Mega simulation Reflective report

Executive Summary
This reflection report is about the experiences in the MEGA simulation game carried out over a period of weeks by our group. The experience was not smooth all along; there were incidences when the group’s overall importance was questionable but other times when we seemed to have a sense of direction. The paper starts by highlighting the reflection technique used in the paper and why others were not used the goes ahead to highlight and reflect on the major critical incidents in the game. I used the Gibbs Reflective model as it was more straightforward and enabled a deeper reflection as opposed to other models such as Kolb’s. The model gives a step-by-step solution to reflection. The first critical incident was about the lack of communication and cohesion in the group due to various elements of diversity such as culture and personality. The second critical incident dealt with individual performance in the group, which was quite satisfactory. The delegation of tasks had a great impact on the group’s performance.

Table of Contents
Introduction 3
Critical Incidents4
2.1 Incident 1 4
2.1.1 Description4
2.1.2 Feelings4
2.1.3 Evaluation5
2.1.4 Analysis6
2.1.5 Conclusion 6
2.1.6 Action Plan7
2.2 Incident 27
2.2.1 Description 7
2.2.2 Feelings 8
2.2.3 Evaluation 8
2.2.4 Analysis 9
2.2.5 Conclusion 9
2.2.6 Action Plan10
Final Conclusion10
Introduction
Reflection can be defined as “a form of mental processing with a purpose and/or anticipated outcome that is applied to relatively complex or unstructured ideas for which there is not an obvious solution.

” (Moon, 1999, p.23). We cannot learn through experiences only as most people tend to assume. One has to review the experiences, describe and analyse, then evaluate them to inform learning about practice (Reid, 1993, p.305). Reflective techniques will, therefore, be crucial in the MEGA team experience analysis in that they will assist the group members to recognise the assumptions, frameworks, and patterns that guided our experiences and whether they were in the group’s best interests concerning performance.
I will use the Gibbs Reflective Cycle in this report as I believe it is quite straightforward, unlike other models as it gives a step-by-step guide on how to reflect through answering various questions in each stage. The model, developed by Graham Gibbs proposes six stages during reflection. These include the description stage, feelings, evaluation, analysis, conclusion, and action plan (Gibbs, 1988, 106). I did not use Kolb’s (1984) cycle as it is has a basic reflection in comparison to the Gibbs cycle. The Gibbs cycle was adapted from the model and expanded further to give a deeper reflection.
Critical Incidents
2.1 Incident 1
2.1.1 Description
Members of my group had a hard time fitting in especially during the first two weeks. Most of us would come on time as we usually set clear timelines on when we were supposed to arrive and start the meeting. This would be deliberated on in our WhatsApp group that we created in the previous week’s seminar. In the first meeting, though we arrived on time, we did not do much as communication was not quite effective. We would remain quiet for a time before someone would try to give their input or encourage the rest to air their opinions. I was among the ones who encouraged people most of the time, as I have always been a team worker. The general atmosphere was rather dull for a group, and there was element of fun, there were no jokes or any form of humor. We, however, continued meeting to give the various strategies mainly because failure to attend without valid reasons was inexcusable as per our group rules set in the WhatsApp group. We would highlight the various strategies on an excel sheet, upload and wait for results on the Mega learning website. Our results had not improved by the third week, and we were left wondering what the problem was.
2.1.2 Feelings
I was quite happy when we were about to start the simulation game and could not wait for the exercise to start. I had come to believe that the task was the best orientation into the business world as it offered me an opportunity to explore and test the various business concepts and actions in a business organisation. I also knew that working in a group would improve my interpersonal skills that would be crucial in conflict resolution and customer relations in the workplace (Mencl, Wefald and Van Ittersum, 2016, p. 641).
Initially, I thought that the reason for the miscommunication in the group was that we were trying to observe and learn about the other members’ character. I was therefore not much concerned with the miscommunication in the group as I hoped it would disappear once we became familiar with one another. The results remained low until the fourth week when they started improving as our strategies began working.
2.1.3 Evaluation
The lack of communication in the group during the first two weeks prevented substantial deliberation about the various business strategies to choose the most effective one. Our results were therefore not quite satisfactory during the period as it is through interactions and communication that members develop group attitudes, roles, and norms and learn to influence group performance and behavior (Sherif, 1936, p. 119). The communication problem would have cost us greatly as ineffective communication would be costly as it leads to a poor sense of direction concerning achieving the group’s objectives (Park, 2008, p.94). The only positive thing was that despite the poor communication, we were all committed to completing and carrying out our tasks. The fact that the weekly meetings were mandatory played a great role in the group’s continuity. Our results during the fourth week were for example quite satisfactory. This was in line with the structuration theory where resources and rules reinforced the group’s behavior (Frey, Gouran, and Poole, 1999, p.64). Absenteeism was minimal, and in case it happened, it would be accompanied by realistic and agreeable reasons.
