To provide a critical examination of human behaviour by reflecting on personal experiences and linking them to theory and research.

Analysis of Group Dynamics
Name
Institution
Abstract
The society in its nature is a large group of the various subgroups combined with different functions to perform. The small groups which form the larger societal group are tasked with important duties of the society and enhancing daily life giving it the pervasive feature. In this sense, it then means that the membership of a group is what forms the important part of our self- concept. Thus, we are defined by the groups which we belong influencing the nature of our changing experience as the member of the small- groups. The essay discusses the small group dynamics with the major focus on group formation and structure and the conflict. The research essay will focus on the small in-class group called “DBZ.” It is a group made up of seven students of which two are girls, and the remaining five are boys all ranging between 20 to 23 years of age and from Canada.
Keywords: small groups, conflicts, social, norms, development, structure, society, experience, human behavior
Introduction
The modern society is largely found in the small groups that are tasked with important duties of the society and enhancing daily life giving it the pervasive feature. In this sense, it then means that the membership of a group is what forms the important part of our self- concept. Thus, we are defined by the groups which we belong influencing the nature of our changing experience as the member of the small- groups (Taşpinar, 2008). In the research assignment, I examined two areas of group dynamics including group formation and structure and group conflicts.

With the focus on the two aspects, students working in the small group will be able to have some experience basing on the aspects and reflect on them. The purpose of the research assignment is to compare the outcome of the in-class group experience with the experience outcome of other well-experienced groups found in the literature by examining the two aspects (Mäkitalo-Siegl, 2008). The “DBZ” was the name of the small in-class group with six students, two girls, and five boys all ranging between the ages of 20 years to 23 years old. One is Indian, Italian, Nigerian and four are Canadians and will have to carry course tasks together.
Group Formation and Structure
Norm Development
Customs, habits and the expectations of the group were adopted as the norms that were to guide the DBZ group. The norms based on the nature and the structure of the group and on how tasks would be carried out, for example, talking concerning each other (Tuckman, & Jensen, 2007). Though groups would operate norms without consent of members, ABZ had a standard form of developing norms. All the seven group members played an active role in creating norms especially a Canadian member who had several to suggest which most were adopted ultimately. When setting the norms for the small groups, it should be noted that the norms should not regulate all aspects of the group interactions (Tuckman, & Jensen, 2007). As the DBZ, the small group had to use the opportunity of the norms to express the values of the group members most of which were appealing. The values that were adopted by the team group members included the mutual respect for other members of the group and the punctuality to the various tasks of the group. These values were substantial in serving a model to develop the norms of the ABZ small in-class group.
Many researchers have come up with different ways of how a group can go about setting the norms. One such a way to set the norms starts by listing all the ideas for norms that members would like to see guiding the group. The process is followed by a session where questions and clarifications can be sought so that members can understand what the norms mean. The third process is to peruse through all the items and identify those items that members agree with and would like to be adopted without pressure. In the fourth stage, in case the approved norms are more than ten items, it is advisable to simplify and combine the items that complement each other (Tuckman, & Jensen, 2007). The fifth process involves ensuring that the group members are comfortable with the revised items before adopting them as norms of the group.
ABZ was the only group in the entire class to apply the above procedure to develop the norms. Other groups’ members had to adopt other procedures from other researcher though the difference was small. ABZ started by allowing all the seven members to suggest ideas and were listed down on the flip chart. Surprisingly, no member could want to be left behind, we all contributed actively. However, due to the small number of members, the items never went beyond ten, so all of them were adopted. In case the group has experienced the need for other guidelines, adoption of new group norms has continued. Generally, the norms of the group give a direction on what the group members ought to do and how they should behave.
Group Development
Three weeks after the formation of the group, we could realize some changes regarding the work output. The changes could be as well noticed on the changed type and the high frequency of the group activities. We become more cohesive than ever, and members could be seen more committed working together, and of course, these changes could not go without conflicts among the members of the group. With all these, then we could point out that Highflier was undergoing some developmental changes. Even amidst the changes, we stuck to the norms of the group.
The research on the group development has aimed at learning how and why the small groups change over time. Tuckman (2007) brought together around fifty- articles on development of small groups with the aim of consolidating the common concepts to form a generalized model on the changes in small groups’ life over time. He studied human relations training, therapy groups, natural and laboratory-task groups (Erez Navot, 2014). In the study, the interpersonal realm was considered based on how the members could act and relate to each another. On the other hand, the realm of the task activity was considered based on the way the interaction of content could relate to the task. After reviewing the literature, Tuckman was able to propose the developmental stages model for a number of settings in a group over time including group cohesion development, intragroup conflicts, testing and dependence, and functional role relatedness (Tuckman, & Jensen, 2007). At the same time, he labeled the stages of task activity as the orientation to the task, task demand emotional response, and relevant interpretation of open exchange and the emergence of solutions (Erez Navot, 2014). The stages were the basis for the determination of the group development
DBZ applied the earlier research in determining the growth and change of the group over time. Unlike other groups, the changes positively enabled our group to grow as other groups could not sail through conflicts. Other than what is depicted in the research, the group’s developmental changes were unique since we share different origins. In comparison to other members, the changes too were a challenge on the effects of group development. The group was able to achieve the cohesiveness of the members by working more together. The group reached a place where it had to work independently without seeking any support from any other source. The group members had to divide the functional roles, and every within the group was assigned the functional role. Finally, based on the expanded task activities, the intragroup conflict became the order of the day among the members. All these activities were happening were indication enough that the group had developed.
