Discussion board | Applied Sciences homework help

1. Tullier, M. (2002). The art and science of writing cover letters: The best way to make a first impression. Monster.com. Retrieved from http://resume.monster.com/coverletter/coverletters

424 800 appendix III Problem-Solving Communication Most of the communication aimed at solving problems and making decisions occurs in meetings. In the past decades, researchers have developed several methods for accomplishing these goals. Each decision- making method has its advantages and disadvantages. The choice of which one to use depends on several factors: What type of decision is being made? If the decision can best be made by one or more experts, or if it needs to be made by the authorities in charge, then involving other group members is not appropriate. If, however, the task at hand calls for creativity or requires a large amount of information from many sources, then input from the entire team can make a big difference. How important is the decision? Trivial decisions do not require the entire team’s involvement. It is a waste of time and money to bring everyone together to make a decision that can easily be made by one or two people. How much time is available? If time is short, it simply may not be possible to consult everyone on the team. This is especially true if the members are not all available—if some are away from the office or out of town, for example. Even if everyone is available, the time-consuming deliberations that come with a team discussion may be a luxury you cannot afford. 801 What are the personal relationships among members? Even important decisions might best be made without convening the whole team if members are on bad terms. If talking things out will improve matters, then a meeting may be worth the emotional wear and tear it will generate. Conversely, if a face-to-face discussion will just make matters worse, then the decision might best be made in some other way. You will participate in many decision-making meetings throughout your professional life. Understanding the stages and process of group problem solving will help you produce high-quality work.

• Stages of Group Problem Solving When it comes to solving problems and making decisions, groups move more or less regularly through several phases characterized by different types of communication. Aubrey Fisher identified four of these stages: orientation, conflict, emergence, and reinforcement.1