Analysis
The communication problem resulted mainly from the fact that the group was a multicultural one and had people with different values and views. The level of diversity in the group was a temporary setback rather than a blessing as it prevented the attainment of the group’s goals in the initial stages. All along I had known that diversity was the key to success in a group as it increased a group’s innovativeness and reduced redundancy (West, 2012, p.85). There was a need to look at the various elements of diversity in the group as they had a great impact on the group’s performance. The cultural dimensions theory, for example, shows that the culture has a great impact on the values of the members of a society as well as their behavior either in groups or alone. According to Hofstede (1980, p. 92), there are four dimensions of culture which include power distance, individualism vs. collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity vs. femininity, and long-term vs. short-term orientation.
For a group to be effective, there must be some element of cohesion, which is defined as the “total field of forces which act on members to remain in the group” (Festinger, Schachter, & Back, 1950, p. 184). Through the group cohesiveness concept, it is clear that there was no cohesion in the group and that much effort should have been put to realize it for better performance.
2.1.5 Conclusion
The importance of communication in a group’s performance can’t be underestimated as it is through communication that we can air our views, express our displeasure with certain behaviors that are not in the group’s interest, and clarify on important issues. The group started on the wrong foot, which made it difficult to improve communication. We should have had some time to get to know each other’s weaknesses and strengths so that we could get along in the future. Tuckman (1965, 388) proposes four stages of group formation and working, which include forming, storming, norming, and performing. We should have pretended to get along, done away with our politeness, developed trust and then work towards a common goal. I did not consider this, as I was only interested in the results.
The fear of knowing how the other members would react to the opinions given could have been eliminated earlier if there was a group leader from the start as leaders can bring a sense of confidence among members that their thoughts can be discussed as long as they maintain respect (LaFasto, 2002, p. 109). Group leaders also reinforce the group rules and values. I learned from the experience that I was not an effective team worker as I had assumed because as for only a few instances of motivation to the members, I did not do much.
2.1.6 Action plan
In future, I should take a more active role in the group. We should also prepare for any other group activity in future by making adequate preparations before undertaking the various tasks. One way will be through the undertaking of the Belbin Team Roles Test (Belbin Associates, 2018). This would involve answering various questions about ourselves in the group context. The test would help determine our weaknesses and strengths concerning functioning in a group. Once we have identified these, we would know how to relate and communicate with one another and hence use the diversity in our group to our benefit.
2.2 Incident 2
2.2.1 Description
Decision making was mostly consensual in the group though there were at times when the group leader’s opinion carried the day rendering consensus impossible. For example, the group leader imposed his opinion over the rest of us at one particular time when we wanted to keep the price of the image car high but he insisted that we make it cheaper even though no other member agreed with him.
All in all, individual performances of all group members were satisfactory as no one seemed to take advantage of the other members’ hard work. We also delegated some duties as we saw the need to rely on individual strengths to accomplish our goals. There would be a group leader, some members who were fast and more alert to errors were assigned the duty of feeding data into excel sheets and the website. The role division helped prevent errors and in the swift movement of the group activities. The group leader would motivate all members from time to time, by reminding us of the tasks ahead and why we had to put in more efforts.
2.2.2 Feelings
I felt that everything was moving as was supposed to. I had known before the game that some members would be lazy mainly due to the complexity of the task involved. The probability of social loafing increased mainly with an increase in the project’s complexity and the group size according to Aggarwal and O’Brien (2008, p.258). As there was no shirking of responsibilities, I was pleased with the experience and looked forward to further engagements. I was however not pleased with the way the group leader used to make decisions on our behalf at times as I felt that we all had a stake in the project.
2.2.3 Evaluation
The fact that everyone contributed to the various task was quite encouraging as, laziness of members would have demotivated some of us. Knowing that others were not contributing anything but just waiting for you to give the answers may demotivate one and lead to a lack of concern. Having a motivational leader was also important, as a group needs constant motivation to prevent personal interest and keep the focus on the group goals (Beagle, 2012, 49). The reliance on individual strengths and division of roles was also important in that it usually helps members to be engaged in something which encourages their commitment to the group goals and prevent social loafing (Forsyth, 2009, p. 80).
2.2.4 Analysis
The small size of our group may have helped prevent members from slacking off their duties in the group in that it was possible to see everyone’s contribution. Every member, therefore, had to do as per the group’s regulations or face action. The group rules, in this case, reinforced a sense of commitment to the tasks as anyone who would have gone against them, would have been seen as obstacles to the achievement of group goals (Kivlighan and Miles, 2007, p. 127). The instances where the group leader decided for the group resulted from over-relying on his ability and giving him too much power.
2.2.5 Conclusion
The group’s performance was good, but we could have done more. We for example over-relied on the group leader when we could have comfortably handled some of his functions. To motivate the group, for example, I did not have to be the leader, but I chose to follow his directions. Excessive power can impair the functioning of a group as it can prevent consensus and even opinions from other members (Wageman, 1995).
Action Plan
In the future, I myself, and the team should be more participative in the whole process. I would, therefore, call for more consensus as opposed to personal opinions and in case the group leader wants to be too authoritative, correct him. The delegation of duties will also require more coordination as it could lead to lack of concern about particular aspects of the game delegated to different members (Ralston 1985, p. 53).
Final Conclusion
I am delighted for having participated in the exercise, as I was able to experience the various aspects involved in group activities. For example, I have learned that there is need to understand each other’s motivations and values and consider these during discussions and delegation of tasks. There is a need for members to express themselves freely so that they can deliberate over what is best for the group. This kind of decision making increases feelings of association with the task and therefore increases productivity (Ralston, 1985, 53). I believe that I have improved my interpersonal skills such as verbal communication, listening skills, and negotiation skills. This has resulted mainly from the daily interactions I had with fellow group members. We had to listen attentively to each of the members’ proposal then debate and analyze on the most effective. These skills will be crucial in the workplace where we may be required to review and come up with various departmental goals and strategies from time to time as they will help minimize conflicts and lead to more effective discussions.
However, the game made me realize that I am not a natural leader as I had always known. While there were problems in the initial stages of the group, I did nothing of significance to address these problems and had to wait for the direction of the group leader like the rest. I will need to improve in this area as problems are bound to occur now and then in the workplace. As a friend/colleague, for example, I can seek to know the cause of the problem in a conflict from each of the parties in the conflict then propose a solution to the whole group for deliberation. The various interpersonal skills will come in handy as according to Mencl, Weffald, and Ittersum (2016, p.642), they have a great influence on leadership.
Theories used in the Reflection
Gibb’s Reflective Model
Kolb’s cycle
Group Dynamics
Belbin Roles Theory
Tuckman stages of group development
Cultural dimensions theory
Structuration theory
Participative leadership theory

References
Aggarwal, P., and O’Brien, C. L. (2008). Social loafing on group projects: Structural antecedents and effects on student satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Education, 30 (3) pp. 255-264. [online] Available at: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0273475308322283, [Accessed 23 Feb. 2018]
Beagle, M. (2012). The Rock: Motivational Leadership: A Leader’s Perspective On Inspiring Others While Finding the Motivator in You. 1st ed. Bloomington: iUniverse.
Belbin.com. (2018). The Nine Belbin Team Roles. [online] Available at: http://www.belbin.com/about/belbin-team-roles/ [Accessed 23 Feb. 2018].
Festinger, L., Back, K. and Schachter, S. (1950). Social pressures in informal groups. Stanford, Calif: Stanford Univ. Press.
Frey, L., Gouran, D. and Poole, M. (1999). The handbook of group communication theory and research. 1st ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.
Forsyth, D. (2009). Group Dynamics. New York: Wadsworth.
Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by doing: A Guide to Teaching and Learning Methods. Oxford: Oxford Brookes Further Education Unit.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values. Beverly Hills, Calif: Sage.
Kivlighan, D. and Miles, J. (2007). Content themes in Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 1997-2002. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 11(3), pp.129-139. [online] Available at http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2007-14184-001, [Accessed 23 Feb. 2018]Kolb, D. (1984). Experimental learning. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
LaFasto, F. and Larson, C. (2002). When teams work best. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.
Mencl, J., Wefald, A. and van Ittersum, K. (2016). Transformational leader attributes: interpersonal skills, engagement, and well-being. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 37(5), pp.635-657. [online] Available at http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/LODJ-09-2014-0178?af=R [Accessed 23 Feb. 2018]
Moon, J. (1999) A handbook of reflective and experiential learning. London: Routledge.
Park, H. (2008). The Effects of Shared Cognition on Group Satisfaction and Performance. Communication Research, 35(1), pp.88-108. [online] Available at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0093650207309363?journalCode=crxa [Accessed 23 Feb. 2018].
Ralston, B. (1985). Group Participative Decision Making: The Management Style of the Future. Management Decision, 23(5), pp.51-56. [online] Available at http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/eb001391, [Accessed 23 Feb. 2018].
Reid, B. (1993). ‘But we’re doing it already!’ Exploring a response to the concept of Reflective Practice in order to improve its facilitation. Nurse Education Today, 13(4), pp.305-309. [online] Available at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/026069179390058A, [Accessed 23 Feb. 2018].Sheriff, M. (1936) The psychology of social norms. New York: Harper.
Tuckman, B. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), pp.384-399. [online] Available at http://psycnet.apa.org/record/1965-12187-001 [Accessed 23 Feb. 2018].
Wageman, R. (1995). Interdependence and Group Effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(1), pp.145-180. [online] Available at http://www.jstor.org/stable/2393703, [Accessed 23 Feb. 2018].
West, M. (2012). Effective Teamwork: Practical Lessons from Organizational Research. 1st ed. Chichester, West Sussex: John Wiley and Sons.