Social Support
In early days of the group, members could show social support for others in the group and more was expected as members would continue holding meetings, sit and share as they wait for assignment. As the members sit together, a sense of belonging and togetherness could certainly develop, and the social bond between them is more strengthened by the task they carry together. When working on the group activities, the members of the team will share information based on the knowledge they have in finding a solution to the problem, in this way, informational support could be realized (Herráiz, & Gutiérrez, 2016). With members interchanging the social support program, they are likely to solve any arising conflicts within the group and at the same time enhancing group performance and processes.
When carrying out their study on co-operating learning, Johnston and Johnston real advocated for the adoption and the use of the small- in class groups. They cited the reason as providing the academic and social support to the students across the educational level without discrimination. Johnston and Johnston (1994) noted that these small groups give the students opportunities to create the relationship and interact with peers and the same time providing and receiving the support from peers. Earlier research had indicated the significance of the small groups that had been established in the primary school which had empowered students to be able to solve social and personal problems. The groups had also been found to influence effective learning environment and positively affected the performance of the students (Herráiz, & Gutiérrez, 2016). The main reason behind the formation of the small in class groups is to provide students with the social motivation focusing on the interpersonal and intrapersonal needs in the classroom.
The experience by the DBZ is in line with the findings since initially after learning of the application of group discussion in this particular course, many did not want. In fact, they had a negative attitude as well as lacked the motivation to forge ahead with this idea. As days went by, things changed as the attitude also started changing. The move was motivated by the continuous assigning of the tasks as the student’s members received support from others thus motivating them. Were it not for the social support of the group members; probably there could have been conflicts and low social motivation what could have led to DBZ failure.
Conflicts
Sources of Conflict
The group recorded some conflicts either each day or after a specific period that could be associated with some members deliberately skipping the meeting time by the groups. Personally, I never found myself conflicting with either the group norms or any member. However, the Nigerian member could always have bitter exchange whenever he felt aggrieved by a member. Absenteeism was a common problem among the members though this violated the group norm that required all six members of the group to be present in the meetings physically. The worst conflict was recorded the time the group had to determine who should leads, a common cause of conflicts in any groups. The question on who had to get the biggest share of the reward and who supposedly could have contributed much to the success of the group (Yavaş, Ero & gcaron; 2009). Often these issues could be realized as the group continues with its activities or when handling a certain task assigned. I also noticed that the two African Americans could not get along well with others.
In simple terms, the conflict has been defined as the involved parties being aware of the existence of the discrepancies, that their wishes are incompatible and that their desires are irreconcilable. Researchers present three forms of conflicts including process, task and relationship conflicts (Jehn, & Mannix, 2001). Through this classification of conflicts, task conflicts will occur when the members of the group fail to agree on various goal- related issues. On the other hand, process conflict occurs when the members do not agree on which method or procedure they can adopt in accomplishing a certain task (Şener, & Taş, 2017). Finally, relationship conflicts emanate from group members disliking one another. In social psychology, to explain the main sources of the intergroup conflicts, two main theories have been utilized including the realistic conflicts theory and the relative deprivation theory. According to the realistic conflicts theory, the conflicts within the groups are caused by the competition for valued material resources within the groups in conflict while the relative deprivation theory is concerned with the rewards that are social such as respect and esteem.
The sources of conflicts within the members are line with what is presented by the researchers, though in ABZ experience, the issue of race partially could be associated with conflicts. As a group, many disagreements occurred when it comes to agreeing on settling on best issues that can lead to achieving the group goals or rather the best methods or procedures to be adopted. There also seemed to be some beef between the African origin members and the native members which more of personal. Understanding these causes was important in seeking a solution in the group. Our solution was long-lasting and has been important in preventing these risks from reoccurring.
Managing Conflicts
Though as a group, we often could not let the conflicts get the better part of us and influence the decision we had to make as a group. Often, members could convene an ad hoc to discuss the way forward in a move to manage any conflicts that might have risen in the midst of group operation. At a point, the group members had adopted a functional role system for each member so that every member could know the function is tasked with to avoid task conflict so in its essence. But usual, few members could not stick to the rule, probably they like working in groups and had found this rule not well with them. The group could apply many means to manage any form of expected conflicts though they did these with a lot of consciousness (Kathman, & Kathman, 2010). The desire of the team was always to find the solution that could last for all and could be individually favorable for any member.
