1.0: Introduction
The intricate dynamics at play anytime many individuals congregate with a common goal in mind are fundamental to the organization’s success and even its very survival. First and foremost, it elicits characteristics from its members that are not often created by individuals working in isolation since these people have a venue to make a uniquely recognized contribution in the group. The most successful corporate consortium is the one that forms with deliberate intention. This group includes everyone who can and will make a positive contribution, has a clear idea of what it wants to achieve, and works under the watchful eye of the leader, who is already familiar with everyone in the group. Furthermore, this team will depart the company with deeper mutual regard and a more united staff than it found it had before they arrived. Many assume that teams are simply made up of individuals who work together to achieve a common goal, but this is only part of the story. Groups are dynamic structures that contain many different types of members and functions. They can facilitate communication between individuals, create team spirit and encourage collaboration. This research hypothesizes that groups can be used to improve communication and productivity by using a problem-solving methodology.
2.0: Supporting arguments:
Groups provide a sense of belongingness among other group members; however, this can also make people feel like they don’t know what’s happening because they may not understand all of the information being discussed (Rudy). When people are told about ideas before they hear them from other people who have already heard them, they don’t feel as though they’re missing out on something important; instead, they feel like they’re part of something bigger than themselves.
While it is possible to communicate with others on a one-to-one basis, it is far more efficient and productive for people to communicate with each other in a group. Communication within groups is numerous: it allows for better coordination and cooperation, improves productivity, reduces stress, and even improves overall well-being. This supports the hypothesis that the dynamics of groups can be used to improve communication and productivity.
According to Hinsz and Jackson (2022), Groups greatly impact how people communicate. How groups communicate is much different than how individuals communicate, especially regarding politics, religion, etc. This has been shown through studies that show that groups tend to have more opinions than individuals, which means that there will be more internal conflict within the group. However, this doesn’t mean that there aren’t any benefits from using groups instead of individuals when it comes to communication; instead, it means that there are benefits from using both methods of communication together. In this article, Hinsz and Jackson (2022) present a new way of thinking about group dynamics. They suggest that groups are not just a collection of people who happen to be grouped; rather, groups are a set of relationships between people. Hinsz and Jackson (2022) propose that these relationships can be used to improve communication and productivity in both short-term and long-term situations. They cite an example from their own experience with a project at work: when the team was working on the same project for many months, they realized there was a communication problem within the team. The team members did not know what each other was working on or what progress needed to be made so that everyone could move forward effectively with their work. The authors believe that if we could change our approach to communication in large groups, we could improve our ability to accomplish tasks more efficiently and effectively.
2.1: Background significance
Groups are a fundamental part of human behavior and have a huge impact on productivity. Groups can accomplish more than individuals because they can share their knowledge, take on the same workload, and help each other out when one person is less capable. Groups also allow for more diverse perspectives, which can help improve communication and lead to better results.
2.2: Problem statement
In today’s business environment, groups are more valuable than ever. They allow businesses to scale their operations and increase productivity. However, there are also some downsides to using groups: They can create friction between coworkers, leading to decreased productivity. Groups can be difficult to manage, leading to decreased communication and collaboration. In this research essay, I will explore how groups can be used to improve communication and productivity to understand this phenomenon better.
3.0: Research Outline
3.1: Thesis statement
The thesis of this research is that groups improve communication and productivity by providing a space for individuals to interact in a safe, productive, and constructive environment.
3.2: Scope statement
The research has one main theme: How groups can be used to improve communication and productivity. The theme focuses on how groups can be used to improve communication and productivity. Answering this question requires a review of previous research on group dynamics and patterns and an analysis of how these patterns could be applied in a work setting. This topic has been explored in previous studies, but it is important because it provides insight into how one-time events may influence group dynamics over time.
3.2.1: The research goal and objective
The research objective for this essay is to explore the dynamics of groups and how they can be used to improve communication and productivity. In general, I believe that groups are useful for improving communication and productivity, but they are not always used most effectively. I will explore various examples of groups successfully utilizing their dynamic nature to achieve their objectives. I will also discuss some challenges when using groups, including communication breakdowns and groupthink.
3.2.2: The research requirements
The research requirements for this project are to explore the dynamics of groups and how they can be used to improve communication and productivity. This requires a lot of data gathering, analysis, and communication skills. The first part of this project will be to collect data about how people organize themselves in teams, how they work together, and what problems arise when they don’t work together well. We’ll also need to analyze this data to determine why certain groups tend not to work well together. The second part of this project involves communicating our findings with other groups—those already working well together and those not. We will use our findings as a starting point for conversations with these different groups to try to understand their experiences better and learn from them.
