Introduction
Group dynamic is essential in determining its course. Our group was characterized with trust, care, and fairness. In fact, no one cared to note each otherās background. We accepted one another as equals within the group. This was essential in enabling us to achieve group cohesion. Moreover, it aided us in performing group activities without hindrance. This paper will reflect on leadership, group theory, and group skills (D.W. Johnson & P.J. Johnson, 2013, p. 27).
Theme, dynamic or pattern noticed
Our members were democratic, trustworthy, and caring. These important elements were achieved early in the group meetings through sharing of roles within the group (Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, 2013, p.121). In fact, even though one of us had more experience with aircraft than the rest, she never showed it in a manner to suggest intimidation.
We considered ourselves equal and in each turn, a new DA was selected to moderate our group tasks. The group was therefore democratic and showed a pattern of trust and leadership (D.W. Johnson & P.J. Johnson, 2013, p. 122).
Provisional explanation/hypothesis
The group did not have age and careers issues. In fact, as said earlier, only one person was knowledgeable on aircraft issues. We therefore depended heavily on her solutions for a single session only. Moreover, the attitude in the group did not allow us to consider aspects like age and careers as issues of concern. Instead, we treated each other equally. In essence, everyone had equal opportunities to be the DA.
Evidence
The fact that everyone got equal chances of becoming a DA as well as in contributing to the solution of issues in the group did not allow us to classify ourselves in any category, class, or age. In fact, as said earlier, only one individual had experience in aircraft related task. This was only helpful in the second discussion. However, she still ensured that our discussions were taken into consideration after an excerpt from her experience.
Analysis of theme, dynamic or pattern
The dynamic, pattern or theme of our group revealed both formal and informal authority. However, this depended on the kind of role given to each individual after a democratic selection. For instance, the Designated Authority (DA) moderated group activities. This afforded him/her formal authority over us during group proceedings.
However, other tasks like note taking, observers, among others toke informal authority as they took keen interest on contributions from each individual. However, it is necessary to not that the first meeting was quite cautious and everyone, including myself, was quite hesitant to take formal authority. Fortunately, one of the group members volunteered and we never looked back (D.W. Johnson & P.J. Johnson, 2013, p. 122).
Discomforting evidence that exists
The group did not have any issues. In fact, only the first meeting was characterized with high tensions. However, this was because we had not met as a group before. Moreover, we did not know what was required of us in the group. In addition, we were hesitant to give contributions. However, this did not affect us anymore after the first meeting. In fact, we gelled quite easily and we were able to agree to most solutions in our discussions.
Conclusion
Our group was characterized with leadership, trust, and care. In fact, everyone was involved in-group discussions. Except for the first meeting, everyone was happy to contribute to the discussions. Moreover, we gelled quite easily since cohesion was achieved quickly within the group. In addition, we trusted each other quite easily and decided on issues through democratic ways.
However, we also gave the minority and opportunity to explain reasons for their choices. Group dynamic was therefore achieved with leadership skills observable in each individual (D.W. Johnson & P.J. Johnson, 2013, p. 122).
Reference
Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, P.J. (2013). Joining Together: Group Theory and Group Skills (11th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.