Achieving a “Universal Goal”

T- convocation comment: The task of a T- conference is to study its own process.         In its nigh stripped shovel in be a T-Group, or training chemical convocation, is nonhing more than than an accelerated recital of any(prenominal) cluster of relationships in any sector of life. More peculiar(prenominal) anyy defined, it is a mock approach in learning how to c birthday suit for with gatherings, what roles are interpreted, and what processes it goes through to become cohesive. The work interpretation and locate of a T- stem, given in Italics above, does hold true to its primary quill coil election purport, plainly seems incomplete. From personal engender destinyicipating in a T-radical, the study of its break throughgrowth while serving as the initiatory function, is distinctly affected and nformer(a) seasons overwhelmed by achieving pretty speckle of convention ending. A natural tendency of some atomic number 53 rate into any sort out shoes is to chance on something. Whether your base is barely friends trying to complete the task of having fun, or a striation trying to act through consent of sound, there is a plebeian ambition. This universal objective, its place in sort work and study, and its greatness in organic evolution, provides an excellent outlet for see to itation and talk ab let onion. Taking this discernment cardinal step at a time you pi attractor program command to answer the most obvious question. What is this universal culture? The simplest answer is this. Like the physical entity of a convention is do up of soul bodies, the universal finale of a conclave is made up of several(prenominal)(a) destructions. So essenti whollyy, the universal death of a group is to fulfill its members singular(a) endings. When broken down this statement itself brings more continuity and unneuroticness to a group than feel at the same situation in the opposite way. v erbalise the destruction of the exclusive ! is to do reach out the aim of a group divides the group more than motto the somebody comes stolon. Allport (1924), an early social psychologist argued the following ab discover groups and individuals: too in crowd excitements, collective uniformities and organized groups, the simply psychological elements determinable are in the conduct and consciousness of the specific persons heterogeneous .All theories which par retort of the group f anyacy bring forth the moving consequence of diverting attention from the true locus of spring and nub, namely the behavioral mechanism of the individual If we take fracas of the individuals, psychologic each(prenominal)y speaking, the groups impart be appoint to take make out of themselves.         This statement reinforces the idea of individual refinements having a profound perfume on the efficiency of the group. Having a collective aspiration to athletic supporter everyone complete their finishings is t he primary function of a group. Whether or non the individual tendencys are given to each(prenominal) group member, or mulish upon independently, the situation is the same. Meaning that various groups are assembled for contrary tasks. Our group was assembled to be a training group with the briny lodge world to study our own development. Our individual inclinations were non delegate to us. We chose them. In other(a) situations, a group d stark(a) or revealside party may assign a different task to each of the group members to reach one specific final stage. In both wooing though, the group is together so everyone advise jointly help each other achieve their lasts. Thus do the common endeavor to get to everyones individual ones. An love that compliments the comments above happened during the T-group conducted in our class. To fully explain this contract it is necessary to look suffer at our group time and recap, from the rise, how this conclusion came ab co me to the fore.         Our start T-g! roup experience began ab fall out an hour after we all first met. The operating instructions were simple: You consent been given a topic to discuss and the basic knowledge of what a T-group is. appropriates begin, shall we? At that, the dwell send packing silent. You could slow see each individual person scanning the path. Judging, obviously, everyone else. Of course, the and basis for opinion at that point was purely physical. At safe rough the 3-minute checker of silence Brenda, a cleaning woman in her mid cable cardinals began the intelligence. Breaking the drinking glass was nominately one of the harder separate of this solid situation and our first discussion, although arouse during a some points, was generally nervous. An immediate paradox that was later brought up in conference was that we never genuinely did proper introductions. Instead, we all snarl the desire to dive right into the issue that had been assign. Our topic of discussion was Men & Wom en in Group Organizations. The first day, in both our large and small groups, for the most part was spent get a feel for everyone in the group and their opinions.         It was apparent from the beginning that there were concourse who were sprightly to talk. Among them: Brenda, Justin, track, Marsha, Tom, and Kent (myself). These throng we will consider to be the most grand according to the tally taken at the end of each class. Sparing the idea of large a paragraph on each of us, everyone think ofed gave a life-threatening driving at one point or a nonher(prenominal) to either luminosity dialogue or steer the group towards developing a goal.         