3.2.3: Research constraints.
The research proposal has several constraints. First, there is no clear consensus on how groups should be defined and how they should be structured. Many researchers assume that groups are homogeneous in terms of their characteristics (such as size). Still, some suggest that it is more important to look at the characteristics of the individuals in a group than those of the group itself. Some researchers also argue that not all groups function equally well, so it is important to look at different groups (such as task-oriented versus social) and see what works best for each.
There are many different ways to measure productivity within a group. One common measure is simply time spent working together, but some researchers use metrics like the number of ideas generated or improved quality of work. These differences make it difficult to compare different results from different studies, which limits our ability to reach any conclusions about whether or not group productivity can be improved by changing group structures or composition. There are many variables involved when looking at group dynamics—not just individual personalities but environmental factors like noise levels and temperature—so assessing these factors through statistical analyses can be challenging. Finally, the project is limited by time and resources. Because of this, I plan to focus on gathering information from secondary databases. This means that any tangential issues will not be included in the study.
3.2.4: The research’s main assumptions.
There is a dearth of research on group dynamics. This is not surprising, as there are many other areas of study in which researchers have yet to make headway. The importance of bringing together different disciplines and perspectives on group dynamics has become increasingly clear in recent years, however, and so more attention should be paid to this topic.
The second assumption is that there are no existing theories for explaining how groups function or how they can be used to improve communication and productivity. This study aims to develop new theories about these topics, thus creating new ways for future researchers to approach them.
Existing theories about how groups function are not applicable in some contexts because they do not adequately address the needs of organizations with diverse populations or those with different goals. In addition, these theories often do not address issues faced by organizations with large numbers of employees. There is a need for new theoretical frameworks that will help researchers understand how groups work better than existing models do today. And finally, groups are dynamic entities that change over time.
3.3: Main supporting arguments.
Part 4.1: This part talks about group formation structure and Norms as the unspoken rules that members of a group agree to follow to keep the group dynamic productive and pleasant for everybody involved (Gençer, 2019). The first approach provides several viewpoint conventions, including how the group is organized. Everyone is expected to adhere to standards, from how the group leader is chosen to how specific duties are carried out.
Part 4.2: In this section, the influence of group formation on social support is investigated. The research investigates a study carried out on students who were experiencing stress due to the transition from high school to college. Even though the group’s connections were not very strong, there was an overwhelming sense of support and understanding (Gençer, 2019).
Part 4.3: Communication networks- In this section, we look at a centralized communication network where all team members may talk to one another and share files related to a project. Because of the centralized network, group members could better communicate and coordinate their operations. The group’s storming dynamics were affected by the fact that all members shared a similar level of dedication to the project (Fonteijn &Dolmans, 2019). Members were able to more quickly agree on a course of action to take in order to achieve their objective.
Part 4.4: We examine the numerous leadership paradigms developed during the study. The research investigated how leaders’ styles affected their followers’ sense of purpose, loyalty, and productivity on the job. Leaders that are dynamic and include their followers are seen more favorably by those who have high levels of agreeableness and extraversion, according to the study’s findings (Fonteijn & Dolmans, 2019). Because earlier studies lacked sufficient power to draw causal links between leaders’ personalities and their followers’ commitment assessments, the present results help to fill in the gaps.
Part 4.5: The research investigated leadership style improvement by dynamic group structure in this section. The report established that the policies and choices that are established in a group environment benefit all of the group members (Wakefield et al., 2019).
Part 4.6: in this part, certain power tactics were examined. According to the findings, the members’ capacity to engage with one another was bolstered, friendships were formed more easily, and power tactics enhanced collaboration. As a result, the team was propelled toward achievement, ultimately completing the task at hand, becoming unified and powerful (Gren & Lindman, 2020).
Part 4.7: This section of the researchers analyzed how a person’s productivity was affected by group dynamics. According to the findings, social interaction increases motivation and activity. Numerous studies have shown that collective output exceeds those of working alone (Wakefield et al., 2019). Ten individuals should be able to do more than ten things together if they each do one item. On the other hand, in situations of social loafing, that number might be as low as 9.
Part 4.8: In this section, the study investigated group dynamics as an effective approach to finding solutions to issues. The study found that working in groups can advance an organization’s contribution to human resources. This is one of the essential components necessary to provide a competitive edge and to be a company that endures throughout time (Gençer, 2019).
