There are many different groups that we fall in to on a daily basis, for example friendship groups, class groups and family groups. If, for example someone is with their friends they might take on a different role to when they are sitting in a class discussion. In a group discussion people will need to take on different roles for it to be effective. For example some people may take on the role of an energiser to keep the group motivated; others may take on an uncommitted role where they sit out and don’t say much, either because they’re shy or can not be bothered to contribute-this is a negative contribution as it doesn’t help the group to progress. On the other hand in a friendship group, people don’t take on roles as much as it is less formal and when in a conversation there isn’t always a final goal that needs to be achieved.
From my research I have found different theorists that all share common theories in effective group communication.
One of the theorists that I looked at was Nicholson. He talks about why people join groups. The five things he talks about are people having the same stimulation, reassurance, attraction of similarity, proximity and physical attraction. I agree with him because, especially in the youth of today’s society, fitting in to certain groups is important as everyone in the group will want to contribute effectively to the conversations had within the group, as they all have similar interests.
Another theorist that I looked at was Albrecht; he talks about roles that are used in a group discussion. The five things that he thinks makes a group are energisers, ideas people, action people, organisers and uncommitted persons. The majority of the roles listed are important because they help to keep a group healthy and effective. Although uncommitted persons aren’t such a good contribution to an active group as they aren’t adding anything in to the group discussion.
Finally I looked at what Dimbley and Burton feel is important and...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document