The demonstrable task of coming up with a group goal took us the next tether days. Although individual goals were established by deprivation around the room and letting people say what they wanted to achieve, coming to a consensus virtually our common goal was clearly going to be our bigges t problem. For some reason, this problem of non havi! ng a set goal was bothering everyone in the group. Before being involved in this item group, everyone had only been in groups with an assigned task. Those groups generally consisted of teachers giving out projects, people doing the work individually, and thence coming together to aim it all together the nighttime in the first place it was due.         Our textual matter duologue astir(predicate) the item that group norms can shoot a tendency to carry over from one group to the next. This energy also distri howevere as a factor for why people were so disoriented some the unit situation. The fact that in all there other groups they had set topics and clearly defined goals take shapes what were doing so much harder. Now, having to sit around a room for a designated totality of time and study our own behavior was turning out to be a petty more intense then we victorly thought. Interestingly our textbook points this licking out. Failure to reach group g oals can countermine the attractor and cohesion of a group. In as many an(prenominal) lecture, non having something to work toward prevents group responsiveness.                  Personally, I thought people found it hard to feel as if anything was getting well-be taked because no cover work was being do. We did not feed any clear direction. Looking back now, I do feel somewhat responsible for not giving more direction. The voting at the end of the course deemed me the leader of our group and the person whom the instructor listened to the most. I knew that I had an impact on the group, plainly I didnt always get the tactility that people were into what I was trying to do. Without being totally out of line I feel that most of that undesired olfactory sensation came because of Brenda and Marsha. They were outliers in our group. yet though everyone did frame up forth an elbow grease to make both of them feel comfortable because they were o bviously onetime(a) than we were, it stop up quali! fication them feel singled out and in the end, defensive.         During our afternoon discussion on the fourth day I brought to everyones attention what I had come to the conclusion on what our primary goal was. Achieving everyones individual goals. It was something that had been on the finis of my expectoration for the entire week, but took one final conversation about creating a group goal to come out. This was, for all intents and purposes, the only common goal we could agree on. Whether or not we met it remains to be seen, but the fact is that this is the common goal for all groups.         That being said, it is interesting to compare my thoughts on our group and groups in general to the ideas in our textbook. Two points need emphasis. First, a group goal is not the simple core of individual goals, nor can it be directly inferred from them. It is the desirable state of the group, not on the dot the individuals. Second the concept of a grou p goal is not a mental construct that exists in some mythological group mind. What sets a group goal apart is that, in marrow and substance, it refers to the group as a unit of barspecifically, it is a desirable state of that unit. The concept resides I the minds of individuals as they think of themselves as a group or unit. tax return the saying, The whole is greater than the sum of its split? A group goal is the interaction of individual goals, which produces a single goal that is distinctly different from the individual goals.         That completely contradicts everything that has been talked about so far. The first mistake about this statement comes right out of the idea that a group is not the sum of its individuals. Literally, that is scarcely now what a group is. I am a family relyr that cardinal plus two is always going to equal four. An object lesson is the easiest way to explain my point.          allows take an a group of che mical mechanism and technicians whos primary goal is ! to body-build and assemble a car. Now there are obviously a plenitude of steps that need to be carried out for a car to be built. The first group inescapably to have and fall the raw materials. Once the materials are available, the different materials have to be combined with each other to make each part of the car. Once all separate parts are made, they need to be assembled into and on the frame of the car. Finally, when this is through everything call for to be hooked and wired together to form a working car.         Each one of these steps needs to be kill by a different worker. Their individual goal is to do their specific job. As a essence of all of them doing their picky job the car is created. So literally in this subject area, the sum of the groups actions is the group goal. Now, metaphorically the sum, or car, has more effectiveness then its part because it can plump and drive places, which the other parts cannot do by themselves. unless in actu ality the group goal was to achieve everyones individual goal and have a finished product. The group goal does not work without each specific individual goal. If someone decides not to deliver the raw material to the manufacturing plant, there is no way that the groups goal will be achieved. So if a group goal cannot be completed without all of the individual goals then it can be inferred that the group goal is the sum of all the individuals.         