Group Interactions

Group Interactions
Name:
Institution:
Group Interactions
When working in a group on matters pertaining change, a theoretical basis can prove valuable in identifying, analyzing, and solving problems in an otherwise complex circumstance. One such theoretical basis is the General systems theory. The account below provides a transitory discussion of at least four of the ten ‘General Systems Concepts’ with regard to small group interactions and their significance. Additionally, it will also touch on the particulars of The Johari Window model.
At a simple level, general systems theory can be explicated as bounded ‘elements’ which are interacting with each other. The elements come together to form a ‘system.’ Four of the ten elements in General Systems Theory of small group interaction include Input, Throughput, Output, and Cycles among others. Input denotes the raw material of interaction in a small group. Open systems have inputs that enter a system through the borders. Inputs can include information received externally. Inputs information can influence how the group performs a particular task (Tubbs, 2012).
Throughput, on the other hand, refers to the number of variables or material moving through a processing system. In this case, it is the inner influences described in a group structure. It includes all behavioral expressions that take place during a group dialog. It takes into account the process of generating and altering ideas in the course of a group exchange. Throughput is a critical stage in the normal functioning of a group.

It is where the majority of group communication takes place (Tubbs, 2012).
The next General Systems Concepts is the Output. Output alludes to the outcomes of the group system interaction. In this case, we can refer to them as the end result of group system interaction. Consequently, this does not, however, mean that it is the end of group interaction because more often than not it means the beginning of the end, during which these outputs are continually being adjusted to fit current issues which means continued interaction. Furthermore, this brings us to the fourth concept in our list known as Cycles. Since often the outputs mark the beginning of an end of group interactions, they are fed back to the group system and become inputs for future interaction (Tubbs, 2012).
The mentioned concepts can play a role in human systems management that can take place at the group and individual levels. It may necessitate identifying, and monitoring decision-making courses. They can allow compliment research on the interaction between the group system and decisions made, as well as the impact of environmental influences, which are important aspects of any conceptual framework. The concepts and ideas of general systems theory with regard to small group interactions can be utilized as ways to conceptualize and understand group members, communication, their background and their disposition. As an approach useful for working with change, the general systems theory puts forth a special framework and perspective (Beebe & Masterson, 2014).
Next, the process of receiving and giving feedback is a vital one in group interaction. Moreover, through the feedback processes, the attributes of group participants can be laid down. The process presents information to a group or an individual either by nonverbal or verbal communication. The information received through the feedback process lets group members know how their conduct affects other members of the group. A state that can be achieved self-disclosure which entails a reaction by group members regarding their perceptions and feelings. In this regard, a model referred to as the Johari Window can be applied to exemplified the process of receiving and giving feedback (Saxena, 2015).
Indeed, the Johari Window contains four quadrants that incorporate the open area, the hidden area, the blind spot, and the unknown. The goal is always to maximize quadrant one and minimize the rest of the quadrants. The Blind Spot contains information you do not entirely comprehend about yourself, however, the group knows. One way one can learn about it is seeking feedback from other group members. If feedback solicited constantly, the area covered by the Blind Spot would reduce. If one wants to reduce the facade, putting out oneself perceptions can be beneficial. In short, this includes revealing oneself opinions, and feelings. As one discloses more about their selves, the scope of the hidden area will be condensed. When you reduced the size of the Facade or the Blind Spot through soliciting and giving feedback, a good chance of increasing the size of the Arena pane comes up (Saxena, 2015).
Moreover, the fourth quadrant represents group members who typically participate passively. Group members are usually in the dark concerning the particulars of fellow member absorbed in the fourth quadrant. In other words, the group does not know much about them. To make the situation even more complex, fourth quadrant resident does not know much about themselves. In this case, to reduce the impact of this quadrant one can inform the group that they learn best by listening (Saxena, 2015).
Lastly, the application of a biblical worldview and biblical principles can assist in improving Johari Window modifications. The scriptures more so the gospel advocates self-examination so that people can know their true selves. For a Christians, self-examination is extremely significant for the strengthening of the faith. Indeed, Apostle Paul reproaches Christians to examine themselves in his second letter to the Corinthians; 2-Cor 13:5. Transplanting this to Johari Window, group members can be in a better position to participate healthily in giving and soliciting feedback when self-examination is encouraged.
References
Beebe, S. A., & Masterson, J. T. (2014). Communicating in Small Groups: Principles and Practices. Pearson Higher Ed.
Saxena, P. (2015). JOHARI WINDOW: An Effective Model for Improving Interpersonal Communication and Managerial Effectiveness. SIT Journal of Management, 5(2), 134-146.
Tubbs, S. L. (2012). A Systems Approach to Small Group Interaction.11th edition (Page 22). McGraw-Hill Higher Education -A. Kindle Edition.