The following is what our group was supposed to discuss.
Watch "Planning a Playground."
After watching this week's videos, focus on the following questions in your collaborative group:
• What leadership theories and styles do you see in the videos?
• Were there any leadership strategies you identified? What would have been a helpful strategy in these videos?
• Discuss constructive and destructive conflict. How do they differ? What did you see with relation to these concepts in the video?
• How would you increase cohesion for these teams?
Group Conversation on Planning a Playground (video)
Team members Nick, Maiky, Janita, Patricia, Talitha (talitha did not post)
Maiky-After reading the chapter I read about a study done on teams, and part of the result was that males were more dominant than females and quicker to challenge others and to control the course of the conversation. I think this was clearly happening here, they shot down Betty's plan even before she was done explaining herself.
A better solution for this would have been to ask more questions and see how the bake sales worked. Maybe raffles could have been part of these bake sales or other extra activities to bring in more revenue. I feel that as a leader David should have taken the lead, asked questions, and not let that idea just get put aside especially since it has worked for her before.
Nick- A more authoritarian leadership style in this video would have helped. The leader was letting the group run itself for the most part. He did step in here and there, but was not very knowledgeable on the topics. He did show some traits of an effective leader, such as letting the group do the work, but when someone had an alternate idea he just shut it down and went with one that sounded better to him. I say more authoritarian because the group was not working very well at all, they were arguing about everything, so they needed someone to step in and set things straight.
Janita- The meeting definitely lacked authoritative leadership and it doesn't seem like they had a clear agenda on all the things that would be discussed. Meeting notes should have been taken with all the suggestions on the budget for the playground and the possible methods to raise the funds. Just to throwing a budget out there without the statistics of their community, what they want the playground to include size etc is premature in my opinion.
Maybe allowing a voting method at the end could be implemented as well instead of rejecting a suggestion early on. Overall the meeting was good, I didn't notice anyone being disengaged nor did they display any blatant disrespect or confrontation. However, improvements in preparation are needed
Maiky- I totally agree with you, they lacked a leader with a clear agenda to get to the end goal. It seems to me like if Aisha hadn't done some research prior to the meeting everyone would have been clueless about a decent budget for the playground, reflecting poorly on the leader or whoever called the meeting. However just like Nick pointed out it was good that the leader let the team talk it out and come up with ideas prior to adding his input but assuming that David was the leader of the group he should have introduced his role better especially since Betty was new and bring some more to the table.
Janita- Hello Maiky, I concur David allowed the group to make some suggestions and then followed up with his thoughts and inputs on how they may be able to proceed, considering the input from all parties. I think he was successful in giving everyone fair treat and an opportunity to speak.
I don't feel like conflict was truly presented in the video however, based on what we did see constructive and destructive conflict has the potential to present itself.Betty could have took offense to the fact that they shot down her idea to host a bake sale almost instantly, without the proper strategy and coaching in place that could have been destructive to the team dynamic. Overall they demonstrated more of a constructive conflict although they didn't like Betty first suggestion when they realized she had some resources that could benefit them they quickly agreed that her assistance in speaking with a friend was welcomed.
Patricia- I agree with you. They immediately shut her down and took her side cause she knew somebody that could help them. I think the group was a little destructive because the 2 guys shot everything down that was suggested to the group before the last suggestion.
Maiky- Hello, I feel that the way the team handled the decision making was completely wrong, from looking at the video there was only one person writing things down hopefully notes. Betty's Idea could have been good or bad and she may have taken offense to it. But I see another problem with how this team handled the final decision.
I feel like there was very little brainstorming and one idea should not be the only choice on the table. By accepting that as their choice and not having other plans to look at and brain storm they lost the advantage of using different points of view to come up with better solutions to raise funds. It seems like they almost used the accommodation style to make the conflict go away and find a quick solution. Instead they should brain stormed some more find possible solutions to include Betty initial idea take notes and postpone coming back with additional information after doing research to find the best choices.
Patricia- I believe it was a mixture of authoritarian and laissez-faire. The leader wasn't knowledgeable in about building a playground and let the group run itself until he decided to step in.
So, thats why I say lassez-faire also. I agree with you Maiky. He should of asked more questions about the bake sale and see how much money they had made doing it. What I think he didn't want to continue with that subject because the people around him wasn't really feeling that idea. I think he should of came prepared to the meeting and set up guidelines for it. The meeting would have ran smoother.