Part 4.9: This section of the study aimed to investigate the effects of group dynamics on social facilitation and performance enhancements. The research confirmed that people worry about being poorly evaluated by others. Working in groups increases productivity for simple jobs but decreases it for more complex ones (Stoddard et al., 2020).
4.0: Dynamics of groups and how they can be used to improve communication and productivity
To understand the impact of group dynamic on productivity, the research examined the experiences gained from the in-class group with the strategies that high-performing groups use to investigate the notions of group dynamics. The group that meets in the classroom is made up of five individuals, all of whom are women. Member (A) is an introverted psychology student who is 19 years old and finds it simple to get her thoughts through in a debate, despite being an introvert. Member B is an introverted psychology student 23 years of age who feels the urge to communicate well despite her reserved personality. Member C, who is shy but introverted and studies honors psychology at the university level, is twenty years old. Member D, a psychology student at the age of 21 who was introverted but enjoyed being around people, and member E, also a psychology major at the age of 21 who was introverted but had a laid-back demeanor when interacting with others in a group situation. The group members decided to call themselves “First Take,” and they adopted the motto “we get it done first” to convey the work ethic and mentality that they share as a collective unit.
4.1: Group Formation Structure and Norm development
These norms are the unspoken rules that members of a group agree to follow in order to keep the dynamic of the group productive and pleasant for everybody involved (Gençer, 2019). The first approach included a number of viewpoint conventions. From how the group was organized (each week a different member was chosen to be the project leader) to how specific duties were carried out, everyone was expected to adhere to a set of standards (the time remaining at the end of class was used to brainstorm and everyone was to add their thoughts and ideas to a document at home). This rule was established so that no one would skip class without telling the others. Member C realized she would lose a bonus mark since she would not be able to participate in the in-class activity and thus would not be able to contribute to the brainstorming portion of the assignment when she learned she would be away from class on the day it was held. Everyone in the group decided on the first day of class that anybody who couldn’t make it to any of the meetings or brainstorming sessions needed to bring in a lot of material to make up for it.
4.2: Social Support
The interpersonal connections between people that have an impact on both their mental health and their ability to operate socially and psychologically within their groups are what we mean when we talk about social support (Gençer, 2019). It is of the opinion that the organization has accomplished a lot thanks to the support of the community. During the actual class period as well as after, there was a sense of togetherness and acceptance among the members of the group. Even though the members of first take didn’t always sit next to one another during lecture due to the fact that Member D had a class at the beginning time of the lecture, the participants in the group, were able to participate in a variety of activities. These activities ranged from group activities planned by the professor to the brainstorming session that took place after class. This would let participants in the group to provide varied viewpoints on a variety of subjects that were being discussed. Because everyone had to go to their various places of employment and attempt to balance academic work for different courses the members were registered in at that point in the semester, there was a shared understanding between the participants when it came to being active on moments after the lecture, which was one thing that the group participants were very happy about.
Gençer, (2019) assert that there is a connection between a person’s level of stress and the social support they get. “The less perceived stress there is, the more genuine social support there is.” A research was conducted on students at an international five-year junior college who were going through stress due to the transfer to Another College. The students that participated in this research were lacking some social support. They claimed that the lack of social support was the cause of their unsatisfactory shift. According to the findings of the research, social support may be broken down into two distinct categories: kin (which includes parents and relatives) and nonkin (friends, classmates and teachers). The significance of students’ nonkins in this investigation was incrofsed because to the increased amount of contact that took place between the students and either their friends, classmates, or instructors. Even though the group didn’t have the finest connection, there was a strong presence of support and understanding amongst the members, which served as a foundation for an experience that was devoid of tension.
4.3: Communication networks
First take was a built centralized communication network for all members of the group so that they could connect with one another and exchange materials pertaining to a job. This was done since many projects demand a range of inputs. This had an impact on the efficacy of the mission, as well as the leadership of the group. The members of the organization were able to more effectively share information with one another and coordinate their efforts because to the presence of a centralized network. The fact that every member of the group had a comparable degree of commitment impacted the way the group interacted with one another in terms of storming. It made it simpler for members to reach a consensus on a strategy for accomplishing a goal. The first attempt had an adequate amount of communication, but there was a lack of clearly defined positions, which made it difficult to carry out one’s tasks. Nevertheless, there was efficient communication when member A had a personal emergency and had trouble accessing the course website, which result in a nearly late submission of the job that was due for that week. Member A made sure to keep the other members updated as quickly as feasible and was able to provide an explanation for the predicament. This exemplifies the significance of excellent communication to the overall efficiency of an organization. The rest of the group would not have been able to complete the work at hand if member A hadn’t been the one to initiate communication with the rest of the members.