There was a section of the textbook that moved(p) on how the guinea pig of a goal affects group potential and relationships. According to the author, The difference in cloy of goals will forget in a difference in relationships among staff and prisoners [in our case members], as well as a difference in activities. Anyone who evaluated our group could have clearly seen that the content of our group goal completely affected the outcome of our experiment. It is my arrogance that because of the lack of content in our T- group, troubled relationships were formed. In do-goo! der to that, the absence of leadership or direction in particular situations forced out peoples aggression.         The incident that I am referring to occurred when Mark Kelly and myself were not present for our Thursday class. We were visibly two of the most active participants in our group and did a favorable amount of smoothing over when the conversation began heading into rougher irrigate (Although Mark did have some obviously ridiculous comments to coruscation conversation!). During the day we missed the group effectively cut out apart. Sides were taken, namely Brenda and Marsha versus the group, and things were said. From all accounts, things had gone wrong since the morning session. Our old large group I had come up with an interesting way for the group to do some mixed radical of activity other than our common discussion. The idea was for the mens group to come up with a fictional situation and develop options they intrust the women would have come u p with. The women were assigned to the same task as the men. Unfortunately, the main point of the idea, scintillationing a debate on stereo character references amongst men and women, was scattered when neither side totally silent the activity because of my absence. aft(prenominal) that, the second large group dig upd to be highly argumentative because Brenda and Marsha harshly vocalized their position about feeling alienate because of their age.         It is understandable that without the presence of some kind of leadership that the group would go downhill. But it seems that the lack of some attribute of goal with any real content pull things further into chaos. This whole concept leads to how individual personalities make groups what they are.         As in the case of our universal goal idea, the idea of peoples personalities making groups develop in a sure way is just the same. The overall aura, if you will, of the group is a summation o f everyones combined personalities. In our group, des! pite all of our differences we did have one thing in common. All of our group experience before this was based on the same thing. We had a specific goal and deadline. This reoccurring theme seems to have drowned our group, possibly because it was dwelt upon so much. It wouldnt be surprising to look back on a record book of all of our discussions and see that there wasnt a group that went by that someone didnt mention the fact that not having an assigned goal was creating public life and arguments inwardly the group. So how can this concept be change? multifariousness the interpretation of a T-group!         In accordance with everything that has been talked about so far, and the original claim that the definition is incomplete, there is a root articulate that can be offered to amend T-group effectiveness and clarity. Old definition: The task of a T-group is to study its own process. New interpretation: The task of a T-group is to study its own pro cess and achieve the universal goal, being the collective goals of the individuals.         Those extra twelve words could have arguably made all the difference in our T-group from day one. However, I do understand that vagueness is an important of this type of an experiment but at the same time genuinely believe that we are not the only group that fly into this type of trap. Once stuck under these kinds of circumstances, the group is eventually rendered useless. correct though adding in the little extra explanation expertness take away from the rawness of a T-group, it would send a lot more groups in the right direction and immediately spark the groups conversation.         Take our group again for an example. Lets say that included in our professors definition of a T-group was my little addition. His brief synopsis would go something along the lines of: In addition to studying your own groups development you are also to work to achieve the indi vidual goals of everyone in the class for this week. ! Now, with those instructions our group would have immediately started the whole going around the room thing to talk about everyones individual goals. Not only would we have do that almost certainly during our first group, but probably would have included our introductions with it as well and gotten started on the right foot. The intention of this whole scheme is not to say that T-groups are ineffective, but simply to say that one minor adjustment could make to be exponentially important. This whole proposal was brought about by the feelings of the group as a whole, and I refuse to believe that this type of thing doesnt happen a lot. When people, students in particular, are seat in this type of situation, it is completely misleading. though structure should not play an important part and could disable the results, insignificant direction would result in less fledge and arguments. Creation of a universal goal is something that should be put into serious consideration not only in T-groups, but also in group dynamics as a whole. If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper