Communication within a given group requires a certain extent of comprehending the context in which both, an individual and the whole group are located. While participating in the discussion in class, each of the group members often played a role without a complete understanding of its function. However, ultimately the group work has comprised the elements of both, individual and group activities and illustrated that an effective leadership results from the personal contribution of each to the given discussion as well as through active participation in activities which lead to the generation of new ideas and thoughts.
While working on the movie project, an individual culture was brought to the group activities through different manners. First, we divided tasks between each other and had some time for each of us to work on the project separately. After the given time, we exchanged our views in the group discussion, and each of the group members had a chance to contribute his or her ideas. Eventually, we had a dynamic debate with the active participation and translation of our thoughts into the given group work.

Your 20% discount here!

Use your promo and get a custom paper on
Movie Presentation and Participation

Order Now
Promocode: SAMPLES20

In our group work, we primarily related to normative culture, while giving each individual a space for reflection. Similar to the concept application in the organizational leadership, while working on the movie project each of us had a rather dry task to work on the specific area which would be relevant for further discussion in our group. In fact, normative culture is partially based on the hierarchy, but eventually, we relied on the decision-making based on consensus. As a result of no objections, setting up clear guidelines for everyone was the best working approach for our group.

In regards to the type of leadership expressed by each in the group, it shall be mentioned that most of the students were acting in accordance with guidelines of the participative type of leadership, which belongs to the democratic leadership style. In our case, the ultimate decision was based on the contribution of each of us to the discussion and in the result of no objections, the task has been submitted. Even though some individuals working in the group exposed partially autocratic style of leadership at the beginning of the discussion, but such a hierarchical approach was then overshadowed by the democratic, participative leadership style that later on dominated the debate. Overall, the contribution of each of the individual could be assessed as effective communication approach.

In fact, two students in our groups met some challenges regarding leadership style. They were not much used to communicating in the debates, and their shy personalities often prevented them from making substantial contributions. However, what could be noted is the fact that it was much easier for them to convey their ideas in the written form than expressing in front of the public. The chosen approach where each of us had to contribute to the debate stimulated their participation in the discussion. It was also a significant stage in the group development process, as shier members of the group had to adjust to the overall culture and leadership style in the decision-making process.

The absence from group activities often comprised a challenge to the general principle of participative leadership. If a person were absent, we would ask to send us her comments on our ideas in the written form, so that participative leadership style would be preserved. In essence, the way we dealt with absences did not impact the overall group work, as we were well informed on ideas and proposals from other individuals. My communication was indeed effective as I try to comment on the ideas that I both, agreed and disagreed to build an overall consensus.