Fonteijn and Dolmans, (2019) conducted research on the topic, and their findings focused on interdependent problem-solving tasks. They utilized two different tasks, and both of them involved generating solutions to problems. The first work included finding a solution to a problem, while the second task involved coming up with new ideas. Both of these tasks were based on a graphical programming interface that was completed online. In order to develop the pipe that would sort chosen news items by publication date, delete any articles that were published more than once, and provide a user the ability to input a search phrase, the programs needed each group to collaborate with one another (Fonteijn &Dolmans, 2019). There were a total of 503 persons who took part in the research, 49% of them were female, and they were divided into 119 groups of four people each. As a consequence of the check performed on the communication network, the findings revealed that there was an enhanced communication network prudency due to collective efforts.
4.4: Group Formation structure Personality qualities relevant to leadership
Another take consisted of participants who have a wide range of personality types. All of the members had a high level of intelligence; nevertheless, several individuals stood out from the others due to particular attributes that contributed to their ability to assume leadership roles. When it came to the given assignments, the first step was to appoint a leader each week to take charge of the assignment. This entailed encouraging the group members to contribute their own ideas and answers, ensuring that the group members understood what was expected of them, and ensuring that the assignment was turned in by the specified date. Even though member D is an introvert, she had great relationships with the other members of the group, was committed to the cause, exuded confidence in herself, and maintained a positive attitude even when things got difficult for the group and its members. Member D exhibited most qualities of a good leader than any other group member. She was likewise quite focused on the task at hand. Because of these qualities, the members of the group were driven to speak more with one another in order to complete the work.
Fonteijn and Dolmans, (2019) conducted a study in which they focused on the various notions of leadership and analyzed the implications of leaders on the behavior patterns of their subordinates in connection to fulfillment, dedication, and efficiency to tasks. In this study, Fonteijn and Dolmans, (2019) analyzed the effects of leaders on the behaviors of their subordinates. They held the belief that the impacts that leaders have on their subordinates not only determine how well those subordinates perform, but also how well their expectations are realized. The purpose of the research was to reach prior studies on the link between the personalities of those who follow a leader and how that leader is seen and accepted by those followers. They discovered that subordinates who have high levels of agreeableness and extraversion had a more favorable perception of leadership that is dynamic and involves others. The findings of the study filled in the blanks left by previous research that failed to find the predicted connections between the personalities of leaders and followers’ perceptions of their level of commitment. In order to provide more information on the outcome of the research, the research conducted by Fonteijn and Dolmans, (2019) had similar hypotheses. Because member D possessed the personal attributes that enabled her to have a comprehension with the team members to develop fluid and easy connections on both task-related and personal friendship-wise.
4.5: Leadership Styles Improvement
The policies and choices that are established in a group environment are beneficial to all of the members of the group. Great leader not only inspires team members but also pays attention to the contributions they make and provides guidance on how certain responsibilities should be carried out. During the first round, we were exposed to a variety of leadership styles from the various members of the group. Some are authoritative, while others are helpful. Members A, C, and D were more collaborative leaders since they thought that offering encouragement leads to better levels of effectiveness amongst members, in contrast to member B, who took a more directive approach. Member B was also more authoritarian. On the other hand, Member E took a position that was closer to the center of the spectrum. Wakefield et al., (2019) suggest that good leaders do not favor one particular style of leadership over another.
4.6: Group Dynamics structure Power Tactics
In order for the members of the first take group to be able to cooperate effectively, certain plans were devised and implemented to guarantee that the group’s duties and objectives would be met. The power techniques assisted teamwork, it facilitated the formation of friendships, and it supported the members of the group in their ability to interact with one another. There was just one instance in which a power strategy was really used on the members of the organization. During the in-class exercise known as the “survival task,” which is when member C emphasized her opinions and ideas surrounding the activity, the fact that she had prior experience relating to the subject matter enabled her to do so. Since of this, the group was pushed in the direction of success because they were able to finish the assignment, so becoming whole and stronger, and because each member recognized the varied contributions that were needed from the other members to do the mission. There are also parallels between this research and a study conducted by Wakefield et al., (2019). In that research, it was found that when there is no formal leader or power structure in a group, the members’ personal advancement drivers emerge in the form of traits, behaviors, and characteristics. These emerge when they are relevant, and they are based on the circumstances of the surrounding environment (Wakefield et al., 2019).
A research that was conducted by Gren and Lindman, (2020) focused on the significance of subordinates’ desire to cooperate with the power techniques that are used by their superiors, whether such power tactics are severe or gentle. It consisted of two investigations that were cross-sectional in nature and was carried out by a total of five distinct organizations. A bank, a federation of small enterprises, a security firm, an oil corporation, and a hospital are the kind of businesses that make up this group. Both the first research, which included 142 workers, and the second study, which included 63 employees, were made up entirely of employees who gave their time to take part in the study. The Need for Closure Scale and a 33-item measure of compliance with dominance methods were used to access both studies. Both studies were accessible based on these reports. It was shown that subordinates are more cooperative when severe treatment is administered.
Power methods, as opposed to soft power tactics, were chosen since it was discovered that power tactics were more successful (Gren & Lindman, 2020). First-experiences takes were comparable to those described in the research study carried out by Wakefield et al., (2019). Members of First-Take were allowed to contribute their ideas and thoughts to the group’s overall effort to attain success by using aggressive power techniques. My experience with first take has taught me that the formation and structure of a group are dependent on the type of norms that are established, the communication that occurs between members of the group, and most importantly the distribution of power that occurs between members in order to ensure that each member possesses an equal or close to equal amount of power. The use of power strategies and the styles of leadership utilized by the members of first take are, in my opinion, the most important areas in which the members of first take have room for improvement.
4.7: The Effect of the Group on the Efficiency of the Individual
Studies have shown that the collective dynamics of a team can either boost or hinder individual performance (Wakefield et al., 2019). Many social psychologists argue that being in the company of others boosts one’s drive and activity. This is where a person’s prevailing character traits come into play. What this means is that if a person has a dominant tendency to make mistakes, his error rate will rise, and vice versa if he has a dominant tendency to make the right decisions, he will be more likely to make the right choices. Multiple studies have demonstrated that group productivity is higher than individual productivity (Wakefield et al., 2019). It is also likely that people will put in less effort than they would if they were working alone. If ten people in a group each contribute one thing, the sum of their efforts should be more than ten. In cases of social loafing, however, that number might be as low as 9. In particular, as the size of a group grows, a smaller percentage of its members will make up a larger fraction of its total output.
4.8: Effective approach to finding solutions to issues
Because working together is the most effective approach to find solutions to issues, groups are an integral aspect of organizations and cannot be eliminated from them. Collaboration, as shown by a plethora of research, has been demonstrated to be an effective strategy for improving production efficiencies. It is easier for groups of people to solve problems and make improvements to processes than it is for individuals working alone. Working in groups has the potential to advance an organization’s contribution of human resources, which is the primary reason for doing so. When the appropriate circumstances and synergy are established for the completion of big and difficult tasks, there is a discernible gap between the amount of effort put forth by a group and that of an individual, and people are more productive when they are working inside groups. This is one of the essential components necessary to provide a competitive edge and to be a company that endures throughout time. According to the findings of a number of academics, the creation of groups has a significant role in the formation of the attitudes and actions of people. For instance, offering assistance is an example of an unprompted action that could take place in a group setting. The establishment of a group is one of the most important prerequisites for enabling activities of this kind. According to the findings of the research conducted by Stoddard et al., (2020) the likelihood of members of a group supporting one another is greater in settings where there is a high level of task coherence, a low level of task confusion, and robust institutional norms. In a study that was conducted in a similar fashion by Gençer, (2019) it was proven that groups have positive attributes such as improving the mindset of assisting each other, delivering group cohesiveness between individuals and assist for peer leadership, and fostering interaction between people. As a result, groups have a positive effect on the job satisfaction and performance of employees. According to the findings of Stoddard et al., (2020) who investigated the impact of goal-setting on the performance of groups in companies, defining group objectives has a significant impact on the performance of such groups.
The accomplishment of individual objectives could also have a beneficial effect on the overall performance of the group. However, objectives that are adopted by a large number of people have a greater influence on the performance of the group. In a nutshell, the advantages that groups bring to organizations are as follows: they reduce the amount of work that needs to be done, they foster innovation and originality, they get rid of the weaknesses that supervisors have, they establish communication channels for individuals, they assist workers in feeling better on a mental and emotional level, they facilitate effective decision-making in the event that the decision-making process is carried out correctly, they permit workers to exercise control over one another, which may be more effective than the control that supervisors exercise.