Many researchers have come forth and suggested ways in which the conflicts can be managed in case they occur. Fisher, Ury, and Patton (1991) suggest that principal negotiation can be one of how conflicts can be resolved. Negotiation itself involves bargaining so as a difference is settled or a solution reached. It involves compromising and some members of the group conceding some of the issues so that agreement is achieved on some points (Cohen, Birkin, Garfield, & Webb, 2008). Other ways to manage conflicts include changing the structure if the structure is among the items causing the conflict. In cases where there are disagreements on the issues, taking a vote can be an option where the members of the group vote and the idea with majority votes is implemented.
DBZ intended to apply most of these ways to manage the possible conflicts the group faced. Apart from what the researchers present, members of ABZ had a unique experience in handling conflicts. For instance, in cases where an arising issue would not be agreed upon, the members could take a vote so that the group implements the idea with majority votes. Alternatively, some members could simply concede on an issue so that an agreement is reached. All these conflict management ways were very important for individual experience in groups.
Gender Differences in Dealing and Resolving Conflict
As already structured within the Highflier small in-class group, it is composed of both genders, with five boys and two girls. The decision by the group was taken after an agreement that all members had to be treated equally irrespective of the gender he or she belongs. It then means that, in cases of conflicts, either of the genders of the member would probably intervene for a solution. Though the Nigerian member was good at intervening and we all supported him whenever he could intervene any conflicts as we endorsed what he put forth. It applies in any form of conflict resolution that could be adopted by the group members (Chizhik, Shelly, & Troyer, 2009). However, despite the decision by the group to treat everyone with equality, the outcomes of the resolving conflicts by boys and girls were different.
The researchers have observed that men and women behave differently when it comes to dealing and resolving the conflicts in the group. The difference goes along up to the way the two genders solves these problems. We however did it differently as any member could play any role in conflicts, gender never worked for ABZ. Studies describe men as the most aggressive and combative though they are more likely to make peace with the competitor at the end of the competition compared to the women. Further study as well has indicated that after the conflicts, men can reach the allies and urge them to come and support the group. Men do reconcile easily and faster than women after the conflict since they believe they have the duty to protect the group (Brewer, Mitchell, & Weber, 2009). The studies indicate the experience at the Highflier group since whenever there was a disagreement or conflict involving men, a solution could easily and faster be found compared to a situation where a lady was involved in the conflict.
Conclusion
In conclusion, small in- class groups undergo various group dynamics including norm development, group development, and social support exhibited in the formation and structure of the group. The small in-class group due to their vulnerability are prone to conflicts that cause various dynamics not limited the sources, management and the influence of gender on these conflicts. Working in small groups influences the human behavior due to the personal experience a person gains from the interaction in the group. Many researchers have carried out studies which have proved the influence of the group dynamics to the human behavior of a person through personal experience. Some of the key areas that can improve the performance of the group in future involve teaching group members’ new skills, training members, encouraging innovation and teambuilding.

References
Brewer, N., Mitchell, P., & Weber, N. (2009). Gender role, organizational status, and conflict management styles. International Journal Of Conflict Management, 13(1), 78.
Chizhik, A. W., Shelly, R. K., & Troyer, L. (2009). Intragroup Conflict and Cooperation: An Introduction. Journal Of Social Issues, 65(2), 251-259. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2009. 01599.xCohen, C. F., Birkin, S. J., Garfield, M. J., & Webb, H. W. (2008). Managing conflict in software testing. Communications Of The ACM, 47(1), 76-81. doi:10.1145/962081.962083
Erez Navot, D. (2014). Tools for the clinical professor: applying group development theory to collaborative learning in law school mediation clinics. Dispute Resolution Journal, 69(3), 65-90.
Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (1991). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, p. 15
Herráiz, E., & Gutiérrez, R. (2016). Social Support as a School Victimisation Risk Factor. Journal Of Child & Family Studies, 25(12), 3473-3480. doi:10.1007/s10826-016-0503-9
Jehn, K. A., & Mannix, E. A. (2001). The dynamic nature of conflict: a longitudinal studyof intragroup conflict and group performance. The Academy of ManagementJournal, 238-251.
Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, F. P. (1994).Joining together: Group theory and groupskills. (5th ed.), Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Kathman, J. M., & Kathman, M. D. (2010). Conflict management in the academic library. Journal Of Academic Librarianship, 16(3), 145.
Mäkitalo-Siegl, K. (2008). From Multiple Perspectives to Shared Understanding: A small group in an online learning environment. Scandinavian Journal Of Educational Research, 52(1), 77-95.
Şener, N., & Taş, E. (2017). Improving students’ creative thinking through purdue model in science education. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16(3), 350-365.
Taşpinar, M. (2008). The effect of the interactive small group study method on democratic attitudes and self-expression ability. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 34(9), 1115-1126.
Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. A. C. (2007). Stages of small-group development revisited. Group & Organization Studies, 2(4), 419-427.
Yavaş, U., Ero&gcaron, D., & Lu, S. (2009). Sources and Management of Conflict: The Case of Saudi-U.S. Joint Ventures. Journal Of International Marketing, 2(3), 61-82.