The following group analysis paper is centered on the observation of Water Board members of the city of East Chicago.
The purpose of the group is to provide residents with quality water, address any disruptions in service and oversee the distribution of funds to ensure all water systems are working efficiently.
The group meeting today was attended by all board members'. The group members were seated as illustrated in the diagram. The group’s seating arrangement did not facilitate good communication between all four members. The group’s physical arrangement seemed focused on establishing clear patterns of communication between public attendees in the meeting and the group ...view middle of the document...
The meeting was called to order and John started by announcing business discussed during their last meeting. He announced four different motions to accept which addressed four different allocations of funds to cover the costs of previously specified services. All four members were in favor of the amounts being allocated. At the start of the meeting group members’ communication patterns consisted of a maypole. Members consistently addressed their questions or remarks to John, nearing the end of their meeting, their communication changed to a free floating pattern.
After group members reached a consensus on the allocation of funds. John asked the gentleman who was responsible for presenting the water report before the board to come forward. The gentleman said they had encountered some problems at the plant and the completion of the water report was not possible. The board members frustration at hearing the news was communicated nonverbally as some members rolled their eyes and others nodded in disapproval. According to Toseland and Rivas (2012) members are always communicating “[e]ven if they are not communicating verbally, they are communicating nonverbally, their behaviors sending intended and unintended messages” (p. 70). John told the gentleman he needed to present the board with the water report on their next meeting, which would be held on April 17, 2014. During the beginning part of their meeting, board members continuously looked down to read information they had been given. Communication between members was non-existent at the beginning stage of the meeting.
The next event on their agenda was to hear the results of the inspection conducted on the water treatment facility. Jeff the project manager who supervised the inspection of the water treatment plant, introduced himself to board members. Jeff relayed to...