4.9: Social facilitation and performance gains
For the aim of understanding peacemaking and competitiveness, dynamogenic stimulation researcher Gençer, (2019) postulated that “the corporeal presence of another rider provides a stimulant to the racer in stimulating the competitive urge…” Social facilitation, defined as “improvement in task performance that happens when individuals work in the presence of other people,” is thought to have its roots in this dynamogenic component. Stoddard et al., (2020) confirmed Gençer’s finding by concluding that teamwork increases output but results in lower-quality work. Stoddard et al., (2020) added to Gençer, (2019) studies on arousal response by looking at how social facilitation could affect it. Stoddard et al., took two different types of experiments into account in his analysis. Zajonc studied people’s actions in two settings: the first, with an audience of onlookers (audience effects), and the second, with a co-actor (co-action effects). In his research, Gençer, (2019) classified human actions into two groups: those that are more likely to be done (and so are the dominant responses to activities that are simpler to learn) and those that are less likely to be performed (and hence are the non-dominant responses). According to Zajonc’s Theory of Social Facilitation, while working on a task with other people, the results might be affected by either social facilitation or social interference (Gren & Lindman, 2020). By contrast, if social interference occurs, the task will have elicited a non-dominant response from the individual, leading to subpar performance, and if social facilitation occurs, the task will have required a dominant response from the individual, leading to better performance when surrounded by others.
Several theories analyze the reasons for social facilitation, such as drive, motivation, cognition, and personality processes that lead to improved group performance. Compresence (the condition of reacting in the presence of others) was postulated by Zajonc to increase an individual’s drive level, which in turn activates social facilitation when activities are simple and easy to execute but hinders performance when tasks are difficult (Gren & Lindman, 2020). The assessment apprehension concept was presented by (Hinsz & Jackson, 2022). It suggests that individuals fear being judged negatively in social circumstances. Fonteijn and Dolmans, (2019) claimed that this fearful motivational reaction, rather than arousal/elevated drive, explains why people are more productive while working in groups on basic activities but less productive when working on complicated tasks alone. Gender’s The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (2019) rests on the premise that people have some say over how they are viewed by others around them. He argues that people offer a favorable self-presentation/social picture of themselves because they are afraid of being judged by others as having bad, unattractive features and attributes. Performance enhancements are predicted by Goffman’s theory of self-presentation, which states that people will put in more effort when they perceive that they will be judged (Gren & Lindman, 2020). An individual’s focus is allegedly divided between their job and their coworkers due to an interference effect, as proposed by the distraction-conflict hypothesis. When the work at hand is straightforward and presents little difficulty, the interference effect is small and performance is enhanced. In more difficult activities, when the effects of distraction are greater, the motivational factor does not contribute to improved performance. The Stroop task (Stroop effect) showed that distractions may boost performance by forcing people to concentrate on fewer things at once. The notion of social orientation examines how people behave in various social contexts. It suggests that those who go into social events with a healthy dose of confidence will benefit from social facilitation effects, whereas those who approach them with anxiety will be hampered by social interference.
5.0: Conclusion
The issue at hand is whether or not our current organizational structure causes major drawbacks in the way that we perform tasks collectively. Groups as a whole have advantages and disadvantages, but it is up to each group to determine where they fit on the spectrum. This kind of research could lead to an increased understanding and awareness of the bonds within groups, as well as a deeper understanding of the dynamics and relationships between them. Larger communities would benefit, too—businesses can become more productive, efficient learning environments can be established in schools, and communities can work together more harmoniously. The result, ideally, is improved communication and greater productivity among members of all kinds of groups.
6.0: References
Fonteijn, H. T., & Dolmans, D. H. (2019). Group work and group dynamics in PBL. The Wiley handbook of problem‐based learning, 199-220.
Gençer, H. (2019). Group dynamics and behaviour. Universal Journal of Educational Research.
Gren, L., & Lindman, M. (2020, June). What an agile leader does: The group dynamics perspective. In International conference on agile software development (pp. 178-194). Springer, Cham.
Hinsz, V. B., & Jackson, J. W. (2022). The relevance of group dynamics for understanding the US Capitol insurrection. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 26(3), 288.
Stoddard, O., Karpowitz, C., & Preece, J. (2020). Strength in numbers: A field experiment in gender, influence, and group dynamics.
Wakefield, J. R., Bowe, M., Kellezi, B., McNamara, N., & Stevenson, C. (2019). When groups help and when groups harm: Origins, developments, and future directions of the “Social Cure” perspective of group dynamics. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13(3), e12440.
write