I feel is that whether one prioritizes his or her needs above the group's depends on alot of factors. I think men are selfish in nature and his or her needs will be met first above anyone elses, especially if the agenda / goal of the group is on a meso/macro level, and in cases whereby they do not benefit directly from it. They would probably take their interests into account first and then settle the group's one next. Also, if it usually involves financial matters or personal gains, obviously one will focus on his or her requirements first.
ReplyDeleteTHEN AGAIN, it also depends on the group's cohesiveness and the interpersonal relationship with the people within the group. With good relationships and connections with the group, one might be able to sacrifice his or her own personal advantages, in order to better work for the good of the group. In this instance, cooperation and conduciveness within the group can be better achieved.
Hi Val,
ReplyDeleteI agree that the most important factor of group communication is interdependency on all group members. It gives room for more ideas to be generated, and solutions to be effectively solved. To have a cohesive group, every member must compromise and come to a mutual agreement, to achieve effectiveness of group discussions. The context of the article above obviously shows the lack of such cooperation, hence disagreement arises.
Your question weighs individualistic mindsets against the group's. In this case I feel that group work involves coming to a mutual agreement among all parties, to ensure that no one is unhappy or left out. Group work encourages the full participation of every group member rather than the individual, hence I feel that the group's decision outweighs the individual. After all, the objective of group work is to achieve optimum efficiency in carrying out the task. Individual demands should thus be compromised, however not to an extreme.
Personally, I feel that in group communication, it is important for us all to assume task roles and work to fulfill the group needs. Individual needs are secondary, since the whole point of getting into group is to achieve something that will bring benefits to every member. I suppose I have this mindset because of the collectivist culture we live in.
ReplyDeleteHowever, if an individual's needs is compromised to a large extent, disagreements are bound to arise. After all, we will all fight for what we want or think we deserve. In group work, it is unfair for one member to be doing more work than the others, although this commonly happens when we do projects. The article is an example of how group communication has broken down, causing disagreements.
In my opinion, as long as every member of the group assume task roles and have the same objective in mind, they should be able to work together well.
Hey Val, i can't read the media article as the link is broken or requires some sort of signing up (to pay as well!)
ReplyDeletebut i agree on the fact that humans are selfish, it was the way we were brought up. Yet, group communication is imminent in social interaction. i believe that everyone plays a part in accommodating to everyone's needs. and in every group there are people who give in and people who take in.
the question is: when is giving in considered too much till we're considered pushovers?
my 2 cents :)
isaac
http://pitstophere.wordpress.com
I think in Singapore we are stuck between being an individual and being part of a group. We are always concerned about what our parents, friends, relatives and even neighbours think of us. It makes our lives stifling when you cannot express yourself in your very own special way.
ReplyDeleteI feel that sometimes, we have to just forget about what people might think about us, and just go ahead and do what you want! Some might feel that it's a very selfish way to live your life, but hey, we live only once! So get out there and enjoy yourself! You have your whole life to regret not doing something, so don't do that!
in a group, there'll be bound to have conflicts and there's also a need to compromise and work together for efficiency.
ReplyDeletei think in a group, we have to forget about 'me' and 'I' and focus on 'us'.
communication between group plays a part too. in such a big group with so many people, there'll bound to have mis-communication problems.
Group communications is important. Without these communications, there will be lots of misunderstandings which results in more conflict and will eventually affect the group from performing to its very best.
ReplyDeleteI feel that in a group, everyone has to learn to compromise. Like what christina has mentioned, everyone has to forget the 'me' thinking and focus on the 'us' thinking. Without that, even the most simple tasks will evolve to world war 3.
Reply to asanationsimplystares:
ReplyDeleteHello!
I agree with you that we should also look at the urgency of the goals that need to be met! While doing that, perhaps the group should also establish a common understanding on that through group communication so as the prevent conflict! Good one there!
Being in a group definitely has its perks like in the example of pursuing a degree with a group of school mates that you gave! Having said that, I wish you all the best for that!(:
Reply to kandidkester:
ReplyDeleteHey kandidkester!
You never fail to crack me up with your analogies! Haha they have a sense of humour in them and also relevance! Yup, I think as long as the group communicates with one another so that everyone understands where each one is coming from and work things out together, they should have no problems establishing group and individual goals!(:
Reply to Serena:
ReplyDeleteHey Serena!
Group communication is certainly a complex issue with no ready-to-use solutions or anything of that sort. All groups have different group dynamics.
As to your many questions posted, let me do my best to answer them(:
To you question on whether it would be possible to fit in one's personal needs such that it fulfills the group's needs at the end of the day, my answer would be a yes. Let me give you a scenario. Imagine if a girl in a group had to go to a particular place to get something done and the group needed to do filming for their project at the end of the day. The group could accompany the girl to the place to get her stuff done and film at that place or a suitable place nearby that area too! This way, at the end of the day, the girls manages to get her stuff done and the group manages to film for their project! Of course, I am not saying that all individual needs can be fitted in such a way that the group needs are also met at the end of the day. I am just saying that it is possible(:
As to your other question on how the process should matter too if we wanted to maintain inter-personal relationships, my answer is a yes too. As mentioned in my entry, there are many different approaches available. The group should come together to select the most suitable approach such that it meets the needs of the group as much as possible.
Having said all that, I wish you all the best for your future group communication!(:
Reply to Danielle Lim:
ReplyDeleteHi Danielle!