The first stage in a group’s development is the orientation phase, sometimes called forming.2 This is a time of testing the waters. Members may not know one another very well and so may be cautious about making statements that might offend other members. For this reason, during the orientation stage, group members are not likely to take strong positions even on issues they regard as important. It is easy to mistake the lack of conflict during this phase for harmony, and to assume the task will proceed smoothly. Peace and quiet are often a sign of caution, not agreement. Despite the tentative nature of communication, the orientation stage is important because the norms that can govern the group’s communication throughout its life are often established at this time. 425 After the group members understand the problem and have a feel for one another, the group typically moves to the conflict phase, which has also been called storming. During this phase, members take strong stands on the issue and defend their positions against others. Disagreement is likely to be greatest during this phase, and the potential for bruised egos is strongest. The norms of politeness formed during orientation may weaken as members debate with one another, and there is a real risk that their 802 personal feelings will interfere with the kind of rational decision making described in the preceding section. Conflict does not have to be negative, however. If members adopt the types of constructive approaches outlined in Chapter 5, they can come up with higher-quality solutions than groups that make harmony a top priority.3 Some groups never escape from the conflict stage. Their interaction— at least about the problem at hand—may end when time pressures force a solution that almost no one finds satisfactory. The boss may impose a decision from above, or a majority might overrule the minority. Time may even run out without any decision being made. Not all groups suffer from such unhappy outcomes, however. Productive teams manage to work through the conflict phase and move on to the next stage of development. The emergence phase of problem solving, sometimes called norming, occurs when the members end their disagreement and solve the problem. Every member may enthusiastically support the final decision. In some cases, though, members may compromise or settle for a proposal they did not originally prefer. In any case, the key to emergence is acceptance of a decision that members can support (even if reluctantly). Communication during the emergence phase is less polarized. Members back off from their previously held firm positions. Comments like “I can live with that” and “Let’s give it a try” are common at this point. Even if some people have doubts about the decision, there is a greater likelihood they will keep their concerns to themselves. Harmony is the theme.4 The fourth stage of discussion is the reinforcement phase. This stage has also been called performing because members not just accept the decision but actively endorse it. Members who made arguments against the decision during the conflict stage now present evidence to support it. In school, the reinforcement stage is apparent when students presenting a team project defend it against any complaints the instructor might have. In the workplace, the same principle applies: If the boss finds fault with a team’s proposals, the tendency is to band together to support them. In real life, groups do not necessarily follow this four-step process (summarized in Table A3-1) neatly. In an ongoing group, the patterns of communication in the past can influence present and future 803 communication.5 Teams with a high degree of conflict may have trouble reaching emergence, for example, whereas teams that are highly cohesive might experience little disagreement. 426 Table A3-1 Characteristics and Guidelines for Problem-Solving Stages Member Behaviors Member Concerns For Higher Performance Forming Most comments directed to designated leader Direction and clarification frequently sought Status accorded to members based on their roles outside the group Issues discussed superficially Why am I in this group? Why are the others here? Will I be accepted? What is my role? Which jobs will I have? Will I be able to handle them? Who is the leader? Is she or he competent? Clarify tasks, roles, and responsibilities Provide structure Encourage balanced participation Identify one another’s expertise, needs, values, and preferences Storming Some members try to gain a disproportionate share of influence Subgroups and coalitions form The designated leader may be challenged Members overzealously judge one another’s ideas and personalities How much autonomy will I have? Will I be able to influence others? What is my place in the pecking order? Who are my friends and allies? Who are my enemies? Do my ideas get any support here? Why don’t some of the others see things my way? Is this aggravation worth the effort? Use joint problem solving Discuss the group’s problem-solving ideas Have members explain how others’ ideas are useful and how to improve them Establish a norm supporting expression of different viewpoints Discourage domination by a single person or subgroup Norming Challenge the group, fight complacency 804 The group establishes and follows rules and procedures Members sometimes openly disagree The group laughs together, has fun Members have a sense of “we-ness” The group feels superior to other groups Groupthink may be a risk How can we get organized well enough to stay on top of our tasks? How close should I get to other members? How can we work in harmony? How do we compare to other groups? What is my relationship to the leader? How do we keep conflicts and differences under control? How can we structure things to run smoothly? Establish norms of high performance Request and provide both positive and constructive feedback on individual and group actions Encourage open discussions about individual ideas and concerns High Performing Members seek honest feedback from one another Roles are clear, yet members cover for one another as needed Members openly discuss and accept differences Members encourage one another to do better How can we continue at this pace? How might we share our learnings with one another? What will I do when this process is over? How will I find another group as good as this one? Jointly set challenging goals Look for opportunities to increase the group’s scope Question assumptions, norms, and traditional approaches Develop a mechanism for ongoing self- assessment and group assessment 427 Sometimes a group can become stuck in one phase, never progressing to the phases that follow. For example, members may never get beyond the superficial, polite interaction of orientation. If they do, they may become mired in conflict. Ongoing groups might move through some or all of the stages each time they tackle a new problem, as depicted in Figure A3.1. In fact, a group that deals with several issues at one time might be in different stages for each problem. 805 FIGURE A3.1 Cyclical Stages in an Ongoing Group Source: Galanes, G. J., Adams, K., & Brilhart, J. K., Effective Group Discussion (11th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2004. Knowing that the team to which you belong is likely to pass through these stages can be reassuring. Your urge to get down to business and quit wasting time during the orientation phase might be tempered if you realize the cautious communication is probably temporary. Likewise, you might be less distressed about conflict if you know that the emergence phase may be just around the corner.

• Systematic Problem Solving The range of problems that groups face on the job is almost endless. How can we cut expenses? Increase market share? Reduce customer complaints? Offer a better employee-benefits program? Not all groups approach problems like these systematically,6 but most researchers agree that groups have the best chance of developing high-quality solutions to such problems when they follow a systematic method for solving problems.7

The best-known problem-solving approach is the reflective-thinking sequence, developed more than 100 years ago by John Dewey and used in many forms since then.8 In its most useful form, the reflective-thinking sequence is a seven-step process. 428 806