Definitely, communication takes place at different levels and communication at different levels involves different factors and issues at work!
It is only human nature that we sometimes put our interests before others. Therefore, perhaps most of us "join" groups also because of some of the benefits it brings us?
All in all, we need effective communication, like you said, to avoid miscommunication and potential conflict, whether in inter-personal relationships or in groups!(:
Reply to Amanda:
ReplyDeleteHey Amanda!
I second you on your point about looking at the task at hand and who it affects first before deciding whether the group's needs or individual needs should be met first. Nice elaboration there! Perhaps if it was an issue that would affect many people and something that was of a more serious tone, such as the climate issue above, the group's needs would come before the individual's as it would benefit more people that way.
It is often hard to be free from conflict forever in one's life but when we do come into contact with conflict, communication is key to sorting things out I believe. If no communication takes place, how is one able to justify oneself or bring one's message across?
Group communication is just not as simple as we thought huh(:
Reply to Hilda:
ReplyDeleteHi Hilda!
Well, there are no right or wrong answers I believe. I think it is just a matter of which perspective one adopts.
In your answers to your two questions for example, I understand that you based effective communication on whether there was valuable interaction between individuals right? That could be one way of deciding whether there was effective group communication.
Other possible ways that people judge whether group communication was effective could be by whether the task was done at the end of the day, whether everyone was happy at the end of the it and so on.
Great insights!(:
Reply to Cheryl:
ReplyDeleteHey Cheryl!
I agree with you that human beings are selfish in nature and are capable of not putting other's interests before ours.
However, like you mentioned, the dynamics of the group also matter. If the group were made up of a group of people with good inter-personal relationships with one another, then, group communication would probably be better in the sense that they understand one another better and they are more self-sacrificing due to their good relations with one another. If the group were made up of people who were merely acquaintances for example, there could possibly be less self-sacrificing on the members part and more time and effort needs to be put in to understand each other's needs, working styles and so on(:
Reply to Amadea:
ReplyDeleteHello Amadea!
In group communication, there definitely has to be compromise on all the members' part in order to come to a mutual agreement with one another at the end of the day. Unless of course, everyone has the same set of ideas and attitudes, which is rarely the case. Like you mentioned, cooperation breeds success in group communication!
The issue on fulfilling the group's needs against the individual's needs has always been very complex. People have different views about this! I guess as long as at the end of the day, the group agrees on a solution/method of going about the tasks that needs to be carried out, everything should turn out pretty well. In the process, if the individual's needs are able to be fitted in, it would be great then!
Like you mentioned, everyone in the group should be happy at the end of the day. Individuals can not have their goals met at the end of the day but they still can be happy! This is because of the way things were handled. So, it would be great if both individual's and group's needs can be met at the end of the day. If not, the group just has to settle for the best possible solution for the group!(:
Reply to Adeline:
ReplyDeleteHi Adeline!
It is true that the many different mindsets we have toward group communication is influenced by factors such as culture, gender, race, social standing and so on.
Also, like you mentioned, it is good for members to asssume different task roles so that the job can be done in the quickest and most effective way at the end of the day.
Like I have been responded to the different readers above, group communication is very complex. I understand where you are coming from in your points. Like you mentioned, I also believe that individual needs should not be totally overlooked to the extent that the group member becomes very unhappy and causes the group to not be able to function properly.
So, in this sense, I think that at the end of the day, some extent of the individual's needs will still be met together with the group's needs. If not, there would not be a conducive environment for the group to communication and thus, possibly not being able to meet the group's objectives.
I wish you all the best in your future group projects Adeline!(:
Reply to pithosphere:
ReplyDeleteHi Isaac!
You should be able to read the article even if you are not a registered member unless you have read the maximum number of two articles within thirty days. Registration is also free and registering for free would allow you to read ten articles in thirty days. Alternatively, you will be able to find the exact same article in print on the October 11,2009 issue of The Financial Times.
Well, to your question, I think that for most of us, giving in too much to the extent where the others are considered as pushovers are when the person who gives in feels unhappy at the end of the day, feeling like he or she does not belong to the group, feeling like his or her opinions are not considered fairly by the group and perhaps loses interest in giving input as he or she feels that the group does not give two hoots about them.
What do you think?(:
Reply to ghostwiththemost:
ReplyDeleteHello!
Yes, I agree with you. Most of us will find that we are not able to say exactly what we want to say at any time for fear of being judged. We perhaps fear that we are not "saying the right thing at the right time".
Kudos to you on your stand for what you believe in! There is no right or wrong in saying what you want to say or doing what you want to do I feel, as long as at the end of the day, you yourself feel like you have not let your conscience down! Afterall, we have nobody to answer to at the end of the day but ourselves!(:
Reply to Christina:
ReplyDeleteDefinitely, there has to be compromise and effective communication in groups in order to get things done at the end of the day!
You also brought up a good point on adopting the "us" and not "I" attitude when in a group because after all, we are working together as a group and not as individuals!(:
Reply to AM:
ReplyDeleteHello!
I hope that things will not get so serious in any group communication to the extent that it can lead to World War Three! Hahahaha
Anyway, effective group communication is definitely important to get things done at the end of the day. Imagine if small groups are not even able to handle small tasks, how is the world, made up of many different groups, able to function as a whole?!
All the best for your future group projects and whatnots!(: